20090527Summons.pdf

IDAHO
PUBLIC UTiliTIEScommission
C.L. "Butch" Otter, Governor
P.O. Box 83720, Boise, Idaho 83720..0074
Jim D. Kempton, President
Marsha H. Smith, Commissioner
Mack A. Redford, Commissioner
May 27,2009
Via Certfied Mail
David J. Meyer, Esq.
Senior Vice President and General Counsel
A vista Corporation dba A vista Utilities
.. 1411 E. Mission Ave.
Spokane, W A 99220
Re: Case No. A VU-E-09-05
Dear Mr. Meyer:
Enclosed please find a Sumons and Complaint issued against A vista Utilities. As
directed in the Sumons, you are to file a wrtten answer or motion in defense of said
Complaint with this Commission within 21 days of the service date on the Sumons.
Your answer may be in a narative form and describe the facts, circumstances, and
rues/laws that apply.
I have also enclosed a copy of Staffs Decision Memorandum regarding the Complaint
and additional correspondence from Mr. Pawlik.
Sincerely,~£i.~
JeUD. Jewell
Commssion Secretar
Enclosures
Cc: Herbert Pawlik
Linda Gervais, Manager, Avista Regulatory Policy
Located at 472 West Washington Street, Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone]
Office of the Secretar
Service Date
May 27, 2009
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
HERBERT PAWLIK,
Complainant,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
SUMMONS
vs.CASE NO. A VU-E-09-05
A VISTA UTILITIES,
Respondent.
THE STATE OF IDAHO SENDS GREETINGS TO THE ABOVE-NAMED RESPONDENT.
YOU AR HEREBY NOTIFIED that a Complaint has been filed with the Idaho
Public Utilities Commission by the above-named Complainant; and
YOU AR HEREBY DIRECTED to fie a written answer or wrtten motion in
defense of said Complaint within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Sumons; and
YOU AR HEREBY NOTIFIED that uness you do so with the time herein
specified, the Idaho Public Utilities Commission may take such action against you as is prayed
for in the Complaint or as it deems appropriate under Title 61 or Title 62 of the Idaho Code.
WITNESS my hand and the seal of the Idaho Public Utilities Commssion this ;i1 tl
day of May, 2009.
(SEAL)
DECISION MEMORAUM
TO:COMMSSIONER KEMPTON
COMMSSIONER SMIH
. . COMMISSIONER REDFORD
COMMS~ON SECRETARY
LEGAL
WORKG FILE
FROM:MARIYN PARKR
DATE:MAY 21, 2009
RE:.\FORM COMPLAINT OF MR. AND MRS. HERBERT PAWLIK
AGAINST A VISTA UTILITIES
On Februar 19,2009, the Commission received a lettr from Mr. and Mrs. Herbert
Pawlik of Harson,. Idaho. The lettr acuse Avista of practicing "unethica: and perhaps crimina:
procedures" related to its rebillig of the Pawliks afer the Company discovered that its meterig
equipment servg the Pawliks failed to opeate correctly for 5 months. The customer's letter was
forwarded to the Consumer Assistace Division to be handled as an informa: complaint.
THE COMPLAINT
From September 2008 to December 2008, Avist's computer biling system prepared 4
months of estimated monthly bilings for the Pawliks. Avista's biling system flags a customer's
account if the cusomer receives an estiated bil for 4 consecutive month. On December 30, 2008,
Avista issued a work order for a field technician to investigate the metering problem at the Pawlik's
residence. The techncian checked the residence meter on Januar 19, 2009. At that time, the
technician discovered that the meter had been working properly but that the TWACS (Two Way
Automated Communcation System) unt that transmits the meter readings automatica:ly back to the
offce for biling had ceased to fuction. The TW ACS ma:fuction was the reason for the 4 months
of estimated bilings. Both meter and TWACS unt were replaced iinediately. Because the meter
had continued to operate properly, the techncian was able to see precisely how much electrcity had
been used by the customer durg the four months (plus a par of Januay 2009).
DECISION MEMORAUM 1 MAY 21, 2009
The last undisputed meter reading wa on August 8, 2008; the reading on that date was
64004. On Janua 19,2009, when the meter was removed and replaced, the meter readng was
85839. Beca the biling should have been to Janua 12, 2009 and the actua reading was taken
on Janua 19, the Company prorated the meter readng back from the 19th to the 12th and biled to a
readng of 82507. Beteen August 8, 2008 and Januar 12,2009, the cusomer was biled for a total
of 8883 kilowatt hours. Based upon the actua: reing taen on Janua 19, the customer should
have been biled for a tota: of 18503 kilowatt hour. Ths represents a biling shortfall of 9620
kilowatt hours between August 2008 and Janua 2009. Ha the Company rebiled for 9620
kilowatt hours, the rebiled amount would have been for $1,647.30. However, Avista reduced the
amount of its rebiling to $1,433.56; a $213.74 savings to the customer.
The "old" meter (No. 12093810) wa removed and replaced on Janua 19,2009. It was
tested for accurac on April 2, 2009. The meter test showed a ful load test of 99.79% and a light
load test of 99.59%. The "new" mete (No. 12151537) was instaled on Janua 19,2009, and at the
request of the customer, was tested on April 10, 2009. Those test results were: ful load 99.96% and
light load 99.84%. Staff asserted these test results are withn acceptable limits.
In an effort to fuer appeae the customer, Avista credited an additiona: $200 on
April 3, 2009, as a good fath PR (public relations) gest to mitigate the customer for his time
associated with his rebiling dispute. The Company fuer offered the customer an extended lengt
of tie to repay Avist. Accrdig the Commssion's Utility Cutomer Relatons Rules (UCRR)
(Rule 204.04), the utlity is requied to give the cusomer the same length of time to repay a rebiled
amount as the lengt of tie for which the under biling had accrued. In ths cae, according to the
Rule, the customer should have been allowed 5 months to repay Avista. However, Avista offered
the customer 12 month to repay.
Afer investgating the complaint, the Staf investigator determed that A vista had complied
with the Commission's UCRR (Rule 204.02) regardi the rebiling of the Pawliks. Avista ha
given the customer twelve months to repay the rebiled amount, more tie than the Utilty Customer
Relations Rules require. Additiona:1y, Avist had credited the account $413:74.
Mr. Pawlik was not satisfied with the inorma: complaint resolution and on May 5, 2009,
was provided with the procedures on how to file a Form Complait. On May 18, 2009, the
Commssion received another letter frm Mr. Pawlik indicatig tht his initial letter of
Febru 12,2009 should have been interpreted as a Formal Complaint.
DECISION MEMORADUM 2 MAY 21, 2009
STAFF RECOMMNDATION
The Pawliks are not satisfied with the outcme of their inormal complaint. Consequently,
they have requested tht their complaint be handled as a forma: complaint. Sta recommends that
the Commission open a case and process it under modied procedure.
COMMSSION DECISION
Does the Commssion wish to accept Mr. and Mrs. Pawlik's Formal Complaint? If so, does
the Commission wish to issue a Sumons to the Company or issue some other proceeding?
~~
Marlyn Parker
Attchments
i:udmemosIormal Complaiit ofHerbeit Pawlik agains Avista Utilities
DECISION MEMORAUM 3 MAY 21, 2009
. ;:: -,'1 -l~u~Jj.-
Rahel & Herbert Pawli RE'CEt\fED
1089 FEB ! 9 AM 8: 26
iDAHO P¡ !E1 ~(~
UT!LITIES CO~ìlf~¡¡SS¡ON
Feliruy 12, 2009
Idao Public Utilities Commsion
472 West Washigtn
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, Idao 83720-0074
Re: Avist meterig and bilin prtices
Dear Made, dear Sir:
Enclosed, plea fid copies of severa documents reflectg some questonable practces
employed by Avîsta We believe the Idao Public Utiity Commssion ougt to be made awae of
those unethca:, perhaps criina: procedurs.
In sumar, Avista notified us in late Janua 2009 about a 'communcation problem' they ha
. with their power meter at our propert. It tued out the problem had persisted since Augu
2008. Instead of replacing the defective meter in a tiely maner, Avista opted to 'estimate' our
power usage over the next six billig cycles. The faulty meter was finaly replaced on Janua
19,2009.
Avist now clais to-have "..under ested." our power consumption by $1,466.51 and
demands payment. Aside from the lùndaental question of a defective meter's viabilty to
properly reord power usage, there are several additiona issues with the way A vist determed
the resultat amount:
(a) Avist did not include the 'underestimations' of August and September '08 in their fina
ca:culation. Consequently, the vast majority of the a:leged shorta:1 is a:10tted to those billg
cycles in which A vista had rased the utilty rates. In other words, A vista tries to use its own
incompetent dea:ing with the broken meter to fleece the customer for additiona: profits.
(b) A Vista pretends biling accuracy by showing kWh-usage fractons to the fift decima: for the
pùros~rof applyig dierent rates. Fact is, however, al these ca:culations are based on pure
conjectu and substadad guesswork, as A vist is not even able to determne power usage from. . month to month. .
(c) In its 'corrcted bil' for November, December and Janua, Avist refers to 'estted'
usage based on meter #12151537. Ths meter is curently (siIce Janua 19,2009) instaled on
our propert and shows a tota recordig of approxièiy 5,000 kWh. Ths discrepancy between
rea:ity and biling veracity is just another example of A vistà' s shoddy record keeping practices.
. '
It needs to be noted" our household consist of two adults. No one else resides on our propert.
Our home is a residence, only; there is no commercia: use of any kid, not even a 'home offce'.
Over the pas four year, we have ardetly invested in energy conservg measures, such as,
insta:laton oflow-E widows, replacing 95% of our light bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs,
chagig to more energy effcient appliances, such as a 13 SEER heat pump. a new refrigerator,
etc. In light of those efforts, Avista's contrved claim ofa shortall of$1466.51, above and
beyond the utity amounts we aleady paid durg the periods in question, is absurd at best.
As the enclosed document copies af A vi has pulled out every stop to bafe customers
with the facade of a vald clai, when in fact A vist ha faied to mainta the miimum
accuracy and reliabilty necessar t6 legitie their dubious demand.
It is our hope, the Idaho Public Utilities Commssion has the authority to protect consumers like
ourselves from Avista's monopolistic utities supply position by stopping Avista from purg
its questionable clais. Please feel free to contact us with any questons or concern you may
have regardig ths matter.
Respectfly,~iHerbert Pawli
Enclosures
May 18 09 09:23a Herbert Pawlik 208-76-1603 p.i --~:;'~'--
i:i:"" .'.L
I .,.
Rahel & Herber Pawlik F~ECEr-/~': :~:
"iìÎir, lil! V I A PM I'). fH.iLuvJ l¡.ll v i 1"1 ¡L... .
May 15,2009
~'I¡~,\t¡_;;. :i1\r..~ r-Á.' . ~A,LJr\i .'." !\'(:t:'-,.;,~~"'1¡i'L~ r'-
IJTi~.JT~E6 r;L.)7'~1~i;/l~~::.)I'~ . .
10 it 2cR-- 33lf- 3 l6,;Z
.5/0, ¡ott 012:. ,
Idao Public Utilities Commssion
472 West Wasngtn
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Re: A vist metering and biling pracces
Dea :Ms. Parker,
Th you for your lettr of May 12,2009.
As you are wel aVl-a, we filed a complaint with IPUC on Febr 12, 2009, sustantiting in .
wrtig an enerated and deailed accun of Avist's mismanent and its deiving and
frudulent practices. Our complait ha al the halmar of
' formal' as describe in 'Rule 54'.
You resnded to our complai on the auority of IPUC. We ha no cause or reon to doubt
your position as an auoried agent of IPUC, and we ha no ca or reon to believe IPUC
would consider our complait anythin less than fomi.
Before even recognizg or comprhendi the ramifcaons of Avista's processes and procedures
in view of genera consumer protection, you sided with line and supen'Ìsory sta at Avista
customer serice, dismissed our complaint anèi validated the legitimacy of Avista's disputed clai.
Encourged an baed by your concurng decsion, Avista abadoned our dispute mid-\\'8Y and
theatened us náth power shut::ff, sequaciously pointig to your aftion of their practice.
In our complaint ca you acted as an agent of IPUC. In ths capacity you made a "ruling" afectg
the pares involved. Consequently, \ve must insist on receiving from IPUC a form, actionable
stalement regarin your decision. For detas, pleae refer to our letter of May 5. 2009.
Your imediat atention and response to th matter is expected.
Sincerrüy, /--..~ ~ . j. , , 1kt/it!£.ç( ...1 04t.
Herbert Pawlik .
.'.
I .
Rachel & Herbert Pawlik
10276 South Carbou Ridge Road
Harson, Idao 83833
. REl::E!\!E~ r~;
ZUU9MAY -8 i!M S' · 5Ml 1 _.. L _
l ,_~ JDi\H()UiiUTIES
May 5, 2009
Idao Public Utilities Commssion
472 West Wasgton
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Re: A vist meteg and bilg practices
Dea Ms. Parker,
In our most recent telephone converation you afed Avist's clai and dismissed our points
and arguents to the contr without due consideration. Ás foreseeable then, A vista ha now
issued a shut-off notice on our account, in accordace with and backed by, your position in ths
cae.
In order to pure ths mattr beyond your agency in the cour system, we ask to provide us with
a form wrtten, aconable version of your decision includig at lea but not lited to,
- an asserton of your legitiacy as. an authori or assigned signatory for the Idao
Public Utities Commsion in our cae,
- your decision per se, and
- your reaso~ and conclusions underlyig your decision in our case.
With the impendig shut-off notice in mid, we ask for your prompt attention t-ü this ma. As
tie is of the essence, we request your respons to be maed to us no lar th May 15,2009.
Respectfly,
fA JtJ ?()t
~ertPawli
:,t
;-:."'.~:: ..
i .
Rachel & Herbert Pawli
10276 South Carbou Ridge Road
Harson, Idaho 83833
. RECEi\lE!J
?OOQ lPR -Q ~M 8. 23..~~.. _ rii f 1. 0 A: ~ i V
Apri 6, 2009 , -'n ¡'¥~k~-~~Nd;~r'VUjJ ll...J i ii_'l.. ~n,..(¡i;:'t1£~';~;..~~
Idaho Public Utilities Commission
472 West Washigton
P. O. Box 83720
Boise, Idaho 83720-0074
Re: A vista meterig and biling practices .
Dear Ms. Parker,
Than you for your correspondence of March 18. We have not received any of your phone
messages. Do you have our corréct number? [phone].
.
Nonetheless, A vista responded by offerig- us a credit of $200, as you mentioned in yourjetter.
They obviously do not understand our intentions. We do want to pay for our realistc
consumpti6n, but we do not want to be fleeced by A vista as a result of their flawed equipment
and operational practices. .
Here are some data for your comparson:
We'moved into our home in Apri12Ó04. Since mid-2005 we utilized the entie ,300Q ~q ft of
the .
home. We have all heating! A/C vents open, as our contractor explained ths wòlild ensure the '
. most effcient operation. of our heating equipmenf (all electrc). Our home has great insulation
which makes it quite cost effective to maitan a constant temperatue in the house.
The witer seasons here in Coeur d'Alene have been simlar from year to year in view of snow
fall and temperatues. Avista's blanet excuse¿of""severe witer conditions)') can be applied to
any year and has no paricular meanng for anyone year. The only different winter season
happened in early 2008 when snow fell til the fist week of June in our area. Ths is clearly
reflected in the higher energy consumption durg that period.
Our new appliances have been intalled properly by service techncians, successively over the
pàst four years. It is very unikely they a:1 stared malfuctioning in November 2008.
When comparng our average power usage of thee prior years to the alleged consumption
clàìed by AvIsta for the rèad dates 11/7, 12/1 0/08 and 1/12/09, thè results are staggerig:
for November: +286%,
for December: +255%,
for Januar: +242%.
There is no reasonable explanation for the tremendous increase in power consumption suggested
by Avist's billg, with one exception: the meter (#12093810) which had stopped tranmitting
data to the A vista office between August 8 and September 10, 2008, was defective in more than
one way.
Of course, Avista maitain the meter had just a 'coIIuncation' problem, but ths is the
statement of a company which does not tae the term integrty too seriously. Their own gross
under estations of our consumption speat for a faulty meter. The way A vista handled the
entie case, from not replacing the defective meter for five month, to exchangig it in an alost
covert operation in the middle of winter, does not fill us with confdence when it comes to
believing A vista's statements.
In order for us to accept A vist's claied power consumption, we expect A vista to prove the
correctness of the meter by providig the instent to us for a check of its calibration.
, Otherwse, A vista shall reduce its claî to the most liely scenaro of our consumption, bemg
congrent with the average consÙrption in prior years.
The enclosures include our most recent correspondence with A vista. Please feel free to contact
us regarding ths matter.
Respectfly,
/ßR~Herbert Pawli
Enclosures