Commission Agendas | previous page
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION MEETING
November 18, 1997; 10:00 A.M.
State Capitol Building, Room 464
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. on November 17, 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 Meetings Held On October 22, 1997, two meetings on October 28, 1997, and November 7, 1997. (Staff: Shirleen Fugitt.)
Consumer Affairs
1. Status Report On Consumer Utility Inquiries And Complaints Recently Received By The Commission. (Consumer Representative: Leni Healy.)
The Commission has received 1341 consumer contacts during 1997. 76 contacts have been received since the October 28, 1997, Commission meeting.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS: 62 contacts involved telecommunications. 23 contacts involved billing issues; 13 contacts reported unauthorized switching of long distance service; 7 reports of poor service were made; 6 contacts involved 900#s; 6 contacts did not get service when promised; 2 contacts involved psychic calls; and one contact was reported for the following issues: above-ground cable, Inter , line calls, won't disconnect and "other".
ELECTRICITY: 9 contacts involving electricity were reported. 4 contacts involved disconnections; 2 contacts involved a change in rates, and one contact for each of the following issues was reported: billing, deposit, and restoration of property.
NATURAL GAS: 5 contacts involving natural gas were reported. 2 contacts involved connections; and one contact for each of the following issues was reported: billing, payment plan, and poor service.
A total of 938 complaints have been resolved informally during 1997.
Electricity
On April 17, 1997, the Commission received a complaint from John Byre, Sioux Falls, SD, against Northern States Power Company (NSP) regarding a bill. Mr. Byre states: "I believe that I am being unfairly charged for moving a cable that was installed incorrectly by NSP. The drawing and work order are very specific about where the cable was to run. NSP claims that they can change the route because of a dirt pile. This excuse is invalid because the original contract clearly states that prior to NSP starting work, the owner must make sure the route of NSP's underground installation is accessible to NSP's equipment and all obstructions must be removed... I believe the PUC should cancel the bill that NSP has assessed me and hold NSP responsible for their own mistakes." The Commission found probable cause and a hearing was held in Sioux Falls on September 29, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On July 9, 1997, the Commission received a complaint from Arnold Murray Construction, Sioux Falls, (Complainant) against Northern States Power Company (Respondent) regarding transferring unpaid balances to its account. The complaint states: "NSP is transferring final bills from one meter that's inactive to active meters. They do not give addresses, usage, etc. We did not agree to this. As a property manager who fee manages, it is very confusing since we work with different owners. We have found other owners and/or tenant bills on ours. NSP in Sioux Falls agrees with us that this should not happen. NSP in Minneapolis doesn't want to discuss this...." "Order them to stop this practice. I didn't give them consent to do this and it is too confusing." The Commission found probable cause and held a hearing in Sioux Falls on September 30, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On October 23, 1997, the Commission received a filing from Lake Region Electric Association, Inc. (LREA) for service outside of its territorial boundaries. Otter Tail Power Company has waived its exclusive territorial rights for the area requested.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the assignment of electric service?
Natural Gas
On June 16, 1997, the Commission received a complaint from Bruce Itterman, Harrisburg, SD (Complainant) against MidAmerican Energy (Respondent) regarding a gas bill. Mr. Itterman states: "I...have a dispute over the gas bill that covers the period November 1996-January 1997. As stated in the lease, the tenant is responsible for the gas. When I received a bill at 625 W 20th I called MidAmerican to have the bill corrected, put in the tenants name. They said they would not do that. I then told them to turn off the gas. They insisted I get the tenant to call. I contacted the tenant and they said they would call. When I called again, MidAmerican said no one had called. I told them to turn the gas off. They said they would not do that. I asked to speak with a supervisor. I was connected to voice mail and left messages twice. I was never contacted. This was the DesMoines Office. In Jan, 97 I called and got the Sioux Falls office. They said any resolution would have to come from the DesMoines office. To date, I have only been sent bills and a collection letter, no other response...." Mr. Itterman feels he is not responsible for the bill pertaining to 625 W 20th covering the period of November 1996-January 1997. He also requests MidAmerican to honor legally binding contracts. The Commission found probable cause and held a hearing in Sioux Falls on September 30, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On July 11, 1997, the Commission received a complaint from Arnold Murray Construction, Sioux Falls, (Complainant) against MidAmerican Energy (Respondent) regarding transferring unpaid balances to its account. The complaint states: "MidAmerican Energy is transferring final bills from one meter that's inactive to an active meter. They do not provide usage, addresses, etc. We did not give our permission for this. As a property manager who fee manages for other owners, this is very confusing. We are
getting the bills for other owners and/or tenants and properties that should not be paid by us. The bills cannot even be checked for accuracy without a separate bill. We have approximately 100+ accounts that took 2 days of phone calls to straighten out. Locally they agree with us. However, these are billed out of DesMoines...." "Order them to stop this practice.... They should have to require my consent to do this...." The Commission found probable cause and held a hearing in Sioux Falls on September 30, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On November 4, 1997, Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., filed a contract with deviation with Merillat Corp. with the Commission. "Montana-Dakota has entered into an Agreement with Merillat for delivery of firm natural gas service to Merillat's facility located at Rapid City."
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the contract for deviation?
Telecommunications
On June 24, 1996, U S WEST Communications, Inc. (U S WEST) filed for approval by the Public Utilities Commission (Commission) its 1995 switched access cost study. According to the application, the study develops an overall average calculated rate of $0.066 per minute required to recover the costs of providing switched access. The following companies were granted intervention on July 30, 1996: Sprint Communications Company L.P. (Sprint); MCI Telecommunications Corporation (MCI); Express Communications, Inc. (Express); AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. (AT&T); Telecommunications Action Group (TAG); and Dakota Cooperative Telecommunications, Inc. (DCT). The Commission also found that pursuant to SDCL 49-31-12.4, the rate increase should be suspended for 120 days. A hearing was held on October 9 and 10, 1996, before the Commission. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission on December 9, 1996, Commissioner Schoenfelder moved to reopen the record for the taking of more evidence. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Burg with Chairman Stofferahn dissenting. A continuation of the hearing is scheduled for March 19 through 21, 1997.
On January 15, 1997, AT&T moved the Commission to (1) disapprove the application of U S WEST for an increase in switched access rates and (2) to close this docket. A hearing on this motion was held before the Commission on January 23, 1997. Commissioner Nelson did not participate in these proceedings. At an ad hoc meeting on January 27, 1997, the Commission granted the motion of AT&T.
The matter was appealed to the Sixth Judicial Circuit Court for the State of South Dakota which remanded the matter to the Commission by Order dated May 29, 1997. The Commission received the Order on June 9, 1997. It directed that the remand be consistent with the Court's oral bench decision. The Court directed the Commission to handle the remand forthwith.
A pre-hearing conference was held on July 2, 1997, and a PreHearing Order on Reopening Record was issued July 3, 1997. This Order rejected Commission staff's testimony in the October, 1996, hearing, directed a new staff analysis in the case and certain financial reviews by staff, specified issues which the Commission wanted addressed consistent with its Motion of December, 1996, and set forth certain scheduling deadlines, including the hearing date.
A hearing on the reopened record was held on September 10 and 11, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On May 16, 1997, the Local Exchange Carriers Association (LECA) filed switched access rate changes in compliance with the Federal Communications Commission orders on pay phone reclassification. On July 2, 1997, AT&T was granted intervention.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed?
On August 18, 1997, the Commission received an application from Vocall Communications Corp. to provide telecommunication services in South Dakota. "The applicant proposes to operate as a reseller of 1+ toll services (including MTS, 1+, 800 and 888, Out WATS, Travel Cards) as well as offer prepaid calling card services." No parties have filed to intervene.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate Of Authority to Vocall Communications Corp.?
On August 27, 1997, Sprint Communications Company, L.P. filed for approval by the Commission the negotiated terms for interconnection, resale and unbundled elements agreement between Sprint and U S WEST Communications. Staff filed its analysis on September 24, 1997, and Sprint's response was filed October 6, 1997.
TODAY, what is the Commission's decision?
On August 29, 1997, the Commission received an application by GLD, Group Long Distance, Inc. to amend its Certificate Of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. "Applicant is a reseller which intends to offer all local services provided by the incumbent LECs....GLD seeks authority to resell local exchange services throughout the state ... in areas served by any LECs in South Dakota that are not eligible for a small or rural carrier exemption pursuant to Section 251(f)(1) of the Federal Act. GLD does not seek to provide resold services to customers in those small or rural territories at this time....Applicant will file a copy of its proposed tariff ... upon completion of negotiations for interconnection." No companies have filed to intervene.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant an amended Certificate Of Authority to GLD, Group Long Distance, Inc.?
On September 16, 1997, U S West Communications, Inc. filed proposed revisions to its exchange and network services tariff. The filing introduces Uniform Access Solution Service. "Uniform Access Solution provides customers a digital connection from their PBX or Call Distribution System to the Public Switched Network....Uniform Access Solution offers an alternative to Digital Switched Service utilizing DID per trunk arrangements when only one number is required for switching of local exchange and toll network calls....U S WEST proposes an effective date of October 15, 1997."
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the tariff revisions?
On September 25, 1997, the Commission received an application by SBR, Inc. for a Certificate Of Authority to operate as a telecommunications company within the state of South Dakota. "Applicant is a switchless reseller which intends to offer 1+ direct dialing, 800 toll free, and travel card (no prepaid calling cards) service through the resale of telephone services provided by facilities-based interexchange carriers." No parties have filed to intervene.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate Of Authority to SBR, Inc.?
On October 6, 1997, U S West Communications, Inc. filed proposed revisions to its exchange and network services catalog. This filing introduces National Directory Assistance. U S WEST is requesting that this service be classified as Fully Competitive. "This service is currently being offered by most service providers, including AT&T, MCI and Sprint." U S WEST is requesting an effective date of November 25, 1997, for this offering.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the catalog revisions?
Announcements
1. November 8-13, 1997, the Commissioners and Charlie Bolle will be attending a NARUC meeting in Boston.
2. A hearing is scheduled for November 18, 1997, at 1:30pm in room 464 of the State Capitol in Docket TC97-142.
3. At 10:00am on November 19, 1997, the Commissioners and Staff will meet with MDU in room 412 of the State Capitol.
4. A hearing is scheduled for November 19, 1997, at 1:30pm in Room 412 of the State Capitol for all of the ETC dockets.
5. The next regularly scheduled Commission meeting will be held Tuesday, December 2, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 412 of the State Capitol Building.
________________________________
Sue Cichos
Business Manager
November 12, 1997
