Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19910815.docx Minutes of Decision Meeting August 15, 1991 - 10:00 a.m. In attendance: Commissioners Joe Miller, Ralph Nelson and Marsha H. Smith and staff members Mike Gilmore, Don Howell, Tonya Clark, Syd Lansing, Lynn Anderson, Brad Purdy, Terri Carlock, Stephanie Miller and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance was Jim Wozniak from U. S. West. Items from the August 15, 1991 Agenda were discussed as follows. 1.  Brad Purdy's August 13, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  Gillingham Transport, Inc. Petition for Reconsideration--Case No. M-7665-1. Commissioner Nelson said he was afraid he thought Tolliver's letter didn't present anything Commission should reconsider, other than just being unhappy with the decision.  Tolliver disagreed that the person testifying in support was a valid witness. Brad Purdy said there might be a question in law, is it sufficient to just say I want this guy to haul for me or do you have to establish need?  Tolliver thinks the application should be denied because he is a carrier there. Commissioner Miller said he thought that standard went away. Commissioner Smith asked if there was any reason to grant reconsideration to beef up our order in light of a possible appeal?  Asked staff if they were satisfied with the order? Brad Purdy said yes. Commissioner Nelson asked if he discussed rate? Brad Purdy responded - he did not. Reconsideration denied. 2.  Discussion of Scheduling in Case No. GNR-W-90-1 (Island Park Water Company). Brad Purdy said staff was going to recommend a hearing in the fall.  Explained company collects their fee in June.  If Commission sets rates now, would have to do them retroactively. -2- Terri Carlock asked about refunding? COmmissioner Nelson said since all the residents will be gone, unless you go to an area where there are summer residents living in the winter, wouldn't do much good to go to Island Park.  Wondered about modified procedure. Terri Carlock suggested a hearing in Idaho Falls. Commissioner Smith asked about the 100% increase. Commissioner Miller suggested that perhaps one commissioner could go. Brad Purdy is working with the company's attorney and will come up with hearing date. 3.  Lynn Anderson's August 13, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  U S West Tariff Advice No. 91-4-S (moving common boundary between Idaho Falls and Shelley exchanges). Commissioners approved filing. 4.  Lynn Anderson's August 14, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  U S West Tariff Advice No. 91-5-S. Commissioner Smith suggested suspending the filing. Commissioner Miller asked how Commission will get to it after suspension? Commissioner Smith said would not necessarily like to respond to the company, but mostly want time to look at the filing. Commissioner Miller asked if Commission should ask the company to respond by letter to the decision memo? Commissioner Smith said she thought staff should be given an opportunity to comment further and ask company for response. Commissioner Miller asked if it should be formal? Decision was it should. Don Howell asked about timing of response. Commissioner Smith asked if public notice is needed? Don Howell responded. -3- Commissioner Smith explained what she thought the point was. Mike Gilmore suggested public notice. **Notice of application will be issued. Commissioner Miller suggested in the order setting out some sort of schedule. Don Howell asked Lynn Anderson if he was going to need more information?  He will talk to Lynn Anderson about timing. 5.  Lynn Anderson's August 14, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  U S West Toll Access, and Miscellaneous Rate Changes. Commissioner Nelson said he didn't see where anyone is discriminated against. **Notice is important.  May not need hearing. Mike Gilmore suggested delaying implementation.    **Do notice.   9.  Mike Gilmore's August 8, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power's Request that the Commissioners write EPA to Request the Administrator to Grant Baseline SO2 Allowances for the Boardman Plant at a 65% Capacity Factor. Commissioner Miller asked Mike Gilmore about a letter of support for this? Mike Gilmore said he thought it was in the interest of the Idaho ratepayer but it isn't as critical as they think. Discussed the issues. Commissioner Nelson said - should be careful about how inflamatory we should be. Mike Gilmore said he would do a draft and circulate it to the Commissioners. 10. Mike Gilmore's August 9, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. GNR-T-90-5--The Toll Deaveraging Investigation. Commissioner Miller told Mike Gilmore the memo was excellent to summarize the matter.  He is at the point where he thought we needed to get going somehow. -4- Commissioner Nelson said he thought we needed about an hour and a half to discuss these in detail to see whether we think they are discriminatory or not. Mike Gilmore said he thought an exchange was needed. Commissioner Miller suggested a prehearing conference to figure out a way to put something together. Mike Gilmore suggested taking the list of issues, putting them in the notice and asking for input. Commissioner Miller said he didn't want to put all these tiny companies through a huge hearing but don't have it integrated enough for it to go away.  Asked Commissioner Nelson about prehearing.  It does need further development. Decision was:  prehearing. 6.  Midvale Telephone Company's Ex Parte Motion for Extension of Time in MID-T-89-1. Don Howell was just letting the Commissioners know there will be a motion in the record that will not be answered.  Midvale's counsel only needed to check with Don Howell on the extension of time.  They now indicate that the answer can be made by September 13.  Explained what staff asked the company for.  Commissioners don't need to do anything. 7.  U. S. West's Motion to Compel Discovery and Request for Hearing in MTB-T-90-5 (Interstate Telephone Company). Commissioner Smith asked if there was any reason not go grant the motion?  Asked if the hearing is a hearing on the motion? Don Howell said yes.  Hobson wants to know if they're not answering is because they can't answer?  Had prehearing conference in March.  Gave background of the case. Commissioner Nelson recommended having it one day next week when the other commissioners are gone. Commissioner Smith said she would grant the motion and compel discovery. Don Howell said one of the problems is she wants a taped conversation between Daley and a company representative.  We can respond to the motion to compel and they can say why they can't produce it. **Will wait the 7 days to see if Commission gets a response to the company motion. -5- 8.  Don Howell's August 8, 1991 Decision Memorandum re:  1990 Revenue Sharing Report, Case No. USW-T-91-3. Question is:  Does Commission want to accept the four area agreed to by the parties? Commissioners agreed to accept the issues and the rationale. Commissioner Nelson asked - and we accept the conclusion that there is 22 million revenue sharing? Yes. Don Howell said this fixes the number and trues up earnings.  Reason why the uncollectables was not discovered previously was that from the time the plan was implemented, the uncollectable procedure was changed.  We didn't find that out until Syd Lansing did the audit. Commissioner Miller said the big question is what do we do from here and what do we do with this pile of money?  Procedurally where are we? Don Howell said at the last prehearing Commissioners asked for a stipulation.  Before that you asked parties to talk about framework for distribution of monies. Commissioner Smith said no procedure for Commissioners doing that on our own was suggested. Don Howell said he understood Commissioner Smith's point.  When we want to talk about network alternatives, that is company's area, not staff.  Think company's concerns are they don't want to set out all the alternatives. Commissioner Smith said she didn't think they want to be perceived as wanting to keep the money rather then give it back. Don Howell said last prehearing conference, Chairman suggested an order would be issued to say what next procedure would be. Commissioner Miller said he would like to have some way to explore other alternatives rather than simply a one-time credit.  Amount of public benefit accomplished by one-time credit is pretty minimal and the consumers benefit of that is minimal.  If there is some public benefit that can be achieved by some other disposition of this money, that is what we should be trying to figure out.  Why can't we get there? -6- Don Howell said part of the problem is we don't tackle disposition until we get the amount.  In future years, would open case to consider disposition.  Maybe we should figure out what to do first and then quantify amount.  With this particular case, if Commissioners want to direct company and staff to propose schedule, criteria, etc., they could. Commissioner Nelson said he wasn't sure we are guaranteed revenue stream in the future.  If company decides to lower rates for 5 or more lines, revenue sharing might go away.  Think the difficulty with coming up with projects is, most good projects are multi-year projects and will require commitment.  Don't have objection to good project but there is no guarantee there will be money in the future. Don Howell said - don't mean to imply there will always be revenue sharing money.  Tech Plus money is now available for sharing. Commissioner Smith said any good project will take time.  You would have to feel comfortable that if there wasn't revenue sharing money, would want the customer to pay for it.  Don't feel comfortable ordering system upgrade ... it is the ratepayers money and it belongs to them.  If there are benefits to the customers, go with it. Commissioner Nelson said it is cheaper in the long run to pay for it out of current.   Commissioner Smith said if we are going to have a network upgrade, will expect them to kick in the 60% of the cost.  Somehow it would have to be decided that their unregulated customers have to pick up their fair share. Don Howell said the only mechanism available now is the one-time mechanism. Commissioner Miller asked - didn't we set aside some time to discuss this?  Could hold this until after August 28 or could do order approving settlement on quantification issue. Commissioner Nelson said he though we ought to hold it now, rather than do 2 orders. Commissioner Miller said lets try and get our thoughts together to advance the ball in the next two weeks. -7- Meeting adjourned.         DATED at Boise, Idaho this       day of October, 1991.                           PRESIDENT                           COMMISSIONER                           COMMISSIONER ATTEST:                               Commission Secretary 0060M