GO207.doc

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF THE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMISSION’S TELEPHONE CUSTOMER RELATIONS RULES (IDAPA 31.41.01.000 ET SEQ.). )
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 31-4101-0001

GENERAL ORDER NO. 207

ADOPTION OF PENDING RULE

On August 28, 2000, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to amend its Telephone Customer Relations Rules, IDAPA 31.41.01. On October 4, 2000, the Administrative Rules Office published the “official” proposed changes in the Administrative Bulletin at pages 600-604. The only comments received were from Qwest Corporation, Verizon Northwest and the Commission Staff.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
The Commission proposed to delete several obsolete references contained in its Telephone Customer Relations Rules and to make several substantive changes. Briefly, the Commission proposed to amend Rule 107 to allow deposits to be credited to a customer’s account or refunded to a customer. The Commission also proposed to simplify and clarify the procedures used for terminating telephone service found in Rule 304. Next, the Commission proposed to eliminate Rule 305 governing the termination of local exchange service for unexplained or large long-distance usage. Finally, the Commission proposed in Rule 502 to reduce the amount of time telephone records be retained from five years to two years.

THE COMMENTS
No written comments were received in opposition to deleting the obsolete cross-references. The Staff also suggested removal of an obsolete reference to the “guarantee option” found in Rule 302.02. Specifically, the Staff proposed eliminating the words “or obtain a guarantee” because the guarantee option was eliminated in our 1999 rulemaking. We find that it is reasonable to delete this obsolete reference to the guarantee option and will incorporate this change in our pending Rule 302.
Qwest and the Staff supported adoption of the proposed rules. Although Verizon generally supported the proposed rules, it did offer two substantive suggestions. Verizon’s comments are discussed in greater detail below.
Rule 107. The proposed modification to Rule 107 would allow telephone companies to return a deposit by either crediting the customer’s account or issuing a refund without requiring an explicit request from the customer. Although Verizon supported this change, it also suggested modification to Rule 107.02(a). More specifically, the Company proposed adding the phrase “and is not delinquent more than once in the previous twelve (12) months” to further clarify what is meant by the phrase “establishes and maintains good credit.”
We decline to adopt Verizon’s suggestion. Rather than “clarify” what is meant by the term “good credit,” Verizon’s suggestion actually would create an additional requirement for returning deposits to residential customers. Rule 5.05 currently defines good credit as “payment by a customer for the most recent twelve (12) consecutive months of all undisputed bills due the telephone company. . . .” We believe that Verizon’s suggestion would not clarify the rule. In addition, we find that Verizon’s suggestion goes beyond the scope of the original proposed rule. Idaho Code § 67-5227 limits changes to proposed rules to those changes which the public might reasonably expect or are a logical extension of the proposed change. The Company’s suggestion does not meet this test. For these reasons, we decline to adopt Verizon’s suggestion.
2. Rule 310. The Commission proposed to amend Rule 310 by simply deleting an obsolete cross-reference. In its comments, Verizon recommended that the Commission delete Rule 310.01 which currently prohibits service providers from disconnecting a customer’s local service if the customer’s local unpaid bill is less than $50. If the Commission does not delete Rule 310.01, then Verizon offered an alternative suggestion that the Commission revise the rule “to be consistent with the deposit requirements of Rule 105 (which states that deposits shall not exceed two month’s charges for local exchange service).” Verizon Comments at 2.
We decline to adopt either of Verizon’s recommendations concerning Rule 310. As mentioned above, the initially proposed change to Rule 310 was merely to delete an obsolete reference. Verizon suggests that we eliminate or modify our long-standing rule that prohibits termination of local exchange service for non-payment of bills of less than $50. No other party recommended this change. In this instance, we do not believe that adoption of Verizon’s suggestions is “a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule” nor would the public reasonably expect such a result. Idaho Code § 67-5227. In addition, the Company’s reference to a “two-month period” used to calculate deposits allegedly contained in the Rule 105 was in fact deleted in 1999. Consequently, we decline to adopt Verizon’s suggestions concerning Rule 310.

GENERAL ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Commission adopts the proposed amendments to its Telephone Customer Relations Rules (IDAPA 31.41.01) as initially proposed with the addition of the Staff’s suggestion to delete an additional obsolete cross-reference in Rule 302. The Commission directs that the pending rules be transmitted to the Administrative Rules Coordinator for publication in the next Administrative Bulletin on January 3, 2001.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the pending rules and the amendment adopted in this Order shall be submitted to the 2001 Legislature for review. If approved, the pending rules shall become final and effective, unless rejected or amended, upon legislative approval by concurrent resolution or upon the date specified in the concurrent resolution.
THIS IS A FINAL GENERAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order (or in issues finally decided by this Order) in Case No. 31-4101-0001 may seek judicial review under Idaho Code § 67-5270 and Commission Rule 401 (IDAPA 31.01.01.401) regarding any matter decided in this Order.

DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this
day of November 2000.

DENNIS S. HANSEN, PRESIDENT

MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER

PAUL KJELLANDER, COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jean D. Jewell
Commission Secretary

Vld/O:31-4101-0001-dh

GENERAL ORDER NO. 207 1

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
November 7, 2000