20041116Decision Memo.pdf

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
CO MMISSI 0 NER HANSEN
COMMISSION SECRETARY
COMMISSION STAFF
FROM:DON HOWELL
DATE:NOVEMBER 15, 2004
SUBJECT:A VISTA'APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF A CUSTOMER
EXCHANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN A VISTA UTILITIES AND
NORTHERN LIGHTS, INC., CASE NO. A VU-04-
On November 3, 2004, Avista Corporation dba Avista Utilities filed an Application
seeking the Commission s approval of a contract between Avista and Northern Lights to
exchange an existing customer. The agreement between the parties is being submitted for the
Commission s review pursuant to the provisions of the Electric Suppliers Stabilization Act
(ESSA) and specifically Idaho Code ~~ 61-333(1) and 61-334B. The Avista and Northern
Lights exchange agreement is dated September 22, 2004.
THE APPLICATION
The parties propose to exchange one existing customer. More specifically, Northern
Lights will allow A vista to serve Jerry VanOoyen located at 43 Gun Club Road in Sagle, Idaho.
Mr. VanOoyen is currently a Northern Lights customer. His property is encompassed by a new
residential development known as Summer Haven. In accordance with the ESSA, Avista will
provide electric service to the new development. Consequently, the parties have agreed that it
would be more efficient to serve Mr. VanOoyen by switching his electric supplier from Northern
Lights to A vista.
Northern Lights and Mr. VanOoyen have executed a "Termination of Service
Agreement" dated September 9, 2004. This latter agreement calls for Northern Lights to remove
its facilities used to serve Mr. VanOoyen so that he may be served by A vista.
Idaho Code ~ 61-332B prohibit an electric supplier from serving a customer already
served by another supplier, except as otherwise ordered by the Commission. Idaho Code ~ 61-
DECISION MEMORANDUM
334B(1) provides that any exception to the anti-pirating prOVISIon must be reviewed and
approved by the Commission. This section further provides that the Commission may only
approve the exchange of a customer after finding that the transfer is consistent with the purposes
of the ESSA set out in Idaho Code ~ 61-332.
ST AFF RECOMMENDATION
Given the agreements of the parties and the customer, Staff recommends that this
Application be processed under Modified Procedure.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission concur that this matter should be processed under Modified
Procedure?
Donald L. Howell, II
blslM:A VUEO406 dh
DECISION MEMORANDUM