Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19930208.docx Minutes of Decision Meeting February 8, 1993 - 1:30 p.m. In attendance were: Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Mike Gilmore Scott Woodbury, Don Howell, Gary Richardson, Tom Faull, Beverly Barker, Carol Cooper, Joe Cusick, Syd Lansing, Terri Carlock, Bob Smith, Don Oliason, Stephanie Miller and Myrna Walters. Items from the February 8, 1993 Decision Meeting Agenda were discussed as follows: 1.  Mike Gilmore's December 29, 1992 Decision Memorandum re:  PUC Actions Required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-486. Commissioner Miller said he wondered if it would make sense to, before the prehearing conference, follow Mike Gilmore's suggestion to have the utilities file statements outlining positions rather than have prehearing and then file statements.  Tell them to file statements within 30 days and have prehearing after that - it might give a better feel for what people think.  Would be in favor of pushing all three inquiries ahead.  Think there would be an advantage to taking an activist approach.  If nothing else, to qualify for participation in energy efficiency program you have to complete this process before you get into that.  There are some reasons for doing it as quickly as we can.  It may be that there won't be a great deal to do on integrated resource planning and efficiency issues and maybe not on debt leveraging.  Hard to tell about companies, whether it is controversial or not.   Commissioner Smith asked if this should be done under one generic case number or give each company a separate case even if you set up one prehearing? Mike Gilmore said he thought there may be some of them that might be willing to declare victory.  Suggest noticing out generic utility case and list it as a topic of discussion - case numbering - then spin out as many new cases as needed. Commissioner Smith said she would hate to give the appearance from the beginning of not giving them an opportunity for their viewpoints. Commissioner Miller suggested that Mike Gilmore could call Larry Crowley at Idaho Power Company and tell him that. Mike Gilmore suggested starting with one case - establishing procedures - will ultimately close that out. -2- Commissioner Smith said you might want to leave that option open. **Randy Lobb, Bill Eastlake and Dave Schunke were in attendance at this time. Mike Gilmore asked when Commissioners wanted it scheduled? Commissioner Smith said she thought early April and give utilities time for their comments first. Commissioner Miller asked if we want to do the same for gas? Mike Gilmore said he thought both should be done together (especially since WWP is a dual company). Commissioner Miller asked about Mountain Fuel's participation? Mike Gilmore will check on whether or not it is utility-specific.  If nothing else they may have to file for an exemption. Commissioner Miller said maybe under our agreement with Utah we would defer to them. Mike Gilmore suggested leaving the option up to Mountain Fuel.  Notice it up to them.  In the end may have to just bless what Utah does. 2.  Don Howell's February 2, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Revision to U S West's Revenue Sharing Construction Schedule for 1993 and 1994, Case No. USW-S-92-1. Commissioner Smith said she checked the order.  It adopted the schedule set out in Appendix A. Commissioner Nelson said he thought the change made sense. Commissioner Miller said he had no objection. Commissioner Smith asked about doing a proposed order? **Proposed order will be issued. Staff recommended that they say how much they are saving. Don Howell suggested that the order say if you are going to have savings set them out in the report.   -3- Commissioner Miller asked Don Howell what his opinion was - why quantification of savings. Don Howell said he thought it would be interesting to see what those savings are.  They are not changing accounting.  They are just swapping offices. Commissioner Smith said she thought we should find out what the savings are. Commissioner Miller said his attitude was the sequencing of the intermediary steps was a matter for managerial discretion and we shouldn't interfere heavily in that area and if they think they can be more efficient in doing it that way it is fine with me.  Were it not that the order was so specific they could have done it anyway. Commissioner Smith said she looked for a way to say that but we are stuck with our order. 3.  Don Howell's February 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  UP's Intent to Abandon the Stoddard Branch, Case No. UP-RR-93-1. Commissioner Smith asked if there were any protests to this? Don Howell said he didn't think it will be a disputed one. Discussed the type of notice. Commissioner Nelson said put out a notice moving toward hearing or could notice up a hearing.  Statute does require hearing. Don Howell said - haven't received any comments from shippers. Commissioner Smith asked about the timing? Don Howell explained the different abandonments.  Suggested notice to the shippers to see what reaction we get. Commissioner Miller said general attitude is when we can do it economically we should schedule a hearing.  We have side-stepped around it before but if there is any question, should schedule a hearing.   ** For now do notice of application. -4- 4.  Mike Gilmore's February 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Water Power's Application for Disclaimer of CommissionJurisdiction Over its Lease of a Combustion Turbine Generating Facility, or, in the Alternative, Approval of Securities Associated with That Lease-Case No. WWP-S-93-1. Commissioner Smith asked Mike Gilmore what his analysis of this was? Mike Gilmore said he thought we had already done this once. Commissioner Miller said the last transaction appeared to be similar. Mike Gilmore said they may not quite fit what the statute intends but it is similar. Commissioner Nelson said this is the same as a purchase in his mind. Mike Gilmore said - could add some language to that effect.  (it is a capitalized lease). Terri Carlock will now do a memo on the substance of the application. Commissioner Nelson said he thought Commissioner Miller made an excellent point that if we look at least cost plan, they shouldn't have ignored the Sysko proposal. Commissioner Miller said he didn't know if we have made the decision on relationship between us and the other permitting agencies.  If they show up with DEQ permit and local permits, can we do our own environmental concerns and hold them to harder standards. Mike Gilmore said in the Pioneer case the site was dismissed but not the application.  Thought Commission can say yes or no to a site. Commissioner Smith said now there is an agency that has expertise in that area.  Would be reluctant to go against them. Mike Gilmore said we are the only agency that can say look at more than one site. Commissioner Miller said he thought we needed to do something about that. -5- 5.  Carol Cooper's February 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Atlanta Power Diesel Generator--Repossessed January 30, 1993. Scott Woodbury reported that he had contacted Lynn Stevenson today.  Their diesel unit was repossessed.  It is not clear whether it will be returned.   The company does have an old army diesel generating unit that is functional.  It will provide enough back-up if he has to resort to it.  Staff thinks it is an incremental cost solely for the leased unit.  There is within the underlying base rates cost  associated with a diesel unit that they had.  It would be staff's recommendation that the 2.1 be eliminated.  He talked to Conley Ward about that.  He said he can understand staff's position but he reminded him that the order authorizing the 2.1 cents was interlocutory subject to refund and adjustment.  Don't see any justification in continuing that.  Staff recommendation is that the 2.14¢ surcharge be eliminated.   Commissioner Nelson said it just seemed on the first cut to eliminate that 2¢ surcharge if they no longer have the diesel. Scott Woodbury said it was repossessed the last one or two days of January. Commissioner Smith said she thought we would have to give him some vehicle to remove the surcharge. Scott Woodbury said certainly the company can ask for reconsideration.  We are still waiting for their rate case. Commissioner Smith said to her it is not appropriate to alter the company's rate without some process.  Thought company should be warned. Commissioner miller said he didn't mind a change of rates without a lot of process when the rate change is initiated by the company and it is indicated that the change is proper.  A rate change initiated by the Commission is not appropriate. Bob Smith spoke to the expiration date for the first charge.  He asked for the 2.14 as an interim rate.  It is part or the original increase.  It has just been carried forward due to lack of activity of Commission or company.   Commissioner Smith commented - lack of Commission participation is over.  Question is what should the company do now? -6- Scott Woodbury said staff did an audit.  It has been the position of the company that if you want to take away our certificate, fine.  Think we could set it up for a show cause hearing. Commissioner Smith said to say the surcharge is coming off on x date, unless they come forward.  It is up to them to take action. **Set it up soon. Commissioner Smith said we can even just give them 5 days to respond. Commissioner Miller said whatever fast procedure you can use is fine with him. Scott Woodbury said a surcharge for something the company no longer owns is justification. Commissioner Smith suggested giving them 5 days to respond or a show cause hearing.              Meeting adjourned at 2:15 p.m. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 2nd day of March, 1993. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary 0141M