20030502Comments.pdf

'if~
LISA D. NORDSTROM
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074
[phone]
IDAHO BAR NO. 5733
HECEIVEO mFILED
ZO03 MAY -I PH~: 07
!tJf~\hj F'UdLiC
UTILITIES COt"1MISSIOH
Street Address for Express Mail:
472 W. WASHINGTON
BOISE, IDAHO 83702-5983
Attorney for the Commission Staff
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTIGATION
OF ATLANTA POWER COMPANY'S RATES
AND CUSTOMER SERVICE.
COMMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION STAFF
CASE NO. ATL-O3-
COMES NOW the Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its
Attorney of record, Lisa D. Nordstrom, Deputy Attorney General, and in response to the Notice
of Proposed Order and Notice of Comment Deadline issued on April 10, 2003 , submits the
following comments.
On September 11 , 2000, the Commission received a petition from residents of Atlanta
Idaho, enumerating their concerns about the electric service being provided by Atlanta Power
Company (Atlanta Power; Company). The petition requested "a formal investigation into the
reliability of electrical service for the Atlanta townsite." In October 2000, Staff proposed to
audit the Company, compile outage information, identify potential improvements and
associated costs and survey customers concerning their desire to improve service reliability and
the amount they are willing to pay to do so." The Commission approved Staffs
recommendation that the customer complaints initially be processed on an informal basis.
STAFF COMMENTS MAY 1 2003
STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff worked with the Company and its customers during a two-year informal review
period that culminated in actions to address the concerns expressed in the residents' petition. In
March 2003 , Staff submitted a report that identified these improvements as including the hiring
of a third person who lives in Atlanta to assist with system problems and the establishment of a
local telephone number to keep customers informed of planned outages and progress on repairs
when the system is out of service. Staff recommended no formal action in these areas.
Staff also recommended that Atlanta Power continue to bring in a leased generator for a
multi-day outage rather than purchase a new one for several reasons. First, a survey of the 65
Atlanta Power customers indicates that only one of the 50 responding customers is willing to pay
substantially higher rates to have Atlanta Power own an on-site backup generator. Second
nearly a third of Atlanta Power customers have already invested in personal backup generators.
Moreover, a Company-owned backup generator cannot provide electricity to all customers under
all outage scenarios.
STAFF RESPONSE TO CUSTOMER COMMENTS
As of April 30, 2003, the Commission had received 5 comments, one of which was
signed by approximately 10 customers of record and 6 other interested parties. Staffhas
reviewed these comments and reaffirms the results of its investigation and its recommendations.
However, Staff wishes to provide additional information in response to certain statements
contained in the customer comments dated April 26, 2003.
The individuals that drafted the comments were concerned that "again, most customers
have not been notified ofthe telephone number to call." The Notice of Proposed Order and
Notice of Comment Deadline to which the interested parties were responding contained the local
telephone number (864-2228) that was established to keep customers informed of planned
outages and progress on repairs when the system is out of service. This Notice was mailed to the
customers of Atlanta Power on April 10, 2003.
The comments also ask in part why they were "virtually ignored by the P.C. for over
two years since the petition." As noted in previous Staff documents, Staff has had significant
ongoing communication with the individuals who wrote these customer comments.
STAFF COMMENTS MAY 1 2003
The comments also state in part that it took "over two years to do an audit." While the
investigation as a whole took that amount of time, the audit did not. Also, the individuals who
wrote these customer comments seem to perceive the over-earnings estimated in the audit as
overcharges to the Company s customers. This is not the case. In addition, no generator rental
costs were paid during the test year of the audit. Based upon invoices reviewed for subsequent
rentals, a month's generator rental is more than $3 000. During the course of the audit, Staff also
reviewed the Company s bank statements, returned checks, invoices for the test year and
subsequent years, and obtained financial documentation from organizations with which the
Company had such a relationship.
The individuals who wrote these customer comments also suggest other options to
provide electrical service, such as allowing the town access to the lines and revenues of the
Company to purchase and continuously run a diesel generator. Staff continues to believe that
Atlanta Power Company is the most realistic alternative to provide affordable and reliable
electrical service to the residents of Atlanta.
The comments also take issue with the number of Atlanta Power customers of record
identified in the signatures to the petition submitted to the Commission in September 2000. As
noted in the October 2000 Decision Memorandum
, "
Staff reviewed the many signatures on the
petition and identified the names of six customers of record. Some of the others apparently are
not customers while others are members of households where one member is the customer of
record.We note that the Commission s Utility Customer Relations Rule 5 defines a customer
as "having applied for, been accepted, and is currently receiving service from a utility or is
assuming responsibility for payment of service provided to another.
PROCEDURAL RECOMMENDATION
Before the Commission renders a final decision in this case, Staff would like the
opportunity to respond directly to customers in writing regarding issues raised in the comments.
Staff further recommends that the Commission schedule a public workshop in Atlanta in early
June so that Staff may discuss its response and/or resolve any remaining customer concerns in
person. Following the workshop, the Commission may wish to allow interested parties to file
supplemental comments before the Commission issues a final Order.
STAFF COMMENTS MAY 1 2003
Respectively submitted this &y of May 2003.
IJ
Lisa D. Nordstrom
Deputy Attorney General
Technical Staff: Keith Hessing
Patricia Harms
Carol Cooper
I:\transfer\lnatleO3.11nkhphcc
STAFF COMMENTS MAY 1 2003
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 1ST DAY OF MAY 2003 SERVED
THE FOREGOING COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION STAFF IN CASE
NO. ATL-03-, BY MAILING A COpy THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, TO THE
FOLLOWING:
LYNN STEVENSON
A TLANT A POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 100
FAIRFIELD ID 83327-0100
CONLEY WARD
GIVENS PURSLEY
PO BOX 2720
BOISE ID 83701-2720
1/if#
SE RET
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE