HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040319min.docIDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
MARCH 19, 2004 – 11:00 A.M.
In attendance were Commissioners Paul Kjellander, Marsha Smith and Dennis Hansen.
Commissioner Kjellander called the meeting to order. The first order of business was approval of the CONSENT AGENDA, items 1—4. Commissioner Kjellander noted that there had been an amendment to item 2, changing the written comment deadline for Staff and interested parties to April 30, 2004 and the Company’s comment deadline to May 7, 2004. There were no further comments or questions. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda items. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously.
The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:
Don Howell’s March 17, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: Expiration of the Commission’s TRS Administrator Contract.
Mr. Howell reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Smith commented that the Commission is lucky to have Mr. Dunbar and we ought to hold onto him as long as we can because he is a bargain. Commissioner Hansen asked for clarification about the proposed salary increase from $30,000 to $33,000. Mr. Howell replied that Mr. Dunbar’s hourly rate will stay the same, but Staff is recommending that he be allowed to work more hours to address the new federal issues. Commissioner Smith made a motion to extend the contract as proposed in Staff’s memo. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously.
John Hammond’s March 17, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: In the Matter of Idaho Power Company’s Application for Authority to Implement an Irrigation Peak Clipping Pilot Program, Case No IPC-E-04-03.
Mr. Hammond reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Kjellander asked if the irrigators will be allowed to choose and/or change the date their service will be interrupted during the irrigation season. Mr. Hammond replied that the company will choose the weekday for the irrigator. Mr. Kjellander asked if the irrigator will be informed as to what day their service will be affected. A representative of Idaho Power replied that the irrigator’s load will be interrupted on the same day each week, but Idaho Power will pick the day. Mr. Kjellander asked if Idaho Power intends to spread the project out over multiple operations. Mr. Hammond stated there is an intent to spread out the program over four regions. Quentin Nesbitt of Idaho Power clarified that the plan depends on the number of volunteers, and it will be spread over as many customers as possible, and not just offered on a first-come, first-served basis.
Commissioner Hansen commented that it will be very beneficial to the pilot program to have the three options to help the PUC determine in the future if there is an interest in more than just the four hours a day, one day a week.
Commissioner Smith stated that she was leaning toward approving the Company’s program as filed with the exception of having the report due on or before December 1st so adjustments can be made for the 2005 irrigation season.
Commissioner Kjellander asked Quentin Nesbitt of Idaho Power if the prolonged irrigation programs could be detrimental to the irrigators’ crops. Mr. Nesbitt stated that most systems during the peak of the season are running pretty much 24/7. He stated that there is sometimes a drop in load on Sundays, but with any interruption the irrigator will need to “work to make it work.”
Commissioner Hansen asked if it would be a burden to the Company to offer three options. Mr. Nesbitt replied that it wouldn’t be a huge burden, and that’s why they did offer the options, but it would be a bit harder to manage the installation of the timers and the billing. Commissioner Hansen asked if some irrigators might be on such a tight budget that they would pick a different crop in order to participate in the option to be interrupted three times, thus getting a lower rate. Mr. Nesbitt stated that with the incentive proposed for the option of being interrupted three times, he didn’t think it would happen because there wasn’t that much difference and the reduction wouldn’t be that significant.
Mr. Kjellander stated that in order to get the program going with as little confusion as possible, he wanted to stick with the original option filing presented by the Company, and that would be his motion, including Commissioner Smith’s concern about filing the report by December 1st.
Commissioner Smith stated she could be persuaded toward Commissioner Hansen’s viewpoint, and Commissioner Kjellander replied that in order to get unanimity, he would withdraw his motion. Commissioner Smith stated that the important considerations are that Idaho Power can administer option three without administratively burdening itself and to find out what the irrigators are interested in.
Commissioner Hansen commented that the Commission had received tremendous input from the irrigators during the recent hearings on the Idaho Power rate case telling the PUC how critical a few percentage points or dollars are to them, and if the Company can implement the program with three options then the irrigation customers will have the benefit of the doubt. He made a motion to accept Idaho Power’s application with the three options and with the report being filed before December 1, 2004. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
John Hammond’s March 17, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: In the Matter of Staff’s Petition to Initiate a Commission Investigation to Determine if OCMC, Inc. Violated the Terms of Its Price List and the Commission’s Operator Services and Pay Telephone Rule 104.4, Case No GNR-T-04-4.
Mr. Hammond reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Smith made a motion to open an investigation and set a prehearing conference. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
Scott Woodbury’s March 17, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: Determination of EWG “Eligible Facility” Status, Skookumchuck Hydroelectric Plant, Case No. PAC-E-04-01 (PacifiCorp).
Commissioner Smith asked if she could have more time to consider items 8, 9, and 10 and proposed going off the record. The meeting was adjourned until 11:45 a.m.
The meeting was reconvened and Mr. Woodbury reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve the sale by PacifiCorp with the findings proposed by Staff. She noted there had been a public comment from a person who is opposed to the sale and who argued that the Commission shouldn’t let go of any utility’s generating resources. She commented that the resource is very small, however, and is definitely higher cost than anything we foresee the utility needing. She also noted that the major transaction was already completed during the late 1990s by the sale of Centralia, and it just makes sense to approve the sale. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
Scott Woodbury’s March 16, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: Residential “Budget Bill” Payment Program, Case No. UWI-W-04-01 (United Water).
Mr. Woodbury reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Hansen complimented United Water for making a proposal with the concern of easing the payment burden for some of its customers. He stated that judging from the comments the Commission received, there was opposition to the program and he questioned if there would be much support for it. He stated that the higher summer rates encourage conservation and he questioned if customers on level pay would conserve. He noted there is not an abundance of water in this area and that is why we have the current pricing policy in place. He said although it may be a heavy burden for some customers in the summer, it does encourage some conservation. He said due to the cost of implementing the program and the comments the Commission received, he was opposed to approving the Company’s request.
Commissioner Smith noted she is looking forward to the opportunity to fix the rate design for United Water so it includes a base block of usage at a yearly rate and then maybe a summer adder for any overage, thereby giving the price signal in the summer but also allowing customers to have a base use amount at a reasonable rate throughout the year. She said this was her dissenting opinion in a previous case, and she looked forward to trying it again. She also stated that she wondered why the Company can’t provide the option of letting customers pay half of their bills one month and the other half the next month, which would be easier and cheaper than trying to impose a plan that costs $72,000 to implement. She asked the Company what would happen if a customer chose to implement on their own the option of paying half their bill one month and half the next—would they be disconnected or receive disconnect notices? Patty Foss of United Water replied that if a customer does not pay a bill in full, then they receive a past due notice 35 days after the bill date, and the past due notices are only generated on amounts over $25. She said customers can certainly make arrangements to pay bills in two installments or more.
Commissioner Kjellander stated he agreed with Commissioner Hansen that the dilution of the price signal defeats in part the purpose of the summer pricing schedule. He made a motion to reject the Company’s proposal at this point, noting that the Commission appreciated the opportunity to review it and the time and effort the Company put into it. He noted the Commission would have a chance to review something similar in eight months as part of a larger case filing. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
Weldon Stutzman’s March 17, 2004 Decision Memorandum re: Petition of Idaho Telephone Association for Suspension of Number Portability Requirements, Case No. GNR-T-04-01.
Mr. Stutzman reviewed his Decision Memo. Commissioner Smith made a motion to allow the six-month suspension requested. She said customers are paying for number portability so they ought to get it as quickly as they can. She stated she agreed that temporary suspension should last no longer than 180 days, or until November 24, 2004, and that the Commission should get bi-monthly updates to see if the companies are going to be able to make the date. She stated that the Commission needs to look at the porting processes and procedures and it would be reasonable if those were available at the end of August. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.
There were no further items on the agenda and Commissioner Kjellander adjourned the meeting.
DATED this _____ day of March, 2004.
____________________________________
COMMISSION SECRETARY
1