Commission Agendas | previous page
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Tuesday, March 29, 2005 at 9:00 A.M.
State Capitol Building, Room 412
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 March 28, 2005.
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 AD HOC MEETING
Electricity
The Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO) is implementing the MISO Day 2 Market on April 1, 2005. Implementation of the Day 2 Market will change the way the utility generates and purchases energy for delivery to serve retail customers in South Dakota. The MISO transactions will take the place of prior transactions relating to energy procurement. The proposed tariff changes would allow the new MISO transactions to flow through the fuel clause as did prior non-MISO energy procurement transactions. The tariff revisions are requested to be approved with less than 30 days notice in order to be effective upon the April 1, 2005, start date of the MISO Day 2 Market.
TODAY, shall the Commission Approve the Tariff Revisions?
The Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO) is implementing the MISO Day 2 Market on April 1, 2005. Implementation of the Day 2 Market will change the way the utility generates and purchases energy for delivery to serve retail customers in South Dakota. The MISO transactions will take the place of prior transactions relating to energy procurement. The proposed tariff changes would allow the new MISO transactions to flow through the fuel clause as did prior non-MISO energy procurement transactions. The tariff revisions are requested to be approved with less than 30 days notice in order to be effective upon the April 1, 2005, start date of the MISO Day 2 Market. Xcel is also requesting that the Commission affirm that South Dakota Statutes and Xcel's Fuel Clause Rider allow for the recovery of cost of the MISO transactions.
TODAY, shall the Commission Approve the Tariff Revisions? AND shall the Commission affirm that these RTO related transactions are recoverable in the Fuel Adjustment Clause?
The Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO) is implementing the MISO Day 2 Market on April 1, 2005. Implementation of the Day 2 Market will change the way the utility generates and purchases energy for delivery to serve retail customers in South Dakota. The MISO transactions will take the place of prior transactions relating to energy procurement. The proposed tariff changes would allow the new MISO transactions to flow through the fuel clause as did prior non-MISO energy procurement transactions. The tariff revisions are requested to be approved with less than 30 days notice in order to be effective upon the April 1, 2005, start date of the MISO Day 2 Market.
TODAY, shall the Commission Approve the Tariff Revisions?
Telecommunications
On November 18, 2003, RCC Minnesota, Inc. and Wireless Alliance, L.L.C. d/b/a Unicel (collectively, RCC) filed a petition to be designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) for purposes of qualifying to obtain federal universal service support in the areas of certain non-rural and rural telephone companies. RCC Minnesota, Inc. is authorized by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as the Cellular Radiotelephone Service provider in the South Dakota Rural Service Area 4 - Marshall, South Dakota. Wireless Alliance, L.L.C is authorized by the FCC as the Personal Communications Service carrier in the partitioned area of the Minneapolis-St. Paul MTA012 which encompasses Minnehaha and Lincoln Counties, South Dakota, in the Sioux Falls Basic Trading Area (BTA 422). RCC also requests the Commission to redefine the following Rural LEC Service Areas: Alliance Communications Cooperative, Interstate Telecommunications Cooperative, Inc., James Valley Cooperative Telephone Company, PrairieWave Community Telephone, Inc., and Sioux Valley Telephone Company. On December 4, 2003, Petitions to Intervene were filed by James Valley Cooperative Telephone, Union Telephone Company, Stockholm-Strandburg Telephone Company, Venture Communications Cooperative, and Interstate Telecommunications Cooperative. Sioux Valley Telephone Company, PrairieWave Communications, South Dakota Telecommunications Association, Roberts County Telephone Cooperative Association, RC Communications, Inc., and Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. each filed Petitions to Intervene on December 5, 2003. The Commission granted intervention to the above named parties on December 16, 2003. The matter was originally noticed for hearing for July 27, 28, and 29, 2004. The matter has been rescheduled for October 14 and 15, 2004. On August 25, 2004, RCC fax filed a Request For Opportunity to File Surrebuttal Testimony requesting a filing deadline of Sept 14, 2004, for such testimony. The Commission granted RCC's Request to File Surrebuttal Testimony at its August 31, 2004, meeting. The filing deadline for the testimony was set as September 14, 2004. On March 24, 2005, the Intervenors filed a Motion to Submit a Supplemental Brief.
TODAY, shall the Commission Grant the Motion to Submit a Supplemental Brief?
2. In the Matter of Approving Agreements in TC05-022, TC05-025, TC05-026, TC05-027, TC05- 028, and TC05-032.
On February 22, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of Qwest's Master Services Agreement. Qwest Corporation and McLeodUSA have executed a commercial agreement related to the provisions of switching and shared transport. The Master Services Agreement is being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-144. In its cover letter Qwest stated that, "Qwest has disputed and will continue to dispute, that the (Master Services) Agreement and similar commercial arrangements between Qwest and CLECs are ICAs that must be filed with the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 252 of the Act. Notwithstanding this position, and without waiving any of its rights or arguments on these issues, Qwest is filing the Agreement as set forth above. Qwest is making the filing solely to avoid further controversy or disputes with the Commission regarding the appropriate legal status of the Agreement. . . ."
On February 22, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of Qwest's Master Services Agreement. Qwest Corporation and AT&T Corp., have executed a commercial agreement related to the provisions of switching and shared transport. The Master Services Agreement is being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-144. In its cover letter Qwest stated that, "Qwest has disputed and will continue to dispute, that the (Master Services) Agreement and similar commercial arrangements between Qwest and CLECs are ICAs that must be filed with the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 252 of the Act. Notwithstanding this position, and without waiving any of its rights or arguments on these issues, Qwest is filing the Agreement as set forth above. Qwest is making the filing solely to avoid further controversy or disputes with the Commission regarding the appropriate legal status of the Agreement. . . ."
On February 22, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of Qwest's Master Services Agreement. Qwest Corporation and VCI Company have executed a commercial agreement related to the provisions of switching and shared transport. The Master Services Agreement is being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-144. In its cover letter Qwest stated that, "Qwest has disputed and will continue to dispute, that the (Master Services) Agreement and similar commercial arrangements between Qwest and CLECs are ICAs that must be filed with the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 252 of the Act. Notwithstanding this position, and without waiving any of its rights or arguments on these issues, Qwest is filing the Agreement as set forth above. Qwest is making the filing solely to avoid further controversy or disputes with the Commission regarding the appropriate legal status of the Agreement. . . ."
On February 22, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of Qwest's Master Services Agreement. Qwest Corporation and Integra Telecom of South Dakota, Inc., have executed a commercial agreement related to the provisions of switching and shared transport. The Master Services Agreement is being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-144. In its cover letter Qwest stated that, "Qwest has disputed and will continue to dispute, that the (Master Services) Agreement and similar commercial arrangements between Qwest and CLECs are ICAs that must be filed with the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 252 of the Act. Notwithstanding this position, and without waiving any of its rights or arguments on these issues, Qwest is filing the Agreement as set forth above. Qwest is making the filing solely to avoid further controversy or disputes with the Commission regarding the appropriate legal status of the Agreement. . . ."
On February 22, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of Qwest's Master Services Agreement. Qwest Corporation and Houlton Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Guaranteed Phone Service have executed a commercial agreement related to the provisions of switching and shared transport. The Master Services Agreement is being filed in compliance with the Commission's Order dated October 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-144. In its cover letter Qwest stated that, "Qwest has disputed and will continue to dispute, that the (Master Services) Agreement and similar commercial arrangements between Qwest and CLECs are ICAs that must be filed with the Commission for approval pursuant to Section 252 of the Act. Notwithstanding this position, and without waiving any of its rights or arguments on these issues, Qwest is filing the Agreement as set forth above. Qwest is making the filing solely to avoid further controversy or disputes with the Commission regarding the appropriate legal status of the Agreement. . . ."
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of a Wireline Adoption Interconnection Agreement between Qwest Corporation and VCI Company. According to the parties, VCI Company wishes to adopt in its entirety, the Interconnection Agreement and any associated amendments between 1-800-Reconex d/b/a USTel and Qwest which was approved by the Commission on July 27, 2004, in Docket TC04-100.
TODAY, shall the Commission Approve the Agreements?
3. In the Matter of Approving Amendments to Agreements in TC05-021, TC05-035, TC05-036, TC05-037, TC05-040, TC05-041, TC05-044, and TC05-046.
On February 14, 2005, the Commission received a filing for the approval of the Webster Interconnection Agreement between Interstate Telecommunications Cooperative, Inc. and Midcontinent Communications. According to the parties, the agreement conforms to the terms and the conditions of the Waubay Interconnection Agreement approved by the Commission in docket TC04-224 on December 17, 2004.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Expedites for Design Services Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement between Qwest Corporation and MCImetro Access Transmission Services, LLC. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which the Commission approved on January 28, 2003, in Docket TC02-183.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement for Commercial Line Sharing between Qwest Corporation and MCImetro Access Transmission Services, LLC. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which the Commission approved on January 28, 2003, in Docket TC02-183.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of a Term of Agreement Update Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement between RC Communications, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which the Commission approved on December 29, 2004, in Docket TC04-255.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement for Elimination of UNE-P and Implementation of Batch Hot Cut Process and Discounts between Houlton Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a Guaranteed Phone Services and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which was approved by the Commission on June 10, 2003, in Docket TC03-069.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement for Elimination of UNE-P and Implementation of Batch Hot Cut Process and Discounts between AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which was approved by the Commission on May 13, 2004, in Docket TC04-080.
On February 25, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement for Elimination of UNE-P and Implementation of Batch Hot Cut Process and Discounts between Integra Telecom of South Dakota, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties, which was approved by the Commission on August 25, 2000, in Docket TC01-049.
On March 2, 2005, the Commission received a filing for approval of an Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement for Elimination of UNE-P and Implementation of Batch Hot Cut Process and Discounts between McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. and Qwest Corporation. According to the parties, this Amendment revises the Interconnection Agreement between the parties approved by the Commission on July 23, 1999, in Docket TC99-057.
TODAY, shall the Commission Approve the Amendments to the Agreements?
______________________
Heather K. Forney
Deputy Executive Director
heather.forney@state.sd.us
March 25, 2005
