20001013_sw.doc

DECISION MEMORANDUM

TO: COMMISSIONER HANSEN
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
JEAN JEWELL
RON LAW
LOUANN WESTERFIELD
TONYA CLARK
DON HOWELL
DAVE SCHUNKE
RANDY LOBB
BEV BARKER
BILL EASTLAKE
WORKING FILE
FROM:
DATE:
OCTOBER 13, 2000 RE: CASE NO. IPC-E-00-14 (Idaho Power)
TARIFF RULES 1 AND 9—LEVEL PAY PLANS
REQUESTED MODIFICATION

On September 29, 2000, Idaho Power Company (Idaho Power; Company; IPCo) filed an Application with the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (Commission) for authority to modify the Company’s General Rules and Regulations—Tariff Rule 1 for its general service territory and Tariff Rule 9 for its Prairie, Idaho service territory. Tariff Rules 1 and 9 detail the Company’s level pay plans, which provide residential and small general service customers with a means of budgeting or “levelizing” monthly payment amounts on an annual basis to avoid seasonal bill fluctuations.
As reflected in the Company’s Application, as of September 26, 2000, there were 43,706 residential and small general service Idaho retail customers as well as 79 residential Prairie service customers enrolled in the level pay program.
In this Application the Company is requesting approval of four proposed modifications to Tariff Rules 1 and 9:
Changing the name of “Level Pay Plans” to “Budget Pay Plans.”
Changing the name of the program to “Budget Pay Plans” will enable the Company to mirror the label used in its new billing system. The Company considers it both prudent and practical to standardize the terminology used in its communications with customers as well as in its internal processes.
Modify the methodology used to determine a participating customer’s estimated billing amount.
Under the present methodology there is a weather adjustment component to the calculation of the level pay plan amount. The Company contends that while relevant for the Company’s greater system, the weather adjustment is not particularly relevant as to an individual customer’s usage. It is accurate, it states, only for the “average” customer and few customers match the characteristics of “average.” To simplify the process, the Company is requesting that it be permitted to calculate the level (budget) pay amount by combining the actual (not levelized) charges on the account from the past 12 months. If the customer is currently participating in a level pay plan, any debit or credit account balance could also be included. The total amount would then be divided into 12 equal payments. This would become the customer’s levelized monthly installment for the next 12 months unless the amount is recalculated due to an interim review.
Review of level (budget) pay plan accounts.
Currently, the annual budget period begins with the July billing period and ends with the June billing period, regardless of whether a customer has been enrolled in a level pay plan for a full or partial year.
The Company in its Application is requesting that the annual review of a customer account occur at the 12-month (or 365 day) anniversary of the date the customer began paying the most current level (budget) pay plan amount. The new monthly payments will be the most current pay level (budget) pay plan amount. If a customer has a debit balance at the time of recalculation, the customer’s monthly level (budget) pay amount will equal the recalculated level (budget) pay amount plus 1/12th of the negative balance. At the customer’s request, a negative balance may be paid in full. Credit balances at the time of recalculation will be refunded at the customer’s request. If no request is made, the monthly level (budget) pay amount will be equal to the amount recalculated level (budget) pay amount reduced by 1/12th of the positive balance.
The Company will continue to reserve the right to revise a customer’s level pay amount at times other than the annual review if changes in rates or other circumstances occur that warrant such a revision.
Modification of enrollment criteria.
Presently, if a residential customer account is in arrears at the time of application for the level pay plan, the customer and the Company will mutually agree on the payment to eliminate the amount in arrears in a period not to exceed 12 months, and that amount will be added to the level pay amount otherwise computed.
The Company in its Application is requesting that only residential customers whose accounts are not in arrears be eligible to enroll in the Company’s level (budget) pay plan. Upon successful payback of arrears amounts, the customer may enroll in the level (budget) pay plan.
The enrollment criteria for the small commercial customer will remain unchanged.

The Company requests that its Application be processed pursuant to Modified Procedure, i.e., by written submission rather than by hearing (IDAPA 31.01.01.201-204) and that the proposed modifications become effective December 1, 2000.
Commission Decision
Staff concurs with the Company’s recommended procedure in Case No. IPC-E-00-14. Accordingly, Staff recommends that the case be processed pursuant to Modified Procedure. Does the Commission agree with the proposed procedure?

vld/M:IPC-E-00-14_sw

DECISION MEMORANDUM 3