19940311.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
March 11, 1994 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Lori Mann, Don Howell, Scott Woodbury, Joe Cusick, Terri Carlock, Stephanie Miller, Syd Lansing and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance were Jim Wozniak of U S West, Jeanette Jackson of Idaho Power Company, Walt Sorg of GTE and Wayne Kidwell, Attorney at Law.
Items from the 3-11-94 Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1.  Scott Woodbury's March 9, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  CSPP Status Report.
Discussed the report.  
Scott Woodbury said there is a reason for filing of the report.
**Decision was that quarterly was sufficient - did not have to file monthly.
2.  Terri Carlock's March 9, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  Pacificorp's Request for $225,000,000 of Pollution Control Revenue Refunding Bonds; Case No. PAC-S-94-1.
Application was okayed.
3.  Lori Mann's January 25, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  MCI Telecommunications and Deaveraging of MTS Rates:  Case No. GNR-T-93-9.  (Held from previous meetings).
Lori Mann said she had been thinking since the last decision meeting and wanted to explain - staff is not opposed to exceptions being given for these two MCI services.  Staff still believes there is an averaging requirement.  If they want to come up with the plans, grant exceptions, but staff is concerned about exception A (the residential customers).  It might be a problem.  Staff is not opposed to granting exceptions if they come in.  It may be creating paperwork, however.
AT&T mentioned in the Leon Case, averaging their customers.
Commissioner Nelson said in MCI's case where they were being offered statewide, there is no discrimination, he would allow exceptions in this case.  The rates are different, but just don't think they are discriminatory.  
In MCI's case where they are offered statewide and you can choose, they do not appear to discriminate.  That leaves us open for the possibility that someone might file tariffs that are discriminatory.
**Were waiting for a better case to decide this.
Commissioner Miller said it may be that we are basically in accord, or we don't have to decide everything in the world.  From his own point of view, there is a difference between averaging and discrimination and he didn't think the traditional concept of discrimination applies in deregulated services.  Although deveraging is in the statute.  Said he was not really ready to endorse staff position of one MTS rate but since everybody agrees that the specific price lists or tariffs before are such that they can be exempt every if they constitute a violation of the averaging requirement, would grant the authorization of the Commission without even making a finding whether they violate the averaging requirement.  Whether they do or don't is an appropriate case for exemption...in the future if other types of tariffs are presented that staff objects to for averaging reasons and present different facts (less than statewide or truly is an effort at what you would call deaveraging) could take it up then.  Could get ourselves out of this problem on exemption but don't want to endorse and can only be one MTS rate or that is to violate deaveraging rule.  They get an exemption.
Commissioner Smith said she would second that.  She is not convinced by the staff but is willing to say these tariffs are authorized without specific finding that they are representative of deaveraging.  These options are all okay.
Eileen Benner asked how we handle future similar filings?
Can this order speak to future filings?  Anticipate we will get lots of multiple filings.
Commissioner Miller said that would require a decision on what is averaging and deaveraging.
Joe Cusick spoke to AT&T filing that is similar.
Commissioner Smith asked how much work this would entail, to bring each one in separately.  Thought staff did that all the time.
Said to approve tariffs without making finding they are deaveraged.
Commissioner Miller said maybe an underlying decision needs to be made that these do not constitute deaveraging, if there is a way out of making that decision.  Wanted to say in this circumstance we will grant the exception and we will at sometime later decide what type of price lists constitute deaveraging.
Eileen Benner said - admittedly you wouldn't have been making this decision if staff hadn't flagged it.  If you tell staff they don't need to red flag these, if you are giving them an exception this time we would have to come to the Commission for the next one.
Joe Cusick spoke to similar filings.  Staff doesn't want to have to come to decision meetings with all these decision memos.
Commissioner Miller said if the circumstances are so that you can compare them to MCI, if they look like MCI, you don't have to come to the Commission, if not, you do.
Commissioner Smith said that was okay with her.
Commissioner Nelson said he wasn't opposed to the outcome as it happens here.  Will have to work on the language.
Don Howell said he thought this would pass legal muster.  Think deaveraging will have to be decided in the future.
Meeting adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 23rd day of March, 1994.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary
mins.31194