The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20010910.min..docMINUTES OF DECISION MEETING SEPTEMBER 10, 2001 - 1:30 P.M. In attendance were Commissioners Paul Kjellander, Dennis Hansen, and Marsha Smith. Commissioner Kjellander called the meeting to order. The first order of business was approval of items 1-3 on the CONSENT AGENDA. Commissioner Smith stated that regarding item 3, it sounded like the parties had already transferred possession and were planning to close one week after the Commission approves the purchase. She said if the Commission takes another 60 days to look at this matter they will be past the time when they can do construction. She asked if there was an urgency and why the Staff needed 60 days to investigate. Mr. Woodbury replied that he would check with Staff. Commissioner Smith asked if the matter could be held until Mr. Woodbury could talk to Staff, hopefully by the close of the meeting. Commissioner Kjellander stated items 1-2 would be approved and item 3 would be held and considered later in the meeting. The next order of business was MATTERS IN PROGRESS: John Hammond's September 7, 2001 Decision Memorandum re: In the Matter of the Petition of Verizon Northwest, Inc. for a Waiver from the Commission's Telephone Customer Relations Rules Regarding Partial Payment Application. Case No. VZN-T-01-8. Mr. Hammond reviewed his Decision Memorandum. He noted Renee Willer of Verizon was present to answer any questions. Commissioner Kjellander confirmed that to deny the petition in its entirety would mean the Company had to incur the $51 million cost. Mr. Hammond said he didn't know the exact cost, and Staff and Verizon had been assuming the matter would go forward in some sense, either being approved on the grounds the Company had presented it or with some minor modifications. He said Staff believes there would be a substantial cost to the Company but is not convinced that it would be $51 million. Commissioner Hansen asked if the other telephone providers, such as Qwest and Citizens, comply with the rules, or if we have rules no telephone providers are complying with. He questioned where the whole industry stood on complying with these two rules. Bev Barker replied that as far as they are able to ascertain based on complaints and discussions with companies, this particular provision has only been a problem with Verizon and is unique to Verizon's billing system. She said not all companies say it is easy to comply but they do comply. She said both Qwest and Citizens comply with the rule regarding customer-directed payments, and the only company where they run into the problem of non-compliance is with Verizon. Commissioner Hansen commented that he is concerned about the rule itself and how important it is that the companies comply with it. He said the memo mentions that two years from now the Company would come forth with a revised billing system to comply with the rules, but he was concerned the Company doesn't think it is necessary and they don't want to make the changes now or two years from now. Renee Willer of Verizon responded that with the merger of Bell Atlantic and GTE, they are just now putting teams together to take a look at what systems need to be changed or modified, which is a large project. She said they didn't ask for a permanent waiver and instead asked for two years to give the Company the time to take a look at and plan for what changes need to be made. She said she hoped the Company wouldn't be ordered to spend money now to fix the problem when in the long run they may be totally replacing the billing system. She said they would like to come back to the Commission in 2003 and report on what modifications the Company is going to be making to the billing system to comply with this particular rule and system changes throughout the Company as a result of the merger. Commissioner Kjellander said he wanted to clarify the fundamental difference between Staff's request and the Company's request, both of which had the two-year temporary exemption. He asked if Staff was proposing that some money be spent to upgrade the system. Mr. Hammond said that Staff is encouraging the Company to take steps as we go forward in order to comply. Mr. Hammond said Staff wanted a definite order stating the Company would need to make the changes or take steps in that direction by 2003, rather than leaving it open-ended. He said Staff's recommendation was to make it more fixed in terms of what the Company would be required to do going forward, although if the Commission ordered the Company to come back to review the situation in 2003 it would achieve a similar result. Commissioner Hansen noted on page 3 of the memo that Staff had recommended that at the end of two years Verizon be required to comply in full with the Commission's rules or demonstrate it was in the process of complying with the rules. He questioned if it shouldn't also give the Company the option of demonstrating why it can't comply with the rules if it runs into problems. Ms. Willer replied they could have the problem fixed in two years or at least will have a better idea of what it is up against and what it needs to do to change the system to comply. She said the Company just didn't want to be locked in stone that it had to go out and spend the money right now to get it fixed. Commissioner Hansen made a motion to approve Verizon's application as presented and see where they are two years from now when they come back to the Commission since it really isn't posing a problem right now. Ms. Willer said the Company is doing everything it can to make sure the customers are taken care of. Commissioner Kjellander said as a point of clarification he would like to ensure that the order requires Verizon to return in two years to give the Commission a status report on its efforts to comply. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously. Commissioner Kjellander asked Mr. Woodbury if they could return to item 3 on the Consent Agenda. Mr. Woodbury reported that the Application by Robert Turnipseed, the owner of Bar Circle S, was rather sparse, but when Staff started to do an initial investigation it realized what the Company was asking for was an extension of its Certificate to three distinct parcels of property. He said Staff has an outstanding production request and is working with the Company on the matter, and soon as Staff can get it straightened out it will be brought back to the Commission. He said it is anticipated that it will not take 60 days, and Staff is asking that a Notice of Application be put out before the matter is brought back to the Commission. Commissioner Smith commented that with a the Notice of Application, Staff report, and then modified procedure with 21 days to comment, it will be 60 days. Mr. Woodbury replied that Staff can shorten the comment period. He said the number of customers is quite manageable and Staff can probably get it done in six weeks. Commissioner Smith asked if the Notice of Modified Procedure could be done with the Notice of Application. Mr. Woodbury replied that it certainly could be done that way. Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to issue a Notice of Modified Procedure with the Notice of Application. A vote was taken on the motion and it carried unanimously. Keith Hessing's September 7, 2001 Decision Memorandum re: Idaho Power Company Irrigation Buy-Back Program Modification. Case No. IPC-E-01-31. Mr. Hessing reviewed his Decision Memorandum. There was no discussion. Commissioner Kjellander moved for approval of the program modification. A vote was taken and it carried unanimously. Scott Woodbury—Discussion re Procedure: In the Matter of the Application of Idaho Power company for Authority to Implement a Residential and Small Farm Energy Rate Adjustment Credit. Case No. IPC-E-01-30. (No Decision Memorandum.) Mr. Woodbury stated that Idaho Power's application to pass through the benefits of an agreement with BPA for residential and farm customers was filed by Idaho Power on August 31, 2001 with an effective date of October 1, 2001. He stated Staff recommended that the matter be processed pursuant to modified procedure with a shortened comment period ending September 20th so the matter could be brought before the Commission at its September 24th meeting. He said if that wasn't acceptable, the Commission needed to consider suspending the proposed effective date. There was no discussion and Commissioner Kjellander made a motion to process the case under modified procedure with a shortened comment deadline of September 20th. A vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Kjellander stated that the remaining items on the agenda under FULLY SUBMITTED MATTERS would be considered under the Commission's private deliberation statutes at a later date. He then adjourned the meeting. DATED this _____ day of October, 2001. ____________________________________ COMMISSION SECRETARY 1 1