961003.docx

DECISION MEMORANDUM
TO:COMMISSIONER NELSON
COMMISSIONER SMITH
COMMISSIONER HANSEN
MYRNA WALTERS
TONYA CLARK
DON HOWELL
STEPHANIE MILLER
DAVE SCHUNKE
JOE CUSICK
GARY RICHARDSON
WORKING FILE
FROM:WELDON STUTZMAN
DATE:OCTOBER 3, 1996
RE:REQUESTS FROM PRESTON AND MONTPELIER TELEPHONE
EXCHANGE CUSTOMERS FOR INCLUSION IN THE SOUTHEAST IDAHO EAS REGION
During the last two or three weeks, the Commission has received a lot of letters, petitions, and electronic mail messages from residents of the Preston and Montpelier telephone exchanges.  These two southeast Idaho exchanges were not included in the pending EAS case, Case No. USW-S-96-4, and the residents have learned that the Commission is considering the Stipulation presented in that case to create three or four EAS regions.  Under the Stipulation in that case, residents in the Price Group 1 category would see a net monthly rate increase of $1.89.  If only three regions are approved (Option 1 of the proposed options for Blackfoot exchange), that amount would increase by $.41 unless the Commission also increased the amount of the customer credit available from revenue sharing funds.  Many of the correspondents from the Preston and Montpelier exchanges state that they would be willing to pay an increase of $1.89 per month in order to be included in a southeast Idaho EAS region.  
Although it is not possible to add these two exchanges to the existing Case No. USW-S-96-4 without reopening the case for hearings, it might be possible to initiate a separate proceeding. The Commission could issue a notice that it is considering, subject to approval of the EAS regions, a proposal to include the Preston and Montpelier exchanges in the southeast Idaho EAS region at the same rates to customers as presented in the existing EAS case.  This proposal could be processed by Modified Procedure, allowing U S WEST, AT&T, MCI, and interested individuals to provide comments, or request a hearing.  The comment period would need to be of sufficient duration to allow an adequate opportunity to provide the customers in the exchanges with notice of the proposed rate increase pursuant to the Commission’s Telephone Rules.
An alternative would be to initiate an investigation by Staff to determine whether EAS  for the Preston and Montpelier exchanges meets the Commission’s standards for implementing EAS.
Commission Decision
Should a proposal to add the Preston and Montpelier telephone exchanges to the proposed southeast Idaho EAS region, subject to approval of the EAS regions by the Commission,  be assigned a docket number and processed by Modified Procedure?
Should the Commission initiate an investigation into whether EAS should be granted for  the Preston and Montpelier telephone exchanges?
Weldon Stutzman
vld/M:EAS.ws