20101214reconsideration_order_no_32137.pdf

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
December 14, 2010
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF MURRAY WATER WORKS SYSTEMS
FOR AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS
RATES AND CHARGES FOR WATER
SERVICE
ORDER NO. 32137
CASE NO. MUR-IO-
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On January 13 2010, Murray Water Works Systems ("Murray" or "Company ) filed
an Application requesting authority from the Commission to increase its rates and charges for
water service. The Application did not include an effective date for the proposed increase in
rates and charges.
On February 25, 2010, the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Notice of
Modified Procedure establishing a 60-day comment period. Subsequently, the Commission
extended the comment period until June 15 2010. See Order No. 31065. On April 13 , 2010
Staff conducted a public workshop in Murray, Idaho regarding the Company s filing.
On June 15 2010, Staff submitted written comments regarding Murray s Application.
The Commission also received six separate comments from Murray s residential and business
customers. On August 12 2010, the Commission held a telephonic hearing at the Commission
office in Boise, Idaho during which the Commission heard the testimony of one Murray
customer.
On November 2, 2010, the Commission issued Order No. 32105. Thereafter, the
Commission received a total of 33 Petitions for Reconsideration ("Petitions ) from individuals
purporting to be residential and commercial customers of Murray ("Petitioners ) within the
November 23 2010 deadline.
PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION
All of the Petitions consisted of a single-page of identical text. The Petitions varied
only in the name and address listed for each Petitioner. Each Petition requested the "immediate
postponement and subsequent reversal of Order No. 3210(5)" until Murray has complied with
all Federal, State and County laws, regulations, orders and licenses, pertaining to public
utilities. . . .Petitions at 1. Petitioners believe that Mr. Lish, Murray s owner, should be
ORDER NO. 32137
subject to fines and penalties. Id. As justification for their request, the Petitioners cite to a
generalized failure by Murray to comply with Utility Customer Relations Rules ("UCRR"
IDAP A 31.21.0 I et seq.and a "co-mingling of records and accounts of a public utility with
other business and personal ventures. . . .Id.
ST ANDARDS FOR RECONSIDERATION
Reconsideration provides an opportunity for a party to bring to the Commission
attention any question previously determined and thereby affords the Commission with an
opportunity to rectify any mistake or omission. Washington Water Power Co. v. Kootenai
Environmental Alliance 99 Idaho 875 , 879, 591 P.2d 122, 126 (1979). The Commission may
grant reconsideration by reviewing the existing record by written briefs, or by evidentiary
hearing. IDAP A 31.01.01.311.03.
If reconsideration is granted
, "
the matter must be reheard, or written briefs, comments
or interrogatories must be filed, within thirteen (13) weeks after the date for filing petitions for
reconsideration. "Idaho Code ~ 61-626(2).The commission must issue its order upon
reconsideration within twenty-eight (28) days after the matter is finally submitted for
reconsideration.Id. Commission Rule 311 "determines when a matter that is reconsidered is
finally submitted for purposes of Section 61-626. . ." IDAPA 31.01.01.332. A matter is
deemed "submitted for decision. . . no later than twenty-eight (28) days after hearing is closed
when a hearing is held...." IDAPA 31.01.01.311.
COMMISSION DECISION AND FINDINGS
The Commission has carefully reviewed and considered the requests put forth by the
Petitioners. We acknowledge and appreciate the sincere concerns expressed in the Petitions.
Many of the concerns expressed in the Petitions can also be found in the public comments
submitted to the Commission during the pendency of Murray s Application, as well as the
August 12 2010, Telephonic Public Hearing.
In response, the Commission has, in part, ordered "Murray to comply with all (Idaho
Department of Environmental Quality) IDEQ requirements" and "immediately develop and
submit a plan of correction to IDEQ and remedy any system deficiencies identified by IDEQ.
Order No. 32105 at 18. The Commission also directed Murray to "immediately submit to the
Commission a copy of the corrective plan required by IDEQ, as well as an invoice detailing the
costs of implementing the IDEQ-mandated measures.Id. As of the date of this Order, Staff
ORDER NO. 32137
continues to consult with IDEQ regarding Murray s progress towards full compliance with
IDEQ's requirements.
Petitioners' complaints regarding Murray s sub-standard business and recordkeeping
practices are well-founded and were of particular concern to the Commission during our rate
case deliberations. Accordingly, the Commission sought to address these concerns by, among
other things, ordering Murray to "modify its current business practices and begin issuing billing
statements that comply with the requirements ofthe UCRR" and "develop and maintain a system
for the recording of customer complaints." Order No. 32105 at 21-22. We find it prudent to
allow Murray a reasonable opportunity to comply with our directives. In the interim
Commission Staff will continually monitor Murray s quality of service and verify whether
Murray complies with the Commission s mandates. As always, customers are permitted to
participate in the verification process and submit specific concerns and complaints to the
Commission pursuant to UCRR401-404, IDAPA 31.21.01.401-404.
Based upon the foregoing analysis and authority, the Commission reaffirms its prior
ruling in Order No. 32105 granting Murray s request for an increase in rates and charges for
water service as set forth more fully in that Order. The Commission finds that its prior decision
is based upon substantial evidence and that the authorized rates and charges set forth in Order
No. 32105 are just and reasonable.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission has jurisdiction over Murray Water Works
System, a water utility, and the Petitions for Reconsideration presented in Case No. MUR-10-
01 pursuant to Idaho Code, Title 61 , specifically Idaho Code ~ 61-626, and the Commission
Rules of Procedure, IDAPA 31.01.01.000 et seq.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petitions for Reconsideration of Order No.
32105 pertaining to Murray Water Works ' Application for an increase in its rates and charges for
water service are denied.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER ON RECONSIDERA nON. Any party aggrieved by this
Order may, pursuant to the Idaho Code and Idaho Appellate Rules, appeal to the Supreme Court
ofIdaho with regard to any matter decided in this Order. See Idaho Code ~ 62-627.
ORDER NO. 32137
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this /'It-A
day of December 2010.
;j
JI . KEMPTON",PRES
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
' '
r. , .
' .
\)"J:v-,,
)..,~
)S~J
MACK A. REDFO"RD1:COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
O:MUR- W-I 0-0 1- np5 _Reconsideration
ORDER NO. 32137