20001218.min.doc

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
DECEMBER 18, 2000 - 1:30 PM

In attendance were Commissioners Dennis Hansen, Marsha Smith, and Paul Kjellander.

Commissioner Hansen called the meeting to order. The first order of business was approval of items 1 -10 on the CONSENT AGENDA. He asked if there were any questions or need for discussion on any of the items. Commissioner Smith stated she had a question on item 8 and asked what Ms. Barker envisioned for the case. Ms. Barker explained that for the two issues, the primary concern that Staff had was on revenue impact. She said Staff wasn't sure what the Commission's feeling would be and since Staff as a whole hadn't had an opportunity to discuss what its feelings were, they thought it would be best to go ahead and suspend the filing and then put it out for modified procedure. Commissioner Smith clarified that Staff wanted to give people the opportunity to express their views as to whether a rate case is needed and their views as to the merits of the charge itself. There was no further discussion, and Commissioner Hansen moved for approval of the Consent Agenda items based on recommendations of the Staff. He also noted that on items 4 and 5, where there were no recommendations by Staff, the Company's request to intervene would be granted. The motion carried unanimously.

The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS:

Scott Woodbury's December 14, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: PGA Increase $14,106,437 (29.19%). Case No. AVU-G-00-5.

Mr. Woodbury reviewed his Decision Memorandum regarding the filing by Avista for a proposed PGA increase. He stated that the increase was the second proposed increase since this past summer and in the past case, the Company was given a 29% increase, or nearly $10 million effective September 1st. He noted the requested increase is sizeable. He asked if the Commissioners wanted to schedule hearings and suspend the Company's proposed January 11th effective date. Commissioner Kjellander stated that in light of the fact that this is the second PGA case brought to the Commission this year by Avista, we need to be consistent with the Intermountain Gas case and handle the Avista case in the same way. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to adopt Staff's recommendations to conduct the workshops and public hearings and suspend the Company's proposed effective date to February 8th. Commissioner Smith asked if she could make a friendly amendment to the motion, making the suspension date February 9th in order to give Staff a couple more days and to coincide with a Friday deadline. There was no other discussion. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

Scott Woodbury's December 15, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Utility Restructuring Application. Case No. PAC-E-00-06.

Mr. Woodbury reviewed his Decision Memorandum. He noted Staff has expressed concern with the incompleteness of the filing and that Staff has communicated its reservations to the Company. He said Staff has had discussions with the Company for the last three months and has identified particular issues and areas that need to be addressed, but the filing addresses none of the concerns. He stated that Staff believes scheduling a prehearing conference as requested by the Company would be premature. He said it is Staff's recommendation that should the Commission find it reasonable to accept the Company's filing, that it issue only a Notice of Application and establish an intervention deadline. Mr. Woodbury stated the Company had filed a letter with the Commission that morning and had pledged its commitment to working with parties to shape the details of its proposal. He said it appears the Company has acquiesced to Staff's proposed procedure and is no longer requesting a prehearing conference for early January.

Commissioner Kjellander stated he had a lot of questions but acknowledged it wasn't the appropriate forum to ask all of them. He asked if the matter was before the Commission as a direct result of the Oregon Legislature's actions, and if that is what prompted Pacificorp to move forward in this direction. Mr. Woodbury replied that in part, that is the reason. Commissioner Kjellander said he questioned what would happen if any one of the six states rejects the proposal. He also wondered if Oregon was still as gung ho about the process in light of what has been going on in the West. He said he would like to see these questions addressed somewhere down the line. He stated he is also curious to know what will happen with system-wide customers if we move forward in this direction. He said he agreed with Staff that it is impossible to have any kind of prehearing conference in the early part of January, and at this time, the only thing he would be willing to move forward on would be to provide notice that the filing has been received and to begin the appropriate notice of application and intervention deadline.

Commissioner Smith stated she would like to ask Mary Hobson, Counsel for Pacificorp, if Mr. Woodbury's assumption was correct that the company is no longer requesting a prehearing conference. Ms. Hobson replied that the letter speaks for itself in that the Company is prepared to cooperate in whatever way the Commission feels is appropriate. She said we may be getting hung up a little on the terminology of prehearing conference. She said what the Company is interested in doing is seeing on an informal basis how quickly it can get together with interested parties and begin to address some of the concerns, such as those that have been expressed by Commissioner Kjellander. Ms. Hobson said that while the Company certainly doesn't want to be pushing something that is inappropriate, it also wants to reiterate its interest in starting informal discussions sooner rather than later. There was no further discussion.

Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to notice the Company's filing and only issue a Notice of Application and establish an intervention deadline, which will give the Commission ample opportunity at a later date to decide whether or not to move forward as modified or formal. Commissioner Smith said she would be happy to support the motion as long as everyone understands that Staff isn't precluded from starting to talk to the Company and that other interested parties are also encouraged to start talking to the Company immediately. She said that sometimes that can happen more quickly if there's not a formal process already outlined by the Commission. With that understanding, she said she would be happy to support the motion. There was no further discussion on the motion. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously.

Joe Cusick's December 15, 2000 Decision Memorandum re: Use of the Gain from the Sale of Qwest's Northern Idaho Exchanges.

Mr. Cusick reviewed his Decision Memorandum. Commissioner Smith said she wanted to thank the Staff for getting the information and that it was appropriate to explore other uses of the money in order to benefit the customers in the sold exchanges. She said the proposal is worth looking into and she wholeheartedly supports Staff's recommendation. She made a motion that the Commission approve it.

Commissioner Kjellander said he also supported the motion and concurred with everything Commissioner Smith said regarding Staff's work. He noted there is a possibility that depth restrictions for burying cable might be relaxed, and our legal staff and others have been looking into that option. Commissioner Kjellander said that if the proposal is ultimately approved for the use of the funds, he would also hope Staff will work closely with Citizens in the assumption the depth restriction is changed so we might be able to save some money in this venture and find other uses for the savings within that exchange.

Mr. Cusick commented that Staff's recommendation might have been somewhat imprecise in suggesting a comment period of no less than 30 days. He asked the Commissioners if they would like to recommend another length for the comment period. Commissioner Smith said it generally makes sense to have a comment period in increments of seven so you don't have a comment deadline falling on a weekend. There was no further discussion. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously.

Having completed the items on the agenda, Commissioner Hansen welcomed Dan Graves, a new employee in the Consumer Section, to the Commission. He then adjourned the meeting.

Dated at Boise, Idaho this 16th day of January, 2001.

Jean D. Jewell
Commission Secretary