19981102_2.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
November 2, 1998 - 1:30 P.M.
In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Ralph Nelson and Marsha H. Smith and staff members Ron Law, Brad Purdy, Birdelle Brown, Bev Barker, Lynn Anderson, Tonya Clark, David Scott, Bill Eastlake, Scott Woodbury, Carolee Hall, Doug Cooley and Myrna Walters.
Also in attendance were John Souba of U S West and Larry Ripley of Idaho Power Company.  
Commissioner Hansen called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone in attendance.
ITEMS FROM THE PUBLISHED NOVEMBER 2, 1998 DECISION MEETING AGENDA WERE DISCUSSED AND ACTION ON THEM RECORDED AS FOLLOWS.
1. Minutes of October 19 and 26, 1998 Decision Meetings (Minutes have circulated to the Commissioners for review and corrections have been made.)
Commissioner Hansen made a motion to approve the minutes as corrected. Vote taken on the motion; motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items 2, 3A, 3, 4 and 4A.
Commissioner Ralph Nelson made a motion to approve staff recommendations on all items on the consent agenda; vote taken on motion; motion carried unanimously.
MATTERS IN PROGRESS
5. Carol Cooper’s October 23, 1998 Decision Memorandum re: Clarification of Telephone Customer Relations Rule 503 Repair Service Standards. (Held from 10-26-98 Decision Meeting).
Bev Barker again sat in for Carol Cooper who is on vacation.  
Commissioner Hansen asked if there was discussion. He commented that as he went back and looked at this matter, Rule 503 currently says “service outage” and the previous discussion was whether that meant “each line” or “total service”. Said here again, he wasn’t around when the rule was written. If the intent was “per line” it would have said “per line”. Service outage means no service to that location. Said he thought this should mean location. But he did think that business and residential are two different things.   With business, if you have one line out of service that could affect your business, people may not be able to get ahold of you. Business is different. Could see that more on line basis. But as he looked at the rule, did think that a service outage is not a line outage, it means total service outage to that location. So the example in the decision memo had at least one line in service at all times and that doesn’t justify getting the refund. Guess the line would have to be drawn somewhere on timing, but 9 minutes is getting picky.
Commissioner Nelson said after thinking about this he came to the conclusion that a repair standard was set and if a person had more than one line to his house and U S West was under no pressure to repair the line you defeat the purpose of the standard. So he concluded that this rule as written,  and maybe it needs to be instituted as it stands now,  it should be applied to each line.
Commissioner Smith said that she believes like she said  last week as long as service is sold on a per line basis, then outages are recorded on a per line basis. For administrative simplicity, don’t think company needs to inquire about line location, use, etc.  People choose to have more than one line because they need more than one line. Maybe they are not able to be interchanged,  so the customer may truly be out of service .   Believe the rule was intended and should be applied on a per line basis. A deadline is a deadline.  You have to have a deadline somewhere.  
Commissioner Smith made a motion that the Commission interpret the rule as staff as suggested that each line must be looked at individually.
Vote taken on the motion; two to one.  Commissioner Hansen opposed  the motion.
6. Brad Purdy’s October 29, 1998 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-98-2; Application of Idaho Power Company to Use its 1997 Revenue Sharing Balance to Fund 1998 and 1998 Payments to the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance.
Brad Purdy reviewed the decision memo. Said at this juncture the Commission is only being asked to go modified or schedule a hearing. Company has requested modified. Staff has recommended because of NEEA, that the Commission go ahead and schedule a hearing.
Commissioner Hansen called for discussion.  
Commissioner Nelson said he thought that in this matter he would prefer going modified and see who asks for a hearing. It could be that the people who were participants last time may think they need their say. Said he would make a motion that the application be processed under modified procedure.
Commissioner Hansen asked if there was discussion on the motion.  
Commissioner Smith asked if staff had an opinion yet on the circumstances of the application - do they oppose the application?
Staff would like to get comments first.
Commissioner Hansen called for a vote on Commissioner Nelson’s motion. Motion carried unanimously.
7. Scott Woodbury’s October 30, 1998 Decision Memorandum re: Case Nos. WWP-E-98-9/WWP-G-98-2. Energy Efficiency Tariffs--Electric Schedule 90.
Scott reviewed the decision memo. Said the matter went out by way of modified. Reviewed the decisions to be made. Staff asked how the Commissioners wanted to treat the Schedule 90 inconsistency with prior order language regarding Total Resource Cost versus “no losers” test?
Said in conversations with the company this morning, the company asked to have read into the record their clarification of this matter. (Copy of said statement is attached hereto)
Commissioner Nelson questioned a couple of numbers on Page 3 of the Decision Memo.
Lynn Anderson was present to speak to the questions.
Said the program limitations were for a specific project. In general the company wants to remove the ceiling because they no longer have the risk of excess rebates that they have had in the past.  In talking to the company, they are actually having a hard time finding programs to expend the monies on. They may come in and ask to reduce that amount.
Commissioner Nelson asked Lynn Anderson if staff had concerns about this?
Lynn replied they had none at this time. He will be attending the Triple E Board meetings now.
Commissioner Nelson asked for clarification of the numbers.
Lynn said one was per location over a total project life and it got confusing. He would look at that to see if it is correct.
Scott added that the language in the decision memo mirrors the language in the application.
**Lynn will check the numbers.
Commissioner Nelson said with that exception he would recommend approving the application.
Commissioner Hansen asked for discussion. Vote was taken; motion carried unanimously.
**Accepted company’s language.
Meeting was adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 9th day of November, 1998.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary