Commission Agendas | previous page
Please see Addendum to this Agenda
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Thursday, January 16, 2003 at 2:00 P.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 January 15, 2003.
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 December 19, 2002 and January 2, 2003. (Staff: Mary Giddings.)
Consumer Issues
1. Status Report on Consumer Utility Inquiries and Complaints Recently Received by the Commission. (Consumer Affairs: Mary Healy.)
The Commission received 1916 consumer contacts during 2002. We have now opened 13 complaints in 2003. 92 of the complaints were received since the December 19, 2002, meeting. During calendar year 2002, the Commission resolved 1787 informal consumer complaints. In calendar year 2003, we have resolved 4 complaints.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS: 73 of the contacts involved telecommunications. 23 contacts concerned billing issues; 4 involved cellular service; 12 concerned the unauthorized switch in telecommunication services; 9 concerned billing for unauthorized services; 4 contacts involved increased rates; 3 concerned poor service; 3 concerned contract disputes and some of the remaining contacts involved Life Line/Link Up, telemarketers and number portability.
ELECTRICITY: 12 of the contacts involved electricity issues. 7 of the contacts concerned disconnect; 5 involved billing.
NATURAL GAS: 6 of the contacts involved natural gas. 1 concerned a disconnect and 5 concerned billing issues.
2. IN THE MATTER OF DISMISSING DOCKETS CT02-035; CT02-042; CT02-046
Complainants state that their service was switched without their authorization. Sprint has indicated in its informal response to the complaint that the switch was made over the internet by Robert. Complainants state that they did not switch service over the internet and that the social security number and date of birth for Robert are incorrect. Complainants request $1,000.00 allowed under South Dakota law. On September 26, 2002, the Commission received a Motion To Dismiss from Sprint. According to the Motion, the Complainant, Robert Herrick, admitted that his son initiated the switch via the internet. Sprint seeks dismissal pursuant to SDCL 25-5-15. On January 6, 2003, Complainant filed a Motion to dismiss his complaint.
Complainants state that in January 2002 MCI called and offered a plan which was accepted by the Complainants. However, when the bill was received it was not the rate that was offered. Complainants switched to Sprint in February 2002 but continued to receive a billing from MCI. Complainants called Qwest in March and April 2002 and were told they would be switched to Sprint hey continued to be billed by MCI. In June 2002 Qwest informed them that there was a PIC freeze on their long distance. Complainants request that their bill be recalculated to the Sprint rate for the period of February 2002 through June 2002.
Associates of ENT Black Hills' representative (Complainant) alleges that McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc. failed to honor its "Most Favored Customer" clause regarding its long distance and high-speed internet access. Complainant also alleges that it paid for advertising in the 2001/2002 yellow pages and the ad was not included in the phone book.
TODAY, if the above matters are resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaints and close the dockets?
Christopher Cutler states that in March 2002, Complainant entered into an agreement with AT&T to receive Fragmented T1 service. On more than one occasion, the AT&T representative assured the Complainant that AT&T could provide this service. Complainant has now been informed that AT&T cannot provide the Fragmented T1 service. Complainant states that it has invested more than $150,000.00 in its business to utilize the Fragmented T1 service. Complainant requests that AT&T provide the Fragmented T1 service that stated it could provide. If the service cannot be provided, Complainant would be willing to negotiate a settlement with AT&T for the expenses the Complainant has incurred. Complainant feels that AT&T should put forth some form of effort to resolve this complaint. On October 24, 2002, AT&T filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment. On December 9, 2002, AT&T filed a Motion for Continuance because of a change of counsel in the case. The Motion for Continuance was heard on December 17, 2002, and the Motion to Dismiss was continued until January 2, 2003. On January 2, 2003, the Commission heard the arguments of the parties on the Motion to Dismiss and deferred action to enable counsel to provide additional legal authority.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant AT&T's Motion to Dismiss?
Electric
Application by Otter Tail Power Company for approval of a contract with deviations with the City of LaBolt. The current municipal contract providing electrical service expires February 7, 2003. The new contract is proposed to remain in effect for 10 years.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the contract with deviations?
Application by MidAmerican Energy Company to revise its disconnect notice including a version of the notice that displays a message regarding the amount of non-utility charges on the account. The company states this language is being added to reduce customer misunderstanding over utility and non-utility charges as they relate to disconnection.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed disconnect notices?
Natural Gas
Application by Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. (MDU) for approval of a general increase in rates in its Black Hills service territory. MDU proposes to increase rates for natural gas service in its Black Hills service territory by $2,173,380 or approximately 5.8% effective upon final disposition of the docket.
TODAY, shall the Commission suspend the imposition of the tariff for 90 days beyond January 30, 2003? AND, shall the Commission assess a filing fee for actual expenses not to exceed $100,000?
Application by MidAmerican Energy Company to revise its disconnect notice including a version of the notice that displays a message regarding the amount of non-utility charges on the account. The company states this language is being added to reduce customer misunderstanding over utility and non-utility charges as they relate to disconnection.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed disconnect notices?
Telecommunications
On October 28, 2002, CI2, Inc. filed an application for a Certificate of Authority to provide interexchange telecommunications services in South Dakota. The applicant intends to provide resold intrastate telecommunications services throughout South Dakota.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant a withdrawal of the application for a Certificate of Authority to CI 2, Inc?
On November 7, 2002, the Commission received a filing of an Agreement for terms and conditions for interconnection, unbundled network elements, ancillary services, and resale of telecommunication services provided by Qwest Corporation in the State of South Dakota (Qwest) to MCIMetro Access Transmission Services, LLC (Third Revision September 24, 2002). According the to parties, the Agreement is a negotiated agreement which sets for the terms, conditions and prices under which Qwest will offer and provide to any requesting CLEC network interconnection, access to unbundled network elements, ancillary services and telecommunications services available for resale within the geographical areas in which Qwest is providing local exchange service at that time and for which Qwest is the incumbent local exchange carrier within the State of South Dakota for purposes of providing local telecommunications services.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed Agreement?
On December 19, 2002, the Commission received a filing of a Type 1 and Type 2 Paging Connection Service Agreement between Qwest Corporation f/k/a U S WEST Communications, Inc. (Qwest) and Western Communications, Inc. for the State of South Dakota. According to the parties, the Agreement is a negotiated agreement which sets forth the terms, conditions and prices under which Qwest will offer and provide to any requesting CLEC network, interconnection, access to unbundled network elements, ancillary services and telecommunications services available for resale within the geographical areas in which Qwest is providing local exchange service at that time and for which Qwest is the incumbent local exchange carrier within the State of South Dakota for purposes of providing local telecommunications services.
Today, shall the Commission approve the proposed Agreement?
Administration
1. IN THE MATTER OF THE CONTRACT WITH QSI CONSULTING. (Staff Analyst: Harlan Best.)
On December 27, 2001, the Commission approved a contract with QSI Consulting for preparation and presentation of testimony in Docket TC01-098 in the amount of $63,220.00. On January 8, 2003, QSI informed Staff that it was requesting a contract amendment for an additional $15,000.00.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the proposed $15,000.00 contract amendment and extend the contract for an additional year?
Announcements
1. The Commission is pleased to welcome Commissioner Gary Hanson, the new Executive Director Pam Bonrud.
2. The office will be closed on January 20, 2003, in observance of Martin Luther King Day.
3. Commissioners Jim Burg and Bob Sahr will be in New Orleans for NARUC January 18 - 21, 2003.
4. The office will be closed on February 17, 2003, in observance of Presidents' Day.
Terri J. Iverson
Finance Officer
terri.iverson@state.sd.us
January 9, 2003
