The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About19931012.docx MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING OCTOBER 12, 1993 - 1:30 p.m. In attendance were Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Don Howell, Lori Mann, Mary Friddle, Keith Hessing, Randy Lobb, Tonya Clark, Joe Cusick, Birdelle Brown, Stephanie Miller, Gary Richardson, Bev Barker, Eileen Benner, Scott Woodbury and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Ron Lightfoot and Pat Stewart of U. S. West. Items from the October 12, 1993 Agenda were discussed as follows. 1. Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated October 12, 1993. Approved. 2. Empire Lines, Inc. - Decision Memorandum from Mary Friddle. Mary Friddle explained the request for suspension. Commissioner Miller suggested modified procedure. Staff recommended 14 day comment period. Mary Friddle said this isn't a commuter service. Commissioner Smith said one of the things that concerned here is the comment about the government subsidy. Tonya clark asked about the policy question? Mary Friddle explained what she was asking. Should they (staff) automatically go modified on these request or should they be brought to a decision meeting asking that? They usually ask for 30-day turn around. Commissioner Nelson said he didn't see any reason to not put it on modified automatically. Lori Mann said it might not go modified like Caldwell Bus. Don Howell said it is like a tariff application. Should at least do a notice of application. Commissioner Miller asked - do commissioners need to do anything? This has already chewed up 8 days. Commissioner Smith said depending on the timing, you could loose two weeks. -2- Commissioner Miller said he thought some automatic notice, notice of application, whatever. **Will start doing that automatically. 3. Lori Mann's October 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: TRS Funding: Case No. GNR-T-93-16. Order is being rewritten. Commissioner Miller had some changes. It confirms prior treatment of USF and TRS. 4. Belinda Anderson's October 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West's Tariff No. 93-05-S to be effective 12-15-93 for adding optional toll calling plans to public access lines and removing nonrecurring charges for new number referral. Approved. 5. Birdelle Brown's October 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Advice 93-10-N Introducing Shared 800 Service in Northern Idaho, effective 9-19-93. Approved. 6. Birdelle Brown's October 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: GTE Advice 93-17 to Offer Alternative Network Routing Service for 911 Emergency Telephone Service. Approved. 7. Birdelle Brown's October 6, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: GTE Advice 93-16 to Offer Calling Number Identification Delivery and other Class Services. Commissioner Miller said he wondered about just approving this without something more in the way of due process. Had the feeling that when we did the U. S. West hearings they were profitable. They did perform a public information function and the other thing he would like to know about the proposed terms and conditions for North Idaho territory - are they or are they not identical to Washington's offerings? Was thinking of Coeur d'Alene and Spokane. Would want them the same on both sides of the line, if you could. Suggested finding out if they offered it in Washington. Said when there is an opportunity for uniformity and if it is not offensive, we should go that way, because lack of uniformity is a reason for Caller ID regulation nationally. Moscow/Pullman would be even more persuasive. -3- Commissioner Smith said she wasn't quite sure of how people did get the information. Didn't want to stir up controversy but want people to have an opportunity to comment. Commissioner Miller suggested a hearing in Moscow. Birdelle Brown spoke to the offering. Said as far as the turmoil we experienced with U. S. West, there are a number of things GTE is doing - they are doing the whole 9 yards. GTE is a fully-regulated utility also. As far as education program goes, GTE put memos in the billing for the billing cycle from mid-September to mid-October. It was a pretty informative piece. We have in our possession a copy of the second notice that will go out in the November/December billing. (If the filing is approved). Commissioner Smith said she guessed she would be inclined to do modified procedure as a minimum rather than just approval. Think we need to give our notice to the people. Seems the least we should do is modified procedure. Commissioner Nelson said he would say so because of the controversy down here. Think we would be subject to a lot of criticism if we just approved it. Commissioner Miller said if we were in northern Idaho, he would go directly to a hearing. In fairness to the company, would go directly to a hearing but if there is a possibility that we agree with the company.. if it would be non-controversial, then that would be okay. But if we get even one request for a hearing, we will probably have to have one. Would take a risk on modified, though. **Modified was approved. Commissioner Miller asked staff to compare these terms with Washington terms. **Comments til October 29. Could then get an answer to them in October. Should be able to either approve or suspend by November 15. 8. Birdelle Brown's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Price List filing 93-14-PL - Percent Interstate Usage (PIU) reporting. Commissioner Smith said she thought our PIU reporting and investigation is an embarrassment. Commissioner Miller said it looked like this is a pretty good system. Asked Birdelle Brown what she wanted to address in a new case? -4- Birdelle Brown said this is a U. S. West case but it didn't address any of the other company's procedures. We have the old order in effect and unless we revised it... there is some policy that should be enforced or changed. Maybe should ask all the other LECs to adopt a policy. Commissioner Smith suggested staff call ITA because most of their requirements are all done together in one tariff. Then GTE could also be asked to submit this tariff. It would be better if the companies submit tariffs rather than go to rulemaking. Commissioner Miller suggested not doing anything for 6 months to allow U S West's system to become embedded. He would be content to let staff notify other companies of this. Let the word get around and take it up in a few months. Birdelle Brown said she wondered if some of the small LECs can gather or use the U. S West information? **Birdelle Brown was instructed to not let the problem die. 9. Joe Cusick's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Implementation of 1+10 Digit Calling on Intra-NPA Toll. Approved. 10. Don Howell's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: ITA's Application to Revise the Rural Exchange Carriers' Access Tariff, Case No. GNR-T-93-18. Commissioner Nelson said he wondered if anyone was concerned about the $500,000 this was going to cost the USF per year? What would it cost USF at 100%? Eileen Benner said the statutory language went to 100%. The companies were filing to bring their tariffs in line with Title 62. Commissioner Nelson asked if it was at out discretion? Eileen Benner explained the wording. Said whats optional is the amount of funding allowed USF to contribute to a company's revenue requirement. If you said no, I don't want it to go at 100%, you have the option of saying set your rates at 100% and USF will only pick up at that level. Back when the level was at 125%, staff was asked to establish a mechanism to true it up and the legislature lowered that. Letters went out to companies regarding the 100%. Responses from Commissioners and companies was that formula was correct. -5- Commissioner Nelson said there is no comment about this at all. It is like it is free. Eileen Benner explained what AT&T was saying. Lowering access rates is an issue but is one Commission has... not sure what Commission can do in this filing. Commissioner Nelson said it didn't look like we're giving them what they want without getting anything in return. Don Howell explained. Commissioner Miller said it didn't seem that moving to 100% really addresses that problem. Commissioner Smith suggested putting it out on modified, saying we are trying to reduce the amount held in the USF. This would put us under 2 years. Commissioner Miller said after this unless CTC comes in, don't see any upward pressure on amount of the funding. Would think that Citizens as a matter of politics wouldn't want to participate in USF. Commissioner Smith said she didn't have anything to say about AT&T and U S West comments. Commissioner Miller said he may say something. 11. Brad Purdy's October 5, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-93-8 - Procedural Handling of Idaho Power Company's PCA Rate Adjustment Case. Brad Purdy explained there are no actual parties. Thought the smart thing would be to put it out for comment. **Decided to do modified procedure. 12. Brad Purdy's October 7, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-93-19: Procedural Handling of Idaho Power's Request to Implement a Mobile Home Pedestal Conversion Program. Commissioner Smith said she didn't think the company considered what they were doing on the informal basis. Brad Purdy said originally it was any mobile home customer. Idaho Power changed it to "when the mobile home is moved". Commissioner Smith spoke to the comments. Based on what we have now, felt she was in no position to approve it. -6- Commissioner Miller said he thought the company should file testimony as to their rationale (the rate base issues). Think it would be helpful where they could actually hear the testimony and cross examination. Trouble with night hearings is you get a lot of uninformed commenters. Require the company and staff to submit testimony. **Was mentioned that two of the parties have counsel. They are to be granted intervention. Commissioner Smith said he hoped that by having a hearing we are not cementing the company into a position. Don't know if they are going to feel pushed into a corner or if they will change their position. **Decision was to have hearing. 13. Brad Purdy's October 7, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. PPL-E-93-1, Pacificorp's Request for Authority to Change its Demand Meter Service Interval for its Pacific Power & Light Service Territory. Brad Purdy said the only issue was the timeframe for the conversion. Said they would still rather do it in 8 years. Staff had recommended 3. Commissioner Miller said he would like to go with staff. Commissioner Smith said she thought the company had a good point about not increasing their budget and manpower. Commissioner Miller said there is increased cost but there is also increased revenue. Commissioner Nelson said he thought the 5 years was a reasonable compromise. That comes to about one a day. 1600 customers is a fair amount. Keith Hessing said a lot of the meters are electromagnetic meters. They will be replaced with upgraded meters. Commissioner Nelson said he would be inclined to give them some benefit of the doubt if we don't know how big a job it is. Commissioners Smith and Nelson said 5. Commissioner Miller agreed with the 3. Commissioner Smith explained her position. Commissioner Miller said that if you stretch it out to a longer period of time, the early ones pay more than the later ones. They are more fairly treated if it happens sooner. -7- Brad Purdy explained the filing. Explained staff's reason for 3 years. Commissioner Nelson said he didn't think it was an unreasonable increase. Commissioner Smith asked about the scheduling - thought 5 years was reasonable. Bev Barker asked if there was some benefit for notification to the customers? Keith Hessing explained what the company is doing on customer information and notice. They wil get individual notification. 14. Brad Purdy's October 7, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-93-24, Procedural Handling of Idaho Power's Request to Offset the Gain on the Sale of The Company's Hailey Turbine Against the Increase in Federal Income Taxes. Commissioner Nelson asked what staff thought about this? Commissioner Smith said she was opposed to single item pass-thrus. Commissioner Miller said okay to modified as did Commissioner Nelson. 15. Scott Woodbury's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-E-93-2 - REBECK-Petition for Reconsideration. Commissioner Smith said she thought we agreed to the February 1 effective. Scott Woodbury said the decision was if it is proper it should be implemented immediately. Commissioner Smith asked what Commission was going to do about Mr. Rebeck? Commissioner Miller said to have Scott Woodbury draw up an order denying reconsideration. **Agreed to by all commissioners. 16. GNR-E-93-6 Energy Policy Act '92 Wholesale Power Purchase Standards (Scott Woodbury). Was continued til Thursday, October 14, 1993. -8- 17. Mary Friddle's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Tow Truck Rules. Commissioner Miller asked if this was just putting them out for comment? Said he focused on the issues themselves. Staff has tried to do these keeping in mind the comments. Wonder if in this circumstance our function should be a "gate keeper" function. Think we should just put them out taking into consideration the comments from the workshops. Commissioner Smith asked about 6C requirement. Mary Friddle responded. If they are holding themselves out for hire... this is one of the rules for the rule requirement. It can be a modification of the equipment not a whole new truck. Commissioner Smith, on page 13 questioned if we intend to specify the charges in the rule? Mary Friddle said no. These are going to be cleaned up. Don Howell explained. Would never ever want tariffs and tables to be part of a rule. Commissioner Nelson had a question on Page 16 about annual inspection. Who would be doing that? Mary Friddle responded - Law Enforcement and PUC. Commissioner Nelson said the other question was on drug testing for drivers of the larger trucks, why would we want to fight thru this if it is a federal rule? Mary Friddle said federal is requiring. They probably won't make an issue but they could. 26,000 is the federal limit. Commissioner Smith said she would like to make a plea for consistency for what they are called. Lets use tow service operators. .04 - there is a comment about checks being refused. Was confused. Tonya Clark explained some of the problem. It started out as a tariff by tow truckers. Mary Friddle spoke to the areas where she thought there would be the most controversy - one of which was grandfathering). -9- Commissioner Smith suggested that when they are cleaned up and while we are waiting for Korey Lowder, Rules Coordinator, explain his published deadline and say we will accept comment... so they will know we have done our part, that it is their fault, not ours. 18. Don Howell's October 8, 1993 Decision Memorandum re: Adoption of Final Rule to Correct Controlled Substance Testing, Case No. 31-6101-9303. Commissioner Miller said all we have to say is - yes we want to adopt it. Commissioner Smith said she would like to know how intrastate got changed to interstate. **19. Continued to Thursday, October 14, 1993. Adjourned. Reconvened at 10:00 am., Thursday, October 14, 1993. In attendance at this time were: Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Don Howell, Scott Woodbury, Tonya Clark, Eileen Benner, Gary Richardson, Eileen Benner, Syd Lansing, Stephanie Miller, Terri Carlock and Myrna Walters. First item considered at this time was No. 19. In the matter of the Amendment to the Commission's Rules Addressing Operator Service Providers and Pay Telephones - Case No. 31-5101-9302. Commissioner Smith asked if there was any comment on staff's "fax machine" comments? Don Howell said they were only staff comments, weren't in the proposed rules. Okay to that rule. Okay to - by telephone number and location address. U. S. West's comments - okayed. 3. Access to Other OSPs. 4. Rule 201. Commissioner Nelson asked if this means all payphones have to be "child heighth"? -10- Don Howell said question is do they have to be in ADA compliance? Commissioner Smith said the only down side is everytime the ADA rules change, we wil have to change ours. Leave ours as they are and say what GTE suggests. Okayed. Add in about incoming calls. Eileen Benner explained "grandfathering". Guess it is a reasonable request. They will be labeled. Okayed. Approved MCI's suggestion. 5.6.7. - no comments. 8. Approved MCI language. 9. Rule 213. Commissioner Smith commented - don't think we can answer all of GTE's questions. Don Howell said we are not going to go out and assess penalties. Commissioner Miller said the rule can't solve all problems. Would suggest approving U S West's suggestion. Say it will be worked out overtime. 10. No comments. 11. Concurrent with U S West request. 16. GNR-E-93-6 - Energy Policy Act '92. Commissioner Smith asked what the difference was between a rule and a policy statement? Scott Woodbury said a rule is more formal. We follow APA and asked that it be published. Said Tom Faull didn't feel there should be rules. Commissioner Miller said he thought rules were primarily his suggestion. Do think as a general matter we should lean towards rules instead of general orders. Policy statement -11- wouldn't have any recognized standard or recognized status in the legal world. You can call it policy statement but it is not really anything. Statement suffers form the difficulty that it is not codified where everything else is. Rules are all in one place. He was the one who was thinking in a general matter, whenever we can move towards rules and not have statements hidden in orders that nobody can find. Think moving to that direction is generally a good thing to do. With respect to these, his general reaction was that it is difficult to make a general evaluation of these four things and come to any conclusion that would bind everybody in every circumstance and the effect of those four things does depend on peculiar circumstances of each utility... etc., so he wasn't of the mind that we needed to make specific finding about these except to say we have reviewed them and it is difficult to make meaningful general evaluations which position it to a case by case evaluation by the utility and the commission. Had a couple of suggestions on the proposed amendments. Said that was as deeply as he thought about it. Didn't know what the migration is from policy to rulemaking, if this should now be put out as proposed... or adopt policy statement and then to rule, will have to rely on staff. Commissioner Smith said we have to do these today because we have to write to FERC. Scott Woodbury said he didn't see that we are under any requirement to notify FERC of what we decided. They gave us a decision date (October 23). Procedurally as rulemaking, wonder about case-by-case and waiting until after the other cases have been resolved. They have not all been before the Commission. Commissioner Miller asked - if we now adopt this policy statement and later consider it in rules, the adoption of the statement would meet the federal obligation to have considered these matters? Scott Woodbury said yes. Think you need to go through steps on Page 15 to determine whether what has been suggested by Congress fits the intent of PURPA or conflicts with state law. As he sees it, there is the override question of, are some of these areas where the Commission has expertise or the ability to conduct responsible evaluation? Many of them are areas that are now the subject matter for SEC, FERC, rating agencies. Commissioner Miller said after reviewing these things, it is not possible for us to make general evaluations that would be binding in every circumstance and as a consensus our policy statements puts the burden on the utilities -12- subject to review by the Commission . Commissioner Smith said that holds true until #4, liability. Scott Woodbury said comments were that was pretty far reaching, is that a direction Commission wants to go? Commissioner Miller suggested stopping with insurance practices, period. Eliminated the 5 specifics. Commissioner Miller asked Tom Faull what he thought of that? Tom Faull said if we are trying to uncover the hidden law, that was what he was trying to do. 3. Was wondering if we shouldn't define or talk about long-term contracts. Scott Woodbury responded - the general thrust is long-term. **Add the long-term. Commissioner Miller asked about #1 - would staff have any any problem with Idaho Power's suggestion? Tom Faull said he did. That essentially codifies their integrated resource plan and he didn't think you would want to do that. Couldn't tell if that was a clarifying thing. Tom Faull explained what he thought it meant. Scott Woodbury asked - what does the Commission do with IRPs, if all you are doing is generally acknowledging them? Commissioner Miller said from the Idaho Power policy statement floating around, effect of the IRP is out there and may have to be taken up. It would be premature to adopt that position in this rule, though. May have to consider it in the next avoided cost case. Should consider it there rather than in this context. Commissioner Nelson said he thought that was a good point. Commissioner Smith suggested a period after contract. Take out the rest. -13- Commissioner Miller said on #2, suggested that adding voluntary creates a thought that the current policy forces the company into purchases that may threaten their liability, we have been careful to see that that doesn't happen. Commissioner Nelson commented - that just implied they were off the hook. Commissioner Miller said he wasn't inclined to make that change. Commissioner Smith explained it said something different to her. They are arguing over if I do it to myself, shareholders have to pick it up but if you require me, ratepayers will have to help. Commissioner Miller said his point is that it leaves the impression that we require specific projects. They go out and negotiate those and bring them to us when it is completely voluntarily negotiated. Commissioner Smith asked if there were circumstances where they came in kicking and screaming and we said you have to? Don't take this as meaning any prejudging of reliability. Commissioner Miller said he was saying we never make them enter into contracts. Commissioner Nelson said where it will make a difference is through a complaint hearing if we approve a large project (80 mw project). Tom Faull said the only worry he has is if later it could be interpreted to say you forced us into it. Commissioner Miller said he just didn't like the implication that we "force" them. Letting the company set up voluntary versus involuntary creates the wrong framework. Scott Woodbury said - they set this up in their Supreme Court brief. Commissioner Miller said the worry here isn't that big a deal, only the fact that accepting that word accept the dichotomy. Commissioner Nelson said if that were a consideration, we would have conducted a hearing where this was thoroughly discussed. -14- Commissioner Smith suggested taking the sentence out. Assume if there is ever an argument like this, there will be a case on it and everyone will get to argue. Don Howell suggested if you are thinking of using rulemaking, you could consider it. Commissioner Miller agreed the sentence should be taken out. 2. Imputed debt structure. Commissioner Miller said his thought was going to 85 or take that sentence out, too. Scott Woodbury recommended taking the sentence out. **Stay at 85 was the decision. Commissioner Miller asked about non-utility system as substitute for wholesale? Commissioner Nelson said he thought it was a good change. Think it is a good assumption. Commissioner Miller said he didn't object to it but thought the thrust of these rules was from IPPs, etc. and the question of purchase from other utilities, at least short term is just in these rules. Thought person should make that clear. So he didn't object. Gary Richardson asked about using non-utility everywhere, to be consistent. Scott Woodbury asked if commissioners were going to let in the Electric Utility Association comments? Commissioners Miller and Nelson said yes. On Page 15 - second bullet from bottom - do commissioners have any thoughts? Can reliance on purchased power be examined and evaluated in isolation, i.e., without considering other utility supply planning procurement options (IRP)? Commissioner Nelson said no. We are just establishing a policy now as set out in modified company exhibit indicating that it fits the general requirements. Commissioner Smith asked - do we want to accept, modify or reject federally proposed wholesale power purchase standards? -15- **Tell them we are modifying. Page 14 - #1, yes. Don't speak to bond rating and leverage. Yes to No. 3. Rulemaking will be done later. Scott Woodbury spoke to WWP's proposed amendments. Can't do those. Last question on Page 16. Scott Woodbury said there was a suggestion that if it can be determined, PPL said it has been difficult to figure effect unless the contract is of a certain size... we have not factored that into the price. We would not be reopening any contracts and making adjustments, don't know whether it was completely clear to be able to do that with QFs. It didn't seem appropriate for QF contracts and didn't know whether we need to address these in this. Lot of issues beyond the scope of the hearings were raised. Commissioner Smith said if we don't have to say anything, leave it out. Scott Woodbury asked if Commissioners had a problem using 85%? Commissioner Smith said we are not delving into their finances. When should they be submitted to the Commissioners? Outside of rate cases? If a utility feels it needs to be covered they are presented to the Commission. Okayed. Meeting adjourned. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 14th day of December, 1993. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary 0179M