The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About19930722.docx MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING July 22, 1993 - 10:00 a.m. In attendance were: Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Mike Gilmore, Lori Mann, Brad Purdy, Gary Richardson, Joe Cusick, Belinda Anderson, Syd Lansing, Keith Hessing, Mary Friddle, Bev Barker, Stephanie Miller, Randy Lobb, Belinda Anderson, Jim Long, Tonya Clark, Dave Schunke and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Patty Nichols of Idaho Power Company, Walt Sorg of GTE and Pat Stewart, Ron Lightfoot and Jim Wozniak of US West. Items from the July 22, 1993 Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows. 1. Lori Mann's July 13, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Leon/Lenore EAS Investigation; Case No. INL-T-91-2. Commissioner Smith said the question is - should Lenore have EAS to Lapwai, Lewiston, etc.? Commissioner Miller said Lenore is the classic EAS case - both to Lapwai and Lewiston, but was unclear what we needed in terms of further work regarding technical hearings with respect to pinning down the cost and cost recovery or what? What does staff think on that? Lori Mann said Inland and US West gave broad estimates. Don't know if that is something you need a hearing on or more specifics from the companies. Birdelle Brown said staff testimony on Lenore was US West was at breakeven. Spoke to Inland costs. Can let Inland tell us what costs are and can be decided without further hearings. There are lots of questions on Leon. **Lynn Anderson was in attendance at this time. Commissioner Smith asked - on Lenore, is Inland in on USF? Response was yes. Commissioner Smith said the feeling was the USF should only pick up reasonable costs to provide EAS services. Don't know what staff follow-up is necessary. Birdelle Brown sand Lenore Inland went into USF 1 1/2 years. Rates have been audited recently. Any additional costs could be dumped into that. -2- Commissioner Miller said it is important for us to not look at the USF as an easy way of solving these problems and start dumping these costs into it without assurances that it is only residual. Commissioner Smith said it is important because of the 100%. It will cause a draw on the fund. Agreed. Commissioner Miller said perhaps we can just ask the companies to file implementation plan with supporting numbers. Would like some assurances that USF funding is all right. Commissioner Smith said we don't know how often it can happen also. **Get implementation plans from the companies. Commissioner Smith said they are really isolated. There are thirty-two Idaho customers aligned with Washington that can't call anywhere in Idaho. Unfortunately there is no good solution. One solution is EAS to Lewiston. You could solve a portion of it by granting to Lewiston. Wouldn't solve the problem of calling to Genessee and Moscow. Commissioner Nelson said on Page 5, ...quoted from the memo....Asked for clarification of mileage. Birdelle Brown responded. It was from the rate center. **Think the figure in error is 29 - it should be 19. Commissioner Smith asked if Commissioner Nelson was thinking of going down the MFJ route? Commissioner Nelson said it would be nicer to see if we could get a waiver. Commissioner Miller said another approach - seems to him when you make one of these decisions, you have to access the community of interest with the costs. So for him the community of interest is not a yes, no decision. If the cost was high, and low on community interest he might not do it. Although he didn't have an opinion on how strong the community interest is, you could say ist is under the threshhold to look at the community interest and find out what the cost is and balance those. Might proceed to a technical hearing. -3- **Scott Woodbury and Eileen Benner were in attendance at this time. **Proceed to looking at that aspect of it. Lenore is easy because it is high on community interest and low on cost. Commissioner Miller said whether right or wrong, cases like Troy are a little different. Troy has some elements of an independent community but also a link to a larger community. It is easier when you have these diverse groups. Without knowing the cost, it is pretty hard to do it. Commissioner Smith suggested another round, do we need hearing or more filings by the companies? These thirty two customers should be sold from Inland to GTE and LATA boundaries moved. Commissioner Miller asked - do you think we could do it by filings or a hearing? Lori Mann said she didn't think a hearing was necessary. It is just how much will it cost. **Decision was to do whatever needs to be done to tie down the numbers. Discussed the exact area. Commissioner Smith commented she didn't know if it will make sense to draw the county boundary. Birdelle Brown said there may be some information we can get from U. S. West on the options. Commissioner Miller suggested - lets just get that information and end up with a decent record. Commissioner Smith asked - are we satisfied that enough has been done about the phone books and 911? Birdelle Brown said no. Companies have made concurrences on phone books but nothing has come back to her. Said on 911, Inland has told us they can make those calls. Big question is where should they go? Need to get the county into it. -4- Commissioner Smith said she didn't think we were the ones to do the particulars. Should we send a letter to the county and say concern has been expressed about emergency services, if you have a preference, you should contact Inland? Think that may be the way to call to their attention that some people are having difficulties. Phone companies need to be told what is the best thing. 2. Don Howell's July 16, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Joint Petition of Idaho Power and U S West to Waive Provisions of Tariff Schedule 40 - Unmetered Service, Case No. IPC-E-93-16. Okayed by Commissioners. 3. Randy Lobb's July 16, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Montgomery Watson's Engineering Evaluation of the Rimrock Service Area of Hayden Pines Water Company, Case No. HPN-W-91-1. Commissioner Smith said we need response time for Hayden Pines and then the staff. Randy Lobb said we did have August 30 date. If it seems reasonable, what they intend to do, was not sure we have to respond except to say it looks reasonable. Guess we could set a date a week or two after that. Commissioner Miller said he thought Randy's recommendation of sending reply by 30th was fine. Randy can review it and put it on the first decision meeting in September to keep this thing going. Commissioner Smith said whatever the staff is going to say should be in writing for the company to see. 4. Jim Long's July 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Communications Advice 93-6-N which Introduces Common Channel Signaling Capability (CCSAC) and Two Optional Features: Clear Channel Capability (CCC) and Signaling System Seven (SS7) Out of Band Signaling. Approved staff recommendation. 5. Bev Barker's July 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Communications Tariff Advice No. 93-04-S. Commissioner Nelson asked if U S West was just a billing agent for the companies or do they buy? Syd Lansing explained. They buy it and collect it. If it is not collected, it is considered at the next billing (two months). -5- The true-up is to reduce risk for the company. Commissioner Nelson asked - so you are at risk for two months. Assume there is a discount for carrying that? Commissioner Miller said it seems there is a division of opinion among the staff. From Bev's perspective, the late payment would be contrary to prior Commission practices. From Telecommunications side it is viewed as a reasonable thing in light of the rate rebalancing proposed by the company in lowering access. He was thinking it would be helpful to have a memo from the Communications side. We received an informal presentation from the company on rate restructure. We did just receive it informally and haven't had staff analysis on the proposed revisions and it seems we need to make an independent judgement on that overall. Don't have in mind all the details. Need staff analysis of that rate reformulation so we can independently decide if that makes sense to depart from our normal approach to these things. In the absence of that, would have to come out with Bev. Commissioner Smith said she had a comment for Bev. Thought just crossed her mind that we have a pretty long list of reasons why you cannot disconnect. Bev Barker said the chief difference is we have said for 3 months in a year you cannot disconnect electric and gas. Have not made any flat out restrictions for telephone companies. Commissioner Smith said we have a long list of things for which you cannot disconnect. Just wonder if the rationale was still valid. Bev Barker said she didn't have a problem if there would be separate billings. Seems contrary to a lot of universal service goals. Overall see their restrictions as being equal. Commissioner Miller suggested speaking to that concern also. If we are going to get a memo on the price issue, we should also have more information on balance of disconnect and late payment. Gary Richardson suggested the public getting involved. Commissioner Smith asked if there was a jurisdictional problem with company disconnecting on Title 62 companies. Attorney needs to look at disconnecting for late payment of Title 62. -6- Eileen Benner asked what Commissioner Miller wanted staff to look at? Was looking at interest payments solely as what happens to that money. Where is it stored, who does it go to? Can look at it in that respect. Commissioner Miller said he was going on Bev's point in her memo that income from late payment charges will be used to offset revenue impact of reduced toll rates and switched access charges. Had the impression this was part of repricing package and that would be rationale for approving it. Said his point was that Commissioners have been exposed very briefly to repricing package. If they are features of repricing, he would like to know what they are. Beverly Barker said it is difficult to rebut what the company wants if there is nothing on the table to look at. Commissioner Smith asked -= does this need to be suspended? Gary Richardson suggested public comment on it. Belinda Anderson said she thought it would be important. Commissioner Smith suggested modified procedure. Commissioner Miller said modified procedure is a good way to take the temperature. **Was decided to do modified procedure with a 21 day comment period. Ask the company and staff to file their comments in that context as well. 7. Birdelle Brown's July 19, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Advice 93-2-S Basic Local Exchange Replacement Tariff. Birdelle said replacement pages have now been filed - they seem to be okay. Filing approved. 8. Birdelle Brown's July 19, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Advice 93-5-N to Withdraw Rate Savers Call Thrift. Ron Lightfoot said it was explained to the one customer that it may not be cost effective. Company believes the product has little value when you look at the Idaho side of the LATA. Now you only get the Idaho portion of the Spokane LATA. Approved. -7- 9. Scott Woodbury's Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-G-93-9. Interruptible Natural Gas Service Agreement, Louisiana-Pacific Corporation. Commissioner Nelson asked if all the numbers in the memo were in the contract? Scott Woodbury replied they were. Company in upsizing it. Commissioner Nelson said he didn't have any trouble with the contract. Scott Woodbury said he is expecting some amended language about the different schedules. Commissioner Miller asked - why did we do this without modified when the company asked for it? Scott Woodbury replied - there is no real reason for the public to comment. Commissioner Miller asked if Potlatch would care? Scott Woodbury said no. Approved. 9A. Bev Barker's July 20, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Emergency Requests for Investigation filed by Warm Springs Mesa Homeowner's Association & Lower Warm Springs Mesa Task Force. Commissioner Miller said he thought Commissioner should not be cautious about opening investigations, but opening an investigation without knowing what the real purpose is is always problematic and question investigations that don't go anywhere and don't solve anything and give customers the signal we will do something. Commissioner Nelson asked how much is in our jurisdiction and how much is DEQ? Would think DEQ would be in on water quality. Bev Barker said it is the typical small water company problem. Have a developer that is not that interested in maintaining a system and he is in a situation now that he has a decrepid system in Lower Mesa. Says he needs more money. That is why people are coming to the Commission saying why more money. In the meantime we are communicating with Mr. Wise that even with a rate case, it will not cover replacement costs. Are in a bad situation. -8- Randy Lobb said the real big issue is the sewer system. They have had some leaks. One thing that the City has indicated that if they put in a sewer system, they will probably need new pipes. It will cost more if they have to fix mains, etc. They want the water company to replace the mains. Can Commission force company to replace lines? Question is, if you investigate it, you have to tell if main replacement is necessary, think it is a difficult question. Not sure what an investigation would really show. Can't look at the pipeline in the ground. It is fairly old. He could probably give us cost estimates on what it has cost to fix leaks. Don't think DEQ has ever considered a "boil" order up there. Think it would be a tough call. Bev Barker spoke of letter DEQ sent to Wise. DEQ wants a standard "boil" order out of there. Commissioner Smith said maybe we need to treat this as a complaint. To the extent the people have complained about inadequate service and service outages and company should be required to respond saying - this is what I am going to do about it. Don't think we can write back and say your problem is too tough and we don't know what to do about it. We are supposed to do something about adequacy of service. Think we need to tell the company to answer these customers' complaints regarding adequacy or service and outages. Commissioner Miller asked what the company would say? Randy Lobb thought the company would say they don't have enough money. Maybe this letter about boiling will get his attention. Think money is a primary concern. Commissioner Miller asked if he had the financial strength to do this? **Treating this as a complaint is a good response. Commissioner Smith said she thought we should be specific about what is our jurisdiction and what is not. Randy Lobb said he has met with the homeowners. This enables them to put pressure on Mr. Wise. Commissioner Smith asked if they ultimately will pay for this? Randy Lobb said they realize that. Brad Purdy spoke to other little water companies and how DEQ gets involved. Think we can approach this with jurisdiction approach of what we can do. -9- Randy Lobb said the boil order is pretty significant. **Do complaint. Ask for reply from company. Do whatever we can to get DEQ to focus on it. 9B. Review of the 1992 Revenue Sharing Year - Case No. USW-S-93-2. Questions on Page 6 of the Decision Memorandum were discussed. 1. Yes. 2. Yes. Are we doing Year II? Commissioner Miller said it seemed we have to keep our commitment and there has been value found to it. Type of evidence needed to stop this is just not here. We weren't persuaded a year ago. Commissioner Smith said we determined it is still in the public interest. We also determined everyone did benefit. There was benefit to local exchange customers who didn't even have computers. Said she believed we did address the concerns. Nothing has changed in a year. Given that, do you want to add Howe and Riverside? Yes. 3. Yes. 4A. Yes. 4B. Tech II quarterly report? No one objected to it. Okayed. 5. Do we want to say anything about MCI's comments? Commissioner Miller said he thought there was some merit to at least the general drift of the comments in that even though we made this commitment and we need to stick with it but that didn't address the larger question of what do we do with our regulatory format for U. S. West in the future and it seems to him that our obligation to the public is such that we do need to review that. Could be after that review, we would decide continuation of this format is the right thing. But as MCI points out, it has been four years since we did this and we have not reviewed it. A lot has developed -10- in telecommunications over the years, so what he is thinking about is a process for review that would start at some point with a view towards finishing shortly after the expiration of the three years. Commissioner Smith said she thought it should end before. Think it could also tie in with major changes regarding EAS. Other point she would add is it is not unusally for states to re-examine their A4Plan. And there is a lot of activity going around the nation now where plans have been in effect 3/4 years, re-examination cycle is not a big surprise to anybody. Commissioner Nelson said he would be in favor of a re-examination. We are not committed to do cost allocations until we can do it. Waiting for the Oregon study to come out is a good idea. Commissioner Miller said he thought he was right, wouldn't go into it with any predisposition. Advantage of raising it now gives plenty of time for that process to occur. Commissioner Nelson said staff is doing an audit as best they can on the company's earnings level. If they think it is unreasonable we will get an alarm from them. Commissioner Smith said she would not go into a review with any preconceived notions. Think there should be an opportunity for ICA, etc. to try to convince us. Stephanie Miller said the staff hasn't done an earnings audit because that was part of the reason for revenue sharing. Syd's audit has been overall earnings of the company. Asked if the Commissioners were proposing a full audit next year? Commissioner Nelson asked when the last earnings-type audit was conducted? Syd Lansing replied - '89 test year for '90. Commissioner Nelson said it might be appropriate now. Syd Lansing said he thought you had to start at the top with 100% of earnings, costs, etc. and make a rational allocation. There are cost allocation manuals that can give us many cost allocation theories. You have to pick a method first. After separations is when cost allocation has to occur. People will argue with whatever system you come up with but it can be done. -11- Commissioner Miller said there will be some areas of contention. Commissioner Smith said what she wanted to avoid is causing a whole set of machinery and mechanisms to start rolling that you can't stop. If you can go in, take the whole company, choose allocation and eyeball state, without the company jumping into full cost allocation method, then she says okay. If it is going to cause the other, she wants to think about it. Syd Lansing said as long as everyone knows it is our staff's first look... Jim Wozniak said we have had four years cost allocations systems. We shared with the Commission before revenue sharing. Wonder about examining cost allocation, suggested sharing of information. Syd Lansing said he would hope so. Commissioner Smith said she just want a general feel for company's earnings. Commissioner Miller said he wants to fit our consumer protection interest and be able to know with relative certainty, Title 61 ratepayers are not being abused and whatever level of detail you need to go to to get that assurance is something we can discuss. Actual calls may take some more work. Obviously will have to have a financial review. Details need to be worked out. Part of it has to be a financial review. Commissioner Smith said first step would be for staff and company to sit down and propose a plan for the Commissioners and have another chance to see if it should be conducted. Thought she would benefit from some thoughtful discussions... to get assurance about feeling good about our decision. Stephanie Miller asked - are you thinking of getting this before the decision on Year III? Commissioner Smith said during Year III. Commissioner Miller said he would think Year III would continue. Primarily those discussions should occur with company and staff with Commissioners removed from that. Commissioners should not make decisions as they go along. -12- 10. Terri Carlock's Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-S-93-3. Approved. 11. Signing of Order No. 25021 in Case No. IPC-E-91-4, Twin Falls Hydroelectric Facility. Commissioners Signed the Order. Meeting adjourned. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 20th day of October, 1993. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary 0167M