12142001.doc

DECISION MEMORANDUM

TO: COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSIONER HANSEN
JEAN JEWELL
RON LAW
LOU ANN WESTERFIELD
LYNN ANDERSON
RANDY LOBB
BEV BARKER
TONYA CLARK
JOE CUSICK
DOUG COOLEY
GENE FADNESS
WORKING FILE
FROM:
DATE:
DECEMBER 14, 2001 RE: AVISTA COMMUNICATIONS AND XO IDAHO’S PETITION FOR A WAIVER FROM THE COMMISSION’S TELEPHONE CUSTOMER RULE 702, CASE NO. GNR-T-01-23

On December 11, 2001, Avista Communications and XO Idaho filed a Petition requesting that the Commission waive a verification requirement set forth in the Telephone Customer Relation Rule 702 (Slamming Rule), IDAPA 31.41.01.702. Avista and XO have entered into an agreement to sell its service operations thereby transfering approximately 150 customers in the Coeur d’Alene area from Avista to XO. These customers currently take local service from Avista. XO and Avista intend to individually notify all affected customers of the proposed transfer in a separate mailing. It is XO’s intent that it would only supplant those telecommunication services currently provided by Avista. In other words, if Avista is providing local service but another carrier is providing long-distance services, XO would only replace Avista as the local service provider and not replace the long-distance provider. XO does reserve the right to market its long-distance services to the customer. The Application is attached.
The Application also states that once the Avista customer is transferred to XO, that XO will maintain the existing Avista rates for a period of at least 90 days. Application at 2. The parties do acknowledge that Avista has bundled some telecommunication services in slightly different ways than XO but “those bundles will continue to be offered to migrated customers in their current form for at least ninety (90) days after the transaction.” Id. In addition to sending each customer a transition letter, XO will send a “welcome letter” to “reiterate the information disclosed in the first letter and provide the customer with other information on XO services.” Id. at 3.
In their Petition, the parties ask the Commission to waive the FCC adopted verification procedure encompassed in Rule 702. The Commission’s Rule 702 adopts the FCC’s slamming rules that require procedures to “verify” that the customer has consented to a change in his or her local or toll carrier. Given that XO and Avista intend to notify each customer individually of their intent to switch the customer from Avista to XO, they believe a waiver of this rule is in the public interest. Given the impending transaction between the parties, they request the Commission expedite its consideration of this matter.
STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION
The parties have requested that the Commission grant them a waiver of Telephone Customer Relation Rule 702. This rule adopts the FCC’s slamming procedures regarding the verification of converting customers from one carrier to another. After reviewing this matter with the Company, the Staff believes that a waiver of Rule 702 is not necessary.
Avista is selling its entire Coeur d’Alene operation to XO. XO is purchasing and assuming Avista’s operations. The parties intend to individually notify each customer of the transaction. The Notice will advise customers of XO’s intent to replace Avista as a provider of certain telecommunication services. Consequently, it is Staff’s opinion that this transaction is different than XO “slamming” Avista’s customers.
Given the limited nature of this transaction, Staff also recommends that the Commission issue an Order without the need to process this matter under Modified Procedure. Staff and the parties have agreed to modify the attached customer letters to provide clearer information to customers.
COMMISSION DECISION
Does the Commission desire to issue a declaratory Order finding that the parties do not need a waiver of Rule 702?
Does the Commission desire to take any other action in this matter?

vld/M:GNR-T-01-23_dh

DECISION MEMORANDUM 3