HomeMy WebLinkAbout19981201.docxDECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER HANSEN
COMMISSIONER NELSON
COMMISSIONER SMITH
MYRNA WALTERS
TONYA CLARK
DON HOWELL
STEPHANIE MILLER
DAVE SCHUNKE
RANDY LOBB
RICK STERLING
DAVID SCOTT
WORKING FILE
FROM:SCOTT WOODBURY
DATE:DECEMBER 1, 1998
RE:CASE NO. EAG-W-98-1
BONITA HILLS SUBDIVISION
On January 14, 1998, V. Scott Brown, Trustee for the S. A. Brown Charitable Trust (Trust) filed a letter with the Idaho Public Utilities Commission requesting Commission approval of a Trust request to obtain water service from United Water Idaho Inc. to the Bonita Hills Subdivision, a planned subdivision owned by the Trust. The Bonita Hills Subdivision is located within the certificated service territory of Eagle Water Company. The Trust represented that Eagle Water Company, despite repeated requests, had failed to provide service to Bonita Hills.
The Commission processed the Trust filing as a Complaint against Eagle Water Company, Case No. EAG-W-98-1. Summons issued January 22, 1998. An Answer was filed February 17, 1998. An informal meeting of interested parties was held March 6, 1998 (see attached notice and agenda). The meeting resulted in a commitment by Eagle Water to serve the Bonita Hills Subdivision and to provide required and related information, studies or plans to the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality (see attached memorandum).
At the complainant’s request, the docket in Case No. EAG-W-98-1 was held open to ensure that Eagle Water followed through on its commitment to provide water service to Bonita Hills. Pursuant to inquiry, the Commission Staff has been informed by John Runft, Attorney for the Trust, that Eagle Water is now providing water service to Bonita Hills. It appears also that there are no present disputes between the Trust and Eagle Water over which the Commission has jurisdiction. (Reference Idaho Code Title 61). Consequently, Mr. Runft and Staff agree that it is now appropriate for the Commission to issue an Order closing the case docket.
Commission Decision
This matter has been resolved without formal hearing. Does the Commission concur that it is appropriate to close the docket in Case No. EAG-W-98-1?
Scott Woodbury
vld/M:EAG-W-98-1.sw2