HomeMy WebLinkAbout19970828Decision Memo.doc DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO: COMMISSIONER HANSEN
COMMISSIONER NELSON
COMMISSIONER SMITH
MYRNA WALTERS
TONYA CLARK
DON HOWELL
STEPHANIE MILLER
DAVE SCHUNKE
CAROLEE HALL
BEV BARKER
DAVID SCOTT
WORKING FILE
FROM: BRAD PURDY
DATE: AUGUST 28, 1997
RE: CASE NO. EXC-T-97-1; APPLICATION OF EXCEL TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR A CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY TO OPERATE AS A LOCAL EXCHANGE CARRIER IN IDAHO
On August 5, 1997, the Commission issued a Notice of Modified Procedure soliciting comments in response to the Application of Excel Telecommunications, Inc. (Excel) for a certificate to operate as a local exchange carrier in Idaho. Excel currently provides interexchange service within Idaho. A number of parties responded to the Commissions Notice of Modified Procedure. Those comments are summarized below.
Commission Staff
Staff opposes Excels Application based upon the Companys record of operations as an interexchange carrier in Idaho and the number of complaints the Commission received from Excels customers. Staff states that it examined its records of informal complaints, comments and inquiries for 1996 and year to date 1997. Those records consist of the Commissions Consumer Assistance Staffs electronic documentation of conversations with Excels customers and various telecommunications companies representatives as well as correspondence, bills, and other written materials. According to Staff, the examination of records revealed a variety of problems encountered by Excels customers including unauthorized switching of primary interexchange carriers (slamming), billing errors, and lengthy delays in completing orders for new service or cancellation of existing service. In one instance, Staff verified that a customer was slammed with a forged letter of agency. Staff provides the following break down of complaints, comments and inquiries submitted to the Commission as of August 25, 1997, concerning Excel:
Category
1996
1997
Billing
Rates & Policies
Carrier Selection & Slamming
Miscellaneous
Total
17
8
21
42
88
12
0
21
11
44
Staff states that customers have been billed for monthly service charges after cancellation of service and have been charged high-random rates by Excels underlying carriers due to errors or delays in completing service orders. Staff observes that customers who sign up for service with Excel through their local exchange company are particularly prone to encounter problems ranging from accessing the network to being properly billed.
The pattern of behavior most concerning to Staff is Excels record of slamming its customers. Several instances of slamming were caused by the Companys practice of switching former customers back to Excels service without authorization after the customer had switched to another carrier. This practice, Staff contends, has also led to instances where a former customers telephone number was slammed even though the former customer had discontinued service and the vacant number had been reassigned to another party.
Staff also notes that the Federal Communications Commission has sanctioned Excel for slamming interexchange service and for forging letters of agency. In addition, the Texas Public Utilities Commission recently rejected an Application by Excel for provision of local service based on its history of providing interexchange service in Texas.
Idaho Telephone Association (ITA)
The ITA represents 19 independent local exchange carriers operating in the state of Idaho. The ITA notes that Excels Application initially purports to seek authority to provide basic local exchange service throughout the state of Idaho. The balance of the Companys Application and supporting materials, however, indicates that Excel intends to limit the area it would serve to those exchanges currently served by U S WEST and GTE. Consequently, the ITA contends that it would not make sense to grant Excel a statewide certificate at this time. Such a certificate might be appropriate only if and when Excel demonstrates its ability and willingness to serve the additional high cost areas now served by the ITAS members and after any suspensions or exemptions benefiting those members no longer are in effect. The ITA contends that granting Excel a statewide certificate today would promote unnecessary confusion and frustration among the rural public regarding the actual availability of alternative local exchange service in rural exchanges.
Thomas L. Goff
Mr. Goff is a resident of Boise who states that he has used Excel in the past and changed to another carrier when his long-distance telephone bill went up rather than down as the Excel agent had promised him. Subsequently, he changed to another carrier. From the time of his transfer, Mr. Goff contends that he has been slammed several times and is still not a customer of the subsequent carrier. He believes that Excel has a deceptive approach for slamming involving the use of a computer program that catches high volume users when they are switching carriers. He states that Excel slammed him six times in one day and that when he calls Excel, that Company denies that he is on its system. But when he calls the 700 number to check which carrier he belongs to, the Company informs him that it is Excel. Mr. Goff is currently pursuing a complaint against Excel through the Federal Communications Commission.
Other
The Commission received comments from 21 individuals expressing support for Excels Application. All but three of those sets of comments were in the form of one of two types of form letters. The first form letter states that the commentor is an independent representative for Excel Telecommunication and that the Company has shown its integrity by giving many people the opportunity to increase their income and by continually saving customers money on their long-distance usage. These commentors go on to state that, as representatives, they will benefit financially if Excel is granted a certificate to operate as a local exchange carrier. The second type of form letter is from Excels long-distance customers who simply state that they express their support for Excels efforts and that Excel has provided outstanding service. Of these commentors, there are only five who are not also financially compensated Excel representatives.
Finally, comments were received from Baumgartner Design of Boise and Dale and Lavine Gardner of Nampa expressing general support for Excel. In addition, Lugh Clark of Nampa supported Excels Application simply because of a problem that individual had experienced in dealing with U S WEST.
Legal Analysis
Idaho Code 61-526 states that the Commission must determine that the present or future public convenience and necessity require or will require the service offered by an applicant for a certificate. Idaho Code 61-528 states, in part:
61-528 Certificate of Public Convenience and NecessityConditions . . . The Commission shall have power, after hearing involving the financial ability and good faith of the applicant and necessity of additional service in the community to issue said certificate as prayed for, or to refuse to issue the same, or to issue it for the construction of any portion only of the contemplated . . . line, plant or system or extension thereof, or for the partial exercise only of said right or privilege, and may attach to the exercise of the rights granted by said certificate, such terms and conditions as in its judgment the public convenience and necessity may require.
Commission Decision
Does the Commission wish to grant Excels Application? If so, are there any conditions or limitations the Commission wishes to impose on Excels certificate?
_____________________________
Brad Purdy
vld/M:EXC-T-97-1.bp3
DECISION MEMORANDUM 1