20031015min.doc

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
OCTOBER 15, 2003 – 1:30 P.M.

In attendance were Commissioners Paul Kjellander, Dennis Hansen, and Marsha Smith.

Commissioner Kjellander called the meeting to order. The first order of business was approval of the CONSENT AGENDA, items 1—9. There was no discussion. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to approve items 1-9. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:

Daniel Klein’s October 9, 2003 Decision Memorandum re: Formal Complaint of Lori Lee.

Mr. Klein reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Smith asked Mr. Howell to confirm her understanding of the statute, particularly Section 61-641 and 61-642, which clearly states that claims should be brought within three years from the time the cause of action accrues. She stated that when the customer moved in she knew or should have known she had a light in her back yard, and every month she received a bill with the charge on it, and the fact she didn’t inquire as to what the charge was for is not the responsibility of the company. Commissioner Smith said in her mind, the Commission is statutorily prohibited from requiring the company to refund the charges for the additional four years, and she would be opposed to accepting this as a formal complaint.

Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to reject the request to turn the matter into a formal complaint. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

Don Howell’s October 10, 2003 Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Power Letter Regarding the Sale of Three Buildings No longer in Use, Case No. IPC-E-03-04.

Kathy Stockton reviewed Mr. Howell’s Decision Memo. Commissioner Kjellander asked if it was her conclusion that the buildings are not “used and useful” as they stand today. Ms. Stockton replied the company is no longer using the buildings. Commissioner Kjellander asked what the fair market value of the buildings is. Ms. Stockton replied the estimated value of the Cambridge operations center is about $120,000; the Homedale operations center $130,000; and the Homedale office about $87,500. She stated these amounts are less than the book value for the three properties.

Commissioner Hansen asked if this is the first time a regulated utility has disposed of assets like this. Mr. Howell replied that this is not the first time we have had utilities dispose of property, but what has happened in the past is that the Company has informally asked for a letter ruling from the Commission, and in his discussions with the Company, he suggested that we treat this as an application so there will be a more formalized process rather than the Commission simply informally making a decision and sending a letter that would be hard to track in the future. He said that in this case, Staff suggested the Company’s letter be treated as an application, and the Company is in agreement with the process, although it doesn’t necessarily agree with the analysis regarding 61-328.
Commissioner Smith asked if it was necessary for the Commission to formally make a finding as to whether 61-328 applies or not, given the Company is satisfied with the procedure proposed by the Staff. Mr. Howell replied that Staff wants to formalize the process with an Order instead of a letter. Commissioner Smith stated she didn’t mind issuing an Order, but questioned why the PUC couldn’t just adopt the procedure without addressing the question of the statute. Terri Carlock added there is a need for some response because the Company is entering into leases on some of the properties with an option to buy and the company needs to know whether it needs to come to the Commission when they sell.

Commissioner Kjellander stated that the bottom line is that if the property is sold and it is currently rate based, it is going to be dealt with in some future rate proceeding, depending upon when it is sold. He asked if it is sold between now and the conclusion of the rate case, if it will get included in rate base. Ms. Carlock replied that if the property is leased with an option to buy later, then it would not be part of this rate case. She said the question of whether the facilities should be in rate base or not would be part of the case, and the outcome of the sale would be in a sale case if the Commission determines this statute applies.

Commissioner Smith stated the implications of a decision in this matter are more far reaching than she first imagined, and she would appreciate more time to think about it. She requested that the matter be held. Commissioner Kjellander asked if there were any objections, and there were none, so the matter was held.

Commissioner Kjellander stated that items 12 and 13 under FULLY SUBMITTED MATTERS would be deliberated privately. There was no further business before the Commission and he adjourned the meeting.

DATED this ______ day of October, 2003.

____________________________________
COMMISSION SECRETARY

1