19971104_2.docx

Minutes of Decision Meeting
November 4, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Ralph Nelson and Marsha H. Smith and staff members Bev Barker, Scott Woodbury, Cheri Copsey, Rick Sterling, Randy Lobb, Wayne Hart, Terri Carlock, Tony Clark, Joe Cusick, Weldon Stutzman, Birdelle Brown, Stephanie Miller, Marge Maxwell and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Mary Hobson and Jim Wozniak of U S West and Theresa Drake of Idaho Power Company.
Matters from the Published November 4, 1997 Agenda were considered and acted upon as recorded herein.
Commission President Dennis Hansen called the meeting to order.
First item considered was the Approval of Minutes from Previous Meeting - October 27, 1997.  Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve the Minutes as corrected.
Commissioner Hansen asked that Item 8 on the Consent Agenda be moved to the Matters in Progress. He then made a motion to approve Items 1 thru 7 on the Consent Agenda. Motion carried unanimously.
MATTERS IN PROGRESS
8. Beverly Barker’s October 31, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Tariff Advice No. 97-3 Revision to Rule F and Schedule 66.
Beverly Barker reviewed the matter. Went over Company proposal.  
Commissioner Smith asked what rates would apply on weekends?
Bev Barker said the $45 from 7:30 to 9 and then 9 to 7:29 a.m. would be $80.
Commissioner Nelson asked about staff concerns and recommendations.
Bev Barker responded that they can be disconnected until 4 p.m. People who got disconnected and didn’t know until they got home would have the choice of the evening or next business day.
Commissioner Nelson said he was wondering about the size of the problem? Do a lot of people wait to be disconnected until after hours?
Bev said the basis for her concern is if they don’t have the money to pay their bill, they don’t have the reconnection fee either.
Commissioner Hansen commented - they are notified twice before they are disconnected, they are given plenty of notice ahead of time.
Bev Barker said all the customers get at least two weeks notice. It is not as if they were unaware of the pending disconnection.
Commissioner Hansen asked how long it would take Idaho Power to respond? If you called in at 4:30, they would have it done by 6?  
Bev Barker replied that the times are set by when the customer calls in. It is when the customer makes the request, not when the disconnection occurs.
Commissioner Nelson said what he was not getting the answer to is, how often does it happen that someone gets disconnected and has money for reconnection?
Bev Barker said the issue that raises concerns is whether or not people can’t pay in the first place, adding a $45 or $80 charge will be that much more of a problem. The theory is people are advised before hand and if they wait, they will have the choice to wait until regular hours or be reconnected immediately. There is an element of customer choice.
Commissioner Hansen said until he knows the magnitude of the cases from 9:00 pm to 7:29 am in regard to reconnects, he is reluctant to go ahead and double the rate, can’t imagine that this would be  a problem right now.
Bev Barker said she had the number of reconnections for the times. For the 9 p.m. to 7:29 a.m., there were 130 reconnections last year. For the 6 to 9 p.m. there were 159. The fee was $22 at that time, not the $45 and $80.
Commissioner Nelson asked Bev if in her recommendation she proposes no change in the second tier?
She agreed that was her recommendation.
Commissioner Smith said she recommended accepting the $80 charge. If staff agrees with the company that expanding the regular hours period will bring more people into the fold, so less people are impacted by the $45 charge, don’t have a problem with that.
Commissioner Nelson said he would move we accept the filing and ask Consumer Section to monitor it to see if it is a problem. Accepted the company proposal of extended regular hours and the $45 and $80 two tier charges for after hours disconnections.
Motion carried unanimously.
9. Scott Woodbury’s October 28, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-E-97-9   WWP 1997 Electric IRP.
Scott reviewed the memo. Recommends that the filing be accepted by letter rather than order.
Commissioner Smith made a motion to accept staff recommendation; motion carried unanimously.
10. Scott Woodbury’s October 29, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. WWP-E-97-8 Reducing Contract Term for Qfs Less Than 1 MW to 5 Years. and
11. Scott Woodbury’s October 29, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: UPL-E-97-4 Reducing Contract Term for Qfs Less Than 1 MW to 5 years.
Commissioner Nelson said he would move approval of items 10 and 11, but knows this is a big change for smaller than 1 mw projects.
Commissioner Smith said she wondered if we could be responsive to Mr. Sorensen’s concerns about open access; explain that FERC is looking out for him. Said she was baffled about how he can use a sprinkler system to generate power in Idaho Falls in the winter. Assume that if he intended the letter in the UPL Case to be a request for grandfathering, it is inadequate. If he has a complaint he should file a complaint (not just make a comment). Commission needs to respond to that.
Commissioner Hansen said the Commission needs to be consistent with all the investor-owned utilities in this matter and where we have already made the same decision for Idaho Power, he would support the motion before the Commission. Vote taken. Motion carried unanimously.
12. Rick Sterling’s October 30, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Power company Tariff Advice No. 97-05 Revisions to Rule H.
Rick reviewed the decision memo. Said staff does not oppose the company’s request.
Commissioner Smith commented that it appears  this is a change that has been requested, and she suggested the Commission accept the Company’s tariff advice.   Approved unanimously.
13. Scott Woodbury’s October 31, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. UWI-W-96-6 Investigation-Water Quality/Service.
Scott reviewed the decision memo. Asked for Commission Decision on what procedure to adopt.
Commissioner Hansen called for questions. Said he was supportive of having public participation on this matter. In the past, it has been perceived by some of the United Water customers that their complaint are not being handled properly or being resolved to their satisfaction. Think United should be more responsive. Said the problem exists. There are people concerned about the color, the taste, the smell. Just coming back and saying there is nothing that can be done or it is not harmful,  is not satisfactory.  If we were in a competitive environment, the customer wouldn’t stay with this type of service. This will give the customers a chance to voice their concerns.
Commissioner Hansen said in his mind this is an issue that needs to be followed up on. One concern he does have is the company is not taking adequate steps in resolving customer complaints, would like to see what they are doing. He is still getting customer complaints.
Scott Woodbury asked what forum should be taken, what did the Commissioners have in mind?
Commissioner Smith said the water quality problems are very difficult. They are in the eyes of the beholder and they come and go. They are hard to solve. Concern she gets from the customers is the price. To the extent that some solution may cost a lot of money, we need to consider carefully before we ask the company to spend money. With water you are never certain what the problem is and what the solution is. Should keep our finger on the pulse but is not sure what we need to do, what we should do separately or as part of the rate case. Don’t see that staff or the company have proposals, was looking for some suggestions.
Commissioner Hansen commented he did know  the public perceived that the problems exist and  they need to be aware of the alternatives to fix the problem, they need to know the cost. Think there are some people who have ideas that would remedy the problem and would like to be heard. As a follow up, think it would be helpful to get the people involved to know the whole problem.
Commissioner Nelson said he didn’t think a workshop is in order. Only thing that would satisfy the customers is a hearing but don’t think we will get any more information than we have in this study. If he was going to make a recommendation, he would suggest a mailing with the information Commissioner Smith was speaking of, informational, really don’t see a hearing as giving us any better information than we have in the report. Agree that a lot of the problem (degree of the problem) is perception.  
Commissioner Hansen asked if the company should have informational hearings in key areas?  Wonder if we set up a couple or three of them to see if there is interest, if the public comes out, or if they hold the hearing and the public doesn’t get involved, then close the matter.
Commissioner Nelson said his suggestion was a mailing to the problem areas with information.
Commissioner Smith commented it sounded like Commissioner Hansen would like some
interaction between customers and the company. That is the other question, do we make it an issue in the rate case?
Commissioner Hansen said if the Commission heads into another rate case with United, it will be an issue. Would like us to go another step further.
Commissioner Smith suggested encouraging the company  to meet with their customers.
Commissioner Nelson suggested that staff raise the issue of water quality in the rate case.
Commissioner Hansen said he would go along with those recommendations.  
FULLY SUBMITTED MATTERS
14. USW-S-96-5 Application of U S West Communications for Authority to Increase its Rates and Charges for Regulated Title 61 Services.
Commissioner Hansen said this is a fully submitted matter. U S West and staff filed a Third Settlement and Stipulation to resolve issues on reconsideration. The Commission has in-hand an order resolving the remaining issues in the case. It authorizes an increase in the company’s Title 61 annual revenue of $5,222,000 and establishes final Title 61 rates to recover the increased revenues. Summarized the order and reviewed the approved rates. The order also vacates the technical hearing on reconsideration scheduled for November 20, 1997. Asked if the other commissioners had comments?
Commissioner Smith said once again she wished to thank the company and staff for working so hard on this. This was a big case, a hard one, and people never like to have to pay more than they are paying now but think the rates being established fairly reflect the cost of  the services the customers are receiving and she is glad we are finally finished with this. Hope we haven’t made any additional errors. Congratulates company and staff for getting this done as quickly as they have.
Commissioner Hansen said he appreciated the attitude and effort of our staff and the company working through these problem areas and would move that we approve the order. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting was adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 13th day of November, 1997.
Myrna J. Walters, Commission Secretary