981125.docx

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER HANSEN
COMMISSIONER NELSON
COMMISSIONER SMITH
MYRNA WALTERS
TONYA CLARK
DON HOWELL
STEPHANIE MILLER
DAVE SCHUNKE
GEORGE FINK
RICK STERLING
BEVERLY BARKER
DAVID SCOTT
WORKING FILE
FROM:SCOTT WOODBURY
DATE:NOVEMBER 25, 1998
RE:CASE NO. UWI-W-98-3
COST OF SERVICE/RATE DESIGN
MOTION TO COMPEL
On November 20, 1998, Sharon Ullman filed a Motion to Compel (attached) in Case No. UWI-W-98-3 requesting disclosure by United Water of specific names and addresses of customers who have complained to the Company about water quality.  
United Water in declining to provide the requested information cited concerns about customer confidentiality and in its filed Reply (attached) specifically notes Rule 403 of the Commission’s Rules Governing Customer Relations (IDAPA 31.21.01) which specifies to whom customer complaint records may be released.  The rule provides that utilities must maintain records of such complaints and that they must be available upon request by the “concerned customer, the customer’s agent possessing written authorization, or the Commission.”  Ms. Ullman, the Company contends, does not fall within any of the identified categories of persons to whom such records may be released.  The Company has provided a numerical total of customers who have complained about water quality.
It is Ms. Ullman’s belief that United Water customers do not necessarily have an expectation of confidentiality regarding complaint records.  Ms. Ullman cites instances where customers’ names and addresses, as reflected in Commission complaint records, have been made part of the public record in Commission cases.  (Staff would contend that in the instances of public records cited by Ms. Ullman disclosures were at the customer’s request and/or with his/her consent).
Staff Analysis
Staff agrees with the Company’s analysis in this matter—specific names and addresses should not be disclosed.
Commission Decision
How does the Commission wish to handle Ms. Ullman’s Motion to Compel?  Pursuant to Procedural Rule 256, the Commission may consider and decide prehearing motions with or without oral argument.

Scott Woodbury
vld/M:UWI-W-98-3.sw3