20071025Comments.pdf

t'
Jean Jewell
Ai.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
chasab1 ~juno.com
Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:12AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from CHARLES BROWN follows:
-- -- - ------- --- - -- --- ----- - - - -------
Case Number: UNITED WATER ; NOT KNOWN UtJI-0-07-oL(
Name: CHARLES BROWNAddress: 2821 ELDORADO
City: BOISE
State: IDAHO
Zip: 83704
Home Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: chasab1~juno. com
Name of Utili ty compa~. UNITED WATER IDAHO INC.Add to Mailing List: (Yes
....
Pl~~se describe your q~~stion or comment briefly:
LADIES/GENTLEMEN:
You have before you a request from United Water Idaho Inc. to raise rates. Please deny
the request. It is unreasonable that the utility would request a monthly billing and rate
cycle when the current bi-month cycle works well for customers and the company. The whole
reason for the requested increase is and I quote: "to cover the increased costs of
addi tional personnel, billing, and collections attributable solely to the conversion to
monthly meter reading and billing.If the request for the increase is denied, no
material harm will occur to the customer nor the utility since the increase is only needed
if the request is approved.
Please say no to this request because it does nothing to provide the customer with better
service or products and does nothing for United Water Idaho Inc. other than make there
company larger. THIS COST IS NOT NEEDED TO CARRY OUT THE BILLING PROCESS, BUT ADDS A GOOD
AMOUNT TO THE BOTTOM LINE OF PROFFIT FOR THE UTILITY WITH THE NUMBER OF CUSTOMERS IT CAN
CHARGE THE FEE TOO. Thank you very much.
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 71.221.182.
-- -- - - - - --- - ----- - - --- - - -- - --- - - - ---
.I ~'" oj 1,1
Jean Jewell
r/~~'
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
swen6163~cableone. net
Wednesday, October 24, 20072:29 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Karen Swenson follows:
- -- - - ----- -- --- ----- - ----- --- -- - ---
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Karen Swenson
Address: 2006 Canal St
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83705
Home Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: swen6163~cableone. net
Name of Utility Company: United Water
Add to Mailing List: no
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
I was just fine paying my water bill every o~her month. United Water made the decision to
have customers pay monthly. They should hayethqught about the ramifications of such a
decision and budgeted accordingly. Uni ted Water should not get an increase due to thier
poor planning/budgeting. I think they should go back to billing every other month and
offer to let folks read their own meter. Now, that would save all of us money!
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 207.114.236.
-- -- - --- -- --- ---- - ------- -- -- -- - ----
~2-; 10"1
Jean Jewell
11: All ~~ ~JJ- l-f
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
biojoe2~hotmail.com
Tuesday, October 23, 2007 4:22 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Nathan C Bronemann follows:
- - - -- - - --- - -- --- - -------- - ------ - ---
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Nathan C BronemannAddress: 8884 W. Inca Ct.
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: bioj oe2~hotmail. com
Name of Utility Compag~ United Water
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
This is regarding the application to allow United Water to increase to monthly billingrather than every two months. They claim ,that .this would make for easier budgeting and
make it easier to pay than a bi-monthly bill. It is not the job of United Water to help
people with their budgeting practices and how does a rate increase make it easier to pay??
They claim that more frequent visits to premises by United Water will enable quickerdetection of leaks or meter problems. Is this really such a big problem to warrant twice
the work and an increase in utility costs? This is just a ploy by the utility company totry to raise their rates yet again. It is by no means necessary and serves littlepurpose. If they were really concerned about their customers, as they pretend to be, they
would survey them directly instead of trying to get IPUC to just grant them this
permission. They claim that this change would reduce the incidence of 'high bill'
complaints. Again, how does allowing another rate increase help the situation? Is this
supposed to help trick customers into thinking that they are paying less by billing them
more often? How stupid do they think their customers are? They also claim that this isonly a 3.75% increase. But, in their application, they show that the monthly rates would
increase from $8.105 (half of $16.21,) to $9.26, or a 12.5% increase in general monthly
rates. They are clearly not acting in the best interests of their customers. Also, the
links provided on their notice supplied to customers (EXIBIT B in the application,) are
incorrect and do not direct people to the correct locations of their application or
comment section. This is irresponsible at best and more likely dishonest. Please reject
this application. Thank you for making the sound decision and looking out for yourpeople.Sincerely,
Nathan Bronemann
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 24.116.172.119
- - - ------- - - - - - -- - - ---- - --- - - - - - - ---
I~ ~'1.~ /
6 1,,;,
Jean Jewell
11"u
;; /1-
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
kurt.stadlbauer~msn.com
Monday, October 22, 2007 5:01 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Kurt Stadlbauer follows:
- -- - -- ----- -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - - - -- - - --
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Kurt Stadlbauer
Address: 2847 Chieftain Way
City: Boise
State: Idaho
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: kurt. stadlbauer~msn. com
Name of Utility Company: United Water Idaho, Inc.
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
Please say NO to this rate increase:
1) Switching from bi-monthly to monthly billing practices serves United Water s cash flowneeds only.
2) The benefits to the consumer cited by United Water are false and the consumer should
NOT pay the additional cost attributed to monthly billing.
3) If United Water wants monthly billing they should look internally for inefficiencies
and employ cost cutting measures to pay for monthly billing instead of once again gouging
the consumer.
4) The consumer has limited resources! We do not have deep pockets as United Water seemsto believe. Since United Water took over in 1999 the cost of water to my home hasincreased an average 39.9% per year. This dramatic increase in cost is even after
substantially decreasing the size of my yard needing watering and employing more efficient
watering systems.
ENOUGH TO THESE UNBELIEVABLE INCREASES OF COSTS ON THE BACKS OF CONSUMERS BY UNITED
WATER! !
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 151.113.255.101
-- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - -- - -- -- - - - - - -
,/
~)/61
Jean Jewell
~ ~
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
jerrym~ptsi-id.com
Monday, October 22, 2007 3:57 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from jerry musick follows:
-- - --- - - - - ------------------ - - - - - ---
Case Number: uwi w-07-04
Name: jerry musickAddress: 2009 Palouse
City: Boise
State: Id
Zip: 83705
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: jerrym~ptsi-id.com
Name of Utility Company: united water
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
why would anyone want to pay more bills every month and be charged to do so? 1.1 millionis not worth the so called benifi ts to the consumer. Think about the extra fuel
consumption for added employees to read meters. Why would anyone want to spend more more
money to do the same job?
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 70.102.214.114
- - -- ------ - --- - - - -- -- -- - - -- --- - -----
~ol'V'3JI)
Jean Jewell
110 AJ/u/1"o
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
jjlemay01 ~hotmail.com
Saturday, October 20, 2007 5:26 PM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Joseph Lemay follows:
--- - -- -- - - - -- -- --- - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - --
Case Number: UWI-W-07-
Name: Joseph Lemay
Address: 12545 W. La Grange St
City: Boise
State: Idaho
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: jj lemay01~hotmail. com
Name of Utility Compa United WaterAdd to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
LADIES/GENTLEMEN:
You have before you a request from United Water Idaho Inc. to raise rates. Please deny
the request. It is unreasonable that the utility would request a monthly billing and rate
cycle when the current bi-month cycle works well for customers and the company. The whole
reason for the requested increase is and I quote: 'to cover the increased costs of
additional personnel, billing, and collections attributable solely to the conversion to
monthly meter reading and billing.If the request for the increase is denied, no
material harm will occur to the customer nor the utility since the increase is only needed
if the request is approved.
Please say no to this request because it does nothing to provide the customer with better
service or products and does nothing for United Water Idaho Inc. other than make there
company larger. Thank you very much.
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 71.209.226
- - - - -- - ----- - -- ----- -- - -- --- - - - -- --
.;
~r3
/01
Jean Jewell
110 //fo
; J1
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
walljs230~cableone. net
Saturday, October 20, 2007 3:54 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Jason Wall follows:
- - - - - --- --- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - ---- - -----
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Jason Wall
Address: 3420 S. Virginia Way
City: Boise
State: Idaho
Zip: 83705
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: wallj s230~cableone. net
Name of Utility Compa United Water
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
I would just like to say that if this case for united water is approved for going to
monthly billing, then a level pay option should be made available for the consumer. I
have no problem with the current bi-monthly bills. I do not feel that going to a montly
bill and charging all customers is fair since United Waters reasoning is that they feel
customers will find leaks and be able to pay a smaller bill easier. If you are
maintaining your property properly you should not incur a large bill due to a leak. If
you manage your money properly you should be able to pay your bill without issue
regarldless of when it arrives. Why should the responsible people have to pay extra for
those who are either stupid or irresponsible in how they manage and maintain theirproperty and money? I am however a fan of level pay. I can understand the extra $1.15 to
everyone if level pay is going to be offered, although I do not see any mention in therequest for the increase that specifically asks for level pay approval. Years ago I
contacted United Water to ask if they would ever offer level pay. The answer I received
blamed it on the PUC in that so people don t get carried away with water usage with a
leveled out bill that the PUC would not authorize level pay. All in the name of waterconservation. I understand we need to conserve water, but we also here from Idaho Powerin the summer about conserving electricity because they may run into a shortage but yet
they have level pay. What is the difference? I have no issue with the increase as long
as level pay is offered when going to the once monthly bill. If level pay is not going to
be offered than I feel this should not be approved since the maj ori ty of responible people
will end up paying a fee to try and solve the stupid, ignorant, irresponsible peoples
issues they create and the reponsible people have nothing in return except more money out
of their pockets.
Thanks,
Jason Wall
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.htmi
IP address is 69.92.131.
- - --- -- --- -- - - - - - - - - ---- - -- - - - - --- --
~.
i(W~ ~IOI).,110 lV,
~ Il
Jean Jewell
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Isgienger~yahoo.com
Friday, October 19, 2007 5:20 PM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Linda Gienger follows:
- - -- - ------- -- --- ------ - -- - --- - -- - --
Case Number:
Name: Linda Gienger
Address: 4125 W Pinoak Ct
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83705
Home Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: Isgienger~yahoo. com
Name of Utili ty Compa Uni ted Water
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
I do not believe United Water has made a compelling case that the benefits of going to
monthly meter reading and billing outweigh the additional $1+ million in added costs. I
urge disapproval of the request.
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 66.233.158.201
- - - - ------ --- - - - ---- - - - --- - - - -- - --
/ M1h--' plo)d'~.
Jean Jewell
I~. AJ/.,/161
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
dfjturner~msn.com
Friday, October 19 , 2007 5:39 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Fred Turner follows:
-- ---- - - - - - -- - ----- - --- - -- - - - - ------
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Fred Turner
Address: 12539 W. Billabong Ct.
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail: dfj turner~msn. com
Name of Utility Compa United WaterAdd to Mailing List: Idaho Inc.
Please describe your question or comment briefly:Gentlemen/Ladies:
You have before you a request from United Water Idaho Inc. to raise rates. Please deny
the request. It is unreasonable that the utility would request a monthly billing and rate
cycle when the current bi-month cycle works well for customers and the company. The whole
reason for the requested increase is and I quote: "to cover the increased costs of
addi tional personnel, billing, and collections attributable solely to the conversion to
monthly meter reading and billing.If the request for the increase is denied, no
material harm will occur to the customer nor the utility since the increase is only needed
if the request is approved.
Please say no to this request because it does nothing to provide the customer with better
service or products and does nothing for United Water Idaho Inc. other than make there
company larger. Thank you very much.
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.htmi
IP address is 71.209.
- - - - -- - - ---- - ------ - - -- - - - -- - - ---- --
1;4- ~~Ol
Jean Jewell
,/~
All x~'j.f
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
rcarter4511 ~prodigy. net
Friday, October 19,20074:12 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Richard Carter follows:
- - -------- ------ ----- - - - - -- --- - -----
Case Number: UWI-W-07-04
Name: Richard CarterAddress: 4511 Fairmont Place
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83706
Home Telephone: [phone]
Contact E-Mail: rcarter4511~prodigy.net
Name of Utility Compa~United Water Idaho
Add to MaiLing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
Monthly billing ailows United Water to collect revenue faster and thus create a cash flow
value that doesn t appear factored in their request. I will not benefit by monthly billing
and see the application simply as a rate increase. When I multiply the $1.15 per month
increase by 215,000 customers, I get a revenue increase of $2,967,000. I think their
figures are grossly inflated and would expect the request to be denied. Thank You, DickCarter
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.htmi
IP address is 208.77.107.
- - - ------- --- - ----- - - - - - - --- --- - -- --
Jean Jewell
IJ;!:;O/Vi/ 11~
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Monday, October 22, 2007 7:46 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Shirley Gaudioso follows:
- - - --- - - -- - -- - - -- - -- - - - --- - --- -- - ---
Case Number:
Name: Shirley Gaudioso
Address: 9061 Wallowa CT
City: Boise
State: ID
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail:
Name of Utility Company: United Water
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment bri'efly:
The proposed application for monthly billing for United Water should not be accepted. To
date there have been no maj or issues regarding the 2 month billing cycle. And in order to
change the cycle it is going to cost the consumer more money --- is absolutely ridiculous.
The cost of water in this area is already outrageous and should not be increased so a few
more people can be hired and charge me more often. If anything, United Water should be
trying to reduce their overhead not increasing it. This change will not help anyone
budget, because it has been this way for years. Secondly, consumers are not going to
change their watering habits because of a monthly billing cycle. If it doesn t rain,
which it doesn t in the summer, then they are going to have to water their lawns, not
because they recevied a monthly billing. Thirdly, the frequent visits matter is again
another attempt at increasing overhead instead of a reduction of overhead. A United Water
employee has never gotten out of the vehicle for more than two seconds in order totroubleshoot any possible meter problems. And I don t believe this would change if they
came monthly.
This sounds like another attempt by United Water to increase pricing without a goodreason. I strongly oppose this increase and you should too. Monthly billing is not a
reason to increase their revienue by over $lM dollars! That's RIDICULOUS!
The form submited on http: / /www .puc. idaho. gov/forms/ipuc1/ipuc. html
IP address is 207.114.236.233
- - -- - - - --- - ----- ----- - - -- - - --- - - - - --
#;:' ~'P 101
Jean Jewell
/1'0 ~ I~'
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tuesday, October23,2007 8:39 AM
Tonya Clark; Jean Jewell; Gene Fadness; Ed Howell
PUC CommenUlnquiry Form
A Comment from Steve Weiss follows:
- ---- - - -- -- -------- - - -- - - --- --------
Case Number: uwl-w-07-04
Name: Steve Weiss
Address ~8778 w. wichita dr.
City: boiseState: id
Zip: 83709
Home Telephone: [phone]Contact E-Mail:
Name of Utility Company: united water/suez
Add to Mailing List:
Please describe your question or comment briefly:
~~, I read this appli99JJ.Rfl it appears to .E3- allother way for a utility to increase revenue
wi th out providing additional product.
Asking rate payers to increase the customer charge is preposterous. This portion of my
bill is greater than the billing for the water I actually use!
I am certainly able to set my budget to pay a bill bi-monthly. If people are un-able to do
the same, then let the utility bill each of them individually for the opportunity to have
monthly billing.
My opinion is this commission should deny this request.
The form submited on http://www.puc.idaho.gov/forms/ipucl/ipuc.html
IP address is 164.165.237.
- - - -- - ----- - ----- -- - ---- -- --- ------
j;jvr-
1/51 0
11d AV.
~. (f
Kurt Stadlbauer
2847 Chieftain Way
Boise, Idaho 83709
RECEi'/
lOU? a J).~!c1
",.
'-v kit uLi
, iP~~!tO .FiUBLiC, I ILl flc0 C';'h/,j.'~C"u. \' Ii ,'J v ,) I '.I
October 22, 2007
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
RE:United Water Revenue Increase Proposal
Dear Sir or Madam
I am appealing to your sense of logic and fair play to see through the efforts of United
Water Idaho, Inc. to increase their revenue by over a million dollars annually. They want
this additional revenue from the consumer to increase meter reading and billing performed
on a bi-monthly basis to a monthly basis. I am astounded how stupid they must think the
consumer is to believe that this proposal is designed to help the consumer budget and
conserve water due to monthly billings. Furthermore, I'm quite certain monthly visits to my
property to read the meter will not detect leaks. Admittedly we have had leaks in the past
and I can assure you United Water did not detect any of them.
The fact of the matter is that the switch to monthly billings along with all the administrative
bureaucracy that comes with it simply serves one purpose: TO INCREASE UNITED
WATER'S CASH FLOW! This is a self serving maneuver for the benefit of United Water.
The real insult is that they try to sell this as a consumer benefit to justify passing the costs
on to the consumer. Quite frankly I don t stand alone when I declare how painfully aware
we are of the "benefits" of doing business with United Water.
I have analyzed our cost of water over the years since we started receiving billings from
United Water in 1999 and found the cost of water to our home has increased an
average 39.90/0 per annum! This is even after dramatically decreasing the size of our
yard and installing efficient drip systems to conserve water. Their proposal to layer another75% cost increase on top of this extraordinary annual rate of increased cost is
unconscionable given that it serves United Water s fiscal policy and nothing more. If United
Water wants more revenue please hold them accountable for legitimate purposes instead of
engaging in deceptive practices targeting unwary consumers.
Sincerely,
Kurt Stadlbauer
UNITED WATER IDAHO INC.
8248 West Victory Road, Boise, 10 83709
O. Box 190420, Boise, ID 83719-0420
Tel: [phone]' Fax: [phone]
United Water...s~ez.
Dear United Water Idaho Customer:
On September 17 , 2007 United Water Idaho filed an Application with the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission (IPUC) asking for authority to convert to monthly meter reading and billing for all
customers. Currently, water meters are read and billed every two months.
There are a several benefits of monthly billing, including:
Easier budgeting and easier to pay than a bi-monthly bill;
Enhanced water conservation and lower bills through the provision of more timely
iJf/( \information on consumption , allowing customers time to make changes in water use
p..11-'practices during the irrigation season , thus saving money;
More frequent visits to your premises by United Water Idaho personnel , enabling quicker
detection and troubleshooting of customer leaks or meter problems.
In the Application United Water Idaho is proposing a revenue increase of $1 125 905. Under
the proposed Application the increase will be applied to the fixed Customer Charge portion of
your bill which is not affected by how much water you use. The requested increase would raise
rates for all customers by about $1.15 a month (about 4 cents a day), bringing the average
annual residential customer bill from $368.61 to $382.44, or 3.75%.
The proposed increase is necessary to cover the increased costs of additional personnel , billingl1.H~ \
and collections attributable solely to the conversion to monthly meter reading and billing. r,~5""'"
'(' .
To learn more about the company s Application please visit the company s website at
http://www.unitedwateridaho.com
The proposal to convert to monthly billing and the proposed increase in rates are subject to
review and approval by the I PUC. A complete copy of the proposal is avai lable at the company
office at 8248 W. Victory Road , Boise, ID and at the Commission s office at 472 W. Washington
Boise, ID. It is also available on-line at the IPUC website:
ttp://www.puc.state.id.us/FILEROOM/water/water.htm
You can also file a comment on the Application via the IPUC website at:
http://www.puc.state.id.us/scripts/polyform.dli/ipuc
Or mail comments to:
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
O. Box 83720
Boise , ID 83720-0074
Sincerely,
United Water Idaho
06010012007
, ~-,-
BorSE 337
~t7.-JL
p. CJ.~~?-zo
(()eP-!fifF;j) ~7rJ.
(j
00 7'1
' "
~I'l-'!
Ie"
.;
1a /Ul ,/1",
;. I~
October 19,2007
In response to: United Water Idaho Letter
HEGEr::
nr'~OCT 'f"'! UU t. tU'j d:
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
IOpe,liC) PUBLIC
uTILITIES COMM!SSIO,
Subject: Revenue Increase
Dear Board Members
I recently received a letter from United Water Idaho Inc. stating they had filed an application with
the PUC requesting authority to convert to monthly meter reading and billing. And, of course, an
increase in revenue to cover the expense of the change would be necessary.
I am writing to suggest to you that this is an unnecessary change. In fact, I would suggest they
change to quarterly meter reading and if monthly billing is preferred, an optional level pay plan
could be implemented for those customers preferring making monthly payments.
One of the benefits they mentioned was "Enhanced water conservation and lower bills through the
provision of more timely information on consumption, allowing customers time to make changes
in water use practices during the irrigation season . I suggest, for those few customers who
watch consumption that closely, they could read their own meter through the irrigation season.
An instruction on meter reading could be included with the billing occasionally, as is done by
Idaho Power Co. and Intermountain Gas.
Please consider these and other consumers suggestions when making your decision on this
proposed added expense for home owners.
Sincerely,
Gage Jasperson
5219 Cassia St
Boise, Idaho 83705
/b~/u!:;.Lf/o1
,/f; J1J/ 10
~ 1 02#~ tfJ!
1J.~60 ~
~'
OU( IW I 0 5/it
~ '
~u: ~o~ M.( tMt ;;tt
QfLvr~
% ~
I~,
pAl' v..~? j?1
~1 ~c ~'
('~?(/!~~1
'/)
/0 &a. ~~.A' &Jf~
j)~1~1;f
I,
. (,,
/(~~~c.--- r---..n
./~
~(k cJ~+
~CA4VA
~~,
so
~~~
uJ~tv~
'$f :r:~
tW ~k :f'f?fJC A-~/
~~~.
VJ--.
' ~
~-j!fLc, C!-e;~
Out, CaiLce! I
(j?&~- ~~ -
t~~
(! ~. ~,~,
r~L/
:wu-e /(k
q.
f~ f1 ==----- C . 0
-\ g
r=- -'
:.:;6 ~'J~ nfi"..~' -,
OY;;:
(").....' ,.
rT\
--.. ........ .
~fu ~
(P-/---
J3e Ire- xr, r:'31D7
Mr. Patrick Fitzsimons
" ..
8957 Ottawa Ct.
, '
Boise; ID" 83709
J;(
~ -
;4-tAe.-,/ /'6 /O/-zA(01
UNITED WATER IDAHO INC.
8248 West Victory Road, Boise, ID 83709
O. Box 190420, Boise, 1083719-0420
Tel: [phone] . Fax: [phone]
,/ ~?(
United Water
..:s.
'-""
e z.
Dear United Water Idaho Customer:
On September 17 , 2007 United Water Idaho filed an Application with the Idaho Public Utilities
Commission (IPUC) asking for authority to convert to monthly meter reading and billing for all
customers. Currently, water meters are read and billed every two months.
There are a several benefits of monthly billing, including:
Easier budgeting and easier to pay than a bi-monthly bill;
Enhanced water conservation and lower bills through the provision of more timely
information on consumption , allowing customers time to make changes in water use
practices during the irrigation season , thus saving money;
More frequent visits to your premises by United Water Idaho personnel , enabling quicker
detection and troubleshooting of customer leaks or meter problems.
In the Application United Water Idaho is proposing a revenue increase of $1 125 905. Under
the proposed Application the increase will be applied to the fixed Customer Charge portion of
your bill which is not affected by how much water you use. The requested increase would raise
rates for all customers by about $1.15 a month (about 4 cents a day), bringing the average
annual residential customer bill from $368.61 to $382.44 , or 3.75%.
.",,;;.
~~~I8-'_lif.*\--~~~~~:;;;:%"'ii',"'
To learn more about the company s Application please visit the company s website at
http://www. u n itedwateridaho.com
The proposal to convert to monthly billing and the proposed increase in rates are subject to
review and approval by the IPUC. A complete copy of the proposal is available at the company
office at 8248 W. Victory Road , Boise , ID and at the Commission s office at 472 W. Washington
Boise , ID. It is also available on-line at the IPUC website:
ttp://www.puc.state. id .us/FI LEROOM/water/water. htm
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
O. Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0074
o~:
--I :AJ
You can also file a comment on the Application via the IPUC website at:
http://www.puc.state.id.us/scripts/polyform.dli/ipuc
Or mail comments to:
;po
:J:~
to
-.J
Sincerely,
/1
p() 1f(6~ E
United Water Idah
~ I / 'I ;f
uvf L /) Y DCA..
'""'00""" v
~I)~"i T)t z. '1 J3
~L - A
f: ~F J- -
-:r AI c.. i~ (? A '5 12 5 ! /1-!-.- c:& J S c;; ~ O. V r.
0,,1
L'/
'/ () ""
ItR :IN Ti!
of
U/I( 1
vJ IG~
lOve If;;; T
dl\(T,
f\J u e L L J..I\!
(;.
4- 5 :z 5 /!AJP
Y"' .:---
CO 5 vV ~7
~f(.
Mr. Don Bartels
, 223 S Owyhee sf
Boise, ID 83705"1633
BOISE TO 837
"""'"........""""', ". -",...
J8 O,t:T '-:;'nn7 p",
' ..... ..........,
-..F.. iI",d::' .
,.".",.
.;!n.
""-
7- 'D kUMP~10);P~~L.
'J L
LA ) J ~ -r
p,
o.
x. ~ 7 J.
() 7-- "3
~ D (f '3 7 ~
(j-
(J 0
REG
LUnl OCT \:1
. :., '" .
8: \ "
E; :::: i:
~: ;'::; + ;'::,: ;::; ";:: (~
H:;
j;;;
iU;;;LiH;
)j",
IL;:L,;LL;