20230620Technical Hearing Transcript Volume I.pdf

BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CAMBRIDGE )TELEPHONE COMPANY'S OBJECTION TO )CASE NO.CAM-T-23-01ITS2023ANNUALASSESSMENTFEES)
BEFORE
COMMISSIONER ERIC ANDERSON (Presiding)
COMMISSIONER EDWARD LODGE
PLACE:Commission Hearing Room II11331WestChindenBlvd.Building 8,Suite 201-A oBoise,Idaho
DATE:June 8,2023
VOLUME I -Pages 1 -52
CSB REPORTINGORIGINALCertgiedShorthandReporters
PostOfTiceBox9774
Boise,Idaho 83707 Reporter:[e-mail] Constance Bucy,Ph:208-890-5198 CSR
1 A PPE A R A NCES
2
3 For the Staff:Michael Duvall
Deputy Attorney General
4 IPUC
11331 W.Chinden Blvd.,
5 Bldg.No.8,Suite 201-A
PO Box 83720
6 Boise,ID 83720-0074
7
For Cambridge Telephone Cynthia A.Melillo,PLLC
8 Company:8385 W.Emerald StreetBoise,ID 83704
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 2 APPEARANCES
208.890.5198
1 I NDEX
2
3 WITNESS EXAMINATION BY PAGE
4 Bachchi Samahon-Oumar Ms.Melillo (Direct)10
(CTC)Mr.Duvall (Cross)13
5 Ms.Melillo (Redirect)15
6
Johan Kalala-Kasanda Mr.Duvall (Direct)16
7 (Staff)Prefiled Affidavit 18
Mr.Duvall (Direct-Cont'd)26
8 Ms.Melillo (Cross)28
Mr.Duvall (ReDirect)38
9 Ms.Melillo (ReCross)40
10 Nancy Ashcraft Mr.Duvall(Direct)42
11 (Staff)Prefiled Affidavit 44
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 3 INDEX
208.890.5198
1 EXH I B I TS
2
3 NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
4
FOR CAMBRIDGE TELEPHONE COMPANY:
5
1.Cambridge Telephone Company Identified 9
6 For the Year Ended December 31,Admitted 512022,Form I
7
8
FOR THE STAFF:
9
A.Cambridge Telephone Company,Premarked
10 PUC Commission Audit,Gross Admitted 17
Annual Intrastate Revenue as
11 of 12/31/2022
12 B.Operating Revenues Premarked
Admitted 17
13
C.Email from Bachchi Oumar Premarked
14 to Nancy Ashcraft,5/15/23,Admitted 17
with attached Cambridge
15 Telephone Company General
Ledger as of 12/21/2022
16
D.Cambridge Telephone Company Premarked
17 2022 Revenues Admitted 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 4 EXHIBITS
208.890.5198
1 BOISE,IDAHO,THURSDAY,JUNE 8,2023,2:35 P.M.
2
3
4 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Good afternoon.
5 This the time and place for an evidentiary hearing in
6 Case No.CAM-T-23-01,further identified in the matter of
7 Cambridge Telephone Company's objection to 2023
8 assessment fees.
9 This hearing is taking place to consider
10 the objection filed with the Commission on May 15th,
11 2023,pursuant to Idaho Code 61-1007.The Commission
12 upon receipt of an assessment fee objection and after 10
13 days'notice in writing to the objector shall proceed to
14 hold a hearing upon such objections with 20 days after
15 the date of such notice.
16 My name is Eric Anderson and I am the
17 Chair of today's proceeding and I'm joined by
18 Commissioner Ed Lodge to my right and we comprise the
19 Commission and we will ultimately render a final decision
20 in this matter.
21 We have a court reporter for this
22 proceeding,also.Connie Bucy is joining us today.
23 Please speak slowly and loud enough for her to hear,and
24 at the end of this,the Commission will review the facts
25 and evidence in the record and make its final decision in
CSB REPORTING 5 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 this case.
2 We'll begin this morning by --this
3 afternoon by taking the appearances of the parties with
4 Cambridge Telephone.
5 MS.MELILLO:Cynthia Melillo,attorney
6 for Cambridge Telephone.
7 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Welcome.
8 Commission Staff.
9 MR.DUVALL:Michael Duvall for Commission
10 Staff.
11 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Very good,
12 welcome.Are there any other parties that I missed for
13 purposes of identification for the record?
14 MR.OUMAR:Bachchi Oumar,CFO for
15 Cambridge Telephone.
16 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you.Are
17 there any preliminary matters that need to come before
18 the Commission at this time,motions or requests?I
19 suppose at this time you could read your statement or
20 your changes.
21 MS.MELILLO:I request to do a short
22 opening statement.I will submit a written statement to
23 the court reporter,but I do want to review one piece of
24 this case that's different than the other case
25 beforehand,so in Staff's affidavit,the Staff mentioned
CSB REPORTING 6 COLLOQUY
208.890.5198
1 differences in amounts between all the different reports
2 submitted by the Company over the --you know,since
3 January.
4 I already explained and will briefly
5 review the difference between the April 14th annual
6 statement and the May 15th annual statement are simply a
7 result of pre-audit and post-audit numbers,but the other
8 report that Staff mentioned was the IPUC Form I.That
9 report does in fact separate interstate versus intrastate
10 regulated revenues.
11 This was filed by a firm engaged by the
12 Company for regulatory reporting and the Company's
13 separation study and it was filed prior to the April 1st
14 filing deadline.That report states that 4,482,487 is
15 the total Idaho operations subject to separations.
16 Staff's report,Staff's affidavit,says
17 that that number is the total,was reported as the total,
18 gross intrastate operating revenue,which it's not.It's
19 the total Idaho operations subject to separations.
20 On the same page of that report,the
21 report states that total revenues from intrastate
22 operations was 716,954.That number is much closer to
23 what the Company reported as intrastate revenue than what
24 Staff contends the intrastate revenue to be.The
25 difference between the amount claimed by Company of
CSB REPORTING 7 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 928,139 versus the 716,954 listed in Form I is that Form
2 I and the annual report do not report the same things and
3 the timing of the reports is different.
4 A Form I reports revenues subject to
5 regulation,so it does not include nonregulated revenues.
6 Form I does not include,for instance,ACAM support or
7 nonregulated revenue from certain funds received from,
8 for instance,Syringa Networks.The Company claims a
9 portion of ACAM support as intrastate revenue,and that's
10 because some --most of the ACAM support goes for
11 internet,build-out.
12 Some of it is for high-cost loop support
13 and that's the piece that gets included in intrastate
14 revenue,so that's what --what I really point out here
15 is there actually was a separation study done.There
16 actually is a separation study reported every year on
17 Form I reported to the Commission and it does separate
18 interstate versus intrastate regulated revenues,and I do
19 have a copy of the first page of that report which shows
20 the total operations subject to separations and the total
21 separated results of Idaho operations.
22 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Have those been
23 submitted?
24 MS.MELILLO:Right now.
25 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:I guess that will
CSB REPORTING 8 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 be Exhibit 1.Thank you.Staff,do you have a copy of
2 this?
3 (Ms.Melillo distributing documents.)
4 (Cambridge Telephone Company Exhibit No.1
5 was marked for identification.)
6 MS.MELILLO:If you look at line 15,
7 total revenues,under total Idaho operations subject to
8 separations,it's the number that Staff contends is the
9 number that should be subjected to assessment for the
10 special regulatory fee,but at the very end of that line
11 15 under separated results of Idaho operations,the
12 number 716,954,but revised upwards by the Company to
13 include things that aren't in the Form I report.
14 With that,I'm done with the differences
15 in the two opening statements.
16 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you very
17 much.Does the Company have witnesses to call today?
18 MS.MELILLO:Bachchi Oumar.
19 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:And we'll go ahead
20 and take the stand for your witnesses,though.
21 MS.MELILLO:Pardon?
22 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Yes,please,
23 again.
24
25
CSB REPORTING 9 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 BACHCHI SAMAHON-OUMAR,
2 produced as a witness at the instance of the Cambridge
3 Telephone Company,having been first duly sworn to tell
4 the truth,was examined and testified as follows:
5
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION
7
8 BY MS.MELILLO
9 Q Would you state your name for the
10 record?
11 A Bachchi Oumar.
12 Q What is your position with Cambridge
13 Telephone?
14 A I'm the CFO for the Company.
15 Q And how long have you been in that
16 position?
17 A Two years,three months.
18 Q And given your position with the Company,
19 is it safe to say that you're knowledgeable with respect
20 to the Company's operating revenues?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Did you prepare the Company's annual
23 operating statement showing 2022 year-end operating
24 revenues?
25 A Yes,I did.
CSB REPORTING 10 SAMAHON-OUMAR (Di)208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 Q And what is your understanding as to what
2 you are to include in the annual report?
3 A Well,the understanding was to include
4 only operations related to Idaho and we call it
5 intrastate.
6 Q Not on the certification,in the annual
7 report.
8 A Annual report,okay,got it.The annual
9 report was all the revenues derived and expenses incurred
10 for the Company in Idaho,yes,in total.
11 Q In the annual report do you separate out
12 intrastate versus interstate activity?
13 A No.
14 Q Where do you separate out your intrastate
15 number?
16 A We typically separate it out when we do
17 the certification in that one page that we provide on
18 April 1st.
19 Q Did you prepare that one-page
20 certification for the Company?
21 A Yes,I did.
22 Q How do you determine what amount goes on
23 the one-page Idaho gross intrastate operating revenue
24 certification?
25 A Well,I go through the set of accounts we
CSB REPORTING 11 SAMAHON-OUMAR (Di)
208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 have and try to determine which revenue items are derived
2 through Idaho sources and outside the state.Obviously,
3 like I mentioned,any internet-related revenues is
4 omitted from that calculation of intrastate,because the
5 understanding that we were working for the past many
6 years is that interstate revenues --internet service
7 revenues were an interstate classification,didn't have
8 the intrastate classification,so I eliminated everything
9 that was interstate from that reporting of Idaho
10 revenues.
11 Q I want to go back to the annual report for
12 a moment.
13 A Yeah.
14 Q In the annual report when you report all
15 gross revenue or gross income and,again,I'm not an
16 accountant,but I am okay with the interchangeability of
17 gross income versus gross revenue and if you're not,let
18 me know,but when you file that annual report,is that
19 all revenue sources,all revenue from all sources?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Okay,so we have no issue with the
22 Commission defining gross revenue/gross income as revenue
23 from all sources?
24 A Agreed.
25 Q Okay,it's just on the certification you
CSB REPORTING 12 SAMAHON-OUMAR (Di)208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 separate out that which is not intrastate?
2 A Yes.
3 Q Okay.At what point did you notice that
4 your filing of the certification might not be correct?
5 A When we received the assessment for 2023
6 sometime April/early May.
7 Q But after that,then you resubmitted with
8 the revised calculation separating out the interstate?
9 A Yes,I did.
10 Q Okay,my last question to you would be
11 would you sign off on a resubmitted certification of
12 gross intrastate operating revenue in the amount of
13 1,258,533.94 as true and correct to the best of your
14 knowledge?
15 A Yes,it will be consistent with how we
16 have done it in the past.
17 MS.MELILLO:No further questions.
18 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you.Staff?
19 MR.DUVALL:Thank you,Chair.
20
21 CROSS-EXAMINATION
22
23 BY MR.DUVALL:
24 Q Mr.Bachchi --
25 A Yes.
CSB REPORTING 13 SAMAHON-OUMAR (X)
208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 Q --between January 1st,2023,and May
2 31st,2023,is it true that you filed to the Commission
3 different or amended amounts of your 2022 gross
4 intrastate operating revenues?
5 A True.
6 Q Is it correct that you changed the
7 miscellaneous,changed or amended the miscellaneous,
8 revenue accounts from 5250 corporate operations revenue
9 to 5280 nonregulated revenue?
10 A Yes,I did.
11 Q What do these miscellaneous revenues
12 amounting to $1,306,439.53 represent?
13 A The one --those amounts that I excluded
14 from that report indicated all revenues that were
15 interstate that didn't belong in the intrastate
16 calculation that we had made.
17 Q Okay,so you filed an amendment to make a
18 distinction according to the Company between interstate
19 and intrastate?
20 A Yes.
21 MR.DUVALL:All right,thank you.No
22 further questions.
23 MS.MELILLO:I do have a redirect.
24
25
CSB REPORTING 14 SAMAHON-OUMAR (X)208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
2
3 BY MS.MELILLO:
4 Q You were just asked between January and
5 May did you file,was it,four different reports or
6 different reports reporting gross intrastate revenues.
7 Were those reports filing gross intrastate revenues or
8 were they gross revenues?
9 A The filing I submitted on April 1st was
10 gross intrastate revenues.
11 Q Which filing,the certification or --
12 A The certification that was due April
13 1st.
14 Q So the reports that counsel was discussing
15 were annual reports.Do they report gross intrastate
16 revenues?
17 A The annual reports did not report gross
18 intrastate,did not,but I did file it.
19 Q So you did not file differing reports with
20 differing amounts of intrastate revenues,it's just the
21 one certification with the mistaken amount and then the
22 objection with the request for a different amount?
23 A Yes.
24 MS.MELILLO:No further questions.
25 MR.DUVALL:Nothing further from Staff.
CSB REPORTING 15 SAMAHON-OUMAR (Redi)
208.890.5198 Cambridge Telephone
1 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you very
2 much.Does the Company have other witnesses to call?
3 MS.MELILLO:No,sir.
4 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Staff?
5 MR.DUVALL:Yes,we would like to call
6 Johan --
7 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Excuse me,sorry
8 about that.You don't have to stay up there the rest of
9 the afternoon,so my apologies for that.
10 (The witness left the stand.)
11 MR.DUVALL:Staff would like to call
12 Johan E.Kalala-Kasanda to the stand.
13
14 JOHAN E.KALALA-KASANDA,
15 produced as a witness at the instance of the Staff,
16 having been first duly sworn to tell the truth,was
17 examined and testified as follows:
18
19 DIRECT EXAMINATION
20
21 BY MR.DUVALL:
22 Q Would you please state your name and spell
23 your first and last name for the record?
24 A Johan E.Kalala-Kasanda,J-o-h-a-n
25 K-a-l-a-l-a -K-a-s-a-n-d-a.
CSB REPORTING 16 KALALA-KASANDA (Di)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 Q Are you the same Johan E.Kalala-Kasanda
2 who filed an affidavit in this case with Attachments A
3 through D?
4 A I am.
5 Q And would it be okay if I called you
6 Mr.Johan?
7 A Yes,it would be.
8 Q Thank you.Do you have any corrections or
9 modifications to your filed affidavit or attachments?
10 A No,I don't.
11 Q If I were to ask you questions today
12 relative to your affidavit or attachments,would they be
13 the same,would your answers be the same?
14 A Yes.
15 MR.DUVALL:Mr.Chair,I now move to
16 spread the filed affidavit and Attachments A through D on
17 the record as if read.
18 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Without objection,
19 it shall be spread across the record as if read.
20 MR.DUVALL:Thank you.
21 (Staff Exhibits A -D were admitted into
22 evidence.)
23 (The following prefiled affidavit of
24 Mr.Johan Kalala-Kasanda is spread upon the record.)
25
CSB REPORTING 17 KALALA-KASANDA (Di)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 I,Johan E.Kalala-Kasanda,being first duly
2 sworn under oath,depose and state as follows:
3 1.My name is Johan E.Kalala-Kasanda.I am over
4 21 years of age,of sound mind,and I have personal
5 knowledge of the facts stated herein.
6 2.The information contained herein is true and
7 correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
8 3.I am a Utilities Analyst 2 -
9 Telecommunications,at the Idaho Public Utilities
10 Commission ("Commission").I have been employed at the
11 Commission since November 2017.I am responsible for
12 telecommunication companies'applications to the
13 Commission.
14 4.On May 15,2023,Cambridge Telephone Company
15 ("Cambridge"or "Company")filed an objection,pursuant
16 to Idaho Code §61-1007,to the Company's 2023 annual
17 Assessment Fee.The Company included attachments and
18 exhibits,documenting the Commission's fee assessment
19 invoice as well as the Company's revised Gross Intrastate
20 Operating Revenues ("GIOR")for the calendar year 2022.
21 5.The Commission's operating budget is derived
22 from the assessment of regulatory fees upon utilities who
23 are subject to the Commission's jurisdiction.Idaho Code
24 §61-1003 provides that on or before April 1st of each
25 year,each utility company shall report its gross
CSB REPORTING 18 KALALA-KASANDA 1
208.890.5198 Staff
1 operating revenues from its intrastate business in Idaho
2 for the preceding calendar year.
3 6.Based upon the total amount of GIOR reported by
4 all the public utilities,the Commission then determines
5 the proportionate assessment applicable to each public
6 utility to recover the Legislature's authorized
7 appropriation.
8 7.Once each public utility's assessment is
9 determined,the Commission notifies the public utility of
10 its regulatory fee no later than May 1st of each year.
11 Such a fee shall be paid to the Commission in equal
12 semi-annual installments.Idaho Code §61-1005.Any
13 public utility may object to the fee "on or before the
14 time specified for payment for the first
15 /
16 /
17 /
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 19 KALALA-KASANDA la208.890.5198 Staff
1 installment of the assessment made against it."Idaho
2 Code §61-1007.
3 8.In its Objection email to the Commission,the
4 Company stated:
5 The 2022 revenues relating to "Idaho Only"(intra-state)was significantly overstated
6 thus increasing our assessment for 2023.
This was the result of me erroneously
7 including inter-state revenues.We
realized the mistake after we received
8 your assessments for 2022.I would like toapologizefortheerrorandhopeyoucan
9 accept the revised 2023 Operator's
Statement.The change in the assessment is
10 significant to us $1,839.57 versus
$8,884.29.
11 See Attachment C.
12 9.Based upon the definition of GIORs,Staff
13 calculated that Cambridge Telephone Company's GIOR for
14 2022 should be $4,962,101.66.See Attachment A.
15 10.Staff recommends that the Company and all of
16 its subsidiaries be audited again for the next filing,
17 with a special focus on the procedures implemented and
18 the effectiveness of these changes.
19 11.Staff recommends that the Company be ordered to
20 conduct a separation study of its interstatel and
21 intrastate2 gross operating revenues.
22 12.Staff recommends that the adoption of
23 guidelines for the reporting of gross intrastate
24 operating revenues be established so as to standardize
25 the reporting procedures for all public utility
CSB REPORTING 20 KALALA-KASANDA 2
208.890.5198 Staff
1 companies.
2 13.For the purpose of regulatory assessment,the
3 definition of the GIOR was provided in Commission Order
4 No.28760 of Case No.EIR-R-01-01.On page 10 of this
5 Order,the Commission stated:
6 Idaho Code §63-3011 defines the term
gross income as having the same meaning as
7 defined in Section 61(a)of the Internal
Revenue Code.The Tax Code defines gross
8 income as all income from whatever sourcesderived,including (but not limited to)
9 the following items:compensation for
services,including fees,commissions,
10 fringe benefits,and similar items;gross
income derived from business;gains
11 derived from dealings in property;
interests;rents;royalties;dividends;
12 annuities,income from life insurance and
endowment contracts;pensions;income from
13 discharge of indebtedness;distributive
shares of partnership gross
14 /
15 /
16 /
17
18
19
20
21
22 lInterstate gross operating revenues means operating revenues
generated from business activities conducted "between states."
23 2Intrastate gross operating revenues means operating revenues
generated from business activities conducted "within a state,such as
24 Idaho."
25
CSB REPORTING 21 KALALA-KASANDA 2a
208.890.5198 Staff
1 income;income in respect of a decedent;
and income from an interest in an estate
2 or trust.26 U.S.C.§61(a).In discussing
the concept of gross income,our Supreme
3 Court has interpreted gross income asincludingincomefromanysource.
4 Henderson v.Smith,128 Idaho 444,915
P.2d 6 (1996)(construing the Idaho Child
5 Support Guideline,I.R.C.P.6(c)(6)
6 Order No.28760 (internal quotations and changes
7 omitted).Therefore,Staff followed the methodology
8 determined in Order No.28760 to determine intrastate
9 revenues as all revenues that are generated as a result
10 of the Company's activities that occur only in the State
11 of Idaho.The origination and ultimate destination must
12 be within the state.
13 14.Staff performed several substantive tests of
14 the reported revenue.The testing of relevant assertions
15 included:completeness,accuracy,valuation and
16 allocation,existence,cutoff,occurrence,and
17 classification and understandability.As explained below,
18 Staff found that the Company erroneously reported its
19 intrastate revenues.
20 15.The reported revenues are classified into
21 revenue accounts and these revenue accounts are broken
22 into categories that Staff established for intrastate
23 operating revenues.These categories generally mirror
24 revenue accounts established by the Code of Federal
25 Regulation ("CFR"),47 CFR Part 32 Subpart D.The Code
CSB REPORTING 22 KALALA-KASANDA 3
208.890.5198 Staff
1 provides the Uniform System of Accounts for
2 Telecommunications Companies.
3 16.The revenue accounts include the actual cash
4 revenues (or equivalents)that have or will occur as a
5 result of the company's ongoing major or central
6 operations during the period.They include the revenues
7 which arise from furnishing regulated telecommunications
8 services to others,from directory advertising,rentals
9 of telecommunications assets and from providing other
10 services which are directly associated with the provision
11 of regulated telecommunications services.
12 17.Staff does not believe operating revenues were
13 accurately reported or properly updated by the Company.
14 This is because,since January 2023,the Company has
15 reported four different amounts of GIOR.In the annual
16 report filed to the Commission on April 14,2023,the
17 Company's GIOR was reported to be $5,795,067.85.On March
18 3,2023,the GIOR reported was $4,482,487.On May 15,
19 2023,the Company filed a revised GIOR of $928,139,
20 claiming calculation errors.The latest revised GIOR was
21 filed by the Company on May 25,2023,in the amount of
22 1,258,533.94.See Attachment A.
23 /
24 /
25 /
CSB REPORTING 23 KALALA-KASANDA 3a
208.890.5198 Staff
1 18.During the audit,Staff uncovered numerous
2 inaccuracies in the calculations of account balances,
3 misclassifications,and inappropriate presentation of
4 account balances.The Company did not fully respond to
5 the first round of audit requests issued by Staff.
6 19.Staff was particularly concerned with different
7 classifications that the Company reported in the accounts
8 5250 Corporate Operations Revenue of $1,306,4403 and 5280
9 Nonregulated Operating Revenue of the same amount of
10 $1,306,4404.In the annual report filed with the
11 Commission on April 14,2023,this was allocated to
12 sub-account 5250.However,in the revised GIOR forms the
13 Company moved these revenues to account 5280 Nonregulated
14 Operating Revenue and made this a basis for its filing
15 error.Staff does not agree with this presentation.
16 20.For the reasons outlined above,Staff believes
17 that it is inappropriate for the Commission to accept any
18 of the four versions of the GIOR submitted by the
19 Company.Staff recommends that the Commission accept the
20 amount of $4,962,101.66 as the GIOR for the Company for
21 the year 2022.
22 21.Staff recommends an audit of the internal
23 oversight/controls and intrastate revenues be completed
24 for the operating year 2023 by Commission Staff,with a
25 special focus on the procedures implemented and the
CSB REPORTING 24 KALALA-KASANDA 4
208.890.5198 Staff
1 effectiveness of these changes.The audit will determine
2 compliance with the definition of Intrastate Revenues as
3 provided by the Commission.
4 22.Staff also recommends that the Company be
5 ordered to conduct a separation study of its interstate
6 and intrastate gross operating revenues.Additionally,
7 Staff recommends that the adoption of guidelines for the
8 reporting of gross intrastate operating revenues be
9 established so as to standardize the reporting procedures
10 for all public utility companies.
11 /
12 /
13 /
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 SAs shown in Attachment B and on line 34 of column E in Attachment A.
4As shown in Attachment D and the total of lines 38 to 54 in
25 Attachment A.
CSB REPORTING 25 KALALA-KASANDA 4a
208.890.5198 Staff
1 (The following proceedings were had in
2 open hearing.)
3
4 DIRECT EXAMINATION
5
6 BY MR.DUVALL:(Continued)
7 Q Mr.Johan,on paragraph 5 of your
8 affidavit,you state Idaho Code Section 61-1003 provides
9 that on or before April 1st of each year,each utility
10 shall report its gross operating revenues from its
11 intrastate business in Idaho representing the preceding
12 calendar year;is that correct?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Does Idaho Code Section 61-1003 state
15 specifically that it is dealing with gross operating
16 revenues?
17 A Yes.
18 Q Concerning those gross operating revenues,
19 does Idaho Code 61-1003 specifically state that it's
20 dealing with specifically intrastate revenue?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Okay,thank you.Now,that we have
23 established we're dealing with intrastate revenue,let's
24 move on to paragraph 13 of your affidavit.What has the
25 Commission previously defined gross intrastate revenue to
CSB REPORTING 26 KALALA-KASANDA (Di-Ct'd)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 be?
2 A These are revenues that the Company
3 generates from its business activities within the State
4 of Idaho.Specifically,the origination and destination
5 of those revenues shall be within the State of Idaho.
6 Q So at the end of 13,you state that the
7 origination and ultimate destination must be within the
8 State of Idaho.Is there any determination of whether
9 it's regulated or nonregulated income in that quote from
10 the previous Commission Order?
11 A No.
12 Q Okay.Now,the quoted section in your
13 affidavit uses the word "income."I know that opposing
14 counsel did not have any objection to this,but as I
15 understand it,did the Commission in Case 28760 treat
16 gross income the same as gross revenues for the purposes
17 of assessment fees?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Okay,and lastly,does the distinction
20 between regulated and deregulated operations matter for
21 the purposes of determining gross intrastate revenue
22 relative to assessment fees?
23 A No.
24 MR.DUVALL:Okay,the witness is now
25 available for cross-examination.
CSB REPORTING 27 KALALA-KASANDA (Di-Ct'd)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 CROSS-EXAMINATION
2
3 BY MS.MELILLO:
4 Q Mr.Johan,in your affidavit,you
5 mentioned differing numbers from differing reports and
6 you listed out four different reports in your exhibit to
7 the affidavit,one of those reports being Form I that was
8 filed on behalf of the Company by its --the Company that
9 it uses for its regulatory filings.Is that Form I not
10 essentially a separation study?
11 A I'm not sure that I have seen that form.
12 Q You referenced it in your affidavit,but I
13 can give you a copy of this.
14 A I have the report.That was filed on
15 March 29th.
16 Q I need to find your affidavit.
17 A No,I have not seen this before.Even
18 within the audit request that I examined and what I
19 received,this separation study was not in there.
20 Q Well,in your Exhibit A,you list out the
21 Company's annual report on 4/14,the Company report on
22 GIOR.I'm not sure what that is.That must be the
23 certification.
24 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Ms.Melillo,quick
25 question for you,is this the same that you provided to
CSB REPORTING 28 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 us?
2 MS.MELILLO:Yes,Exhibit 1.
3 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Okay,thank you
4 very much.
5 Q BY MS.MELILLO:Well,this form is a form
6 that's filed with the Commission,so it would have been
7 available to the Commission,but you have it now,so this
8 form is a separation study,essentially.Are we to
9 assume that everything on here is to be ignored?
10 A Well,it does require me further examining
11 it,because what I refer to in Exhibit A,I mentioned
12 four times that we have received four different numbers.
13 In the first column that was filed on April 14th,this is
14 the annual report that usually the Company is expected to
15 file.In that annual report,there are two columns,
16 total and Idaho.
17 The expectation is as recommended by the
18 System of Accounts,Code of Federal Regulations,the
19 Company is expected to make a distinction between what is
20 intrastate and interstate.When they do that,then in
21 the annual report,the two columns will then be filled
22 out.That is the report that was filed on April 14th.
23 Q Are there instructions on that report that
24 says that Idaho column is the separation into intrastate,
25 because that is not the Company's understanding and not
CSB REPORTING 29 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 any other companies'understanding.In reviewing annual
2 reports,they all say same as other column.
3 A Well,from my reading of the Code of
4 Federal Regulations --
5 Q But I'm not talking about the Code of
6 Federal Regulations.I'm talking about the annual
7 report.
8 A Well,the purpose of that particular
9 column,because that column has a purpose,the purpose of
10 that column,it says clearly in the top of the column
11 Idaho only,so --
12 Q Total revenues for Idaho only.
13 A Yes,and then in the other column,the
14 first column,it states clearly total Company,so there
15 is a distinction between the two.
16 Q Again,a company that does business in
17 Idaho and Nevada and Oregon and Washington would be total
18 company versus total revenues Idaho,not necessarily
19 segregated out into intrastate revenues in Idaho versus
20 interstate revenues.
21 A But in the instructions in the composition
22 of accounts,it is specifically stated --
23 Q On the annual report form?
24 A Well,the information that you have and
25 you put into the annual report,you are told how to
CSB REPORTING 30 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 separate them.With that separation,you will then put
2 them into annual report,because the annual report does
3 have two columns.It is quite difficult to ignore one
4 column and just use the other column,because there is a
5 reason for that.
6 Q Is it a reasonable interpretation that the
7 Idaho column is total revenues from services in Idaho
8 versus received from my customers in Oregon?
9 A Well,that will be --my interpretation of
10 it is that Idaho only is only what you have received in
11 Idaho.
12 Q It could be from,received in Idaho from,
13 interstate business,yes?
14 A That should be part of the total Company.
15 Q Why would that not be part of Idaho
16 Company?
17 A Because you received your income from
18 outside of Idaho.
19 Q No,I received my income in Idaho for
20 services that were interstate in nature.
21 A That then will be part of your Idaho
22 column.
23 Q But it does not separate it out into
24 interstate versus intrastate in the Idaho column.
25 A Okay,let me elaborate.You have a
CSB REPORTING 31 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 customer in Oregon.You serve that customer in Oregon
2 from Idaho.The revenue that you generate from that
3 customer who isn't in Idaho,as per the Commission's
4 definition,that revenue is interstate revenue from your
5 customer in Idaho,so when you put it in your annual
6 report,it will be into the total Company,not in the
7 Idaho only.I don't know if that makes clear.
8 Q I think we're all clear that the Oregon
9 customer is not Idaho only and is total Company.
10 A Uh-huh.
11 Q But the Idaho customer might be an
12 internet customer and would be total revenue within Idaho
13 but not intrastate revenue in Idaho,so my point being,
14 that annual report does not separate interstate versus
15 intrastate.It's simply total revenues generated in
16 Idaho only.The separation study,Form I,is what
17 separates those total revenues in Idaho into interstate
18 versus intrastate.
19 A So my understanding is the amounts after
20 breaking it down,making the separation,the amount you
21 generate from the two,that is what you report on your
22 annual report,because on your annual report,you are
23 showing what are the revenues that you have generated in
24 Idaho and what are the revenues which are total Company
25 that exclude Idaho;otherwise,what we have is you submit
CSB REPORTING 32 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 two revenues to the Commission,that's why we have this
2 confusion today.We don't know which one is Idaho and
3 which one is not Idaho.
4 Normally,once this separation study is
5 conducted,from there you then have the results that will
6 allow you to fill in your annual report to Idaho,so when
7 we receive it,we can clearly see that these are the
8 revenues that generated total Company and these are
9 revenues that are only Idaho.
10 Q So what you're now saying,although all
11 years prior this has never been done by any company that
12 I have ever worked with,that Idaho only column should
13 solely be intrastate revenues that are going to be filed
14 for purposes of the special regulatory fee?
15 A Well,that is correct,because when you
16 come down to the bottom line of it,really the most basic
17 origin of it,when the accounts are put together,that is
18 where you do your break-up,because the instructions into
19 the composition of the account makes it very clear.I
20 have read this document thoroughly,the Code of Federal
21 Regulations.It states very clearly how to break them up
22 originally and then once you do that,you report them
23 into your accounts and you sign them.
24 Q Nowhere on the annual report does it refer
25 to breaking things down on that Idaho only column in
CSB REPORTING 33 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations.
2 A Well,every accountant,I'm sure
3 Mr.Bachchi will agree with me,every accountant will
4 know,even a [inaudible]will tell you,how to put your
5 accounts together.The CFR will tell you what accounts
6 you need to maintain and what you need to include in the
7 account.The instructions are very clear there.From
8 that --
9 Q I don't think the instructions were clear
10 on the annual report that that Idaho only column is only
11 for intrastate revenues,which it's not.
12 A Well,I don't know what is your
13 interpretation of that column --
14 MR.DUVALL:I would object to a legal
15 conclusion on that one.
16 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Sustained.I
17 think let's focus our examination on questions,not
18 assumptions and statements,please.
19 Q BY MS.MELILLO:I will concede that my
20 client viewed that Idaho only column as total revenues in
21 Idaho and not a separation.The separation was based on
22 the statement,the certification,and Form I,so how we
23 get over that,I guess,is a big misunderstanding and
24 perhaps additional filings,but,again,going back to the
25 report,you didn't make --did you make any review of any
CSB REPORTING 34 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 of the revenues that might be considered interstate?
2 A Yes.I thoroughly conducted my review
3 using the general ledger that was submitted to us as part
4 of the audit request.It is from that general ledger,
5 because from the information I received,the information
6 on the general ledger were audited.My main concern was
7 that we received information that was not audited,but
8 the general ledger information was audited,so from the
9 general ledger,plus the instructions of the CFR,Uniform
10 System of Accounting,I then re-calculated everything
11 taking into consideration the definition of what is
12 considered gross intrastate operating revenues.
13 When I did that,plus the verification of
14 what the Company has already done,I come up with my
15 total;however,prior to that,I received four different
16 amounts that was submitted.The amount received as part
17 of the review,the review was revised twice.There was a
18 review that was submitted on May 15th and then another
19 review that was submitted as part of the audit request.
20 All that confusion made me feel that an adequate and
21 proper separation study needs to be conducted in order
22 for a good understanding and an audit be made.
23 Q And you won't accept Form I that was filed
24 with the Commission as a formal audited separation
25 study?
CSB REPORTING 35 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 A Well,this will require review from me.I
2 have not seen this before.This would require review
3 from me,because --
4 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Asked and answered
5 twice now,too,so thank you.
6 Q BY MS.MELILLO:In questioning from
7 counsel,he asked several times whether Idaho Code
8 61-1003 references regulated versus nonregulated or
9 deregulated and,of course,it does not,but it says
10 revenues from its intrastate utility business.What do
11 you make of that word utility?Is that to be given any
12 meaning?
13 MR.DUVALL:Again,asking for a legal
14 conclusion.
15 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:I believe counsel
16 accepts that.
17 Q BY MS.MELILLO:Even looking at your
18 Exhibit A and all of your calculations of what should be
19 included in Company's assessment fees,we've got routers
20 and modems,even though the guidance from the Commission
21 excludes that stuff,cell phone and accessories,even
22 though wireless is excluded,Wilderness Wireless,
23 nonregulated revenue,again,although the statute does
24 reference regulated versus nonregulated,I do believe the
25 word utility has some meaning.CPE,which again on the
CSB REPORTING 36 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 guidance is excluded.Internet,which I understand your
2 position is internet is intrastate and I guess we just
3 have to differ about that for the moment,but you gave no
4 deference to any of those categories.You just assumed
5 based on your audit that that was all going to be
6 considered intrastate?
7 A Not quite.Internet I do want to
8 reiterate that it is partially intra and partially inter.
9 It very much comes down to the physical equipment,where
10 they are geographically located.
11 Q But you did not exclude any of it?
12 A Well,that is because normally in accounts
13 like this will have it broken down into two as per the
14 CFR recommendations,because I read the CFR how this
15 needs broken down.It needs to be broken down into two.
16 Part of the internet that is interstate revenue needs to
17 be specified and intrastate also needs to specified.I
18 very much walked through line by line using two prongs,
19 the CFR recommendation as to what needs to go into what
20 account and the definition of the Commission as what is
21 considered in intrastate revenue.That's how I came up
22 with this.
23 MS.MELILLO:No further questions.
24 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you.Staff?
25 MR.DUVALL:Yes,thank you.
CSB REPORTING 37 KALALA-KASANDA (X)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
2
3 BY MR.DUVALL:
4 Q Mr.Johan,you were provided,I believe it
5 was,Form I,and am I correct in understanding that you
6 weren't saying you reject that as a form,only that you
7 would need to review it because you've only seen it just
8 now.Is that a correct understanding?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q Okay,thank you.Counsel asked you or at
11 least mentioned that in Idaho Code 61-1003,it does say
12 utility.It does say utility in fact,does it not?
13 A It does.
14 Q But in Case No.28760,or thank you,Order
15 number in Case No.EIR-R-01-01,the section you quoted in
16 your affidavit on paragraph 16 says,and this is about
17 gross operating revenue,it says all income;correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And it goes from everything to fees and
20 compensation for services to life insurance income?
21 A That's correct.
22 Q So all is an incredibly broad statement
23 there,would you agree?
24 A Yes,sir.
25 Q Okay,so now,you stated,also,that on
CSB REPORTING 38 KALALA-KASANDA (Redi)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 the end of paragraph 13 that it's the origin and ultimate
2 destination that must be within the state to be
3 considered intrastate income;correct?
4 A Yes,that's correct.
5 Q So it's your position that if either the
6 origin or the destination was outside of the State of
7 Idaho,say,in Oregon,yeah,that would be interstate
8 income;correct?
9 A That's correct.
10 Q But with 61-1003 saying that a --that its
11 income for a --the gross operating revenue for a
12 utility,it narrows intrastate down to with this case
13 here all income,it's your understanding that anything
14 from whether it's the utility's sort of main line
15 providing internet or even up to --as long as the origin
16 and ultimate destination are within the State of Idaho,
17 anything as broad as life insurance could be intrastate
18 income;correct?
19 A That's correct.
20 MR.DUVALL:Thank you.No further
21 questions.
22 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Redirect?
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 39 KALALA-KASANDA (Redi)208.890.5198 Staff
1 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
2
3 BY MS.MELILLO:
4 Q The Order number you reference does relate
5 to railroads,not utilities and not telephone utility,so
6 again,the Company has no issue with gross income/gross
7 revenue including all of the Company's revenues,but for
8 purposes of this assessment,we must show gross operating
9 revenues from intrastate utility business.That's the
10 clarifier that we're missing,yes?I mean,obviously,
11 we're not assessing the regulatory fee on life insurance
12 proceeds;correct?
13 A That's correct.
14 Q So that would not be a utility business;
15 correct?
16 MR.DUVALL:Legal conclusion.
17 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Can you just
18 perhaps try to pose this in a different question format?
19 You're trying to get statements that he's in agreement
20 with.Pose it in more of a question format.
21 Q BY MS.MELILLO:Would life insurance be
22 considered a utility function,a utility business?
23 A That depends how the Company describes it
24 and puts it into the account.
25 Q Different question,would cable TV be
CSB REPORTING 40 KALALA-KASANDA (ReX)208.890.5198 Staff
1 considered a utility business?
2 A Cable TV is a provision of communication
3 services.
4 Q Is it a regulated utility business?
5 A Well,that is a different question.As
6 far as regulation,I am not --I did not do my work in
7 this particular project to look at what is regulated and
8 what is not regulated.I only looked at what is
9 intrastate and what is interstate,so I did not look at
10 that part.
11 Q So there's further things that you could
12 have looked at?
13 A Well,if I'm asked to look at what is
14 regulated and what is not regulated,that can be looked
15 at,but as far as my understanding of what considered
16 assessment fee,the definition of the Commission only
17 refers to what considered intrastate and interstate.
18 Whether they are regulated or not regulated,the
19 definition does not account for that.
20 MS.MELILLO:No further questions.
21 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you.Thank
22 you,Mr.Johan,for your testimony.
23 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Mr.Duvall,
24 further witnesses?
25 MR.DUVALL:Yes,Ms.Nancy Ashcraft.
CSB REPORTING 41 KALALA-KASANDA (ReX)208.890.5198 Staff
1 NANCY ASHCRAFT,
2 produced as a witness at the instance of the Staff,
3 having been first duly sworn to tell the truth,was
4 examined and testified as follows:
5
6 DIRECT EXAMINATION
7
8 BY MR.DUVALL:
9 Q Would you please state and spell your
10 name,your first and last name,for the record?
11 A Nancy Ashcraft,N-a-n-c-y A-s-h-c-r-a-f-t.
12 Q Are you the same Nancy Ashcraft that filed
13 an affidavit in this case?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And do you have any corrections or
16 modifications to your filed affidavit?
17 A No.
18 Q If I were to ask you questions today
19 relative to your affidavit,would your answers be the
20 same?
21 A Yes.
22 MR.DUVALL:Mr.Chair,I would now move
23 to spread the affidavit,the filed affidavit,on the
24 record as if read.
25 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Without objection,
CSB REPORTING 42 ASHCRAFT (Di)208.890.5198 Staff
1 it shall be spread.
2 (The following prefiled affidavit of
3 Ms.Nancy Ashcraft is spread upon the record.)
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 43 ASHCRAFT (Di)
208.890.5198 Staff
1 I,Nancy Ashcraft,being first duly sworn under
2 oath,depose and state as follows:
3 1.My name is Nancy Ashcraft.I am over 21 years
4 of age,of sound mind,and I have personal knowledge of
5 the facts stated herein.
6 2.The information contained herein is true and
7 correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
8 3.I am a Financial Specialist,Senior at the
9 Idaho Public Utilities Commission ("Commission").I
10 started working in this position in 2016.I am
11 responsible for the billing and collection of annual fees
12 assessed on public utilities as described in Idaho Code
13 §§61-1001 through 61-1008.
14 4.In my position,I am aware that Cambridge
15 Telephone Company.("Company")objected to its 2023
16 assessment fees ("Objection").The Company filed its
17 Objection and two accompanying Exhibits on May 15,2023.
18 5.The Company claimed it made an error in the
19 intra-state data that it sent to the Commission;the
20 Company stated this error resulted in an assessment fee
21 of $8,884.29 instead of $1,839.57.
22 6.The Commission issued Notice of Objection on
23 May 26,2023,and the Company was served the Notice of
24 Objection Hearing via email on that same date.See IDAPA
25 31.01.01.14.The Company was also sent the Notice of
CSB REPORTING 44 ASHCRAFT 1208.890.5198 Staff
1 Objection Hearing via certified mail as courtesy.The
2 Objecting Hearing has been set for June 8,2023,in
3 accordance with Idaho Code §61-1007.
4 /
5 /
6 /
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 45 ASHCRAFT la
208.890.5198 Staff
1 (The following proceedings were had in
2 open hearing.)
3 MR.DUVALL:The witness is now available
4 for cross-examination.
5 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Thank you very
6 much.
7 MS.MELILLO:No questions.
8 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:No questions.
9 Thank you,Ms.Ashcraft,no questions from us.
10 (The witness left the stand.)
11 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Do you have any
12 other witnesses to call today?
13 MR.DUVALL:No.
14 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:No.Does the
15 Staff have any additional items they wish to discuss or
16 the Company?
17 MR.DUVALL:Yes,actually.Does opposing
18 counsel anticipate submitting any briefs or any
19 supplemental information in this case?
20 MS.MELILLO:I think we'd like the
21 opportunity to do that.
22 MR.DUVALL:Okay,because the statute
23 governing the timeline in this case mandates that an
24 Order be out within 20 days.All that Staff would ask is
25 that either the Commission allow for an intermediate
CSB REPORTING 46 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 Order,as I believe my correct understanding of the
2 statute doesn't require a final Order to be out within 20
3 days,or that opposing party if they're going to file
4 supplemental materials that they file that with enough
5 time for Staff to file a brief if that's determined
6 necessary and for an Order to come out within 20 days,
7 and that's 20 regular days,not 20 business days,if I
8 read the statute correctly.
9 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:So Staff is
10 directing the Commission to interpret what you just said
11 and I'm having a difficult time doing that.Mr.Duvall,
12 could you --if you want me to form this into some sort
13 of plan,what are you asking me to do?
14 MR.DUVALL:I'm asking for,just for,
15 enough time to if opposing counsel submits additional
16 materials for Staff to respond to those materials and
17 then give the Commission enough time to deliberate all
18 within 20 days,so I guess what I'm asking specifically
19 is can opposing counsel submit that material within the
20 next,say,business week or something to that effect?
21 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:So the docket will
22 remain open for this period of time,then;is that what
23 you're asking to do?
24 MR.DUVALL:Only if they're going to
25 submit additional materials.
CSB REPORTING 47 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:And you anticipate
2 submitting additional materials?
3 MS.MELILLO:Yes.
4 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Okay.
5 MS.MELILLO:Mr.Chairman,I would be
6 okay with stipulating to a longer period of time for your
7 Order if we get a certain period of time to submit
8 materials.
9 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Statutorily is
10 that required?
11 MR.DUVALL:I would want to review the
12 statute again,but I believe that we could issue an
13 Order,because it just says an Order must be issued
14 within 20 days,it is my current understanding,which I
15 might change after reviewing the statute again,that we
16 could issue an intermediate or interlocutory Order within
17 20 days allowing for additional time to be given for
18 opposing to counsel to submit and,if necessary,for us
19 to respond.
20 I'll just read the statute into the record
21 starting within about halfway down.Within 20 days of
22 such hearing,this hearing,the Commission shall make and
23 enter its findings and issue its Order in accordance with
24 said findings and forthwith transmit the same to the
25 objector by registered mail.It doesn't say that it must
CSB REPORTING 48 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 be a final Order,so we would want to perhaps do some
2 research on whether it must be a final Order,but if we
3 don't find anything that stipulates that it must be a
4 final Order,we would not object to an interlocutory
5 Order being submitted within 20 days after which a final
6 Order could be submitted within the Commission's schedule
7 or guidelines.
8 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Well,that cleared
9 everything right up for me.
10 MS.MELILLO:Would the Order be
11 appealable?
12 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Excuse me?
13 MS.MELILLO:Would the Order be
14 appealable?
15 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Of course.
16 MS.MELILLO:Not an interlocutory
17 MR.DUVALL:A final Order,they would
18 have 21 days to reconsider.
19 MS.MELILLO:Then we probably won't need
20 to submit any additional materials.We'll just wait and
21 see how it goes and appeal if needed.
22 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Okay,we could
23 also take a recess if you wanted to do this research
24 now.
25 MR.DUVALL:I think that if they're okay
CSB REPORTING 49 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 with seeing how things go,issuing a final Order and then
2 going on --dealing with reconsideration at that point,
3 I'm okay with that,but give me just one moment.
4 (Pause in proceedings.)
5 MR.DUVALL:If opposing counsel is okay
6 with closing the record now so that we can get a final
7 Order out within 20 days of this hearing,then they can
8 reconsider if they feel so inclined,Staff has no
9 objection to that course of action.
10 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:I appreciate that
11 and whether or not counsel is in agreement or not,I was
12 going to close this out today anyway,and then you may
13 appeal if that's what you wish to do,so that's where
14 we're going to go with this.I do understand what you're
15 trying to say,but I think what I'm going to do is go
16 ahead at this point in time,unless any other parties
17 find that there's something else other than what we spoke
18 of that needs to be added to the record,bring it up now,
19 if not,this hearing will complete --will be completed
20 and we will close the record,meaning this case will be
21 deemed fully submitted.
22 The Commissioners will deliberate
23 privately and issue a final decision in the course,and
24 then,of course,at that point you can determine whether
25 you wish to appeal or not,so that is where the
CSB REPORTING 50 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 Commission is going to go,so --
2 MR.DUVALL:Nothing further from Staff.
3 COMMISSIONER ANDERSON:Okay.With that
4 and all of our things have been completed here today,
5 this hearing is adjourned.
6 (All exhibits previously marked for
7 identification were admitted into evidence.)
8 MS.MELILLO:Thank you.
9 (The hearing concluded at 3:24 p.m.)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CSB REPORTING 51 COLLOQUY208.890.5198
1 A UTHENT I C A T I ON
2
3
4 This is to certify that the foregoing
5 proceedings held in the matter of Cambridge Telephone
6 Company's objection to its 2023 annual assessment fees,
7 commencing at 2:35 p.m.,on Thursday,June 8,2023,at
8 Commission Hearing Room,11331 West Chinden Blvd.,
9 Building 8,Suite 201-A,Boise,Idaho,is a true and
10 correct transcript of said proceedings and the original
11 thereof for the file of the Commission.
12 Accuracy of all prefiled testimony as
13 originally submitted to the Reporter and incorporated
14 herein at the direction of the Commission is the sole
15 responsibility of the submitting parties.
16
17
18
CONSTANCE S.BUCY
20 Certified Shorthand Reporter #1 7
21
2 2 CONSTANCE S BUCY
NOTARY PUBUC-STATE OF IDAHO
COMMISSION NUMBER 12995
2 3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 9-5-2024
24
25
CSB REPORTING 52 AUTHENTICATION(208)890-5198