PSC debates utility secrecy

HELENA, MONTANA - Two public service commissioners want to revisit how - and why - the public can be barred from seeing certain utility information, such as prices paid for gas-and-electricity contracts that supply the public.

Commission Chairman Greg Jergeson, D-Chinook, says he has a "gnawing sense of unease" about the secrecy. He and Commissioner Doug Mood, R-Seeley Lake, want industry and the public to weigh in on how much secrecy is really needed.

"I'm not sure that all that information is protectable particularly when the Montana Constitution requires this agency to be as open as we possibly can," Mood said recently.

At the request of Jergeson and Mood, the five-member commission informally agreed to consider whether it should seek comment on the secrecy issue from "interested persons," which could be utilities, industry experts, the media or the public.

A formal decision by the PSC on this comment process may come sometime next month.

Yet the tentative first step didn't come without some debate.

Commissioner Tom Schneider, D-Helena, said the question is whether the secrecy helps secure lower rates for consumers. Answering that question may take more time and expertise than the PSC has, he suggested.

"(Consulting) firms that command $500 an hour (might) answer the questions," he said. "Who in the hell is going to take the time to do that?" The heart of the matter is whether the public can see details on contracts that NorthWestern Energy arranges to supply its customers with electricity and natural gas.

NorthWestern must buy energy on the open market from third-party suppliers. Its 300,000-plus customers in Montana then pay the cost, through rates approved by the PSC.

NorthWestern chooses the contracts either through a bid process or negotiation with individual suppliers, such as PPL Montana, the major power-plant operator in the state.

NorthWestern has asked for and received from the PSC approval of "protective orders" that say the public cannot see the price, terms or conditions of these contracts, or, in some cases, even know which company has been chosen as a supplier.

The public also doesn't get to know the identity of any losing bidders, or what price or product those bidders offered.

The PSC reviews NorthWestern's choice of contracts, to see whether the company made a prudent choice, and sets rates based on the overall cost of all the contracts.

Only the PSC staff, the Consumer Counsel - a state office that represents consumers in rate cases - or other legal "parties" in the review get to see some of the individual contract information.

Mood said he sees no reason why bid information should remain "protected" or kept from the public after the contracts have been awarded.

Some of the information held secret also is available elsewhere, such as suppliers' electricity wholesale transactions filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, he added.

But Commissioner Brad Molnar, R-Laurel, said if bidders believe secrecy is to their economic benefit, they might drop out of future bidding if the PSC requires that information to be made public.

Fewer bidders may mean higher prices for consumers, he said: "We're harming our own constituents, our own economy, our own state." Commissioner Bob Raney, D-Livingston, said he sees no reason to change the rules on "protected" information. Rather, the commission just needs to take a harder look at whether to grant those protections for certain information, he said.

The PSC has rarely turned down an industry request to shield information from the public.

Energy isn't the only area where secrecy is an issue.

Geoff Feiss, who represents small telephone companies and co-ops, has argued that wireless carrier Alltel should be required to divulge how it spends federal subsidies to expand its service.

He said that "a review of the (secrecy) rules is timely," and that it's too easy for companies to come before the PSC and seal information that should be scrutinized.