19970210_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
FEBRUARY 10, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Ralph Nelson, Marsha H. Smith and Dennis Hansen and staff members Brad Purdy,  Susan Hamlin, Scott Woodbury, Birdelle Brown, Ron Law, Bill Eastlake, Joe Cusick, David Scott, Syd Lansing and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Jeannette Bowman of Idaho Power Company and Peter Richardson, Attorney at Law.
Items from the February 10, 1997 Decision Meeting were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1. Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated February 10, 1997.
Commissioner Hansen made a motion to approve the RCD agenda; Commissioner Smith seconded the motion; Commissioner Nelson concurred.
2. Birdelle Brown’s February 6, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Advice 97-03-N to Introduce a Guaranteed Rate Calling Connection Toll Discount Plan in Northern Idaho effective February 28, 1997.
Approved.
3. Bill Eastlake/Weldon Stutzman’s February 7, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: EAS Petition.
Assign case number.
4. Brad Purdy’s February 7, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-96-22. Petition of the Industrial Customers of Idaho Power for Reconsideration of Commission Order No. 26753 Terminating Idaho Power Company’s Partners in Industrial Efficiency Conservation Program.
Commissioner Smith said since this was just filed a week ago, she would like to see the item held at this time. Think it would be wise to wait.
Will be held until the next decision meeting.
5. Susan Hamlin’s February 7, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. USW-T-96-16 Application of U S West Communications Inc. for Approval of an Agreement for Resale Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Section 252(3).
Commissioner Hansen asked who filed for the interconnection agreement?
Susan Hamlin replied that U S West did. In U S West’s request they indicate that Montana Communications will be filing for a certificate soon.
Commissioner Nelson suggested it could go out on modified procedure.
Commissioner Smith suggested rejecting it because it is not in the public interest because they are not registered in the state. It is not consistent with the public interest.
Bill Eastlake said in speaking to Montana Communications they did not seem to be in a hurry to serve in Idaho.
Commissioner Smith asked why U S West would get ahead of the game on this?
Said she would make a motion to reject this interconnect agreement as not consistent with the public convenience and necessity because the provider has failed to get registered, to get certified, whatever.  
Motion seconded by Commissioner Hansen; concurred to by Commissioner Nelson.
6. Terri Carlock’s February 7, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Pacificorp authority to Issue and Sell Additional Common Shares for the Dividend Reinvestment and Stock Purchase Plan, Case No. PAC-E-97-1.
Approved.
7. Idaho Power Case No. IPC-E-96-16 regarding enforceability of Commission orders consistent with Idaho Supreme Court opinion - Rosebud (Mtn. Home).  
Matter was held. Decision Memorandum was not available at this time.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 10th day of February, 1997.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary