Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19930319.docx Minutes of Decision Meeting March 19, 1993 - 1:30 p.m. In attendance were: Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Scott Woodbury, Terri Carlock, Don Oliason, Belinda Anderson, Gary Richardson, Lynn Anderson, Mike Gilmore, Mary Friddle, Bill Eastlake, Jack Taylor, Marge Maxwell, Denise Barkdull, Jim Long, Randy Lobb, Bev Barker, Tonya Clark and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance were Walt Sorg from GTE, Peter Richardson and Woody Richards, Attorneys at Law. Items from the March 19, 1993 Published Agenda were discussed as follows. 1.  Syd Lansing's March 11, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power Average Unit Cost. Commissioner Miller said in the memo Syd pointed out some problems but then said not withstanding, Commission should approve them. Syd Lansing said that was true.  Over time the problems will be corrected.  We have two years of information now.  Just wish it was better information. Commissioner Miller asked - there's nothing we can do about it now? Syd said that was right. Commissioner Smith suggested having Stephanie Miller send back the letter of approval. 2.  Randy Lobb's March 15, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power's Tariff Advice No. 93-1 "Uniform Irrigation Service Agreement". Staff recommended suspension of the filing. Commissioners approved staff recommendation. 3.  Belinda Anderson's March 16, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  GNR-T-93-6; Communication Telesystems International's Application to Process Calls to the Operator ("O-"). Commissioner Miller said he was wondering whether..we have this exemption process and everybody gets exempted, was wondering if we still need to do this sort of process, are we satisfied that all of these types of providers can provide this functionality without an investigation? -2- Belinda Anderson replied that she thought it was still important.  Explained it is important to get their compliance. Exemption was approved. 4.  Marge Maxwell's March 17, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Staff Request for Issuance of a Complaint against Sunbeam Water Company. Matter was discussed. Commissioner Smith said a lot of the customers showed up at the last hearing. Mike Gilmore suggested we could write to the customers informing them of their rights. Beverly Barker said if the Commission issued a complaint it would give us backing to get something from him. Commissioner Smith said in the past when we got tough the response of the company was the opposite of what we hoped for. Randy Lobb said Parrish is not only ignoring us but also EPA on water quality regulations. Commissioner Miller said what we could do is send a letter to the customers explaining their rights.  Then if we wanted to try and do something more, could open a docket to investigate quality of service and customer relations generally, go over and see if we would hear from them; see what the customers feel about their circumstances. Commissioner Nelson said he thought that was a good first step to get a feel from the customers. Beverly Barker said the problem is if you have rules that someone isn't abiding by, and we don't do anything, what kind of a message does that send? Commissioner Nelson said this is a small enough utility that if you don't get any reaction at all, you could find out what kind of enforcement policy you have. Mike Gilmore said we do have the option against the officers, not the company itself.  That probably would get Mr. Parrish's attention. -3- Commissioner Miller said he agreed with what Beverly Barker said but at this point we don't know why he isn't following the rules - don't have a record.  Advantage of a general investigation would be the record for a subsequent enforcement action.  We don't all have to go, could send Commissioner Nelson.   Commissioner Nelson said we have to respond somehow. Commissioner Miller suggested a letter from Mike Gilmore to the customers that they do not have to abide by the demand letter and inform them of their rights.  Or do we want something more? Commissioner Miller said - do you want to see if we get a response or wait? Decision was to open an investigation - two votes to one. 5.  Scott Woodbury's March 17, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. IPC-E-92-4 - Afton Replacement Contract. Commissioner Smith commented there is a pretty clear choice of viewing the issues.  Asked if staff could recommend a way out without creating too much havoc? Commissioner Nelson said the fact that the overall agreement from Meridian is below the avoided cost rate would allow us to accept that without accepting the Energy Producers' opposition but when he thinks about abandoning one and replacing it with other generation, it causes problems.  Because of the way most of them are set up it would be difficult to abandon. Commissioner Miller said he was torn in different directions.  On the one hand the Energy Producers raised interesting questions that may have to be addressed sometime.  On the other hand, the ratepayer benefits that flow from this reduced avoided costs payments and the overall public benefit of eliminating a heavily contentious set of circumstances leads him to want to be able to approve this as a settlement without precedential value and without having to decide all the things the Energy Producers suggested to us.  Not to say that those issues are not without merits, so if it is within our legal and logical powers to set this up as a unique circumstance and as a settlement without precedential value, and without deciding one way or another, that is what he would like to do.  But don't know if that is a sustainable result. -4- Scott Woodbury said if you look at it from Idaho Power's point of view it is a settlement and whenever you have a contract and there are two parties and if they want to settle it fine but from precedential point of view, don't think you can force Idaho Power company to negotiate with similar parties. Commissioner Smith said she was at the same place.  Said she liked what the Company said in their reply comments contending that the Commission has ample authority to approve both the Meridian Agreement and termination of the Afton agreement based on the fact that they are part of a "reasonable settlement of numerous contract problems unique to the Afton contract and settlement of protected, expensive litigation in multiple forums that continued for years with no end in sight".  Think that is the way she would like to go also. Scott Woodbury said some of the developers asked about  litigation to put themselves in a similar situation.  If they want to incur the costs they could roll the dice. Commissioner Nelson said he would be willing to look at another situation on an individual basis, Supreme Court never resolves a question they are not asked to resolve.  In this case we are able to find the contract is below cost.  Think we would have to make a finding one was reasonable and another not and it would be difficult to do. Commissioner Miller said he thought the issues of rate transfer and of fuel sources transfer, when in a circumstance where you don't have parties, is a very interesting question but different from a situation where you have willing parties.  Can you make that distinction? Scott Woodbury said yes.  Said IEBI in their comments said that to do ...they raised the issue of discrimination.  If you look at the company's willingness or unwillingness as being arbitrary... Commissioner Nelson asked - aren't you doing that without a set of facts in front of you? Scott Woodbury said yes.  If they refuse to talk to people about firming up their contract, are they being arbitrary? Commissioner Miller said the delimma is this may not be the best circumstance to decide what our policy on rate transfer ought to be, but don't know where you would decide it. -5- Scott Woodbury said he didn't believe the developers can point to anyother jurisdiction that allows transfer of rates or fuel sources.  Would agree with Idaho Power that this is just a settlement feature.  But do that and he thought staff's approach is also reasonable and it is an approach which the company in its reply indicated would get them from point A to point B. Commissioner Smith said she agreed Commission wants to terminate Afton and approve Meridian and question is doing those two things, do we want to do anything about rate transfers and fuel substitutions. Commissioner Miller said on the one hand he thought those are issues that could be thought about but on the other hand, don't think thinking about those should delay approval of this settlement.  Was not sure that a case that would come to the Commission as proposed settlement should have declarations or policies. Scott Woodbury said it would certainly benefit the developers if the Commission were to take the policy directions suggested by IEPI, but don't know if it would benefit the company or the ratepayers unless the facts presented themselves... Commissioner Miller said he was willing to think about and consider those things but wouldn't consider them here.  Leave those questions open and not purport to reject them but leave them open. Commissioner Nelson said he would second that. Commissioner Smith said okay. 6.  Don Oliason's March 17, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  UPL-E-93-1, Line Extension Tariff Advice No. 92-5. Approved. 7.  Terri Carlock and Denise Barkdull's March 17, 1993 Decision Memorandum In the Matter of the Application of Idaho Power Company for an Order Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of Up To $200,000,000 Aggregate Principal Amount of First Mortgage Bonds. Commissioner Miller said it looked fine. Commissioner Nelson commented it really rolled their equity down aways. -6- Terri Carlock said she thought their dividend and reinvestment policy will take care of that.  This is primarily going to be used for refinancing.  If so, those ratios won't develop. Approved. 8.  Mike Gilmore's March 11, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. 31-2101-9301--Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Readopt and Reformat Information to Customer Rules of Customers of Gas, Electric and Water Utilities. Commissioner Miller said just as a general matter, was wondering about the problem of trying to do administrative formatting and major substantative changes at the same time.  Maybe we could beef up the notice to make it clear to the reader that there are significant changes.  Order as proposed asks for comments on Rule 26, but Nos. 41 and 46 are also substantative.  Reader of this material doesn't figure that out until he gets to Page 5 of Appendix A.  So maybe we could do something in the notice to bring it to the readers attention immediately. Mike Gilmore suggested moving 26, 41, 42 and 46. Commissioner Smith asked if there would be any benefit to doing it at the same time but having two separate documents? Mary Friddle said we will have to send it out to all those who were at the workshops. Mike Gilmore said he thought we could send Appendix A and a letter to most people.  One of the reasons these were hurried onto the agenda was that Mary Friddle is going to be attending meetings next week. Commissioner Miller said his other question was - given the significance of some of these changes and given the audience, am not sure we can count on them to do good written comments and wonder if we ought to schedule or at least say we will schedule hearing after we receive comments to tell us what they think.  Think there would be some value to talking directly to the Commissioners. Mike Gilmore suggested inviting requests for public hearing. Commissioner Miller said he would change the wording on oral presentations.  Here we presume we won't have them.  Maybe here say we are going to conduct hearings if requested. -7- Mike Gilmore said we did invite requests for hearings. 10. Discussion of Policy Statement for Temporary Authority of Applicants for Tow Truck Authority. Commissioner Smith said she thought Mike Gilmore and Mary Friddle did a good job with this.  Think this is the way to go. Commissioner Miller said he continued to not understand why the current procedures for temporary permit don't fit here.  That has worked for true emergencies; i.e. fire fighters.  Was still not sure why we should bend the rules for people who have not gotten their authority rather than the ones who already have their authority. Mary Friddle said one of the reasons is the volume for safety inspections.  Other part of the reason is basically the Commission has ignored the enforcement of the tow truckers and now we say...think it would create bad public relations to get the additional $50 because of back log, there would be more staff work. Commissioner Miller said if there is legitimate concerns of the State Police about getting people to respond to accidents, couldn't they tell us the localities where they exist and we grant temporary to them?  Do they have to have this for all of them? Mary Friddle said we haven't gotten that information from the State Police.  There are 75 that have applied and have not complied.  Twenty-five do not have insurance. Commissioner Nelson said he thought we were dealing with people who have been in business and are now trying to get legal which creates mitigating circumstances. Mary Friddle said a lot of them wait until they get a threat of being taken off the rotation list to apply.  Then after June 30, can go back to the temporary and permanent procedure. Commissioner Miller asked - when we started this, why didn't we require them to have a temporary? Mary Friddle said she thought it was because it was the Commission's decision to start regulating. Tonya Clark explained how this started.  Were trying to control by area. -8- Commissioner Miller said the State Police is going to give them until June 30.  Asked why we have to bend our rule for this? Commissioner Smith explained they are aiding and abetting those who do not have authority.  Didn't think it was that much of a bending of the rules..we are regulating entry. Commissioner Miller said he just wondered if we have to bend our rules at all if they are willing to wait until June 30. Commissioner Nelson asked - are we creating any problems for ourselves when we approve this? Mike Gilmore said there is a rational basis for responding to whatever situation is out there.  This is the easiest way to find a basis for what you are doing.   Commissioner Nelson said he thought he would go ahead and do it. Two votes to one approving the policy.  Commissioner Miller voted no. Mike Gilmore will do a general order. 11. Don Howell's March 9, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  GTE Local Calling Plans in Case Nos. GTE-T-90-1, 92-2, -3, -4. Held at this time. Meeting was adjourned Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 6th day of April, 1993. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary mjw 0148M