19940512_2.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
May 12, 1994 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Marsha H. Smith, Joe Miller and Ralph Nelson and staff members Don Howell, Lori Mann, Keith Hessing, Tonya Clark, Gary Richardson, Belinda Anderson, Birdelle Brown, Brad Purdy and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance were Walt Sorg of GTE; Pat Stewart of U S West; Mary Mowry and Patty Nichols of Idaho Power Company and James Martell of Rural Telephone Company.
Items from the May 12, 1994 Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1.  Mary Friddle's May 10, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  Air Data Express, Inc.
Discussed the protest of Pony Express.
Commissioner Miller said he thought it was appropriate for the staff to do the additional investigation but he wouldn't hold the hearing and would deny the protest.
Commissioner Smith said she liked the staff research and thought that should be part of the order.  Shipper support was adequate.
Commissioner Miller said the Commission policy is pretty clear.  Just an allegation of competitive harm is not enough to get a hearing.
Approved the application of Air Data Express.
2.  Birdelle Brown's May 9, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  GTE Advice 94-04 - Feature Group D Switched 56 Data Service and Switched 64 Data Service.
Approved.
3.  Scott Woodbury's May 10, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. IPC-E-94-7  Glenns Ferry Amendment to Firm Energy Sales Agreement and Case No. IPC-E-93-18 Rupert Dismissal of complaint for Grandfathering.
Commissioner Nelson asked if there was any downside to this?  Why would they file a complaint if they got a contract filed a week later?
Item was held at this time until Scott Woodbury was present.
4.  Lori Mann's May 10, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  Petition for Reconsideration in the Leon EAS Case:  Case No. INL-T-91-2.

Commissioner Smith said Senator Gary Schroeder filed a petition for reconsideration on behalf of the 32 subscribers of Leon.  Reviewed the petition for reconsideration.
Commissioner Nelson said he thought the order went to some length to explain the impact on the community.
Commissioner Smith said she would think that the petition for reconsideration should be denied.  Can't imagine there is any new information that could come forth that wasn't offered.
In our we could note specifically some of the comment Commissioner smith made recently to the Governor's office that the median bill numbers reflect clearly that there are a few high users in the group and that they are persons who would benefit at the expense of all other ratepayers.
The other important point is that the presentation on the part of the people of the area was not unanimous in either their desire for EAS or the community they wish to call.  Point that out in the order.  It wasn't unanimous by the 32 people.
Commissioner Miller said he agreed with that.  Do think maybe we should make clear that we do analyze these things we do look at it from the consumer point of view, not company preference.  There are essentially then two groups.  Those who would benefit and those who would not.  In this case the non-beneficiaries would have to pay for the benefits that they would not share in and would flow to the beneficiaries and the amount they would have to pay was so high that if you understood the figures you would not do it.
Make it clear to the Senator that all the customers' interest should be looked at.
Commissioner Smith said from a utility point of view they are made whole.
Commissioner Nelson said to point out somebody has to pay for this.
Deny the petition for reconsideration.
5.  Lori Mann's May 10, 1994 Decision Memorandum re:  Rural Telephone's Certificate Amendment Application:  Case No. RUR-T-9-4-1.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn't see any problem with it.  Would like a report once it is in, am interested in the initial report.
Commissioner Miller said he noted the staff concern about continued increasing impacts on USF.  Said for him, this use of the USF is a legitimate one.  There are other circumstances that you worry about.  Expanding the geographic scope of a phone company is acceptable.
Taking money from the general body of ratepayers for the benefit of a few, isn't as important as this is.
Report is to be sent to the Commission, when the project is completed.
Back to 3 - IPC-E-94-7.
Commissioner Nelson said his question was:  on the amendment of the agreement, is there any down side?
Scott Woodbury responded - it is a year later but they have substituted the 24911 rates which were lower than the original contract rates.  This entire agreement has been long in coming.  Were provided with notice in November that the complaint had been settled.  
Commissioner Nelson went over the timing.
Scott Woodbury said the Rupert contract dismissal of the complaint gives them the rates in the new contract.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn't think we had changed rates for Idaho Power for three years.
Scott Woodbury said Idaho Power changes for variables.  Explained the base payment.  
After discussion, proposed amendment was approved and complaint was dismissed.
6.  IPC-E-94-6  Idaho Power Company's Application for authority to implement the Power Cost Adjustment Rate for Electric Service to Customers in the State of Idaho for the Period May 16, 1994 thru May 15, 1995.
Commissioner Smith said in review - the hearing in this matter was held Tuesday, the company was told at that time that the matter would be decided today and announced at the decision meeting.  Said the case Chairman, Commissioner Nelson has a recommendation.
Commissioner Nelson said he would recommend that the draft order be adopted that provides the company, with very minor exceptions, an increase of 1.449 mills instead of the requested 1.45 mills.  Also made a small change in the methodology wherein they use the deposit interest rate for the entire year instead of changing it January 1.  New rates will go into effect Monday, May 16.
Commissioner Miller said (1) it is important to him that the staff did its very good work in verifying the calculations.  It is critical to the integrity of this system that they are verified and we are able to see that it is completely accurate accounting.
(2)  The value of this is that it is important for consumers to know the cost of the energy they are consuming.  On a hydro system the costs do very according to stream flows.  This serves the purpose of showing the customers when there is high water and when there is not.  The costs are lower in some years and rates come down.  Whether they go up or down, the benefit of letting the customers know the costs is a valuable thing.  So, he is ready to sign.
Commissioner Smith said she would note that she is anxiously awaiting a winter in which we have above normal snow pack and stream flow and hope it is soon.  If anyone knows what would cause it to snow, let us know.
Meeting adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 16th day of May, 1994.
Myrna J. Walters
    Commission Secretary
051294