Commission Agendas | previous page
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Wednesday, February 21, 2001; 2:30 P.M.
State Capitol Building, Room 468
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 February 20, 2001.
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 Held On February 6, 2001. (Staff: Mary Giddings.)
Consumer Issues
1. Status Report On Consumer Utility Inquiries And Complaints Recently Received By The Commission. (Consumer Affairs: Leni Healy.)
The Commission has received 566 consumer contacts during 2001. 207 of those contacts were received since the February 6, 2001, Commission meeting.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS: 101 of the contacts involved telecommunications. 21 of the contacts concerned the unauthorized switching of services; 11 contacts concerned poor service; 11 contacts concerned billing issues; 10 contacts involved telemarketers; 8 contacts concerned raising rates without notice; 6 contacts concerned high rates; 5 contacts involved delayed disconnection; and the remaining issues were 900 numbers, annoyance calls, Caller ID, calling cards, cellular service, collect calls, unauthorized billing for services, advanced services, extended area service, e-mail, tax, delayed installation, intercept message, and internet service providers.
ELECTRICITY: 11 of the contacts involved electricity issues. 3 contacts involved disconnection; 3 contacts concerned high rates; 2 contacts concerned energy assistance; and the remaining issues were billing, easement, and fees.
NATURAL GAS: 95 contacts involving natural gas were reported. 87 contacts involved high gas prices; 3 contacts concerned disconnection; 2 contacts concerned billing issues; and the remaining issues were payment arrangements, poor service, and rebates
481 complaints have been resolved informally during 2001.
On October 8, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by Sheryl L. Klein against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding poor service. The Complainant outlines a series of service outages, repair difficulties, outdated service and staffing issues. The Complainant seeks the following relief: "We want the line fixed completely and permanently, so it functions at a 100% reliable level. We want this done now, before another winter sets in. We have been told several possible problems by U S West repairmen including aging lines and old systems. We do not know what the solution is, but want it found and implemented now. We ask that U S West be required to make whatever investment is necessary to fully remedy the problem. We also want to be reimbursed for a reasonable amount for the loss of phone service and the associated stress and hassles. We request $500.00." A hearing in this matter was held on February 3, 1999, in Mission, South Dakota. A second hearing was held on November 4, 1999. At the December 14, 1999, meeting the Commission denied fines and moved to keep the docket open.
TODAY, staff has an update. AND, if the matter is resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaint and close the docket?
On October 8, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by JoAnn C. Klein against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding poor service The Complainant outlines a series of service outages, repair difficulties, outdated service, phantom calls, and staffing issues. The Complainant seeks the following relief: "Contact U S West and insist that our long continuation of poor service and outages be corrected. Also reimbursement or credit for days when phone lines have been out." Mrs. Klein also requests that her billing for 24 directory assistance calls and long distance calls which were not made by the Kleins be credited from their billing. A hearing in this matter was held on February 3, 1999, in Mission, South Dakota. A second hearing was held on November 4, 1999.
TODAY, staff has an update. AND, if the matter is resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaint and close the docket?
On November 6, 1998, the Commission received a complaint by Lawrence Klein against U S WEST Communications, Inc. regarding poor service and a request to have lines updated. The complainant explains a history of poor and unreliable telephone service. The complainant outlines the necessity of the telephone and seeks reliable telephone service. A hearing in this matter was held on February 3, 1999, in Mission, South Dakota. A second hearing was held on November 4, 1999.
TODAY, staff has an update. AND, if the matter is resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaint and close the docket?
On December 11, 1998, the Commission received a complaint from Margaret Figert, Mission, South Dakota, against USWC regarding poor service and request to have lines updated. The complaint notes a history of poor, interrupted, and sporadic service, and an inability to transmit data and use the internet. The complainant is requesting that USWC upgrade its lines throughout southern Todd County, South Dakota, or sell out to Golden West, Wall, South Dakota, who has fiber optic cable. A hearing in this matter was held on February 3, 1999, in Mission, South Dakota. A second hearing was held on November 4, 1999.
TODAY, staff has an update. AND, if the matter is resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaint and close the docket?
On February 29, 2000, the Commission received a complaint filed by Marvie Tschetter, Huron, South Dakota, regarding the delayed release of service and billing disputes against FirsTel. The Complainant switched her service from FirsTel to U S WEST in June of 1999. At that time, she understood that U S WEST would disconnect her services with FirsTel. FirsTel continued to bill for numbers that were to have been released to U S WEST and the Complainant alleges that the billings were incorrect. The Complainant's lead numbers have been disconnected by FirsTel. The Complainant requests that her telephone numbers be reactivated and released, "the Basec.Net account terminated and zeroed out with FirsTel upon release of the numbers" and, "after a complete audit of the account, and my numbers released, I will stop the proceedings." The Commission found probable cause in this matter at the March 13, 2000, meeting. On October 13, 2000, the Commission received a Motion to Amend Complaint. On October 16, 2000, the Commission received a Motion to Join Qwest as a Party. A hearing is scheduled for December 13, 2000. The hearing was cancelled. The hearing was rescheduled for February 22, 2001. Staff was notified that a settlement has been reached in this matter. The February 22, 2001, hearing was cancelled.
TODAY, if the matter is resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaint and close the docket?
On January 19, 2001, the Commission received a complaint filed by Walfrido and Debra Paez, Rapid City, South Dakota, against AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. regarding unauthorized billing for services. The Complainants claim that they received a billing which included international toll charges to a foreign country which they did not authorize. AT&T claims that the charges were generated through the Complainants' computer modem. The Complainants claim that "we do not have a modem on our computer connected to the phone lines." The Complainants request removal of charges and reimbursement for all expenses related to the cost of attending a hearing. On February 9, 2001, the Commission received from AT&T a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative, Motion to Join Midcontinent Communications.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant AT&T's Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative, Motion to Join Midcontinent Communications?
Electric
The City of Pierre has submitted an application for a permit to construct transmission facilities as defined at SDCL 49-41B-2(9)(b). These facilities consist of approximately 4.03 miles of new 115 kilovolt (kV) electric transmission line and associated terminal facilities between the City's Ash Substation and the Western Area Power Administration Oahe-Pierre 115kV line. In addition, a 0.80 mile segment of the City's Ash to Evans 115kV transmission line would be relocated to a new route and constructed on new structures. Both transmission lines are located in Hughes County, South Dakota. On February 6, 2001, the Commission granted the City's request for an extension of time. Staff has indicated that a stipulation has been reached.
TODAY, if a stipulation has been reached, shall the Commission approve the stipulation? Or, how shall the Commission proceed?
On January 4, 2001, the Commission received the application by MidAmerican Energy to revise its bill form to reduce administrative cost and clarify certain language.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed tariff revisions?
Natural Gas
On January 10, 2001, the Commission received an application by MidAmerican Energy to revise its bill form to reduce administrative cost and clarify certain language.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed tariff revisions?
On January 29, 2001, the Commission received the application of MidAmerican Energy to refund amounts received from Northern Natural Gas Company as a result of final resolution of Kansas Ad Valorem Tax proceedings. On December 27, 2000, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued an order approving a settlement between the parties relating to excessive prices paid for natural gas which included Kansas Ad Valorem taxes. As a result of the Order, final distribution of the refund by Northern is expected by February 10, 2001, and MidAmerican wishes to make the refund available to customers through its purchased gas adjustment in the month of March.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed refund plan?
Telecommunications
Amendment No. 4 to the Interconnection Agreement between Qwest Corporation (Qwest) and Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (Sprint) was filed with the Commission for the states of Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming for approval by the Commission. The agreement is a negotiated agreement with the parties adopting the negotiated interconnection agreement between Sprint and Qwest which was approved by the Commission effective November 21, 1997, in Docket TC97-149. The Amendment adds terms and conditions for the LIS Inter Local Calling Area (LCA) Facility. Parties had until January 30, 2001, to file comments.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement?
Amendment No. 3 to the Interconnection Agreement between Qwest Corporation (Qwest) and Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (Sprint) was filed with the Commission for the states of Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming for approval by the Commission. The agreement is a negotiated agreement with the parties adopting the negotiated interconnection agreement between Sprint and Qwest which was approved by the Commission on November 21, 1997, in Docket TC97-149. The Amendment adds terms and conditions for Complex Firm Order Confirmation (FOC). Parties had until February 6, 2001, to file comments.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement?
On January 22, 2001, amendment nos. 1 and 2 to the Interconnection Agreement between Qwest Corporation ("Qwest") and @link Networks, Inc. ("@link") were filed with the Commission for approval. Amendment No. 1 adds terms, conditions and rates for Unbundled Dedicated Interoffice Transport ("UDIT"). Amendment No. 2 replaces the Line Sharing Interim Agreement entered into between @link and Qwest on April 24, 2000, with the terms, conditions and rates for Line Sharing as set forth in Attachment 1 to Amendment 2. Parties had until February 12, 2001, to file comments.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Amendments to the Interconnection Agreement?
On January 31, 2001, Maxtel USA, Inc. filed an application for a Certificate of Authority to provide Interexchange Telecommunications Services in South Dakota. The applicant is a reseller which intends to offer interexchange services, including 1+ and 101XXXX outbound dialing, Toll-Free inbound dialing, directory assistance, data services, and travel card services.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a Certificate of Authority to Maxtel USA, Inc.?
On February 6, 2001, McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. (McLeodUSA) filed an Intrastate Switched Access Tariff with an effective date of March 7, 2001. McLeodUSA also filed a petition "requesting an exemption from the requirement to develop intrastate switched access rates based on company specific costs." On February 9, 2001, McLeodUSA filed a letter requesting to withdraw the filing.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant McLeod's request to withdraw the applications?
Announcements
1. Commissioners and staff will be attending the NARUC meetings in Washington DC, February 25-March 1, 2001.
2. The Commission's Consumer Outreach Booth will be at the Sioux Falls Home Show, March 1-4, 2001.
3. The Commission's Consumer Outreach Booth will be at the Watertown Home Show, March 9-11, 2001.
4. Hearings in Dockets CT01-003 (Paez/ATT); CT01-004 (Mack/Talk.com); CT01-005 (Ourada/WorldCom); CT01-006 (Donahoe/WorldCom), will be held on March 22, 2001, beginning at 8:30am in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
5. A Commission meeting is being scheduled for March 22, 2001, at 1:30pm, in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
6. The Commission's Consumer Outreach Booth will be at the Black Hills Home Show, March 29-April 1, 2001.
7. The next regularly scheduled Commission meeting will be held March 6, 2001, at 1:30pm, in Room 412 of the State Capitol Building.
Sue Cichos
Deputy Executive Director
sue.cichos@state.sd.us
February 14, 2001
