HomeMy WebLinkAbout28173.docBEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE INVESTIGATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRONIC FILING AND PUBLISHING TECHNOLOGIES. )
)
)
) CASE NO. GNR U 99 1
ORDER NO. 28173
In March 1999, the Commission initiated this proceeding to investigate the best manner of implementing electronic filing and publishing technologies. Following a public workshop, the Commission issued a Notice of Modified Procedure soliciting comments on proposed procedures to initiate electronic filing of tariffs and price lists. The Commission also asked for comments regarding administrative rules necessary to implement electronic filing “in all matters before the Commission.” Order No. 28095 at 3.
In response to the Notice, the Commission received comments from U S WEST Communications and PacifiCorp. After reviewing the proposed procedures and the comments filed by the two utilities, the Commission adopts the proposed procedures and shall implement the electronic filing of tariffs and price lists on or after October 18, 1999.
BACKGROUND
On July 16, 1999, the Commission issued its Notice containing proposed procedures to implement electronic filing of tariffs and price lists. Order No. 28095 at 1-3. Briefly, the Commission proposed that electronic filing be voluntary and that utilities wishing to file electronically will submit the filing via the Internet to the Commission’s Home Page in Adobe portable document format (PDF). In addition to the electronic filing, the utilities will be required to file a single paper original with the Commission Secretary.
Utilities desiring to file electronically will obtain one or more passwords that will permit access to a portion of the Commission’s Home Page. The filing utility will fill in an electronic form and subsequently upload the tariffs or price lists. Upon completion of the successful upload, a “receipt” will be electronically presented to the filer. The uploaded filing will then be placed on the PUC’s Home Page under the heading “Submitted Tariffs/Price Lists.” Once the tariff is approved or the price list becomes effective, the existing tariff or price list will be updated by the Commission Staff and placed on the Home Page under the heading “Approved Tariffs/Price Lists.” The filer will be notified by E-mail when the submitted tariff/price list has been received and again when the tariff/price list has been approved or becomes effective.
The Commission’s Notice stated that the Commission believes its current computer system is adequate to accommodate the electronic filing of tariffs and price lists. The Commission observed that software upgrades or new equipment may be necessary if the computer system becomes overloaded or unable to timely handle the volume of traffic. The Commission also noted that utilities wishing to file electronically will need an Internet service provider, a web browser, Adobe exchange software, a login name and password to the IPUC web server and instruction on how the Commission’s system works.
In addition to the proposed procedures, the Commission also requested comment “on the concept of a rule that would allow for electronic filing in all matters before the Commission.” Order No. 28095 at 3. In particular, the Commission sought comments regarding the Commission Secretary’s ability to grant waivers or make exceptions to persons unable to make electronic filings. Id. The Commission received only two written comments in response to its electronic filing proposal. These comments are reviewed in greater detail below.
COMMENTS
PacifiCorp
In its comments, PacifiCorp supported the Commission’s incremental approach to electronic filing. Comments at 1. The Company agreed with the proposal to allow utilities “the option of filing tariffs and price lists electronically with one paper copy mailed separately.” However, the Company noted that there may be instances where documents included in other electronic filings (i.e., not tariffs/price lists) may not lend themselves to be converted to a PDF format. Such items might be photographs, maps, oversize spreadsheets or documents containing trade secrets or other confidential material. These possible exceptions to PDF formatting support the concept of having the Commission Secretary grant an exemption or waiver from an electronic filing rule applicable to all documents.
PacifiCorp also expressed concern regarding the Commission’s ability to upload voluminous documents that may not only be difficult to upload but may also “be time consuming for the viewer to page through.” Id. at 2. The Company commented that the Commission may find it necessary to put a page limit on electronic filing and require paper filings for large documents. In setting a page limit, the Commission may wish to consider a dots-per-inch (dpi) “standard since a document scanned and PDF’d at 250 dpi will take up less room on the server than the same document scanned at 600 dpi.” Id. Given the number of parties that may wish to file electronically, PacifiCorp was concerned that the users may experience delays caused by use of the electronic filing software that may result in missed filing deadlines. The Company inquired whether the Commission’s software is capable of handling multiple users uploading large files at the same time or does it form a queue of “first come, first served”?
Addressing administrative rules, PacifiCorp suggested that the Commission experiment with electronic filing for a period of time before promulgating any rules. “Such a process would provide the Commission and parties experience helpful in identifying issues and formulating appropriate rules.” Id. at 1. The Company also stated that there may be many instances where it is not necessary or appropriate for utilities to electronically file in “all matters.” PacifiCorp commented that electronic filing should only be required in formal docketed matters and not other instances such as the Company’s annual report, its results of operation, etc. The Company concluded by suggesting that the Commission consider creating a work group to discuss concerns or solutions during the initial phase of the electronic filing process. Id. at 2.
B. U S WEST
The Company commended the Commission for pursuing the transition of many of its regulatory procedures into the electronic medium. The Company asserted that the current volume of information necessary for the Commission and other utilities to process dictates a more efficient medium to replace paper for filing and storage. U S WEST concurred that electronic filing will increase the Commission’s efficiency and streamline its regulatory oversight.
U S WEST agreed that electronic filing should be voluntary “at least until a period of testing convinces the Commission and those companies who choose to work with this proposal that the electronic option is efficient and economical.” U S WEST Comments at 3. As was the case with PacifiCorp, U S WEST recommended that the Commission implement electronic filing incrementally for a period of no less than one year. This would allow the Commission to obtain experience and address problems before the promulgation of a rule. The Company supported granting the Commission Secretary authority to make exceptions and/or grant waivers to those unable to make electronic filings. Id.
In addition to the filing of tariffs and price lists, U S WEST stated that the Commission’s procedures need “much more clarification before the Company can endorse expansion to [other] areas.” Id. The Company expressed concern that a single model for electronic filing may not adequately address the breadth and scope of all the Commission’s various processes. “For example, matters involving significant amounts of highly confidential information or matters which have very little interest to any segment of the industry or the public may not prove to be suitable candidates for an electronic process.” Id. at 3-4. The Company suggested that an appropriate starting point for the expansion of electronic filings may be to encourage voluntary filings of annual reports or non-confidential testimony and exhibits in cases of public or industry interests.
In addition to its general comments set out above, U S WEST also identified four specific areas that warranted further review and consideration. These areas are discussed below.
1. Security. U S WEST suggested that the Commission employ hypertext transfer protocol secure (HTTPS) software to provide a secure, encrypted transmission path to a secured partition within the Commission’s server. The Company maintained that this is a standard method used in the Internet today to conduct electronic commerce and to protect confidential/proprietary documents.
2. Back-up Server. The Company urged the Commission to consider other computer sites which would serve as a back-up in case of failure of the Idaho server. U S WEST suggested that the Commission consider entering a partnership with a neighboring state to act as mirror sites for one another. “This would allow electronic filing to continue in the event the Idaho Commission server was down.” Id. at 2. While such a procedure may not be necessary for the initial implementation of electronic filings of price lists and tariffs, the Company urged the Commission to address this issue now since establishment of redundant systems could be a time-consuming process.
3. Archiving. The Company observed that the Commission’s proposal does not mention development of an electronic system for archiving files and superceded tariffs. The Company maintained that development of such a system is important to the transition to an electronic medium. Along this line, U S WEST urged the Commission to consider establishing the electronic filing as the official filing in a particular matter. While the Company understands the practical and legal considerations why a paper copy must accompany the electronic filing, the electronic system should be designed to replace the existing paper record. If this is not the objective, “there is a danger that this process will simply create an additional layer of activity which drains, rather than conserves, the Commission and industry resources.” Id. at 3.
4. Hot-links. The Company suggested that rather than maintain a copy of the electronic tariffs/price lists on its Home Page, that the Commission merely establish “hot-links” to its set of tariffs/price lists. In other words, the tariffs/price lists would be available on the utility’s server rather than on the Commission’s server.
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
After reviewing the proposed procedures and the comments filed by the two utilities, we find that it is appropriate to implement electronic filing of tariffs and price lists. We further find that it is reasonable to implement the electronic filing of tariffs/price lists on a voluntary basis during a trial period. After an appropriate period of time, the Commission will be able to determine whether changes to our electronic filing procedures are necessary and whether the electronic filing of tariffs/price lists should be made mandatory with exceptions granted by the Commission Secretary. We decline to establish a specific period of time for the trial but we intend to monitor the process. In addition, the experience gained from electronic filing of tariffs/price lists will be beneficial when the Commission considers implementing additional electronic filing procedures for other documents.
Both commentors also posed questions about the electronic filing process. Many of the questions raised by the parties are addressed in the “Users Manual” for the electronic filing of tariffs/price lists. We adopt the procedures for electronic filing contained in the Users Manual. Rather than attaching the Users Manual to this Order, we suggest interested persons review and down load the Users Manual from the Commission’s Home Page: www.puc.state.id.us. Other questions that merit discussion are discussed below.
Large Format and Trade Secret Documents. PacifiCorp expressed concerns that there may be instances where electronic filing is not appropriate for certain types of documents such as photographs, maps, or documents containing trade secrets. U S WEST also expressed concern that the Commission utilize software that provides a secure, encrypted transmission path. As explained in Part 2 of the Users Manual, the Commission acknowledges that some of documents may not lend themselves to be converted to a PDF format. Consequently, the Users Manual provides that exhibits and maps do not necessarily need to be filed electronically.
In instances where confidential information may be contained in the transmittal letter or other background documents to tariffs/price lists, the Users Manual contemplates in general guideline No. 9 that confidential documents shall be filed with the Commission on floppy disks. One of the reasons for starting with tariffs/price lists was that such documents are not generally considered to be trade secrets or confidential. See Idaho Code §§ 9-340A through 9-349F. In addition, the Commission has recently proposed to amend our Rules of Procedure. Case No. 31-0101-9901. In particular, the Commission’s proposed rules address procedures for the filing and safeguarding of confidential and trade secret information. If adopted, the Commission’s proposed procedural rules would govern how confidential or trade secret information is to be filed. As is currently the case, trade secret confidential information when filed in paper form should be clearly marked and the transmittal sheet should advise the Commission Secretary that the transmittal includes documents alleged to be trade secret or confidential.
Voluminous Documents. PacifiCorp expressed concerns regarding the Commission’s ability to upload large documents. For purposes of electronic filing, the Users Manual contemplates the maximum file size is three million bits of data. This is roughly 700 pages of printed material. If documents are larger than 300 pages, the Manual instructs the filer to divide the document into several parts.
3. Server Size and Back Up. U S WEST urged the Commission to consider whether other computer sites could serve as an appropriate back up in case of failure of the Commission’s server. As currently configured, we contemplate that the Idaho server will be able to accommodate multiple uploadings. As is the case with any electronically transmitted document, the equipment of the sender, the transmission path, and the Commission’s server all affect transmission and uploading speeds.
Turning to U S WEST’s question about a back up server, the Staff is exploring the possibility of identifying a back up server with a sister state. The problem currently confronting the Commission is that surrounding states have not fully implemented electronic filing, as is the case with Michigan and Connecticut. As the electronic filing trial proceeds, this issue will be further scrutinized.
4. Archiving and Official Files. U S WEST also inquired about development of the electronic system for archiving files and superceded tariffs. The Staff shall maintain archive files containing cancelled or superceded tariffs/price lists to avoid confusion, however, this file will not be maintained on our Home Page.
The Company also suggested that the Commission consider making electronic filing the “official” filing for the Commission. We find that adoption of electronic filing as the Commission’s official files would require changes to the Commission’s Administrative Rules as well as the Public Utilities Law. We believe there is plenty of time to review this question as we incrementally implement electronic filing.
5. Utilities Maintaining Official File. Finally on a related issue, U S WEST suggested rather than maintain electronic tariffs/price lists on the Commission’s Home Page, that we merely establish “hot-links” so that tariffs and price lists would be maintained by the utilities and not the Commission. While we find that such redundancy is reasonable, the Public Utilities Law requires that tariffs/price lists be filed and maintained by the Commission. Idaho Code § 61-305 provides that every public utility “shall file with the Commission such schedules showing its rates, tolls, etc. In addition, Idaho Code § 62-606 requires Title 62 telecommunications utilities to file with the Commission tariffs or price lists. Consequently, the statutes require that the Commission maintain such tariffs/price lists. Again, this may be a matter that will be reviewed and revisited as the Commission gains experience with electronic filing.
The Commission’s Rules generally require that utilities file an original and three copies of their tariffs/price lists. More specifically, Procedural Rule 132 requires that utilities file an original and three copies of tariffs/price lists. IDAPA 31.01.01.132. For Title 62 telecommunications companies, Rule 204 also requires an original and three copies. IDAPA 31.42.01.203. Procedural Rule 13 provides that “the Commission may permit deviation from [its procedural] rules when it finds compliance with them is impractical, unnecessary or not in the public interest.” IDAPA 31.01.01.013.
Because the electronic filing of tariffs/price lists is voluntary, we find it is not necessary to implement a rulemaking to amend the two rules specifying the number of copies to be filed. Consequently, companies not participating in the electronic filing shall continue to submit the requisite number of copies required in the two rules cited above. For those utilities participating in the electronic filing process. We find pursuant to Rule 13, that it is impractical and unnecessary to file three paper copies of the tariffs/price lists. Utilities participating in the electronic filing shall only be required to file one electronic and one original paper tariff/price list with the Commission Secretary.
We find it appropriate to begin the electronic filing of tariffs/price lists on or after October 18, 1999. This will permit the Staff to first run a few internal trials to check the electronic filing system. For companies desiring to participate in the trial, it will be necessary to upload all their tariffs and price lists rather than just the subsequent amendments to tariffs and price lists.
O R D E R
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the electronic filing of tariffs and price lists on a voluntary basis begin on or after October 18, 1999. The Commission adopts the electronic filing procedures contained in the “Users Manual.”
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that public utilities desiring to file their tariffs and price lists electronically may do so following procedures contained in the Users Manual published on the Commission’s Home Page: www.puc.state.id.us.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission grants an exception from Procedural Rule 132 and Title 62 Rule 204 requiring utilities to file an original and three copies of their tariffs/price lists. IDAPA 31.01.01.132 and 31.42.01.203. Public utilities filing tariffs/price lists electronically shall only be required to file the electronic and one original paper copy of the tariff or price list.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order (or in issues finally decided by this Order) or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. GNR-U 99 1 may petition for reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order with regard to any matter decided in this order or in interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No. GNR-U-99-1. Within seven (7) days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for reconsideration. See Idaho Code § 61-626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this
day of October 1999.
DENNIS S. HANSEN, PRESIDENT
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
PAUL KJELLANDER, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary
vld/O:GNR-U-99-1_dh3
ORDER NO. 28173 1
Office of the Secretary
Service Date
October 5, 1999