Commission Agendas | previous page
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, February 11, 1997; 10:00 A.M.
Foss Building, Floyd Matthew Training Room
Pierre, South Dakota
NOTE: If you wish to join this meeting by conference call, please contact the Commission at 605- 773-3201 by 5:00 p.m., Monday, February 10, 1997.
NOTE: Notice is further given to persons with disabilities that this Commission meeting is being held in a physically accessible place. If you have special needs, please notify the Commission and we will make all necessary arrangements.
AGENDA OF THE COMMISSION MEETING
Administration
1. Approval Of The Minutes Of The Commission Meeting of January 14, 1997, And The Ad Hoc Commission Meeting Of January 27, 1997. (Staff: Shirleen Fugitt.)
Consumer Affairs
1. Status Report On Consumer Utility Inquiries And Complaints Recently Received By The Commission. (Consumer Representative: Leni Hook.)
The Commission has received 142 consumer contacts during 1997. 103 contacts have been received since the January 14, 1997, Commission meeting.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS: 89 of the contacts involved telecommunication issues. The unauthorized switching of long distance service was the main issue which involved 24 contacts; there were 17 "other" contacts; 14 billing issues were handled; 7 contacts involved telemarketers; 5 contacts involved sex line calls; 5 contacts involved service issues; 4 contacts concerned held orders; 3 deposit issues were handled; 3 annoyance calls were reported; 2 disconnection contacts were handled; 2 payment plan issues were handled; 1 contact involved capital credits; 1 contact involved leased equipment; and 1 contact involved a request for extended area service.
ELECTRICITY: 7 complaints involving electricity were reported. 2 deposit contacts were made; 2 disconnection issues were handled; 2 "other" issues were reported; and 1 billing issue was submitted.
GAS: 7 complaints involving natural gas were reported. 3 billing issues were reported; 2 "other" issues were made; 1 service contact was made; and 1 rate issue was submitted.
A total of 69 complaints have been resolved informally during 1997.
Electricity
1. EL96-008 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ARNOLD MURRAY CONSTRUCTION, SIOUX FALLS, SD, FOR A MASTER METERING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SANDLOT APARTMENTS. (Staff Analyst: Steve Wegman. Staff Attorney: Camron Hoseck.)
On May 23, 1996, the Commission received a request by Arnold Murray Construction for approval of master metering for a proposed 44 unit apartment complex planned for construction in 1996.
TODAY, Staff has an update.
2. EL96-024 IN THE MATTER OF THE FILING BY NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF A RATE REDUCTION/FREEZE AND ADOPTION OF ACCRUAL ACCOUNTING FOR POST-RETIREMENT BENEFITS OTHER THAN PENSIONS. (Staff Analyst: Greg Rislov. Staff Attorney: Camron Hoseck.)
On September 30, 1996, the Commission received a filing from Northern States Power Company (NSP) for approval of an overall rate reduction / freeze and adoption of accrual accounting for post-retirement benefits other than pensions. NSP is expecting savings resulting from its merger with Wisconsin Energy Corporation (WEC) to form Primergy, a new utility holding company. The proposed rate reduction of 1.5 % is based on the expected savings. NSP is proposing to freeze its decreased rates through the year 2000, subject to extraordinary events. A regularly scheduled meeting of October 8, 1996, the Commission voted to assess a filing fee not to exceed one hundred thousand dollars for the duration of the case.
TODAY, Staff has an update.
Natural Gas
1. NG96-016 IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY PAM NATURAL GAS AGAINST MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY REGARDING PGA FACTORS. (Staff Analyst: Dave Jacobson and Steve Wegman. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On July 8, 1996, the Public Utilities Commission (Commission) received a complaint against MidAmerican Energy Company (MidAmerican) from PAM Natural Gas (PNG) regarding PGA factors. Also on July 8, 1996, PNG filed a request with the Commission to receive all underlying workpapers of MidAmerican's June PGA filing which were submitted as confidential. On July 30, 1996, a regularly scheduled meeting, the Commission deferred action in this matter at the request of the parties. On November 1, 1996, a regularly scheduled meeting, the Commission considered the complaint. The Commission voted to defer action in this matter in order to allow the parties to review MidAmerican's proposal. [Commissioner Schoenfelder dissenting.] PNG had also requested that they be allowed to receive MidAmerican's workpapers that are filed under confidential seal with the Commission. The Commission unanimously voted to establish a procedural schedule for a hearing on PNG's request for confidential information. On December 31, 1996, a duly noticed meeting, the Commission voted to not find probable cause, to dismiss the complaint and to close the complaint portion of the docket. The Commission has scheduled a hearing for 1:30 p.m. on February 12, 1997, to determine whether it shall grant MidAmerican's request to trea workpapers underlying the June PGA as confidential. On February 4, 1997, the Commission received an electronically transmitted petition from Northwestern Public Service Company (NWPS) to intervene in this matter.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant intervention to NWPS?
2. NG96-023 IN THE MATTER OF THE FILING BY MIDAMERICAN ENERGY COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF ITS 1996 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AND ITS 1997 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BUDGET. (Staff Analyst: Bob Knadle. Staff Attorney: Camron Hoseck.)
On December 30, 1996, the Commission received a filing by MidAmerican Energy Company (MidAmerican) for approval of its 1996 economic development report and its economic development budget for 1997.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve MidAmerican's 1996 report and its 1997 budget?
Telecommunications
1. TC94-121 IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION BY U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC. TO HAVE ITS NONCOMPETITIVE SERVICES REGULATED AS PROVIDED FOR IN SDCL ยง 49-31-4.1. (Staff Analyst: Harlan Best. Staff Attorney: Rolayne Wiest.)
On December 28, 1994, U S WEST Communications (U S WEST) filed with the Public Utilities Commission (Commission) a petition pursuant to SDCL 49-31-4.1 and a memorandum in support of its petition. In its memorandum, U S WEST stated tha " eeks to have all of its noncompetitive services price regulated. That would include residential, business and agribusiness local exchange service, emergency services, switched access services, and any services which would be covered by the catchall provision of SDCL 49-31-1.1(6), or which may be reclassified as noncompetitive pursuant to SDCL 49-31-3.4." Commission Staff and U S WEST entered into a Stipulation and Agreement on June 12, 1995, which stipulation constituted a proposed settlement between the parties. A duly noticed public hearing was held on the proposed stipulation and the petition in general on Monday, August 14, 1995. On September 19, 1995, a regularly scheduled meeting, the Commission deferred action on this matter and directed Staff to prepare service quality standards in connection with this docket. On December 18, 1995, Staff and U S WEST filed with the Commission a Stipulation and Agreement as to Service Standards; and an Addendum to Original Stipulation and Agreement.
A ad hoc meeting held on December 27, 1995, the Commission voted to approve the original Stipulation and Agreement and the Addendum to Original Stipulation and Agreement negotiated between U S WEST Communications, Inc. (U S WEST) and Commission Staff, and to reject the Stipulation and Agreement as to Service Quality Standards. It also voted to review U S WEST's service quality performance before implementation of the second and third rate increases authorized by the original Stipulation and Agreement. On January 8, 1996, the Commission issued its final decision in this matter by issuing its Order Granting Approval of Stipulation and Addendum. Among other things, the Commission ordered that "the Commission shall review U S WEST's service quality performance at the end of 12 months following the effective date of the increase. Based upon the Commission's approval of U S WEST's performance, the proposed second increase may be implemented at the end of 18 months from the first increase." Twelve months have now lapsed since the effective date of U S WEST's rate increase.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed in its review of U S WEST's service quality performance?
2. TC95-120 IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF DAVID GLADER FOR EXTENDED AREA SERVICE BETWEEN COLTON, SOUTH DAKOTA, AND SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Harlan Best. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On November 7, 1995, the Commission received a petition filed by David Glader, Susan Olson, and Jody Bentz for Extended Area Service between Colton, South Dakota, and Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Colton is served by Sioux Valley Telephone Company and Sioux Falls is served by U S WEST Communications, Inc. A Petition to Intervene was timely filed by the South Dakota Independent Telephone Coalition, Inc. (SDITC) on November 27, 1995. A regularly scheduled meeting of December 12, 1995, the Commission granted intervention to SDITC. A regularly scheduled meeting of February 21, 1996, the Commission ordered an expedited procedural schedule in this matter. On March 4, 1996, the Commission issued its order establishing a procedural schedule wherein all briefs were due on or before April 12, 1996. On March 22, 1996, both U S WEST and Sioux Valley Telephone Company submitted comments on the petition. In its comments, Sioux Valley Telephone Company has offered to allow the customers within the Colton exchange to determine, through balloting, whether one-way EAS should be provided. A regularly scheduled Meeting of April 2, 1996, the Commission decided to defer action in this matter until a determination of whether U S WEST should be allowed to increase its switched access rates based on its old cost study. A regularly scheduled meeting of June 12, 1996, the Commission reconsidered this matter in light of U S WEST's filing of a new cost study (TC96-107) which purported to support higher switched access rates. The Commission deferred action in this matter pending the disposition of Docket No. TC96-107. By Order dated January 31, 1997, the Commission disapproved U S WEST's proposed switched access rate increase and closed Docket No. TC96-107.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed in this docket?
3. TC95-122 IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR ONE-WAY EXTENDED AREA SERVICE FROM DELL RAPIDS, SOUTH DAKOTA, TO SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Harlan Best. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
A regularly scheduled meeting of November 2, 1995, the Commission voted to open a docket to address the petition filed for one-way Extended Area Service from Dell Rapids, South Dakota, to Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Dell Rapids is served by Sioux Valley Telephone Company and Sioux Falls is served by U S WEST Communications. A Petition to Intervene was timely filed by the South Dakota Independent Telephone Coalition, Inc. (SDITC) on November 27, 1995. A regularly scheduled meeting of December 12, 1995, the Commission granted intervention to SDITC. A regularly scheduled meeting of February 21, 1996, the Commission ordered an expedited procedural schedule in this matter. On March 4, 1996, the Commission issued its order establishing a procedural schedule wherein all briefs were due on or before April 12, 1996. On March 22, 1996, both U S WEST and Sioux Valley Telephone Company submitted comments on the petition. In its comments, Sioux Valley Telephone Company has offered to allow the customers within the Dell Rapids exchange to determine, through balloting, whether one-way EAS should be provided. A regularly scheduled Meeting of April 2, 1996, the Commission decided to defer action in this matter until a determination of whether U S WEST should be allowed to increase its switched access rates based on its old cost study. A regularly scheduled meeting of June 12, 1996, the Commission reconsidered this matter in light of U S WEST's filing of a new cost study (TC96-107) which purported to support higher switched access rates. The Commission deferred action in this matter pending the disposition of Docket No. TC96-107. By Order dated January 31, 1997, the Commission disapproved U S WEST's proposed switched access rate increase and closed Docket No. TC96-107.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed in this docket?
4. TC96-183 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF APOLLO COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, LLC FOR A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES IN SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Tammi Stangohr. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On November 20, 1996, the Commission received an application from Apollo Communications Services, LLC (Apollo) for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Apollo proposes to provide 1+, 800, directory assistance, travel card, and private line. No interventions were filed prior to the December 6, 1996, deadline.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant Apollo a Certificate of Authority?
5. TC96-191 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF AFFINITY MARKETING STRATEGIES LLC D/B/A FUNDING OUR FUTURE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES IN SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Tammi Stangohr. Staff Attorney: Camron Hoseck.)
On December 2, 1996, the Commission received an application from Affinity Marketing Strategies LLC d/b/a Funding Our Future (Affinity) for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Affinity proposes to offer both inbound and outbound long distance services and will marke services through Catholic dioceses, parishes, institutions and organizations. No interventions were filed prior to the deadline of December 20, 1996.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant Affinity a Certificate of Authority?
On December 12, 1996, the Commission received an application by U S West Interprise America, Inc. (Applicant) for a Certificate of Authority to provide local exchange and interexchange telecommunications services within the state of South Dakota. Applicant proposes to offer high speed data communications services such as Private Line Data and fast packet services for the purpose of Network Integration for Local and Wide Area Networks (LANs/WANs). An intervention deadline of December 27, 1996, was established and Dakota Cooperative Telecommunications, Inc. (DCT), AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. (AT&T), and the South Dakota Independent Telephone Coalition, Inc. (SDITC) have timely filed for intervention. The Applicant filed a response to each of the above-mentioned petitions to intervene on January 6, 1997. A regularly scheduled meeting of January 14, 1997, the Commission granted intervention to DCT, AT&T and SDITC. On February 4, 1997, the Commission received a late filed petition to intervene from MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI).
TODAY, shall the Commission grant MCI's late filed petition to intervene?
7. TC96-201 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF DISCOUNT NETWORK SERVICES, INC. FOR A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES IN SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Tammi Stangohr. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On December 16, 1996, the Commission received an application from Discount Network Services, Inc. (Discount) for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Discount is a switchless reseller which intends to offer 1+ direct dialing, 800 toll free, travel card, and prepaid calling card service through the resale of telephone services provided by facilities-based interexchange carriers. No interventions were filed prior to the January 3, 1997, deadline.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant Discount a Certificate of Authority?
8. TC96-203 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF PROVIDIAN GROUP, LLC FOR A CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES IN SOUTH DAKOTA. (Staff Analyst: Tammi Stangohr. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
On December 20, 1996, the Commission received an application from Providian Group, LLC (Providian) for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Providian intends to offer 1+ direct dialing, 800 (Toll-Free), travel card, and prepaid calling card services. No interventions were filed prior to the January 10, 1997, deadline.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant Providian a Certificate of Authority?
On January 2, 1997, the Commission received an application from American International Telephone, Inc. (AIT) for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Applicant seeks to provide 1+ service, calling card service, and prepaid telephone cards. No interventions were filed prior to the January 17, 1997, deadline.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant AIT a Certificate of Authority?
On January 7, 1997, the Commission received an application from Intercontinental Communications Group, Inc. d/b/a ICLD for a Certificate of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. Applicant seeks to provide 1+ direct dial calling, inbound 800 service, operator assisted service, debit card and travel card services. No interventions were filed prior to the January 24, 1997, deadline.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant ICLD a Certificate of Authority?
On January 14, 1997, the Commission received an application by U S WEST Communications, Inc. (U S WEST) requesting the Commission to allow U S WEST to implement an Interconnection Cost Adjustment Mechanism (ICAM) for a defined 36-month period. The ICAM is limited to one time, extraordinary or start-up costs for systems modifications or development, network rearrangements and business office processes effectively mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 for the convenience of and use by U S WEST's competitors, and to facilitate U S WEST's existing customers' ability to choose a different local exchange service provider. Because no current or proposed rate or charge will provide an opportunity for U S WEST to recover all of these extraordinary, one-time or start-up costs, U S WEST proposes the ICAM to recover the totality of such costs. U S WEST has requested expeditious Commission treatment of this application. An intervention deadline of January 31, 1997, was established and Dakota Cooperative Telecommunications, Inc. (DC ), subsidiaries Dakota Telecommunications Systems, Inc. (DTS) and Dakota Telecom, Inc. (DTI), PAM Communications (PAM), MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI), McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. (McLeodUSA), Sprint Communications Company L.P. (Sprint), AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. (AT&T), and Midco Communications, Inc. (Midco) have timely filed petitions to intervene.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant intervention to DTS, DCT, DTI, PAM, MCI, McLeodUSA, Sprint, AT&T, and Midco? How shall the Commission proceed in this docket?
Announcements
1. The Commission's upcoming hearing schedule is posted on the Internet. It can be found at http://puc.sd.gov/schedule.htm.
2. The next Commission meeting is scheduled for 10:00 a.m., March 4, 1997, in the Floyd Matthew Training Room of the Foss Building in Pierre, SD.
______________________________
William Bullard, Jr.
Executive Director
Wednesday, February 5, 1997
