20051026Comments.pdf

' C F: i
DONALD L. HOWELL, II
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074
[phone]
IDAHO BAR NO. 3366
" ,""'.' , .,, ,, ; ~.!:,"
1'-; 1': '1" 2,: 6 P fj 1: : 2
C) p;IqJ i '..1
, '--,j
L v
u; ;Ll'; !ES COi"'li'-1ISSION
Attorney for the Commission Staff
OL -U oL./~()
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE AMENDMENTS TO
THE COMMISSION'S CUSTOMER
RELATIONS RULES , IDAP A 31.21.01 CASE NO. 31-2101-0402
COMMENTS OF THE
COMMISSION STAFF
COMES NOW the Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission, by and through its
Attorney of record, Donald L. Howell, II, Deputy Attorney General, and submits the following
comments in response to the Notice of Rulemaking issued on October 5, 2005.
BACKGROUND
On July 22, 2004, the Idaho Community Action Network (ICAN) filed a "Petition for
Rule Change." More specifically, ICAN proposed changes to six existing rules andthe adoption
of one new rule, all found in the Commission s Utility Customer Relations Rules, IDAP A
31.21.01. In response to ICAN's Petition, the Commission initiated a negotiated rulemaking so
that interested persons would have the opportunity to discuss the merits of the proposed changes
and determine whether there is consensus on the proposed changes or alternatives to the
proposed changes. Public workshops were held in Boise and Coeur d' Alene on October 21 and
, 2004, respectively.
Following the workshops, Staff recommended that the Commission propose amendments
to Rules 305 306 311 , and 701. Staffs recommendations differed from the revisions originally
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
proposed by ICAN. At its Decision Meeting on August 16, 2005 , the Commission accepted
Staff s recommendation.
The Commission s proposed rules were included in the Idaho Administrative Bulletin
published on October 5 , 2005. A public hearing concerning the proposed rules was held on
October 19 2005.
STAFF COMMENTS
Proposed Changes to Rule 306
A. Adding LIHEAP to Eligibility Criteria
Under the existing provisions of Rule 306, gas and electric utilities are prohibited from
terminating service during the months of December through February to any residential customer
who declares that he or she is unable to pay the utility bill in full and there are children, elderly
or infirm persons in the customer s household. In its Order No. 29165, issued in November
2002, the Commission reaffirmed four goals for its winter moratorium policy:
In 1987, the Commission articulated four goals for its winter
moratorium policy: 1) preserve public health and safety by limiting
the circumstances under which service may be terminated during
winter months; 2) encourage the development of good payment habits
by customers; 3) provide relief from impossible financial obligations;
and 4) facilitate collection of problem accounts. General Order No.
177. Although nearly 15 years have passed, we believe that these
goals are still relevant today.
Order No. 29165 at 8.
The current policy balances the needs of certain vulnerable customers to retain service
during the coldest winter months with utilities' need to receive payment in full during each of
those months. However, it does not offer any protection to customers who may simply be unable
to afford to pay their winter heating bills in full. Of particular concern are those customers who
use natural gas for space heating, the cost of which has increased by up to 27% from last year.
See Order No. 29875. Escalating energy prices are taking a bigger bite out of household
budgets. Low income customers are hit the hardest by price increases. They pay a larger
ST AFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
percentage of their income for energyl and are less likely to have the ability to invest in
weatherization or conservation measures. Although financial assistance programs such as the
Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Project Share are available to
help customers pay energy bills, funding for those programs has not kept pace with the rapidly
escalating cost of energy. It is also important to note that in Idaho, LIHEAP is funded entirely
through grants from the federal government. For the 2005-2006 heating season, eligible Idaho
customers will receive between $98 (minimum basic benefit) and $442 (maximum basic benefit).
Compared to the previous heating season, this represents a slight increase in the minimum
benefit and a significant decrease in the maximum benefit; during the 2004-2005 heating season
basic benefit amounts ranged from $95 to $600.
Rather than expand the moratorium to include more months, as suggested by ICAN in its
Petition and several of those who submitted comments or testified at the public hearing, the Staff
supports the Commission s expansion of the eligibility criteria for the moratorium to include
customers who receive LIHEAP. This would allow customers who do not meet the current
moratorium eligibility criteria (elderly, children or infirm) but are low-income and facing
financial hardship to receive moratorium protection if they so choose.
Customers who receive LIHEAP will not be automatically protected from disconnection.
Under the proposed rule, a customer must apply for and be deemed eligible to receive LIHEAP
benefits by the appropriate local agency. Then the customer must take the additional step of
notifying the utility that a LIHEAP grant is pending and he or she is unable to pay the bill in full
at the present time. Adding LIHEAP to the moratorium eligibility criteria would also encourage
eligible customers to apply for assistance and receive the benefits to which they are entitled.
customers who previously did not apply for LIHEAP become motivated to do so, it would not
affect the total amount ofLIHEAP funds available during the program year or the benefit
amount available to each qualified recipient.
According to data gathered by Idaho s energy utilities, 20 777 customers had LIHEAP
benefits applied to their accounts during the 2002/2003 heating season. This represents 3% of
total residential energy customers in Idaho. Of those 20 777 customers, only 20% (4 094)
1 For example, as of May 2005, households at or below 50% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines paid 34.4% of their
annual income for home energy bills. This calculation was done prior to the recent significant increase in natural
gas rates. Idaho has 21 000 households meeting this income criteria. (On The Brink: 2005 Fisher, Sheehan &
Coulton).
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
declared eligibility for the moratorium. Nationally, 94% ofLIHEAP recipients have at least one
member who is elderly, disabled, or a child under 18. It is reasonable to assume that the vast
majority of LIHEAP recipients in Idaho would be covered under the existing eligibility criteria
for the moratorium, although clearly most choose not to contact the utility to declare an inability
to pay and request the protection from disconnect that the moratorium offers. However, there are
some LIHEAP recipients, including handicapped adults and low income wage earners (also
known as "the working poor ) who are unable to keep up with their winter heating bills but do
not qualify for moratorium protection under the current rule. Although there are probably not a
large number of customers who fall into this category, it is nevertheless important to extend to
them the opportunity to seek protection from disconnection during the winter months.
Staff recognizes that adding LIHEAP to the eligibility criteria would alter the underlying
logic of the moratorium, adding an income-based test to the existing public health and safety
criteria. Staff sees the proposed change as being entirely consistent with the Commission
stated goals for the moratorium. Making this change is not without risks, however. More
customers will be able to qualify for the moratorium, and to the extent that those additional
customers (1) contact the utility to declare their eligibility and (2) decrease the amount they
would otherwise payor stop paying altogether, utilities' cash flow would be affected. However
Staff does not believe the additional risk will significantly impact bad debt or place an
unreasonable burden on affected utilities.
B. Modifications to Winter Payment Plan
Staff supports eliminating monetary restrictions on when a customer can participate in a
Winter Payment Plan. Under the Winter Payment Plan, a customer pays one half of the regular
Level Pay Plan amount. Staff suspects that the existing restriction on participation in succeeding
years - that the balance owing as of November 1 does not exceed $75 or the amount of the
customer s previous monthly billing, whichever is greater comes into play rarely, if ever.
Staff does not know how many of the relatively few customers who sign up for the
Winter Payment Plan choose to sign up in succeeding years. Since the Winter Payment Plan
requires customers to make regular monthly payments throughout the moratorium period -
encouraging them to pay rather than not pay - customers should not be prevented from
participating in succeeding years if the customer honored his or her previous payment agreement.
ST AFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
C. Customers and applicants who move
Staff supports the proposal to require utilities to provide service to customers and
applicants who move to a different location during the moratorium period. It is Staff s
understanding that energy utilities are willing to provide service to a customer who had
previously signed up for the moratorium and subsequently moved to another location within the
same utility s service territory during the months of December through February, regardless of
the customer s payment history or the fact that a balance was owing. In other words, utilities are
willing to treat an existing customer s moratorium eligibility status as portable to a new location.
The existing Rule 306 allows, but does not require utilities to do this.
Staff also supports the proposed change to Rule 306 to require energy utilities, under
certain conditions, to provide service to an applicant2 during the moratorium period regardless
past payment history or an unpaid bill owing at the time of application for service. If the
applicant had received service within the past 30 days, declared eligibility for the moratorium
and subsequently moves to a new residence, the utility would be required to provide service.
Adding this provision as Rule 306.09 would provide a narrow exception to the general rule
requiring applicants to pay outstanding bills prior to receiving service and would allow both
customers and applicants who had been protected by the moratorium prior to moving to retain
that protection at a new residence.
If this proposal is not adopted, someone who moves and has a gap in service of 10 days
or less (a "customer ) will be treated more favorably than someone who moves and has a gap in
service of more than 10 days but less than one month (an "applicant"). Staff s proposal, in
essence, gives former customers some additional time to move and reapply for service during the
months of December through February without being held to the more stringent credit criteria
that generally applies to applicants throughout the year.
Proposed Changes to Rule 305
A. Information about moratorium and payment plans on termination notices
Staff supports the proposed amendment. As revised, the rule requires disconnection
notices issued during the months of November through February by electric and gas utilities to
2 "Applicant" is defined as "any potential customer who applies for service from a utility". A customer who moves
from one location to another continues to be considered a customer if he or she had received service from that utility
within the past ten (10) calendar days. See UCRR
ST AFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
either include or be accompanied by information about the winter moratorium and the
availability of payment plans, including level pay and the winter payment plan. Staff prefers to
see distinctive, targeted, and timely information provided to customers immediately before and
during the moratorium period.
B. Exact time of disconnection
At the public hearing, one person recommended that utilities identify the exact date and
time of disconnection. She indicated that customers need to know when service was scheduled
for disconnection so that they could plan accordingly and hopefully prevent it from happening.
For example, a customer could have a check ready to give to the service technician when he or
she arrived to disconnect service. Staff does not support this suggestion.
Such a requirement could have the undesirable impact of encouraging customers to put
off paying, making payment arrangements, or seeking financial assistance until the last possible
minute. Customers who wait to pay at the door immediately prior to disconnection increase both
their own costs (there is a fee assessed if an energy utility collects payment at the customer
premises) and general ratepayer costs (the fee does not pay all utility costs associated with a
collection visit). Utilities maintain that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to include on
notices the precise date and time that disconnection of service will take place. Even specifying
morning or afternoon time frames would be problematic, interfering with the utility s ability to
manage its workforce efficiently or respond to emergencies.
C. Languages other than English
Several people at the hearing recommended that utilities provide disconnection notices
and bills in Spanish and other languages. Within the context of formal cases before the
Commission as well as in informal discussions, Staff has encouraged utilities to identify and
address any language barriers that exist within their service territories. One reason Staff has
chosen this approach is that there is not a uniform distribution of non- English speaking
customers throughout the state, making a one-size- fits-all solution less effective.3 Staff does not
3 According to the 2000 Census, there are more Hispanics living in southwestern Idaho than there are in other
regions of the state. Of those counties, several had a relatively high Hispanic population; in particular, 26% of
Minidoka County's residents are Hispanic.
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
believe that simply requiring utilities to create separate notices and bills in Spanish4 or other
languages will resolve the larger issue of accommodating customers who speak languages other
than English.
As a practical matter, Staff notes that Rule 305 speaks only to disconnection notices, not
bills, and that water utilities as well as energy utilities are covered by the rule. Moreover
requiring utilities to include a particular type of foreign language statement on bills or
disconnection notices would be inadvisable if the requisite customer support infrastructure was
not in place. Rather than make additional changes to Rule 305 at this time, Staff recommends
that the Commission initiate a separate investigation into how best to address the needs of utility
customers who do not speak English. An investigation would include an analysis of what steps
have already been taken by utilities, such as employing Spanish-speaking customer service
representatives, having Spanish-language menu options on utility Call Center interactive voice
response systems, and using on-call third-party translation services to communicate with
customers via telephone.
Proposed Changes to Rule 311
A. Disconnection on days before holidays
Staff supports the proposal to prohibit disconnection on days before holidays. Very few
if any, involuntary disconnections are scheduled around the Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New
Year s Day holidays. Five other holidays (Martin Luther King Jr. Day/Idaho Human Rights
Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Labor Day, and Columbus Day) occur on Mondays; the
current rule already prohibits disconnection on weekends. The combination of current practice
and Monday holidays means that prohibiting disconnection on the day before the remaining two
holidays (Independence Day and Veteran s Day) is most likely to affect utilities. Therefore
Staff believes that prohibiting disconnection on days before holidays would have minimal impact
on utilities.
4 The 2000 U.S. Census shows that the majority of Idahoans (91 %) speak only English at home. Of the 111 879
Idaho residents who speak a language other than English at home, 77% also speak English well or very well. The
foreign language most often spoken in Idaho homes is Spanish; almost 7% of the state s population (80 241 people)
speak Spanish at home.
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
B. Disconnection on Fridays
Under the current rule, disconnection is allowed between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. on Fridays.
Prior to May 2003 , no disconnection was allowed after noon on Fridays. The Commission
approved the change from noon to 2 p.m. in response to Intermountain Gas' advocacy that
disconnection should be allowed until 4 p.m. on Fridays. See Case No. 31-2101-0201. Staff
recommends that, at a minimum, the Commission adopt the proposed amendment to Rule 311 to
reinstate the Friday noon deadline.
At the hearing, two people recommended that the Commission prohibit disconnection on
Fridays, saying it was difficult for customers to negotiate with utilities or attempt to secure
financial assistance to either avoid disconnection or get reconnected on Fridays. Staff knows
that energy utilities do not support total prohibition of disconnection on Fridays. PacifiCorp
expressed a willingness to not disconnect residential customers on Fridays, but did not want a
similar prohibition for business customers. Other utilities were opposed to prohibiting
disconnection on Fridays , stating that it would impair their ability to efficiently manage their
workforces. Intermountain Gas stated that 12% of all disconnections are done on Fridays
meaning that the proposed rule change would have a significant impact on the utility
operations. Staff notes that all of our neighboring states (Montana, Oregon, Washington
Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming) prohibit disconnection all day on Fridays.
Proposed Change to Rule 701
Staff supports the proposed revisions to Rule 701. Adding more specificity with respect
to what should be contained in rule summaries will help utilities better understand the
Commission s expectations. Staff is developing model rule summaries to provide guidance to
utilities, which will be made available upon request. Staff intends to prepare Spanish language
translations of the model summaries as well.
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
SUMMARY
In summary, the Staff supports adoption of the proposed rules. The changes strike the
appropriate balance of rights and responsibilities between customers and the utilities.
Respectfully submitted this Zbtk day of October 2005.
Donald L. Howell, II
Deputy Attorney General
Technical Staff:Beverly Barker
Nancy Hylton
umisc/comments/31-21 0 1-0402dhbab
STAFF COMMENTS OCTOBER 26, 2005
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 26TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2005
SERVED THE FOREGOING COMMENTS OF THE COMMISSION STAFF, IN
CASE NO. RUL-04-, BY MAILING A COpy THEREOF POSTAGE PREPAID
TO THE FOLLOWING:
KAREN McWILLIAMS
ICAN BOARD MEMBER
ID COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK
1425 N LIBERTY
BOISE ID 83704
SAM BLAIR
ID COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK
3450 HILL RD
BOISE ID 83703
MONICA MOEN
ATTORNEY
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 70
BOISE ID 83707
MAGGIE BRILZ
PRICING DIRECTOR
IDAHO POWER COMPANY
PO BOX 70
BOISE ID 83707
CAROLE ROCKNEY DIR
CUSTOMER & REG. LIAISON
ACIFICORP
1900 SW 4TH AVE
PORTLAND OR 97201
ROBIN CROSS SR ANALYST
CUSTOMER & REG. LIAISON
ACIFICORP
925 S GRAPE ST BLDG
MEDFORD OR 97501
BRUCE FOLSOM
VISTA UTILITIES
MSC-
PO BOX 3727
SPOKANE W A 99220-3727
MIKE BROEMELING
AVIS T A UTILITIES
803 MAIN ST
LEWIS TON ID 83501
PAUL R POWELL
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS CO
PO BOX 7608
BOISE ID 83707
TERRI SHOEN
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS CO
PO BOX 7608
BOISE ID 83707
GREG WYATT
UNITED WATER IDAHO IN
PO BOX 190420
BOISE ID 83719
PATTY FOSS
UNITED WATER ID AH 0 IN C
PO BOX 190420
BOISE ID 83719
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
RICHARD CARMAN
EVERGREEN WATER COMPANY
248 EVE GREEN TERRACE RD
ST MARIES ID 83861
ROBERT TURNIPSEED
BAR CIRCLE S RANCH INC
PO BOX 1870
HAYDEN LAKE ID 83835
KELLY D HOWELL
FALLS WATER COMPANY INC
1770 SABIN DR
IDAHO FALLS ID 83406-6747
ROBERT J BOYLE
SPIRIT LAKE EAST WATER
15807 E INDIANA AVE
SPOKANE W A 99216
SUNBEAN WATER COMPANY
C/O RODNEY PARRISH
4537 YELLOWSTONE
CHUBBUCK ID 83202
TONY BOWAR
BRIAN WATER CORPORATION
PMB 228
5120 W OVERLAND RD STE C
BOISE ID 83705
ISLAND PARK WATER CO
DAVID BENTON/ ENG/MGR
550 LINDEN DR
IDAHO FALLS ID 83401
R PRICE
CAPITOL WATER CORP
2626 ELDORADO ST
BOISE ID 83704
TROY HOFFMAN WATER CORP
C/O H. JAMES MAGNUSON
1250 W NORTHWOOD CTR #A
COEUR D' ALENE ID 83814
MIKE GROTH PRESIDENT
COUNTRY CLUB HILLS UTILITIES
570 S YELLOWSTONE AVE
IDAHO FALLS ID 83402
NOLAN GNEITING
MORNING VIEW WATER CO
3996 EAST 200 NORTH
PO BOX 598
RIGBY ID 83442
ROBERT DESHAZO
EAGLE WATER COMPANY INC
PO BOX 455
EAGLE ID 83616
ARLEN & NANCY LISH
DBA MURRAY WATERWORKS
410 VALLEY VIEW RD
KINGSTON ID 83839
NICK PURDY
PICABO LIVESTOCK COMPANY
PO BOX 688
PICABO ID 83348
KENNETH & CATHY RICKEL
BITTERROOT WATER CO
PO BOX 2306
HAYDEN LAKE ID 83835
EARL BAINBRIDGE
PRESIDENT
ACKSADLE ESTATES WATER
PO BOX 161
TETONIA ID 83452
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
KEN RICKEL
PRESIDENT
RICKEL WATER COMPANY
PO BOX 1261
HAYDEN LAKE ID 83835
BRETT McCARTY
HAPPY VALLEY WATER SYSTEM
10045 N MEMORY LANE
RATHDRUM ID 83858
KEITH E GARNER
STONERIDGE UTILITIES CO
5295 S COMMERCE DR SUITE 175
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84107
ALTER R WANNER, PRESIDENT
GROUSE POINT WATER CO
C/O STATEWIDE CONSTRUCTION
4225 RIV A RIDGE
BOISE ID 83709
ROBAER COBOTT
PONDEROSA TERRACE ESTATES
WATER SYSTEM
2626 WRENCO LOOP RD
SANDPOINT ID 83864
BARBARA V CHILD
TERRA GRANDE WATER
10012 ESHELMAN
BOISE ID 83704
TIM ELSEA PE DIRECTOR
RESORT WATER CO INC
165 VILLAGE LANE
SANDPOINT ID 83864
SECRE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE