19990826_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
August 26, 1999 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Marsha H. Smith and Paul Kjellander and staff members Terri Carlock, Weldon Stutzman, Stephanie Miller, George Fink, Bob Smith, Randy Lobb, Lynn Anderson, Tonya Clark, Bill Eastlake, Don Howell, Cheri Copsey, Keith Hessing, Birdelle Brown, Joe Cusick, Doug Cooley, Rick Sterling and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Joe Miller, Attorney at Law; Jeannette Bowman of Idaho Power Company, James Hovren of Evans Keane and John Souba of U S West.
Commissioner Hansen called the meeting to order and welcomed all in attendance.
First item of business was the Consent Agenda which consisted of 10 items listed on the Agenda.  Commissioner Hansen called for questions or comments on any of the items.
Said he had a question on No. 8. Scott Woodbury’s August 23, 1999 Decision Memorandum re:  UWI-W-99-4; (United Water) Propose Purchase of Barber Water.
Asked if it was staff’s recommendation that modified procedure for written comments for the technical part and then a hearing for public comments?
Scott said staff was proposing the same procedure as in the earlier filing. That is also acceptable to United water.
Commissioner Smith said on Item1 - Weldon Stutzman’s August 17, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Application of Nextlink Idaho, Inc. for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, the decision memo did not speak to comments from TDS and Century and they were considered in the decision also. With that comment, she made a motion to approve the items on the Consent Agenda. There was no further discussion. Vote was taken on the motion; carried.
MATTERS IN PROGRESS
11. Birdelle Brown’s July 30, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Universal Service fund -- 1998 Annual Report. (Held from previous decision meetings).
Commissioner Hansen said in the last decision meeting, Birdelle Brown had reviewed this matter but the commissioners had asked a couple of questions.
Birdelle said the first one (1)  was how the companies affected felt about the rate increases and what they proposed for implementation of them. She sent out some information but didn’t get any official comments back. Closest thing to getting an answer back was Conley Ward’s letter. Thought that was rather inconclusive. Feeling from Conley Ward and Midvale was that we not do anything; that they have information to bring to the commission on local rates. There were no comments on access rates and (2)There was a difference between tariffed and the actual rates for business lines. She addressed that briefly. The tariffed rate is still under the threshold. But if the
tariffed rate is changed it won’t really resolve any differences. Only way to resolve that was to bring the actual billed rate up to the threshold rate. She did not do a complete report on that.
Commissioner Hansen called for questions or discussion.
Commissioner Smith said she thought the remaining issue is what to do with local rates for four of the companies and we dealt with access rates earlier and surcharges. It was her understanding that there are four companies the Commission is dealing with. (1) With Rural, since we just issued an EAS order and they are determining the cut over, that we not change any of the rates for Rural and decide that issue after the cut over is proposed. It wouldn’t make sense to change those now.
With regard to Midvale, Cambridge and Inland, think an appropriate course of action would be written notification to these companies that their local rates are no longer within the bounds of USF and to give them a period of time in which to make filings with the Commission as to how they are going to address that. They can get out of the fund or propose ways to bring rates into accordance with the statute.    Give them four weeks. Then we could decide and go from there.  One answer might be that they are filing a rate case. Understand Midvale is working on that. Wouldn’t change Midvale. With that, the only other suggestion would be to adopt the administrator’s recommendation to increase toll surcharge .003 per billed minute. Need to do that to maintain an appropriate balance in that fund.  
Don’t know whether there has been any analysis done based on the Rural order if that would still be adequate.  
Birdelle said the order didn’t speak to the USF. Can deal with Rural after that determination.
Commissioner Hansen said the Commission has a motion before it. Vote taken on the motion; carried.
12. Brad Purdy’s August 19, 1999 Decision Memorandum r: Case No. IPC-E-99-7; Application of Idaho Power to Offset 1998 and 1999 Northwest Efficiency Alliance Payments Against Reserved Funds.  
Don Howell reviewed the memo in Brad Purdy’s absence. Decision before the commission is how the commission wishes to process the application. Company has requested modified procedure. Staff thought it should be brought to the commission’s attention in Matters in Progress to see if the Commission believes modified is appropriate or schedule it for hearing. Staff would probably recommend that it go modified but also recognizes public hearings may be  warranted.
Commissioner Hansen agreed there have been discussions in the past; different parties have expressed concerns. But do think this can be handled under modified; however, would open it up for discussion.
Commissioner Kjellander commented - with modified nothing precludes the Commission from changing gears at any time.
Commissioner Hansen said our rules contemplate that a party could ask for a hearing. If a party asked for that the commission would make a subsequent decision regarding hearing.
Commissioner Kjellander said we are not closing anyone out by going modified. He would go with that.
Commissioner Hansen made that a motion; motion carried.
13. Scott Woodbury’s August 23, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: case No. AVU-E-99-4; (Avista) Schedule 90 Electric Energy Efficiency Programs Proposed Revision.
Scott reviewed the matter. Notice of Application and Modified was issued on July 2. Commission staff was the only party to file comments. Staff recommended approval of the filing but also recommended the Company be required to provide quarterly reports to the commission or through the Triple E Board detailing activities in each customer segment and for each measure.
Commissioner Smith had a question. Asked if staff had shared their recommendations with the company and how did they respond?
Scott replied he had not had any personal discussion with the company.
Randy Lobb responded at this time. Said he had informal discussions with the company in the IRP meeting with John Powell. They didn’t have any problem with staff comments.
Commissioner Hansen asked what the pleasure of the Commission was? He then made a motion to approve staff recommendation. Vote taken: motion carried.
14. Scott Woodbury’s August 24, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. AVU-E-99-6; (Avista) Centralia Plant Purchase and Sale Agreement. Purchaser: TECWA Power, Inc. (EWG).  and
15. Scott Woodbury’s August 24, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. PAC-E-99-2; (Pacificorp) Centralia Plant Purchase and Sale Agreement. Purchaser: TECWA Power, Inc. (EWG).
Scott asked to have 14 and 15 discussed together. Said in each case the utility is proposing the sale of their interest in Centralia. Decision Memos set out details.  
Commissioner Kjellander said in reviewing the two proposals, one filing is complete and the other is not. Asked how to encourage Avista to upgrade its proposal?  Think a critical part of the information is still needed.  
Scott Woobury said he indicated staff has similar concerns and can express that through production requests to the company. Have had no discussion with Avista. Don’t know if they are agreeable to supplementing their application.
Commissioner Smith said she thought it would be more efficient to do both caes at the same time and put them out for notice. Asked if Commission could get by with 28 days notice? With regard to the other issues, think it is unfair to penalize Pacificorp since they have filed a more complete filing. It would seem that if staff’s analysis is that Pacificorp’s filing is complete enough that modified procedure would work, then it should proceed and if Avista isn’t ready it should go out on its own track. If it works to treat them together okay, but if one is ready to roll, you shouldn’t hold it back because of the other one.
Commissioner Hansen asked what the pleasure of the Commission was.
Commissioner Smith said she would make her comments a motion. It included: (1) that we as soon as possible put out for comment the EWG issue seeking comments within 21 days and (2) issue a notice of application and set intervention deadline in both filings and after the intervention dates, would like a recommendation from the staff as to whether we then proceed to preharing conference or to further comments and at that time trreat each case separately for those recommendations.
Vote taken: motion carried.
16. Carol Cooper’s August 23, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Floyd Audette, Idaho Power Line Extension Complaint.
Carol Cooper reviewed the matter. Staff is recommending, because of the confusion, that the case be handled formally as Mr. Audette is requesting.
Commissioner Kjellander asked if Mr. Audette owns 11 of the 12 lots?  
Carol Cooper replied that he owned some of them.
Commissioner Kjellander asked if he is getting a fee to ask in behalf of others?
Carol Cooper said not that she was aware of.
Commissioner Smith said she guessed when our rule says if they are unhappy with informal it can go formal, she agrees that it should go formal, review it and make a decision. Staff’s recommendation was approved.
17. Carol Cooper’s August 23, 1999 Decision Memorandum re: Telephone Directories for Added EAS Exchanges.
Carol said this is in regard to the expansion of the EAS area. Have heard from three customers asking for directories for all the areas that are toll free. They want listings for all those area they can call toll free. To obtain a number from Weiser to Boise they now have to dial Directory Assistance and pay 85 cents for up to 2 numbers. They feel this isn’t fair. U S West says they will make the directories available but there will be a charge for them. Staff recommends, realizing that not all customers would want these directories, that they would instead like to have the alternative directory that their name is printed in but that those desiring directories be given one without charge.  
Commissioner Hansen asked if it wouldn’t be more financially beneficial for the company to waive the 85 cent charge rather than providing the phone book. If you were just brought into a larger area, would you rather waive the per phone request or provide a directory if those were the only two choices you had.
John Souba of U S West responded. Said U S West’s opinion is that the company is comfortable with the current situation that means if you are a Weiser resident you can access DEX for nothing or call DA or buy a phone book. If the Commission goes with staff recommendation, company would like a chance to provide a filing.
Commissioner Hansen asked if the company in the coming year, everyone in a local area is going to be provided with a directory?
John said this is a decision that is made by U S West DEX and if they decide to do that, they can do it. In Eastern Idaho there is a competitive directory that contains more communities than U S West.
Commissioner Hansen said in Preston EAS it was brought out the directory tied them to Logan, UT. They didn’t have a directory for local calls. That was a concern. Thought in the Commission’s order that was addressed.
John Souba said U S West’s posture is that their current policy of providing their home exchange meets the definition of the Commission rule. Should the Commission accept staff’s recommendation, the Company would like to make some formal comment on the record prior to being required to provide free directories.
Commissioner Kjellander said in talking to other phone companies, the phone book is given to a customer upon request. Think they should have some access without paying a fee. Asked if there was any discussion about the need for a bill stuffer for that? Was that part of the discussion?
Carol Cooper was it was not part of the discussion. U S West refused to provie the directories for no charge.
Commissioner Kjellander made a motion. Staff’s recommendation is consistent with GTE and if a directory is requested and it is within extended EAS, they should have access to that.  Do agree with the cmpany that yellow pages and phone books are becoming more competitive, so requiring sending books to everyone is not necessary.  
Commissioner Kjellander said he would recommend staff’s recommendation and look forward to the company’s comments if it is approved.
Commissioner Smith said she was going to vote against the motion. Directories are competitive.  Her advice is for the Weiser person to call the Regional Directory  people and they will get them a directory. There are other self-help methods to get a Boise directory. Would also note that DA is an unregulated service. Seemed to her that the Commission is trying to put its foot back into services that have been deregulated and the Commission ought not do that. It was deregulated for market concerns and we should let that happen.
Commissioner Hansen said he could agree with Commissioner Smith if the public was aware of that process. If they knew they could find it. Looking at the yellow pages, you can’t find the information number. If U S West wants to take Commissioner Smith’s comments to heart and put this in the phone book, but he thought that knowledge isn’t there to the customer right now so he believes that a customer in a local calling area should have the number available to make that call.
Commissioners Hansen and Kjellander voted for staff’s recommendation; Commissioner Smith opposed.  
Meeting was adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 9th day of September, 1999.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary