The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUPLE964v2.docxSUSAN HAMLIN DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PO BOX 83720 BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074 (208) 334-0300 Street Address for Express Mail: 472 W WASHINGTON BOISE ID 83702-5983 Attorney for the Commission Staff BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) OF UTAH POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY)CASE NO. UPL-E-96-4 FOR APPROVAL OF NEW TARIFF ) PROVISIONS RELATING TO NEW SERVICE)FIRST PRODUCTION ATTACHMENTS AND DISTRIBUTION LINE)REQUEST OF THE INSTALLMENTS OR ALTERATIONS.)COMMISSION STAFF )TO UTAH POWER & LIGHT ___________________________________________) The Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its attorney of record, Susan Hamlin, Deputy Attorney General, requests that Utah Power and Light Company, a division of PacifiCorp, provide the following documents and information, pursuant to Rule 225 of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission’s Rules of Procedure, IDAPA 31.01.01, on or before THURSDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1996. This Production Request is to be considered as continuing, andUtah Power and Light Company is requested to provide, by way of supplementary responses, additional documents that it or any person acting on its behalf may later obtain that will augment the documents produced. For each item, please indicate the name of the person(s) preparing the answers, along with the job title of such person(s) and the witness who can sponsor the answer at hearing. Unless stated otherwise, all requests should be considered for Utah Power’s or PacifiCorp’s Idaho jurisdiction only. Request No. 1:Provide copies of all line extension policies currently in effect in each of the state jurisdictions in which PacifiCorp serves. Request No. 2:Provide copies of any studies, reviews, work papers or other information which the Company relied on in concluding that the allowances provided under the policy currently in effect “...are not economically justified and provide subsidies to some customers at the expense of others” as stated on page 2 of the cover letter attached to the Company’s application. Request No. 3:Provide copies of any studies, reviews, work papers or other information relied on by the Company to support the statement on page 2 of the cover letter attached to the Company’s application which states “A study of the revenue requirement necessary to support new line extensions showed that one times annual revenue allowance to be neutral, or cost justified.” In addition, please explain in detail what is meant by the terms “neutral” and “cost justified.” Request No. 4:Provide copies of Utah Power’s previous line extension policies in Idaho for as many years as are available. Request No. 5:Provide information showing an analysis or calculation of the estimated annual revenue per customer for each customer class. Show what the estimated annual revenue has been for each customer class over the past 30 years. Request No. 6:What has the Company’s annual investment in new distribution facilities been for each year for the past 30 years? Request No. 7:What was the basis for the extension allowances of terminal facilities plus 300 feet of distribution line, or alternatively for non-residential customers three times their estimated annual revenue, as provided under the current policy? Provide any analysis or other information previously prepared which supports these allowances. Request No. 8:Provide work papers or other information used by the Company to estimate the current cost of terminal facilities for typical customers in each customer class. Request No. 9:Prepare examples to illustrate the effect of the proposed policy change for hypothetical typical customers in each customer class, including individual residential customers and residential subdivisions, irrigators, small and large commercial customers, and industrial customers. Request No. 10:Provide an explanation of the rationale behind the Company’s proposal to implement a contract tracking charge. Request No. 11:Provide information showing how the Company arrived at the proposed amounts of the contract tracking charge. Request No. 12:How would contract tracking charges be booked for accounting purposes? Request No. 13:Are annually incurred costs as defined on sheet 2R.1 the same as facilities charges as the term is used in numerous places throughout the proposed tariff and as are specified on sheet 300.2 of the proposed tariff? Request No. 14:How is demand determined for purposes of applying either the proposed or existing tariff? Is demand considered the coincident nameplate capacity of the Customer’s equipment, the estimated coincident demand, the total non-coincident demand, or something else? Request No. 15:Are there any terms defined in the general definitions (sheet 2R.1) which are not used in subsequent sections of the proposed policy? If so, can these terms be deleted? Request No. 16:What is the basis for an amount of $200 as a proposed minimum engineering cost? Request No. 17:Provide information used by the Company to establish the amounts proposed as facilities charges as specified on sheet 300.2 of the proposed tariff. Request No. 18:Provide an explanation of the rationale behind contract minimum billings. For Utah Power’s Idaho customers, how many monthly billings in each month for the past three years have been contract minimum billings? How many total monthly billings have there been during the same time period? (Or in general, how often will a contract minimum billing be applied?) Provide examples showing how contract minimum billings are calculated and applied. Request No. 19:How are engineering costs billed to new customers? Are the costs calculated for each specific job? Are the costs shown separately on the customer’s bill, or are they included in a general overhead? If the costs are included in a general overhead, what is the general overhead rate and how much of the general overhead rate do engineering costs represent? Request No. 20:What constitutes a large, complex or speculative line extension as discussed on sheet 12R.1 of the proposed tariff? Request No. 21:Explain how the Company determines line extension costs. Provide a copy of any and all information which the Company uses to develop cost estimates. Request No. 22:Provide a sample of a complete cost estimate with all supporting cost breakdowns for the following: a) single residential customer; b) residential subdivision; c) irrigation customer; d) non-residential customer < 1000 kW; e) non-residential customer > 1000 kW. Request No. 23:Are customers billed for line extension costs based on the estimated costs or actual costs? Request No. 24:Does the Company compile and record the actual construction costs once construction has been completed? Request No. 25:Under what circumstances might a service conductor serve more than one customer? (See sheet 12R.3 Section 2(a)(1)of the proposed tariff) Request No. 26:In cases where the service conductor exceeds 100 feet, how is the cost for additional footage calculated? If the service conductor is less than 100 feet, would a customer receive credit for the reduced cost? Could any credit received be applied towards other line extension costs? Request No. 27:Provide information showing the frequency in which there are none, one, two, three or more than three additional customers connecting to a line extension within the five year refund period. Request No. 28:Do facilities charges change (increase or decrease) for a line extension if additional customers connect? Request No. 29:If no contract administration charge was paid by the original applicant for a line extension, would all additional applicants on the same line be allowed to connect at no cost for the shared portion of the line? Request No. 30:Explain why non-residential customers 1000 kW or less may be required to pay a contract minimum billing for five years, while non-residential customers over 1000 kW must pay a contract minimum billing for as long as service is taken but in no case less than five years. Request No. 31:Explain the rationale for a termination charge for non-residential, over 1000 kW customers if service is terminated within the first 10 years. What compensation is provided by the termination charge that would not be covered by the contract minimum billing? What costs are a termination charge intended to cover? Why is a termination charge only required for customers over 1000 kW? Request No. 32:Why is the Company proposing a different refund method for vested interest refunds for non-residential customers over 1000 kW than for all other customers? Request No. 33:Provide additional explanation or clarification of the following statement which is included in Section 4(b) on sheet 12R.6 of the proposed tariff: “The Company may require the Developer to pay for facilities to provide additional service reliability or future development.” Request No. 34:Provide additional explanation or clarification of the following statements which are included in Section 5(a)(1) on sheet 12R.6 of the proposed tariff: “An Applicant may contract with someone other than the Company to build a Line Extension. The Applicant must contract with the Company before starting construction of a Line Extension.” Request No. 35:How are costs for design, specifications, material standards and inspections as discussed in Section 5(a)(3) on sheet 12R.7 estimated? Does an applicant pay these costs if the Company builds the line instead? If so, is the applicant billed explicitly or through an overhead charge? Request No. 36:How long would a customer for temporary service be required to pay a contract minimum billing? Request No. 37:Does a customer who requests temporary service from an existing line extension pay the same amount for sharing the line as a permanent customer would pay? Request No. 38:Provide a list of all line extensions made in Idaho in 1994 and 1995. For each line extension, include the following: a. actual cost of the line extension; b. amount of allowances and refunds granted to the Applicant as part of the extension; c. net amount paid by the Applicant to the Company for the extension; d. description of the Applicant, such as residential subdivision, single residence, duplex, commercial, industrial, irrigation, etc. e.voltage, phase, and length of the line extension; f.whether the line extension was overhead or underground; g.whether Company, Company contractor, or customer installed the line. Request No. 39:What was the average length of service conductor installed for all residential line extensions in 1994 and 1995? Request No. 40:What is the Company’s embedded costs by customer class for transformers, meters, services and new line extensions, or alternatively, for FERC accounts 360-373? Provide all work papers showing these calculations. Request No. 41:If the Company’s proposed line extension policy is adopted and implemented, how would the Company’s annual revenue requirement be affected? Provide information to quantify the effect. Request No. 42:Provide a list of the refunds issued for line extensions for each of the past three years. For each refund, show the amount of the refund, the refund recipient and the cumulative amount refunded to each recipient in relation to the total amount the recipient paid for his line extension. Request No. 43:How many new line extensions were made by the Company in each of the past five years? DATED at Boise, Idaho, this day of September 1996. ______________________________________ Susan Hamlin Deputy Attorney General SH:RPS/jo/umisc/prodreq/uple964.sh