19930524.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
May 24, 1993 - 1:30 - p.m.
In attendance were:
Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson.  Also in attendance were staff members:  Mike Gilmore, Scott Woodbury, Don Howell, Joe Cusick, Tom Faull, Jim Long, Gary Richardson, Madonna Faunce, Birdelle Brown, Randy Lobb, Judy Stokes, Tonya Clark, Lori Mann and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance was Walt Sorg of GTE.
Items from the May 24, 1993 Published Agenda were discussed as follows.
Commissioner Smith announced that the next decision meeting would be June 1 at 1:30 and following that there will be one on Thursday, June 24 at 1:30.
1.  Regulated Carrier Divison Agenda dated May 24, 1993.
Approved.
2.  Don Howell's May 24, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  UP Abandonment of the Stoddard Branch, Case No. UP-RR-93-1.
Commissioner Nelson said he thought there were four requirements in Idaho Code 62-424.  Asked Don Howell about that.  Thought that No. 3 - The branch has a potential for profitability, was a stumbling block.  However, if Double D Seed can get a hearing, would support him in everything we can.  Have to make a finding.  Could say without 25/30 more cars the line isn't profitable.  
Commissioner Miller said given the limited effect of our findings, he was not as worried about the formal findings as he was the essence of this case, which appears to be a thin case.
Commissioner Smith said Don Howell pointed out the numbers were closer than they appeared.
Commissioner Miller said he had been trying to think of what our obligation is to one private enterprise.  Why worry about using up all of our resources.. It is usually $25,000 at a minimum.  Would be in favor of filing a protest and if a hearing is granted, then decide how much additional effort we should make.  It could be that we could be more helpful with technical assistance to the one private enterprise.  Would be in favor of filing a protest at this point but reserving determination of how big a commitment we should make.
-2-
Commissioner Smith said the other alternative would be filing something besides a protest.
Commissioner Nelson said he wondered what we would say in the protest about profitability.
Commissioner Miller said we haven't been able to make that finding.
Commissioner Smith said we haven't looked at our workpapers.  Could pare down on branch costs.   Said to say we want to help this guy without filing protest and spending money.
Don Howell said the opportunity costs and lost revenue are about the same.  The difference here is there is no opportunity costs.
Don Howell said the Union Pacific doesn't give you the car numbers until they file.  Other option is to just file general comments and if there is a proceeding, can make determination on what role you want to take.  Think this will probably be modified procedure.
Commissioner Miller asked what we would say in general terms?
Don Howell said if you just want to file general comments to stay on the service list, you could say reason for low carage is the costs.  Could support a request for modified procedure.  
Suggested help by the Congressional delegation.  The distinction between this case - this case is different from Teton and Wallace because there was outpouring in those cases.  Only had a single shipper here.
Commissioner Miller asked if it would be fair to guess that if we filed a separate protest, that would be more likely to get a hearing than comments?
Don Howell said he thought so.  If a state says they are going to protest and file testimony, we can say what areas are soft in the case.
Commissioner Miller said if we did do a protest and got some type of hearing, could we put on a credible effort without hiring consultants, a lot of outside consultant resources?
Don Howell said we could do some of that.  We don't need McFarland, dont need an appraiser.  Are going to need someone to crank the numbers.  We have acquired enough experience to know what areas to attack and what to lay off of.  We are not going to have Health & Welfare environmental consultant.
-3-
Commissioner Miller said if Commissioners said we ought to  protest but the handling of the case should be done in house, could we do it?
Don Howell said - could probably.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn't mind going after them any chance we get but don't see this as having enough interest to pursue it.  However if the numbers are that close... Guess he thought we didn't have a case.
Don Howell said we have not talked to the other shippers to see why they didn't come.  Whether you have the shippers with you or not, seems you determine how strong a challenge you will get.  If you know that kind of information, would help you make a decision, we could find that out.
Commissioner Miller said - could make a definitive decision Wednesday morning.  There is divided sentiment.  
3.  Jim Long's April 29, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Parma Petition for Toll Free Calling to Caldwell, Nyssa and Nuacres (Case No. GNR-T-93-11) - held from 5-6-93 and 5-17-93 Decision Meetings; and
4.  Jim Long's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Parma - Wilder Petition for Toll Free Calling Between Both Exchanges.
Commissioner Smith said these items should be held indefinitely pending the completion of the staff EAS investigation and work plan which is estimated to take a year.  Need someone to draft letters to the primary petitions and tell them about the EAS plan, etc.
Jim Long said he would do that.
Commissioner Miller said he thought the public should get some kind of notice.
Discussed steps to take to get to EAS.
Staff will do a case by case analysis.
Mike Gilmore said publishing notice is up to the agencies.
Commissioner Miller said he was thinking it would be helpful to first have a case number, would let phone companies know what we are doing and it would be helpful to some legislators,
Don Howell will work on a notice.
-4-
5.  Joe Cusick's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Introduce Enhanced Service.
It is for exchanges where they can be put in.
Joe Cusick explained the service.  Will be rolled out to the public July 1.  
Approved.
6.  Belinda Anderson's May 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Gem State Utilities Corporation DBA PTI Communications Tariff No. 93-2 to Add 800 Data Base.
Approved.
**Notify customers with bill stuffers.
7.  Belinda Anderson's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  MCI's Transmittal No. 31 for Collect Calls.
Commissioner Nelson asked - if we had two companies that filed a tariff like this, wouldn't we work ourselves down to zero?  Thought this was phony.
Commissioner Miller said he thought it was a good deal.  Seemed to him the way the staff analysis was, staff was trying to force onto price list, rate doctrines that apply to tariffs.  So a reference in the tariff would not be proper.  Where this is only an informational price list and not a tariff, it is only intended as informal price list, why wouldn't we allow this, when you are dealing with a service that appears to be highly competitive and if your policy in the competitive markets is to make as many services available as you can, why object to something like this?  Guess it stems in part for his feeling that staff hase an up hill battle in this deaveraging.  Just thought this was an unnecessary attempt to pose PUC concept on service that was removed from that type of regulation and that if this is a service some citizens will find useful, why should we get excited about it?
Commissioner Smith said - but if this is a one cent lower rate, does it mean anything?
Commissioner Miller said he thought the language they have selected was probably from a national cooky-cutter tariff and doesn't fit very well in Idaho.  
Commissioner Smith said it could be postponed by making it part of the case.
-5-
Commissioner Miller said we could do that.  In the meantime MCI should be able to put it out.
Commissioner Nelson asked - could we accept the filing without that paragraph?  
**It has already gone out with that notation.
Discussed offering it at this time but put it in the case.
Commissioner Smith said if staff thinks it should be in the case, it should be.
Lori Mann asked how it should be added to the case?  MCI's brief is due Friday.
Commissioner Smith suggested calling MCI to let them know this is going to be an issue in the case.
Commissioner Miller went over staff's argument.  The MTS service offered two-way is deaveraged and (2) that in someway the incorporation of "other rates" is an additional improper practice of charging rates that are not in their tariff.
Commissioner Smith said she didn't have a problem with the second point.
Commissioner Miller said the other issue is if this "collect call access" is improper deaverage.  
Joe Cusick said yes.
Commissioner Smith said referencing is not a problem.
Commissioner Miller said the first issue, the deaverage issue, is probably (1) already in the other case or maybe we just need to add this.  Seems whatever you decide on the general material in the case will apply to this service anyway and if we don't think the FX is optional on the independent grounds of an improper adoption by reference, can forget that part of it.
Commissioner Smith suggested Lori Mann look at it and see if it is included and see if it is prudent to also put it at issue.
8.  Scott Woodbury's May 4, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. IPC-E-92-31--Rosebud - Mountain Home.  (Held from 5-6-93 and 5-17-93 Decision Meetings).
-6-
Commissioner Miller said in review - we had two prehearing conferences and have been high-centered for sometime to see what the next step should be and identify which are ready for decision if any, was hard to come to grips with.
Had typed up a conceptual outline of one way to try and move the ball forward without deciding too much to this point.  If we want to go along those lines, will need to get it refined.  Was primarily intended as a conceptual way to go.  Asked Tom Faull to look at it.  Think he thinks it is appropriate.
Tom Faull said Scott Woodbury was concerned that this doesn't address Owen's problem.  Seemed the concern is that he didn't know whether to pursue the project, negotiate contracts, without having ballpark figure of what rates will be.  If Owen doesn't raise the issue, that is fine but if he does, worry about it then.
Without that issue think it is reasonable.
Commissioner Nelson said he thought Owen can come pretty close calculating the rates on his own.
Commissioner Miller said he thought he will say he can extrapolate the rates but they don't mean anything to him if Idaho Power Company gets to negotiate away from SAR rate.. or if the rate takes into account dispatchability.  Said his response to that is if that is Owen's response, it is now okay to say we have to decide No. 4.  Until then we don't.  
Commissioner Nelson asked - if we have to decide that on #4, wouldn't it be better to stall until the next avoided cost hearing?
Tom Faull asked - does Owen have legitimate grounds for complaint or not?  If he has an opportunity to get the existing rates or to be grandfathered into the current rates and you deny him that opportunity.....
Commissioner Nelson said his initial reaction is he isn't very far along to grandfather in.  
Commissioner Miller said that would be a subject for a hearing.  The advantage of this approach is that it does establish or reaffirm the principle that these projects just don't exist in the.  You don't get a rate until you have a project.  Think we need to reestablish that.  If the decision of what are the items that can be included in negotiations from the SAR rate has to be forced on us, then it has to be forced on us.  Maybe that can be blended into another case or be a general thing.  Don't think any of us
-7-
are comfortable making any substantitive decisions based on the record now or on our own level of confusion.  At least this moves it along.
Commissioner Smith said she thought he wanted a commitment out of the ocmpany before he makes a commitment.
Scott Woodbury said all he wants is a rate to determine viability.  Staff's analysis of company's rates are they are not reasonable.  Company says it wants an assessmenbt by the Commission that rates as submitted are reasonable.  Seems like we are avoiding that.  Commission doesn't want to address that now.  We can suggest wording later.  Company is going in a totally different direction than the Commission on this.  Don't know if we are providing Owen with much of anything as far as Commission's decision about being close to project before rates... don't know.. it seems that the only thing separating him from a project is, he has an up and running proto-type in Colstrip which he wants to cooky-cutter around where he can get rates and fuel.  He has provided the company with site selection, type of technology, type of fuel, certainly he can extrapolate rates are all he wants - unlevelized dispatchable rates.  Company says he is not entitled to that rate because they have reached saturation point with that type of project and added to that is they are saying Commission must consider obtaining additional take and pay contracts on the company's debt/equity ratio and how it is looked at by finance raters.
Commissioner Nelson said - lets talk about location for a minute.  Do they have land?
Scott Woodbury said they have an option on it.  Do we require that they purchase it?
Commissioner Nelson asked - isn't the site a problem?
Scott Woodbury said he thought rates could be set with some assumptions.
Commissioner Smith asked Scott Woodbury what he wants them to do?
Scott Woodbury said  - he questioned whether you want to establish rates or have the company establish them and you approve them.
Tell the company to get busy and calculate some rates and give them to Rosebud.
Company's rates are not reasonable.  What we should tell the company is how they should be set.  The types of adjustments they are making... they are factoring in stuff that the
-8-
Commission has indicated should not be factored into the calculation.
Commissioner Smith asked - are we supposed to ignore the fact that they don't need this power?
Tom Faull said - they haven't filed a case and rates are not correct.
Commissioner Miller commented - we have one staff person who thinks it is okay and one who does not.  Is reluctant to make decision Scott Woodbury wants us to make.
Commissioner Smith said she didn't think that was in the record.
Scott Woodbury said he didn't assess the reasonableness of the rates.  Tom Faull looked at them and he established the methodology and they haven't met the methodology..  Perhaps the next step should be a hearing on the reasonableness of the rates.  The company isn't going to do anything without being forced.
Mike Gilmore asked if Scott Woodbury should suggest a procedure in a decision memo?
Commissioner Smith asked - are we saying a complaint between these two parties is not the right place to decide these generic questions?
Commissioner Miller said he thought these have been established.  Seemed to him it is arguable that the present state of affairs could be characterized that there is a certain amount of uncertaintly for projects above 10 mws.  It could be argued that the procedure is quite clear and it is the commission's policy to make people abide by it.  The correct characterization he was not prepared to answer right now.
Mike Gilmore said if there is anything to come out of APA is you have to make a decision.  It is our job to come up with a procedure to answer the questions.
9.  Scott Woodbury's May 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. WWP-E-93-4 - Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity - Rathdrum Turbine Project.
Scott Woodbury said he prepared the memo but Lori Mann should answer the questions.  Said filing was just made last week.
-9-
Commissioner Smith said she thought it would be helpful to know what DEQ is going to do.
Scott Woodbury said the purpose of the DEQ hearing is not to put on a case.  They have already come up with a proposed draft.  Purpose of the hearing is just to take public testimony.
Commissioner Miller asked when it was likely they will issue their permit?
Scott Woodbury has not talked to the DEQ person.
Commissioner Miller asked - did we want that permit issued as part of our record?
Scott Woodbury said he thought we indicated that the form that our certificate would take would be contingent upon licensing and permitting.  We don't have the staff or the expertise on licensing and permitting.  Panhandle Health District is also a licensing authority with respect to containment over the acquifer.
Commissioner Smith asked - so is the best thing to do here is send out a notice of application, etc. and in time speak of how we will handle it until we see how much interest there is in the project?
Scott Woodbury said he had already talked to the Citizens Coalition for Responsible Growth.  They are very interested.  They are proceeding for all of the agencies.  Spoke to the timing.  Said the company's case is in.
Commissioner Smith said - so we could just do notice of application, set intervention dates, etc.
Discussed prehearing conference.
Scott Woodbury said the consumer group says they will need about 60 days to complete discovery.  Company would like hearing beginning of August.
**Scott Woodbury is to rummage up a schedule and put that in the notice also.
No prehearing conference - go to hearing.
10. Scott Woodbury's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. IPC-E-93-11 - Horseshoe Bend Hydroelectric Company Firm Energy Sales Agreement-Second Amendment.
-10-
Commissioners approved amendment - it should be done by order.
11. Mike Gilmore's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Rules of Procedure--Case No. 31-0101--9301.
Mike Gilmore will do order of adoption.
12. Mike Gilmore's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Telephone Customer Relations Rules - Case No. 31-4101-9301.
Commissioner Nelson asked how we could have current case by case analysis without rule binding it?
Mike Gilmore responded that U S West has a tariff they think speaks to a lot of the converns.  Said Bev Barker was reluctant to put that much detail in the rules.
Commissioner Nelson said it looked like GTE wants clarification but not specifics.  Guess we have to be prepared at some point to receive a complaint because they are being treated unfairly by Commission Staff.
On Rule 303, it looked like if you have a bill of $100 or more you can have ht disconnected without notice.
Discussed the wording.  They have to have found out you misrepresented who you were.
Commissioner Smith asked about consistency -  the amount is $50 in one rule and $100 in another.
Discussed the difference.
Commissioner Smith asked about GTE's request - if they want to determine from the $50 - give notice.
Approved as modified.
13. Mike Gilmore's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Telephone Customer Information Rules - Case No. 31-4102-9301.
Commissioners approved issuance of order of adoption.
14. Mike Gilmore's May 21, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Comments on Readoption and Reformatting of the Commission's Customer Relations Rules for Gas, Electric and Water Public Utilities--Case No. 31-2101-9301.
-11-
Rule 11.  
Commissioner Smith asked if this was the safeguard that staff is looking for here?  The safeguard is if the utility wants to do something different from the rule, they get the Commission to order it?
Mike Gilmore said the thing he set out in the rules is it makes you list exemptions.  Explained his exemption wording.  
In the comments can draw IGC's attention to the exemption.
Discussed definition.
**In 3.02 and 3.06 can put it in the "comments".
Rule 109 change looked okay.
201.K -
Commissioner Nelson suggested giving the address of the nearest local office that could help them.  Give them the address of the service center.
Mike Gilmore thought his rewording would take care of that.
Okayed.
202.
Adopted IPC recommendation.
Rules 203 and 204 - Okayed.
Mike Gilmore will put in explanation.
Rules 304 and 313.
Mike Gilmore explained there are a certain amount of cases where they don't get around to it in 28 days.
Commissioner Nelson said he did see some give and take.  Are we going to surprise anyone by not giving them a 7 day notice?  How easy is it for the company to keep track of these 7 day notices?
Mike Gilmore said they should have it in the computer.
Commissioner Nelson said he would go against Bev Barker on this.
-12-
Rule 308 -
Commissioner Miller said in the absence of some information that the current rule isn't working, wouldn't put some arbitrary time limit in it.
Mike Gilmore said he could see where the utility could do it.  Company wants to not be required.
Commissioner Nelson said - would rather leave that off until it is a problem.
Rules 500 to 502.
Workshops will be convened on these.
15. Lori Mann's May 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re:  Springfield Petition for Toll-Free Calling to Blackfoot; Case No. GNR-T-92-9.
Commissioner Smith asked about company using what they had until they got upgrade next year?  
Commissioner Nelson said he would suggest:  approve this, tell them to implement, keep track of blaockage and upgrade as soon as they can.
Commissioner Miller said it appears to be impossible to tell if the amount of blockage will rise to public concern level.   There is no way to determine that.  Apparently the community is willing to accept the inconvenience of intermittent blocking.
Discussed whether or not they could always get an operator if not 911?
Lori Mann said she thought so.
Commissioner Smith asked - if 911 was blocked, could you get an operator?
Commissioner Miller said his concern was not getting to anyone.
Commissioners asked Lori Mann to tell Belinda Anderson that that was a concern.
**Will be held until Tuesday's decision meeting, to get response to this concern.
-13-
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 27th day of July, 1993.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary
0159M