The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About19930308.docx MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING March 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, Mary Friddle, Tonya Clark, Belinda Anderson, Eileen Benner, Jack Taylor, Stephanie Miller and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance was Conley Ward, Attorney at Law. Items from the March 8, 1993 Agenda were discussed as follows. 1. Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated March 8, 1993. Approved. 2. Don Howell's March 3, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: UP's Objection to Rail Labor's Participation in the Weiser-Payette Hearing, Case No. UP-RR-92-2. Commissioner Nelson asked who the Union is? Don Howell responded. Commissioner Nelson said he thought the agent could provide testimony to the functions he provides that are not provided by St. Louis. Commissioner Miller said from an historic standpoint we have let them in on every case and they have, on occasion, provided some information. Would keep them in the case. **Commissioner Smith asked that the usual language be put in about not broadening the issues, etc. **Would also grant the Fruit and Vegetable people intervention. 3. Birdelle Brown's March 4, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Inland Telephone Company - Maps of Certificated Areas, INL-T-93-1. Approved. 4. Belinda Anderson's March 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: GTE's Advice No. 93-02 to Add Locations to the List of Communities Where CentraNet is Available. Approved. Belinda Anderson said she had a question from GTE. Do they need to keep filing changes in this as they are now? -2- Commissioner Said she thought it would be wise for GTE to have it listed specifically in the tariff. **Bob Smith was in attendance at this time. 5. Belinda Anderson's March 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: GNR-T-93-5; TELCO Northwest, Inc.'s Application to Process Calls to Operator ("O") on a Pay Telephone and Belinda's Amended Memorandum in that regard. Commissioner Nelson asked if on an emergency call, when you hear that message, does that cause panic? Belinda Anderson replied it is standard technology. Tonya Clark suggested using investigators to verify payphone compliance. Approved the filing. 6. Bill Eastlake's March 4, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Irrigation Conservation Filing (IPC-E-93-2). Commissioner Smith asked Bill Eastlake - on small system payments, do payments go only to the dealer? Bill Eastlake said no. They would go to the farmer himself. The dealer gets a little piece only. The limit of $8,000 refers to the farmers. Commissioner Smith asked about the interventions? Bill Eastlake said if we hadn't been so involved in the PCA case, etc., we would have gotten this on the agenda sooner to have it go modified. Have enough information to approve it as it sits now. Have at least one customer who would like to sign up now. (Customer was in attendance at the meeting). **Terri Carlock was in attendance at this time. Commissioner Smith asked about modified with a shortened comment period? Mike Gilmore said you could conditionally grant it. Commissioner Smith asked Bill Eastlake if he accepts it as is? Bill Eastlake said yes. -3- Commissioner Miller asked staff if they would have any further comments? Bill Eastlake said they would not. Commissioner Miller said the irrigators have intervened but understand staff hasn't heard from them. Bill Eastlake said he thought that Idaho Power Company had talked to everyone but wanted to do it by formal filing. Commissioner Nelson said - lets put out an order approving the plan with 21 days to object if they so desire. Put out an order approving it with the 21 day reconsideration time. Commissioner Miller said - or we could do a conditional approval with 14 day comment period and then issue a final order. **Conditional approval with 14 day comment period was approved. 7. Bill Eastlake's March 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Commercial Lighting Filing (IPC-E-93-5). Commissioner Miller asked Bill Eastlake what his thoughts were on the three points he suggested including in the order, asking company to comment on modified? Bill Eastlake said he would ask the company to comment on modified. They were suggested by Water Resources people but he is in agreement with them. Don't know that they should be required in the program but want company to be aware of concerns. Commissioner Nelson asked - aren't they pretty well regulated on PCBs? Bill Eastlake said it was mercury in the tubes. In that sense it is anticipatory of possible regulation. They simply have a "cover your behind" sentence. They're just asking people to sign off. Thought the disposable tubes should be mentioned also. Commissioner Nelson asked - there is currently no regulation on the disposal of mercury? Bill Eastlake replied there would be a small amount in the tubes. -4- Commissioner Smith asked about doing modified? Was decided to go modified and ask the company and anyone else interested, to comment. 8. Scott Woodbury's March 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: ATL-E-93-1 - General Rate Case. Commissioner Nelson asked about the interim increase? Commissioner Smith said no interim rate relief can be granted without a hearing. Commissioner Miller said 63% rate increase on an interim basis just based on an application is perhaps unusual. Scott Woodbury said the application was accompanied by testimony of Lynn Stevenson, and staff audit. Commissioner Miller asked - where do we see this case going? What else is there to know? Scott Woodbury said there is no proposed rate design. Could do it the same as last time but the company has indicated that that type of design did not provide them with the needed revenue. In the last case it was debated as to what level of rates would give the company the maximum return, thinking that at some level the death spiral would happen and they would lose customers. Company says the generation is twice as much as the rates with increase they requested. They haven't included any supporting data. Their rates right now are some of the highest in the country. Commissioner Miller asked - so you think this will have to go to hearing to resolve this? Scott Woodbury said he thought it was sufficient enough an increase to warrant some input. The Company also says the staff report on which they base their application clearly indicates that the existing rates are insufficient to provide an appropriate level of rates, so therefore interim as requested is confiscatory, Seems like the Company's been out on this for quite awhile and asking for quick turn around is asking a lot. Would suggest expedited hearing date but think that is the Company's position and staff is yet to develop one. Commissioner Nelson asked - then how can we make a decision on interim rates? -5- Scott Woodbury said he tried to get in on the agenda as soon as possible because company was asking for interim rates. Commissioner Miller said he was torn. Don't think we should impose regulatory burden on the Company but on the other hand it is very difficult to vote for interim relief of the Company just on the basis of a brief memo. So right today, couldn't do anything. If we want to defer until Friday for further thought and staff analysis, then could take some definitive action Friday. Give staff time to figure out long view of this case and where it ought to go. Also look for a hearing date. **Carol Cooper was in attendance. Spoke to the fact that the customers are unhappy about not having a copy of the application available in the service area. Asked if copying charges could be waived and copies be sent to customers in the area. Copies are to be sent to some of the people in the area. **Tom Faull and Syd Lansing were in attendance. 8A. Earth Power Energy & Minerals, Inc. Motion to Stay Complaint Proceedings and Petition for a Declaratory Ruling in Case No. IPC-E-92-29. Scott Woodbury explained the filing. Said Earth Power would like a declaratory ruling. Talked to Bart Kline about the filing. Company has no objection to vacating oral argument and wants to voice their objections to the stay. All the Company agreed to at this point in time is a delay of a hearing. They want to reply in writing. Commissioner Miller asked - is it still their view that we lack jurisdiction? Scott Woodbury said the complaint was originally before the Commission. Question of jurisdiction was framed differently than it was before. Explained why the Company thinks it is appropriately before the Commission. Idaho Power Company doesn't want it stayed for a long time. Bart Kline is still chewing on this. Commissioner Smith said we can only rule on the procedural relief. **Vacate Thursday hearing and wait for Idaho Power Company's response. -6- Commissioner Miller said he agreed the oral argument should be delayed. Scott Woodbury said Bart Kline felt uncomfortable since the application has now changed. **Vacate the oral argument. Kline has until the 19th to file a response. Further proceedings will be scheduled as necessary after that. 9. Terri Carlock's March 5, 1992 Decision Memorandum re: Pacificorp Debt Issuance Amendment; Case No. PAC-S-91-1. Approved. Meeting adjourned. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 11th day of March, 1993. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary mjw 0146M