AGcomments_dh.doc

ALAN G. LANCE
ATTORNEY GENERAL

DAVID G. HIGH, Chief
Civil Litigation

BRETT T. DELANGE (ISB # ______)
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
Consumer Protection Unit
Office of the Attorney General
700 West Jefferson Street, RM 210
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID 83720-0010
Telephone: [phone]

Attorneys for the State of Idaho

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE EXAMINATION WHETHER THE COMMISSION SHOULD ADMINISTER THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATION COMMISSION’S NEW SLAMMING RULES, 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1100 et seq. )
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. GNR-T-00-38

COMMENTS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

COMES NOW Brett T. DeLange, Deputy Attorney General, and submits these comments on behalf of the Idaho Attorney General in the above-referenced case. In Order No. 28580 issued December 4, 2000, the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (“Commission”) issued a Notice of Modified Procedure requesting interested persons to submit comments whether the Commission should administer the new slamming rules promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). As the Commission noted in its Order, slamming is the unauthorized change in a telephone customer’s selection of a local or long-distance carrier. As set out in greater detail below, the Office of the Attorney General believes that it is appropriate for the Commission to administer the new slamming rules.

COMMENTS
In 1971, the Idaho Legislature enacted the Idaho Consumer Protection Act. The purpose of the Act was to protect Idaho consumers and businesses against unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts and practices in commerce. Idaho Code § 48-601. Idaho Code § 48-603D states that “it is unlawful for a telecommunications provider to request a change in a consumer’s local exchange or interexchange carrier without the consumer’s verified consent.” Idaho Code § 48-603D(2)(a). In other words, it is a violation of the Idaho Consumer Protection Act for telecommunications providers to unlawfully change or “slam” an Idaho customer. Idaho Code § 48-606 provides that the Attorney General may enforce and prosecute violations of the Idaho Consumer Protection Act.
In the FCC’s First Order on Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 94-129, FCC 00-135 (May 3, 2000) the FCC recognized that its previous rules “had failed to deter carriers from engaging in slamming.…[The FCC’s new] rules were designed to ensure that carriers cannot profit from slamming activities, as well as to compensate subscribers for the inconvenience and confusion experienced due to slamming.” Id. at ¶3.
As interexchange competition has developed, so to has the occurrence of slamming. During the last four years, the Consumer Protection Unit of the Attorney General’s Office has been actively engaged in investigating and resolving slamming complaints. The table below shows our slamming activities.
1997 1998 1999 YTD 2000 Complaints 133 371 259 33 Court Cases 2 2 4 2 Penalties Imposed $35,427.27 $92,631.57 $103,631.57 $32,500
As the Commission noted in its Order, the FCC’s First Order on Reconsideration encouraged state regulatory commissions to enforce the FCC’s new slamming rules. Implementation of the single uniform standard across 50 states would deter slammers from focusing activities in states that did not adopt the FCC’s rules. As the Commission’s Order noted, 31 state commissions have opted to administer the new slamming rules. Order No. 28580 at 2.
The Office of the Attorney General believes that there are efficiencies to be gained by having the Commission enforce the FCC rules. As is presently the case, both the Commission’s Consumer Assistance Staff and the Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Unit take slamming complaints. Even the FCC recognized that having state commissions enforce slamming rules will provide consumers with a single point of contact for each state. 65 Fed. Reg. 47,682 at ¶22. As is the Commission’s practice, slamming complaints are typically processed in an informal manner which provides for the timely processing of slamming complaints. Utilizing the Commission will also “provide a neutral forum for the resolution of slamming disputes.” Id.
The Consumer Protection Unit and Commission Staff have met to discuss procedures for implementing the new slamming rules and to ensure that the Attorney General is informed of significant slamming problems. In particular, the PUC will be the primary agency for investigating and resolving slamming disputes. In those instances where the Commission Staff receives ten or more complaints filed against a company, the Commission’s Consumer Assistance Staff will apprise the Consumer Protection Unit of this fact. The Attorney General will then be in a position to consider enforcement action under the Idaho Consumer Protection Act. As the FCC recognized in promulgating its rules, the slamming rules state that “nothing in these procedures is intended to abrogate any party’s right to pursue relief for a slamming violation in state or federal court.” 65 Fed. Reg. 47,682 ¶24. See also 47 C.F.R. § 64.1140(a) (“the remedies provided in [the FCC slamming rules] are in addition to any other remedies available by law.”).
In conclusion, the Commission’s adoption of the FCC slamming rules will benefit Idaho consumers. In those instances where there is a clear recalcitrant long-distance carrier, the Attorney General’s Office will be able exercise its enforcement authority in appropriate cases. Adoption of the FCC’s rules will benefit Idaho consumers and hopefully reduce slamming complaints.
Respectfully submitted this ________ day of December 2000.

Brett T. DeLange
Deputy Attorney General
Consumer Protection Unit

Vld/N:GNR-T-00-38_AGcomments_dh

COMMENTS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 3