20070530reconsideration_order_no_30324.pdf

Office ofthe Secretary
Service Date
May 30, 2007
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF AN INVESTIGATION
INTO RURAL TELEPHONE COMPANY'
COMPLIANCE WITH COMMISSION
RULES REGARDING CLASSIFICATION OF
LOCAL SERVICE AND NOTICE OF
TERMINATION OF SERVICE
ORDER NO. 30324
CASE NO. RUR-07-
On April 20, 2007, the Commission issued final Order No. 30306 in this case
dismissing a complaint filed by a customer of Rural Telephone Company. The complainants
alleged that Rural discriminated against them with its decision to reclassify their service from
residential to business. In response to the complaint, the Commission directed Rural to file an
explanation of its procedures regarding classification of the complainants' service. Order No.
30140. The Company filed its written explanation on February 26, 2007, and the complainants
filed a response on March 12, 2007.
After reviewing the record in the case, the Commission concluded that Rural "did not
act unreasonably, unfairly, or inconsistently with its tariff in determining to reclassify the
Shimoda account as business rather than personal." Order No. 30306 p. 4. However, the
Commission did not allow Rural to bill and collect the difference between the residential and
business rates for past service.
On May 9, 2007, the complainants filed a Petition for Reconsideration.The
complainants disagree with the Commission s conclusion that Rural did not act improperly in
reclassifying their telephone service. Complainants also argue that the Commission failed to
follow its own rules and regulations and also allowed Rural to violate Commission rules and
regulations. Finally, the complainants assert that they have not been given a chance to correct
the error that occurred when Rural originally classified their service as residential rather than
business.
The Commission has fully reviewed and considered the arguments made by
complainants in their Petition for Reconsideration and finds that the Petition for Reconsideration
should be denied. The arguments and allegations raised in the complainants ' Petition are similar
to those raised in their complaint and written response and were fully considered by the
Commission in reaching its decision in Order No. 30306.
ORDER NO. 30324
The complainants question why the Commission does not allow them an opportunity
now to correct the classification of their telephone service. Nothing in Order No. 30306 prevents
the complainants from changing their telephone service. As customers, complainants have the
ability to apply to the utility for services offered, as appropriate.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complainants' Petition for Reconsideration is
denied.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION.Any party
aggrieved by this Order or other final or interlocutory Orders previously issued in this Case No.
RUR-07-01 may appeal to the Supreme Court of Idaho pursuant to the Public Utilities Law
and the Idaho Appellate Rules. See Idaho Code 9 61-627.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 30 H--
day of May 2007.
J~~
MARSHA H. SMITH, COMMISSIONER
ATTEST:
~\)
w,gfJe n D. Jewell
Commission Secretary
bls/O:RUR-O7-ws3
ORDER NO. 30324