19990803_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
August 3, 1999 - 1:30 P.M.
In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Marsha H. Smith and Paul Kjellander. Also in attendance were staff members Don Howell, Birdelle Brown, Tonya Clark, Bev Barker, Stephanie Miller, Ron Law, Joe Cusick, Cheri Copsey, Carolee Hall, Rick Sterling, Randy Lobb and Myrna Walters and Joe Miller, Attorney at Law.
Commissioner Hansen called the meeting to order.
First order of business was the Consent Agenda - Items 1 - 4.
Commissioner Hansen called for questions or comments from the Commissioners. Said he had a comment on No. 3 - Cheri C. Copsey’s July 30, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: CenturyTel of Idaho, Inc. Revision to Idaho Rural Exchange Carriers Tariff No. 2 - Equal Access Recovery Charge -- Case No. CEN-T-99-2. Said staff had two recommendations: that it be handled by modified procedure and that the filing be suspended for 30 days.
There were no questions.
Commissioner Hansen then made a motion to approve all four items on the consent agenda. Vote taken: motion carried.
MATTERS IN PROGRESS
5. Birdelle Brown’s July 30, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Universal Service Fund -- 1998 Annual Report.
Commissioner Hansen announced that the Commissioners would be deliberating on Rural Telephone EAS case today and would like to hold this item until the next decision meeting.
Commissioner Smith asked if that was okay timewise?
Birdelle Brown responded that if  an order could be out by September 1, effective October 1, it is okay.
Item was held at this time.
5A. Bev Barker’s July 30, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Utah Power & Light Service Quality & Customer Relations Investigation.
Bev Barker reviewed the matter; said there was some concern expressed at the Pacificorp/Scottish Power public hearings regarding service reliability, etc. Commissioner Hansen expressed concern about what was being testified to at the hearing. Said she had scheduled a meeting with Utah Power while staff was in the area. At that meeting the Company did speak to reliability and customer issues raised at the hearing. Question she is posing to the commission is whether it is the commission’s pleasure to institute an informal investigation into UPL regarding customer service and service reliability, understanding that staff will come up with a recommendation as to whether or not to go formal at a later date. Bev said that since the decision memo was prepared, staff attorney on the merger case has expressed concern about overlapping of that case. She was just pointing that out for the Commission’s guidance also.
Commissioner Hansen said he had a question or two. He was glad it was proposed to treat this as an informal investigation. Don’t know if we need to open a formal investigation, don’t see this as being part of the merger case. Think it is totally separate but in his mind, if staff uncovers a lot of problems in these areas and feel that a formal case needs to be opened, would think the parties to the merger case would want to be aware of that also. There were a lot of accusations made. Asked if staff was going to contact the witnesses that testified about the quality of service at the hearing? How was staff going to conduct the informal investigation?
Bev said she was already exploring with UP&L the changes they could make with complaints already filed with the Commission. There were also specific incidents raised by public testimony that she could follow-up on. Traditionally that is what staff does if there is a concrete problem raised by someone in the process of testifying. Staff does usually check with those customers to see what the problems are that were testified to. This is no different from what is done in prior proceedings.
Commissioner Kjellander asked - to the extent that staff does talk to some of the people who expressed concerns at the hearing, question he had is why they didn’t report those before? All of a sudden everyone had problems at the hearing.   Asked if staff could get a handle on that and on how reporting could be corrected. Also asked about overlap? Would this be a good time, or if you had overlaps at this time, were there specific ones or just in general?
Bev Barker responded the main concern was if we did a more broad ranging investigation, that there might be some things that came out in that investigation that may have bearing on the Commission decision in the merger case and all the parties would be interested in those findings and the decision-making procession the Commission took; to the extent that service reliability might have some bearing on the merger case. That is all speculation at this time.
Commissioner Kjellander asked - since it is informal at this time, did Bev think it was a big problem?
Bev Barker replied - if the Commission is looking at what is already in the record and following up on specifics, think we have something that the commission should hear from the staff whether or not it is formal or not, and strictly related to current performance rather than speculating on conditions with or without a merger.
Commissioner Smith said just as an observation,  the Company is charged with this responsibility  whether  they are proposing a merger or not, think it is a good thing to go forward with it and it can be kept separate.
Commissioner Hansen called for further discussion.
Hearing none, he made a motion that the Commission go ahead and have staff conduct an informal investigation on service quality and report back to the Commission by September 1.  
Vote taken on motion; carried.
Meeting was then adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 11th day of August, 1999.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary
mjw