19920915.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
SEPTEMBER 15, 1992 -  1:30 p.m.
In attendance were:
Lori Mann, Scott Woodbury, Brad Purdy, Gary Richardson, Tom Faull, Belinda Anderson, Tonya Clark, Marge Maxwell, Nancy Harman, Randy Lobb, Jim Long, Birdelle Brown, Stephanie Miller, Lynn Anderson, Terri Carlock and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance were:  Jim Wozniak of U S West and Skip Worthan from Intermoutain Gas Company and Woody Richards, Attorney at Law.
Items from the September 15, 1992 Agenda were discussed as follows.
1.  Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated September 15, 1992.
Approved.
2.  Syd Lansing's September 4, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Picabo Water Company Tariff Filing.
Commissioner Smith said she didn't see any reason to make them jump through any more hoops.
Commissioner Nelson asked about the contributions from the parent company?
Syd Lansing said the equipment goes on their land.  Said it is pipes.  There are no easements.  If somebody wanted to say it doesn't belong to the water company, it could be.
Commissioner Miller said he thought we should approve the tariff and ask them to file a rate case.
Commissioner Smith asked Syd Lansing about retroactive rates?  Said Commission is just deciding what the rates should be going forward.  Weare not going to penalize for incorrect procedure in the past.  We re not going to penalize them for now.  Don't want them to file rate case.
Tariff approved.  No order.
3.  Jim Long's September 8, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Advice #92-8-S from U. S. West Company to change the existing Meridian Exchange Base Rate Area and to change Zone 2 & 3 to Zone 1 & 2.
After discussion of the area affected, filing was approved.
-2-
**Madonna Faunce, Dave Schunke and Don Oliason were in attendance at this time.
4.  Mike Gilmore's September 8, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Master-Metered Mobile Home Parks and the Increasing Block Rate of the Idaho Power Surcharge--Case No. IPC-E-92-16.
Commissioner Smith said it seemed the reasonable thing to do was to give them what they requested.  If they started with August, master-meters haven't been disadvantaged too much.  Would not offer it to Schedule 7 or 9.
Deferred Debit -
Commissioner Nelson said it didn't look like enough money to make an entry worthwhile.
Commissioner Miller said he didn't have an objection to allowing it.
**Yes to deferred debit.
5.  Scott Woodbury's September 8, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. GNR-T-92-7.  (Universal Service Fund).
Commissioner Smith said it looked like the complaints could be dismissed against the companies that the administrator and hearing examiner recommended. That just left four companies.
Belinda Anderson said she had a contact with American ShareCom.  Were supposed to overnight their filing to Alyson Anderson.  They are still technically not in compliance.
Commissioner Miller asked - does the staff have a recommendation on informal actions for those still not in compliance?
Scott Woodbury said - think we could provide them with a notice or intent to file to see if that is any further enticement.  Thought maybe one more nudge for three and go forward on American ShareCom.  Didn't know what to do on PayLine.
Belinda Anderson said they indicated they were not doing business in our state and then indicated Sprint was their carrier, then that they overstated money to Sprint.  It is impossible for us to know if they are using underlying carrier or not.  Think the burden of proof that they are not would fall on them.
-3-
Mike Gilmore suggested notice of intent to file at District Court.  
Commissioner Miller asked about doing consent agreements?  They can settle without admitting wrong doing.  The hook is if they don't comply, you can go forward.
Scott Woodbury said he would explore that.
Commissioner Smith suggested saying sign a consent agreement or we will go to district court.
6.  Mike Gilmore's September 10, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Hunmac Sales, Inc's Petition for an Order Exempting Intermountain Gas Company from complying with Section 807(c) of The Uniform Mechanical Code, IDAPA 31.I.2.3-Case Nos. INT-G-92-4 and 31.I-R-92-1.   
Commissioner Smith commented the code has quite a few advocates.
Commissioner Nelson said he was kind of confused that this particular type of device does not pose much of a problem.  Why should we be in the wey of this being marketed?  There are still city and county codes for them to overcome.  Was convinced this device was safe.
Commissioner Smith said she didn't want to be in a position to decide whats safe and whats not safe.  Thought that decision should be left up to code enforcers, etc.  But our rule should not stand in the way of this.  Compliance with other rules should be compliance for us, i.e. if the city of Boise doesn't adopt the Uniform Mechanical Code that was okay but if Nampa did require it, then that should be okay also.  Question is:  can city adopt what state has?
Commissioner Miller asked - if we have adopted it and told our utilities to enforce it, how would that overlay with that jurisdiction?  Agreed that we ought to give significant deference to the people who promulgate the code.  They are experts.  At the same time, thought there was no evidence this device has resulted in harm to anyone.  Thought Consumer Protection..that if you outlaw these devices, you may create incentive for less safe devices.  Outlawing these devices could actually impede the safety  concern.  Thought the staff's conditions provided a good starting point for way of exemption of the way the code would look.  Looked like most of them were not controversial and it was primarily clarification.  Only thing controversial was the fan requirement.  Wasn't left with strong feeling one way or another on the fan question.  To
-4-
him it is possible that ventilation concerns could be addressed with adequate warning to the consumer that ventilation had to be provided.  Was generally willing to create an exemption of our rule along those lines if the interested parties could work out the language of those conditions.
Commissioner Smith spoke to Mountain Fuel's having problem with "uncarburetted" also.
Commissioner Miller said perhaps that can be reworded.
Tom Faull said Mountain Fuel was correct.
Commissioner Miller said Intermountain Gas Company expressed some need for clarification which he thought could be worked on.
Commissioner Smith asked if it was up to the Commission to decide or adopt by legislature?
Commissioner Miller said he thought we just had to fix our rules and not decide that.
Commissioner Smith said all agreed on that.
**Go with Commissioner Miller's approach to getting the wording modified.
Commissioner Miller said he did think gas companies, Hunmac and staff can get together on that.  Instructed Tom Faull to have an open mind on the ventilation concern.
What about already installed appliances?
Commissioner Nelson said allow them to hook up the houses but not the appliances.  Leave those up to the local authority.
Skip Worthan for Intermountain Gas Company said if something could be worked out on ventilation, it is basically an interpretation.
**Looks like we need to come back to the question of already installed applianced.  Hold off on that question until we know what the qualifying language will be.
**Will have it back for consideration by the 28th.
-5-
7.  Mike Gilmore's September 10, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Water Power Petition for Exemption from Gas, Water and Electric Utility Customer Relations Rule 21.2-GNR-G-92-1.
Commissioner Smith said no comments were received.
Commissioner Nelson said he would move adoption.
Scott Woodbury said exemption as long as the function is being performed.
Commissioner Smith said - as long as they are spot checking they can conclude that the city is doing a good job.
Commissioner Miller said the only concern we would have is seeing that it gets done.  If WWP was doing it we could assure it is being done.  If city is doing it, we don't regulate the city.
Commissioner Smith said you still have authority over WWP.
Commissioner Miller asked about having them request to recertify or report.
Commissioner Smith said since it is a new thing, requiring a report would be good.
**Report in a year.
8.  Mike Gilmore's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  U S West's Petition for Exemption from Customer Relations Rule 1.2 to Allow it to Consult Commercial Credit Records in Determining Whether New Customers Must Provide  Deposit-Case No. GNR-T-92-8.
Commissioner Nelson said he was not as familiar with why these kinds of credits were left out before.
Commissioner Miller said he thought the information on their payment habits on other types of obligations may not tell you anything about their likelihood of payment on utility services.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn't have any objection to it on a trial basis.  Wasn't too impressed with the comments on Research, Inc.
Commissioner Smith asked if he wanted to condition the trial on some of the staff's requests for data?
-6-
Commissioner Nelson said yes.
Commissioner Miller said he had some reservations about it given the fact that the company's uncollectibles are still under 1% of revenue indicating the utilities are in good position for collection of amounts of uncollectibles to other businesses, consequently the need is less for these.  Am concerned that the purpose of the program is not to help customers get on and stay on the system, but to protect company revenues, testimony on other cases indicates that there is a part of the population that has a hard time getting past the first few months of payments.  They drop off quickly.  Think we need to focus on how to keep them on and not how to get them off.  Am not sure that this general credit information, guess we don't know, don't know if this presents you with any more useful information that you have otherwise.  Some percentage of new customers will be subject to this and it will be unpleasant.  Am not very enthusiastic about this but if it is only a test and if it is understood we are not making any commitment beyond that and if majority of the Commission wants to support it, won't dissent.
Commissioner Smith said there may be reason for a trial.  Thought U. S. West should be directed to work with staff to get data.
Commissioner Nelson said he thought U. S. West should establish a criteria.
Commissioner Miller said what the standards are and how they are interpreted are important.  Thought what Research had to say was interesting and if this was a proposal for a permanent program, might consider accepting some of their recommendations.  Thought was this is a test and when its over, evaluate it again in the light of Research's proposal.  Would just defer analysis of it until we have test results.
Lori Mann asked what kind of data the Commissioners wanted collected?
Commissioner Smith responded - whatever company and staff decide is necessary.  
Commissioner Nelson asked for an interpretation of how they are going to decide if its good or not?
Eileen Benner asked if Commissioners want data on Title 61 versus 62?
-7-
Commissioner Smith said she thought it was primarily Title 62 problems.
Jim Wozniak of U. S. West spoke to when account goes bad it is both areas but would be willing to look into that.
Commissioner Nelson said data on size of account written off would be helpful.
Commissioner Smith said she thought a lot of them might be fraud.
Jim Wozniak said what Company got on line from credit company is a score, don't ask questions.  Company won't be interpreting data.
**After discussion, was approved for trial period.  Will hear back from the company at the end of the trial period.
9.  Marge Maxwell's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Salas Complaint Against IPCo. Transfer of Amounts to His Account.
Marge Maxwell said it has been brought to her attention that perhaps this matter shouldn't be discussed at a public meeting.
Commissioner smith said Commission did have procedure in Caller ID matters.
Commissioner Miller asked if we had a procedure for these?
Commissioner Smith said she thought there was nothing Commission could do at this point because it had been bucked up to Commissioners for decision.  Suggested there was a procedure legal could work on.
Commissioner Nelson said he was wondering how this woman can sign an agreement to pay her bill and then get $650 tacked on.  Asked what is the recourse if you don't pay the $50?  She was never on the account.  The allegation is she was living there.  Her name is not on the account.  Only name on the account is Rivera.
Marge Maxwell read the second paragraph of Idaho Power's agreement.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn't see where she is a guarantor.  Didn't see how they can transfer anything to her.
-8-
Commissioner Miller asked - is respondent's bill in his name alone?
Marge Maxwell said yes.
Commissioner Smith said she thought there may be good reasons to deliberate this in private.  Will get back to the matter.
10. Bev Barker's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Disagreement Between Staff and GTE Regarding Tariff Interpretation.
Commissioner Smith said it looked to her like in this case the staff had the right interpretation of the tariff.  There is no requirement that all of this type be spent in one location.  They may be subject to a service order, but they are not obligated to pay for the same amount of time twice.
Agreed.
11. Bev Barker's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power Request for Permission to Implement Pilot Program Regarding Conduit Installed By Customer.
Commissioners had no problem with the program but asked that something in writing be on file with the Commission.
If they have something else in mind rather than a tariff, that is fine, just something in writing.
12. Scott Woodbury's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. WWP-E-92-6 - PCA Surcharge.
Scott Woodbury said staff is doing an audit this week.  Will provide Commissioners with their initial impressions by the end of the week.
After discussion, Scott Woodbury suggested modified procedure to be issued next week after audit is complete.
Agreed.
13. Brad Purdy's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power's Application for an Accounting Order in Regard to its Power Quality Program - IPC-E-92-18.
Commissioner Nelson asked about the costs.
-9-
Don Oliason responded.  Company was asked to get involved in those.  These are the costs that have been accumulated for 2/3 years.  
**Will go out modified procedure.
14.  Kent Searles' Request for Declaratory Ruling regarding service from Albion Telephone Company - ALB-T-92-1.
Item was held, per Mike Gilmore's request.
14A.  Eileen Benner's September 14, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Albion Tariff Advice:  Reduction in Toll Switched Access Charge, per Order No. 24423, Case ALB-T-89-2.  
After discussion, Commissioner Miller said he would approve these rates for Albion but would defer the USF question to the other case currently in-house.
Stephanie Miller said at this point we don't know how the other companies will stack up.  We know we are not comfortable with Albion.
Commissioner Miller asked - how much of a process will it take to work through the earnings process - rate case or something else?
Stephanie Miller said you could probably have something like make-whole cases like return on equity.  Would be simpler then a general rate case but require them to substantiate it.  Could present adjustments staff hasn't picked up on.  Albion is close enough and it is on the side of having enough funds so we would be comfortable saying they really need these funds.
Commissioner Miller said he did think we owe it to everyone to make that case as simple as possible and not make it more than it has to be - avoid a full rate case.  Get it submitted and decided expeditiously.  Asked if it would take anything more than submitting staff analysis to the company and asking for response or will it take hearing, testimony, etc.?
Eileen Benner explained that the company has asked for a pass-thru.
Commissioner Miller said maybe we should keep the 92-10 case separate from this.
-10-
Commissioner Smith said if we are saying we are going to approve the rates or figure out whether or not the need USF funding, don't think that should be in a case where all the other companies are.  Think it should be relatively streamlined for everybody.  Don't care what the vehicle is.
Jim Wozniak said he shares Eileen Benner's concern.  They only asked for new rates.
COmmissioner Smith said she was worried about keeping everybody cooperative and getting it handled expeditiously.  Said she would approve the rates and if they want money, they can apply for it.  
**Numbers should be shared with the companies.
15. Terri Carlock's September 11, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Citizens Utilities Company Common Stock Authority Under 1992 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Case No. CUC-S-92-2.
Approved.
16. Lori Mann's September 9, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  Case Nos. ALB-T-89-2 and MTB-T-89-9:  Treatment of Information Discussed IN CAMERA.
Discussed staff comments.
Commissioner Nelson asked about U. S. West's allegation that it was raised off the record.
Commissioner Miller said he had one question.  He looked at the transcript and all he found in the envelope was the transcript of the questions and answers and didn't find the documents that were the basis of this.
Lori Mann replied that all the documents were collected at the end of the proceeding.
Commissioner Miller asked if the only thing we are talking about here is the transcript, not the documents that were the basis of this?
Lori Mann said yes.
Commissioner Nelson said it is hard to believe there was anything proprietary in the transcript.
-11-
Commissioner Miller said he went through the transcript.  As he looked at it there were six actual facts that were disclosed:
1.  The average monthly total number of business customers.
2.  Number of business customers that made less than one call to Burley/Declo per month.
3.  Number that made more than 100 to Burley/Declo per month.
4.  Total amount billed to those who made more than 100 calls.
5.  Total billed to all business customers.
6.  Number of residential customers with more than 70 calls per month.
Rest of the transcript was discussed back and forth.  From the standpoint of facts that qualified as secrets, those were the six items that were involved.
Commissioner Nelson said - so there was some actual information on the record.  Thought this was a poor case to set precedent on.  Is questionable whether or not there is economic value.
Commissioner Smith said it seemed to her that information can have economic value.
Commissioner Miler said he had a little trouble...because it relates to businesses that aren't profitable.  Can think of circumstances where business was losing money but would consider information about that activity just as secret as one that is profitable.  Knowing that information would be valuable to a competitor.  Whether that information is readily ascertainable by other means, essentially the same information is in the public domain.  It establishes the same point that the call volumes are not distributed evenly over all customers.  Arguably the information that drives economic value is already in the public domain.
Commissioner Smith said what we were interested in was how broad is the need for discounted calling or free calling or how many people were going to be hurt if we ordered EAS, etc.; is this a need by the majority of the community?  That is what we were looking at, but from the standpoint of a competitor, think a more specific breakdown would be much more valuable than this.  They are looking to come in and pick customers in a market.
-12-
Commissioner Miller said that gets you to the question as to whether this has economic value.  This information doesn't give you any information on who specific customers are for direct marketing.  It doesn't give you information that would allow you to develop a more broad-based marketing campaign or rate design you don't already have.  Even though some call data does have value, have hard time seeing value of these.
Commissioner Smith said it might not be the same in Albion as Boise.  Does the size of the exchange enter as a factor?
Belinda Anderson said anytime there is an EAS petition, it indicates high toll useage.
Commissioner Miller said the information is less of a secret because in general this information is available in other sources or you could say that since the equivalent information is available in other forms, this information doesn't have any independent economic value.  Do agree with Commissioner Nelson that this isn't the best case to make any general policy with respect to these things.  There are circumstances where call data does qualify as trade secret and should be protected.  If you look at those at issue here, looks like those items don't get up to that level.  Don't want to establish a policy using this case.  There are very few facts at issue.  In general the information conveyed by those facts is largely available other ways.
Commissioner Nelson said it is a close enough call that he would not overturn the company's position.  It is not clear enough in his mind that there is harm being done by publishing it that would cause him to overturn the company.  Is reluctant to do that.
Was decided to defer the matter until the next decision meeting.
Meeting adjourned.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary
0123M