19950630_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
June 30, 1995 - 2:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Ralph Nelson, Marsha H. Smith and Dennis Hansen.  Also in attendance were staff members Brad Purdy, Weldon Stutzman, Judy Stokes, Scott Woodbury, Rick Sterling, Stephanie Miller, Jim Long and Myrna Walters.
Commissioner Nelson called the meeting to order.
Items from the June 30, 1995 Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1.  Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated June 30, 1995.
Commissioner Hansen said he would move approval of this item.  Other commissioners concurred.
2.  Brad Purdy's June 26, 1995 Decision Memorandum re:  Case No. WWP-E-93-10; Washington Water Power Company's Avoided Cost Compliance Filing.
Questions on Page 3 of the Decision Memorandum were answered as follows:
1.  Does the Commission wish to adopt the CCCT cost data for Water Power that it adopted for Idaho Power and PacifiCorp?
Yes.
2.  Does the Commission wish to lower the availability of Water Power’s rates from 10 MW to 1 MW as it did for Idaho Power and PacifiCorp?
Yes.
3.  Does the Commission wish to reaffirm its decision in Order No. 25883 indexing changes in the gas price at Sumas, Washington or use an average of Sumas and Kingsgate as proposed by Water Power?
Commissioner Smith said she was wondering if staff had a response from the company as to their proposal?
Rick Sterling said when they made their updated filing, they made adjustment to Sumas, had talked with the company about this question.  They seem convinced that if we made adjustment the way they did last time it wouldn’t make a lot of difference.  If we do it like they did this time, think it is really not an issue anymore.  Don’t have anything in writing to state that.
Commissioner Smith asked - if you use the change in the price?
Rick Sterling replied - tied to one location.
Commissioner Nelson said he would suggest retaining Sumas and if the company feels disadvantaged going forward, they could reapply.
Commissioner Hansen asked - if staff says it matters little, why is it such a big think if WWP feels more comfortable with the two, why are we forcing them to go the other route?  What is the advantage?
Rick Sterling replied - only advantage is that it adds some complexity that doesn’t really make a lot of difference.  Company does have to track that and make the calculations.  They had limited data to start with.  Only had 6 months when they started.  Since that time they have found more data to show the difference is even less than what they thought.  Location they want to use is more expensive.  Don’t have that much concern but this is one of the items we identified as generic.  If we allow them to change a generic variable, the other utilities will ask about variables.  
Commissioner Hansen asked if a consistent analysis is more critical then being more accurate in the numbers?
Rick replied - in this case, yes.  It would be changing a generic variable.
Okay to Question No. 3.
3. Bev Barker’s June 28, 1995 Decision Memorandum re:  Idaho Power Tariff Advice No. 95-04  Revision of Schedule 66, Charges for CT Metering.
Commissioner Smith said she would move approval - good cause has been shown to do it on less than 30 days also.  
Other Commissioners concurred.
4.  Belinda Anderson’s June 28, 1995 Decision Memorandum re:  Petitions for EAS Within the Boise, Nampa and Caldwell Areas.
Commissioner Smith commented she thought we would have a mess if we throw this latest petition into the generic case.  Would be her recommendation to give it its own case number and keep it separate.
Commissioner Hansen commented - this whole are has come alive - if it isn’t included in the generic case, how are they going to be included in?
Commissioner Smith said what we are saying is that now that the case is open, and the hearing set for August is to look at generic issues, this hearing is not the time to consider specific routes.  After considering that we will go back and measure individual route petitions.  Don’t think giving it its own case number, will preclude consideration of it.  From a point of keeping it straight for purposes of filing of appeals and administrative matters, it would be good to keep it separate.
Decision was to give it a separate case number.
5.  AT&T’s Motion to Vacate July Meetings - GNR-T-94-05  Petition for IntraLATA EAS and CP in U S West’s Service Territory.
Motion granted.
Order or notice to be issued cancelling meetings, since the dates were set out in an order.
Meeting adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 5th day of July, 1995.
Myrna J. Walters,
Commission Secretary
mjw
063095.min