HomeMy WebLinkAbout991029_dh.docDECISION MEMORANDUM
TO: COMMISSIONER HANSEN
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSIONER KJELLANDER
MYRNA WALTERS
STEPHANIE MILLER
TONYA CLARK
RON LAW
JOE CUSICK
BEV BARKER
WORKING FILE
FROM:
DATE: October 29, 1999
RE: AMENDING THE COMMISSION’S TELEPHONE CUSTOMER
RELATIONS RULE 105.02 FOR CALCULATING THE AMOUNT OF DEPOSIT FOR MTS SERVICES, CASE NO. 31-4101-9901
On August 27, 1999, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding its Telephone Customer Relations Rule 105.02. IDAPA 31.41.01.105.02. This rule sets out the methodology for calculating the amount of deposit that a local exchange company (LEC) may collect when providing billing services for message telecommunication service (MTS). In calculating the portion of the deposit attributable to MTS, a LEC has two alternatives. If there is no MTS usage history, a company may ask for a deposit equal two months’ estimated charges for MTS. If the LEC has MTS usage history available, the LEC may ask for a deposit of two months of the average MTS charges reflected on the customer’s bills over the most recent 12-month period. In comparison, the Commission’s Rule 110 allows MTS companies that perform their own billing to ask customers for a “reasonable deposit” in circumstances where deposits are permitted to be collected. IDAPA 31.41.01.110.
THE PROPOSED RULE
In its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission proposed to amend Rule 105.02 to eliminate the two different standards for collecting deposits attributable to MTS and simply allow carriers to collect a “reasonable deposit.” The Commission’s proposed amendments are outlined below:
31.41.01.105.02 MTS Billed by the LEC.
MTS Billed by the LEC. In addition to a deposit allowed pursuant to Rule 105.01, a local exchange company providing or billing for message telecommunications service (MTS) may ask for a reasonable deposit equal to two (2) months’estimated charges for MTS that it bills if the applicant or customer has no previous usage history, or two months’ average charges for MTS that it bills as reflected by the customer’s past usage over the most recent twelve (12) month period. Deposits for customers expected to take service for short periods of time (e.g., political campaigns, conventions, fairs) may be based on expected usage during the time in service. (7-1-93)( )
THE COMMENTS
The Commission’s Notice requested interested persons to submit comments regarding this rulemaking no later than October 27, 1999. Comments regarding this rulemaking were filed by the Legislative Services Office and U S WEST Communications. Legislative Services reported that the Senate and House Subcommittees for review of Administrative Rules have no objections to the proposed rule. U S WEST “heartily supports” the proposed revision. The Company asserted there is no reason to maintain the inconsistency between Rule 105.02 and Rule 110 (IDAPA 31.41.01.110) regarding “reasonable” deposits for MTS. U S WEST stated that the former 12-month average deposit standard required by the Idaho Commission was unique in the 14 states it serves and “it fairly discriminate[d] against incumbent LECs.” U S WEST Comments at 2.
COMMISSION DECISION
1. Does the Commission wish to adopt the proposed rule as its pending rule and submit for legislative review?
2. Does the Commission desire to make any changes to the rule before submitting it for legislative review?
vld/M:31-4101-9901_dh
DECISION MEMORANDUM 2