19970804_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
August 4, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at the meeting were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Ralph Nelson and Marsha H. Smith and staff members Don Howell, Scott Woodbury, Brad Purdy, Stephanie Miller, Birdelle Brown, Bev Barker, Joe Cusick, Randy Lobb, Don Oliason, David Scott, Bob Smith, Bill Eastlake, Rick Sterling, Ron Law, Tonya Clark and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Woody Richards, Attorney at Law; Jed Manwaring, Attorney at Law; and Skip Worthan of Intermountain Gas Company.
Commission President Dennis Hansen called the meeting to order.
Items on the Published Agenda for this meeting were considered and acted upon as follows.
1. Minutes of July 28, 1997 Decision Meeting.
Commissioner Marsha H. Smith said that she had just reviewed the minutes, as had the other Commissioners and she would move their approval at this time. Motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items 2, 3 and 4 on the Consent Agenda were the next items for consideration.
Commissioner Nelson made a motion to approve said items 2, 3, and 4. Motion carried unanimously.
5. Carolee Hall’s July 29. 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Citizens Telecommunications Company of Idaho (CTC Idaho) Introducing Rates, Terms and Conditions for INTRALATA Toll Service, Effective August 8, 1997.
In Carolee’s absence, Joe Cusick reviewed the decision memorandum. Staff has concluded that the filing is revenue neutral. Joe said normally a filing like this would be given more of a review but because of the timing of the termination of the US West/CTC Idaho agreement and the fact that 34 interexchange carriers are signed up in the Citizens territory, including AT&T and MCI, staff has recommended approval of the filing.
Commissioner Smith asked when the company was going to ballot the customers?
Joe Cusick replied that they have already done that.
Commissioner Smith further commented that the customers already will have choices on
August 8, then. It shouldn’t really be in effect until the calling plan is in effect, but the
customers have choices and they have been notified of that.
Commissioner Nelson then made a motion to approve the filing. Motion passed unanimously.
6. Scott Woodbury’s July 29, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. CAP-W-97-1 Capitol Water Corp v. Cole Road Company, et al.
Scott Woodbury reviewed the matter, per the decision memorandum. Staff is recommending a prehearing conference. Response to the Summons is basically a general denial.
Commissioner Hansen asked staff if in recommending a prehearing conference they felt additional information could be sorted out so the Commission can proceed with this case.
Scott said yes.
Commissioner Nelson asked if the company wasn’t asking for relief that the Commission does not have authority to grant?
Scott said staff would like to defer response to that question until the prehearing conference. Commission does not have enforcement powers.
Commissioner Smith said she would like to see the staff calculate what the amount is that should have been paid. If an independent third party has made that determination,  Commissioners can get rid of any dispute over cost; and there doesn’t have to be an argument over the amount.
It is the tax contribution at issue and whether or not the party requesting the extension was advised that this would be part of the contribution.
After discussion, Commissioner Hansen made a motion that the Commission proceed with a prehearing conference to see if additional information can be sorted out. Motion carried unanimously.
7. Scott Woodbury’s July 29, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. INT-T-97-2, Intermountain Gas Company Integrated Resource Planning Guidelines Requested Revision Petition for Reconsideration.
Scott Woodbury reviewed the decision memorandum. Company has by letter indicated language that they would find acceptable. Did the Commission intend what they said; if so, would reconsideration be granted?
Commissioner Hansen said we did have a representative from Intermountain Gas at the last decision meeting. Skip Worthan is also here today. Asked if Mr. Worthan had comments?
Mr. Worthan said Mr. Richards has put it eloquently in the letter to the Commission, that IGC got an acceptance from staff in their June memo. However, the order as written would be far more stringent and would direct company back to ‘93 which the Company thinks is too comprehensive and they are trying to modify. Thought staff intent was there.
Commissioner Smith said she thought that the language proposed in the letter was okay with a couple of little changes. In the sentence “Instead, a general explanation with each IRP filing of why (changed it to whether) there are no(took out no) cost effective DSM opportunities will be sufficient.
Commissioner Nelson said he would make that a motion. Commissioner Hansen called for a vote - it carried unanimously.
8. Scott Woodbury’s August 1, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-E-97-2 (Washington Water Power Company) Reconnection Charges (Seasonal Temporary Disconnects).
Scott went over staff recommendation. Commented $20,000 per annum is de minimis and what they are proposing is the acceptable thing to do.
Commissioner Hansen said company is not incurring lost revenue. That was taken into consideration in the last rate case filing. Based on that he does support reconnection fees of $16 and $32 but has a hard time accepting the charge incurred by seasonal people.  
Commissioner Nelson commented that looking at the costs incurred in the 1985 rate case is ancient history. Think for most of these customers they are in a rural setting and the costs to maintain wire to them, didn’t think it is a hardship paying a minimum and he doesn’t mind charging them. Originally thought allow them a paper disconnection and charge $16 to reconnect. Only possible problem would be that the customer would think he had no electricity and there would a live wire.   Think these are people who can afford $8.00 a month. If they want to disconnect they can afford the $16.00. They don’t get a lot of sympathy.
Commissioner Smith said she wondered if we didn’t need a hearing. Don’t know enough about these people. This owner (that we heard from)  would pay the monthly maintenance for the other 33 people. Don’t know if it fair or not.
Commissioner Hansen asked if the Commission could assume that all the disconnects are people who have a second home in a rural area? Was sure a lot fell into that category.
Commissioner Nelson said it was fine with him to have a hearing.
Commissioner Smith commented she didn’t think there was the right balance between the customer charge and the reconnect fee.  
Commissioner Hansen made a motion that the Commission proceed with a hearing and schedule it as soon as possible up in the area. This has been on the agenda for quite a while.
Scott Woodbury will talk to the Company.
**Matter of prior reconnections will be discussed at the hearing.
Decision meeting was adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 5th day of August, 1997.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary