Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20000313.min.doc Minutes of Decision Meeting March 13, 2000 - 1:30 p.m. In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Marsha H. Smith and Paul Kjellander. Commission President Dennis Hansen called the meeting to order. Commissioner Hansen announced that Item 7 on the Consent Agenda - Birdelle Brown's March 10, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: U S west Tariff Advice 00-02-S To State The ITSAP Surcharge As a Separate Line Item on the bill, To Be Effective April 1, 2000, is held at this time. CONSENT AGENDA Items 1 through 6 and No. 8 were considered at this time. Commissioner Hansen asked the Commissioners if there were any questions or comments regarding any of these items? Hearing none, he then made a motion to approve staff recommendation on the items listed. Motion carried. MATTERS IN PROGRESS Scott Woodbury's February 25, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. INT-G-99-2 (Intermountain Gas) Composite Depreciation Rate--Tri-Annual Review. (Held from the Feb. 29, 2000 Decision Meeting.) Scott Woodbury reviewed the matter. It was processed pursuant to modified procedure. Staff proposes two adjustments, and Scott reviewed those. Commissioner Smith had a question for Syd Lansing. Asked if the company hasn't asked for any rate increase for increased depreciation, wouldn't it be good to depreciation as much as we can? If there is no rate case? Syd replied he would generally agree. Said we are in a position where we could be shifting cost from the future back to right now with this increase in depreciation. There is a possibility we could have a decrease without that. That is the balance staff is working on. Commissioner Smith asked if staff did that analysis for rate reduction? Syd Lansing said the last audit was 1 1/2 years ago. Terri Carlock said Intermountain Gas is on this year's audit schedule. Commissioner Hansen had a question. Does the Commission now review this on a three-year basis with IGC? Terri Carlock replied depreciation is on a three-year cycle. Commissioner Hansen asked Terri Carlock if in three years it would be clearer whether this proposal was correct? Terri Carlock said based on this, the company would have better information at that point in time and would be included in the depreciation study. Commissioner Hansen commented he personally had no problem with approving the Starf's proposal with the two adjustments. He then made a motion to approve, with staff's two proposed adjustments, and in three years with better information we would be in a better position to make the changes the company is asking for and they would be warranted. Commissioner Smith said she would lean towards approving the company's original proposal or its compromised proposal. Staff is concerned about a rate decrease. Don't think you could do a rate decrease for that amount. Only problem she would see is if we don't have a rate case in the next 7 years. Said her inclination would be to take as much depreciation off the books as possible. Commissioner Kjellander said it all seemed arbitrary in picking a solution. Company's reply makes some sense. Said he would probably go somewhere in the middle. Said he would be looking at the company's position. Said he can understand both proposals. Did recognize that there was a motion on the table. Commissioner Hansen commented that the Chair would accept a substitute motion. Commissioner Kjellander said he would propose a substitute motion to take the company's figures in their reply with the understanding we are going to do an audit in a year and we are going to go through this in three years. Commissioner Hansen asked for discussion on the motion. There was none. The substitute motion carried unanimously. Scott Woodbury's March 10, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. IPC-E-00-1 (Idaho Power) Schedule 24--Irrigation Tariff Proposed Revisions. Scott Woodbury reviewed the decision memo. Said the principal change is deposit requirements. Deposit process is more consistent with other non-residential customers. He set out the proposed changes. Said the matter was processed under modified procedure. Staff recommends approval. Commissioner Smith said she did have one objection. She was sorry to see the prepayment option go; savings to the customers of having to write out a check for $2.10. Probably will get a few calls on this. Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve the proposed tariff revisions. Vote was taken; carried unanimously. Jean Jewell's March 10, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Request by Brian Emerick for Formal Consideration of His Complaint. Jean reviewed the matter. Said Idaho Power admits there was a misunderstanding but has confirmed that the amount is correct. She asked if the Commissioners wanted to accept the formal complaint and send out a summons? Commissioner Kjellander asked if the Idaho Power costs for this are resonable based on everything Jean knows? Jean replied the costs were, but the customer is also to be informed. Commissioner Kjellander said as far as the complaint is concerned, it would appear to him if that is what it costs, to go forward wouldn't seem warranted. Asked if it were in writing, would it be a big cost? Jean said she didn't know. They handed him a brochure. The actual quote wasn't on it. Commissioner Kjellander said in terms of being a formal complaint, if that is what the costs are, that is what they have to pay. Would like to see them do it in a reasonable fashion. Don't know if this is the appropriate venue for this to be discussed. Thought maybe this is a procedure question that should be adressed by an attorney. Asked Don if this was the appropriate venue to say to the company, you didn't supply the quote before it was initiated. Jean said the Commission is currently reviewing the line extension policy of Idaho Power Company. Commissioner Kjellander said he would make a motion that the Commission not go further with this complaint; that we go ahead and make a ruling today that a summons not be issued but also take note that we are looking at the line extension policy and let Mr. Emerick know that this is part of another procedure. Vote taken on Commissioner Kjellander's motion; Commissioners Hansen and Kjellander voted yes; Commissioner Smith voted no. Bev Barker's March 10, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Informal Investigation of Pacificorp's Customer Relations and Quality of Service in Idaho. Bev Barker reviewed the matter. Pacificorp has responded to staff's report and this decision memorandum before the Commissioners is analyzing that response. The Company has proposed filing a plan by May. Although staff doesn't yet know what the plan will be, a lot of details will be presented in that plan. Staff thinks that should be scrutinized. Bev said the issue before the Commission now is, do they wish to conclude Staff's informal investigation? Does the Commission wish to proceed with a formal investigation or case? Or would the Commission prefer to direct the Staff to continue to monitor the Company's performance and address any problems it detects through the mechanisms already established in PAC-E-99-1? Commissioner Hansen first commented that staff did an excellent job with this and so did the Company. Commissioner Smith said she would second what Commissioner Hansen said; she appreciated staff's hard work on this. Commissioner Hansen made a motion to accept the staff report and conclude the informal investigation. Vote taken; motion carried. FULLY SUBMITTED MATTERS USW-T-99-15 In the Matter of the Application of U S West Communications, Inc. for Deregulation of Basic Local Exchange Rates. Commissioner Hansen announced that the Commissioners would privately deliberate this matter. Decision Meeting was adjourned. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 27th day of March, 2000. Myrna J. Walters Commission Secretary