200304181st Response of Gary Neal.pdf

JOHNL. GANNON - ISB #1975
Attorney at Law
1101 W. River Street, Suite 110
Boise, Idaho 83702
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile [phone]
RECEIVED 0FILED
2003 APR 18 PH 4:
iU/U,;G PUGLIC
UTiLIT itS COfvlMISSION
Attorney for Meierotto, Padget, Herrick & Neal
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION
OF QWEST CORPORATION FOR PRICE
DEREGULATION OF BASIC LOCAL
EXCHANGE SERVICES
CASE NO. QWE-02-
GARY NEAL'S RESPONSE TO
QWEST CORPORATION'S FIRST
INTERROGATORIES AND
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF
DOCUMENTS TO GARY NEAL
COMES NOW, Gary Neal, by and through his attorney of record, John L. Gannon, and
pursuant to Rule 225 of Rules of Procedure of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission and Idaho Rules
of Civil Procedure 33 and 34, hereby submits the following responses to Qwest Corporation s First
Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal:
INTERROGATORY NO.1: Please identify all of Mr. Neal's credentials to offer opinion
testimony on the wireless industry and on wireless technology. For purposes of this Interrogatory,
opinion testimony" refers to any written or verbal testimony not specifically supported by a third
party document (i., not one produced by or on behalf Mr. Nea1) identified and produced in this case.
" credentials " Qwest seeks an identification of specific educational, vocational and first hand
research experiences, as well as any studies, reports or publications authored by Mr. Neal.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.I received a Bachelor of Arts Degree from
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal- 1
A:\NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses. wpd
Augustana College on the 29th day of May, 1983. I received a Doctor of Jurisprudence Degree from
the University of Oregon on the 16th day of May 1993. I do not have any specific education or
experience relevant to the wireless industry or technology. Vocationally, my credentials are as set
forth in my prepared testimony. I have not authored any studies, reports, or publications relevant to
the wireless industry or wireless technology but I have conducted first hand research on the internet
regarding the telecommunications industry, long distance and pay phone issues and issues regarding
Qwest charges. However, most of my testimony relates to my expertise in knowing what a law office
requires for its communications needs..
INTERROGATORY NO.2: Are you aware that there are multiple competing telephone
companies (known as competitive local exchange carriers or "CLECs ) registered in Idaho that can
provide residential and small business telephone service to Neal and Uhl PLLC?
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.Gary Nea1 objects to this interrogatory in that
it dea1s with an issue that is not involved in the case before this Commission. Without waiving this
objection Gary Nea1 answers as follows: No. In fact, I did not know that Neal & Uhl, PLLC could
be provided residential telephone service by any provider. There may be a CLEC that can provide
business service.
INTERROGATORY NO. 3: When Neal and Uhl PLLC replaced its older telephone system
in 2002, did it research or contact any CLECs to determine if Neal and UW PLLC could obtain its
telephone service from a CLEC? If yes, please fully describe all such contacts and why Neal and Uhl
PLLC opted to obtain service from Qwest. If no, please fully explain why it did not.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.Gary Neal restates his Objection to
Interrogatory No.2 and without waiving said objection answers as follows: No. Neal & Uhl, PLLC
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal - 2
A:\NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses. wpd
preferred to obtain service from Qwest, primarily as a consequence of its name recognition. Other
providers considered were C.A. Affinity. That company was rejected as a consequence of customer
servIce Issues.
INTERROGATORY NO. 4: When Neal and Uhl PLLC replaced its older telephone system
in 2002, did it research or contact any wireless providers to determine ifN eal and Uhl PLLC could
obtain all its telephone service from a wireless provider? If yes, please fully describe all such contacts
and why Nea1 and Uhl PLLC opted to obtain wireline service from Qwest. If no, please fully explain
why it did not.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.No. In my opinion there is no wireless
solution which meets the needs of Neal & 00, PLLC. A landline is absolutely critical to the
functioning of the firm.
INTERROGATORY NO.5: What wireless provider does Nea1 and Uhl PLLC use for the cell
phones identified on page 1 of your testimony. Identify and describe the wireless plan or plans Neal
and 00 PLLC uses.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5:Three offour attorneys at Neal & 00, PLLC
utilize cell phones for personal and business use. However, Neal & Uhl, PLLC does not subscribe
to any services provided by a wireless provider. Rather, the individual attorneys pay for their own
plans. My service is currently provided by AT&T.
INTERROGATORY NO. 6: Does Nea1 and Uhl PLLC direct its attorneys or runner to make
long-distance calls over the cell phone rather than over its wireline Qwest phones? Please fully explain
why or why not.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.6: No. This is not an issue which has been
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal - 3
A: \NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses. wpd
considered. The primary focus related to communication issues is flexibility. This is a choice thus
left to the individua1 attorneys or the runner. I seldom, if ever, make a long distance call over the cell
phone when a wireline is available. Problems with batteries, reception, transmission, and voice quality
render the Qwest wireline a superior product.
INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Do you admit that, if you were so inclined, Neal and 00, PLLC
could publicize its cell phone numbers to the public? If you answer this other than by simply stating
II admit, " please fully explain your answer and identify all facts or documents supporting your answer.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Yes.
REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.1: Produce all documents identified in response to
Interrogatory No.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.No documents have been
identified in response to Interrogatory No.
INTERROGATORY NO.8: Are you aware that many attorneys publicize their cell phone
numbers?
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.No. My experience is just the opposite.
Attorney s cell phone numbers are extremely difficult to come by.
INTERROGATORY NO.9: Did the Commission take action against Qwest in connection
with the informa1 complaint you mentioned on page 7 of your testimony? If yes, please fully explain
such action and identify all facts and documents relating to the informal complaint. If no, please fully
explain why the Commission did not take action and identify all facts and documents relating to the
informal complaint.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.I do not think the Commission took any
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal - 4
A:\NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses.wpd
action against Qwest in connection with the informal complaint, which was possibly just a phone
inquiry, mentioned on page 7 of my testimony. This was an issue that both the commission and
Qwest had significant knowledge of In fact, this issue appeared to be significantly similar to issues
raised with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC), which penalized
Qwest $30 000.00 for violating state rules that required company operators to offer consumers a
quote of the rates, charges, and fees for collect calls made from pay phones within the state. It was
my intent to pursue a claim against Qwest to recover my damages. However, it would appear that
Qwest was protected from such suit by statute and/or rule. Further efforts to pursue this issue were
deterred when I attempted to obtain additional information from Qwest. Qwest was not helpful in
providing additional information. I concluded it would take too much effort to recover a relatively
modest sum of money. However, Qwest's uncooperative attitude heightened my interest in
everything related to Qwest activities in the state of Idaho and makes me feel less secure should
Qwest local service ever become deregulated.
REOUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.2: Produce all documents identified in response to
Interrogatory No.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:All documents in my possession
related to Interrogatory No.9 are attached to my testimony. I don t know of any others.
INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Since 1994, have you exclusively used U S WEST or Qwest
business wireline service at the firm(s)at which you have worked? If no, please identify those time
periods during which you used other carriers.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10: I am uncertain as to which business wireline
services were utilized by the firms at which I worked. I understood that at one time one law office
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal - 5
A:\NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses. wpd
for which I worked did have some aspect of its service provided by C.A. Affinity during the 1990'
Usually it has been US WEST or Qwest.
INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Identify all billing disputes (other than the one discussed on
page 7 of your testimony)which you have had with US WEST or Qwest since 1994. For each
identify whether the dispute was resolved to your satisfaction, involved a complaint to the Public
Utilities Commission and, if so, how the complaint was resolved.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:I do not recollect any additional billing
disputes with US. West or Qwest since 1994. I have had some issues concerning linebacker service
at my persona1 residence as well as collect ca11 blocking. Neal & Uhl, PLLC also had a small dispute
concerning payment related to inclusion in the white pages when in fact, no listing was printed. All
billing disputes have been resolved with the exception of the Zero Plus dialing issue.
INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Please explain how you came to be involved in this case.
Include in your description whether you or your representative was contacted by Commission Staff,
Mr. Gannon or any other party and asked to participate. Also, if you or your representative was
contacted and invited to participate, include in your description, to your best recollection, what was
stated by that third party.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:Prior to my involvement in this matter, I had
discussed the Zero Plus dia1ing issue with John Gannon. Mr. Gannon was aware of my dissatisfaction
with Qwest. I am a regular subscriber and reader of the Idaho Statesman and read an article from the
Idaho Statesman concerning Qwest's attempt to deregulate its rates. The Statesman suggested that
a means of presenting evidence and cross-examining witnesses at future hearings was to intervene in
the action. Mr. Gannon and I explored the concept of intervention and I am participating as a party
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal - 6
A:\NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses.wpd
in that effort. I was not contacted by Commission staff and asked to participate. I am unaware of
Commission staff having contacted my representative. No other party, including but not limited to
Qwest, has asked me to participate in this matter.
INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Do you receive cable television service at your home? If so
what cable company provides you service?
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:Gary Neal objects to this interrogatory
because it dea1s with issues outside of the scope of this proceeding. Without waiving this objection
Gary Neal states: No.
INTERROGATORY NO. 14: Please provide your home address.
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14:My home address is 3255 N. Holl Drive
Eagle, Idaho 83616.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.3: To the extent not produced with regard to Request
for Production Nos. 1 or 2, please produce all documents in your possession relevant to your
responses to Interrogatory Nos. 1 -14.
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.A copy of the Statesman Article
is produced in Sharon Herricks responses..
DAT
Gary Neal
Gary Neal's Response to Quest Corporation s First Interrogatories
and Requests for Production of Documents to Gary Neal- 7
A: \NEAL IN1ERROGSDiscovery Responses. wpd
CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ON THE 18th DAY OF APRIL, 2003 , I
SERVED THE FOREGOING PLEADING IN CASE NO QWE-02-25. BY MAILING
A COpy THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID, (UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED) TO
THE FOLLOWING:
(HAND DELIVERED)
MARY S HOBSON
STOEL RIVES LLP
SUITE 1900
101 S CAPI8TOL BLVD
BOISE, ID 83702
CONLEY WARD
GIVENS PURSLEY LLP
277 N 6th ST, SUITE 200
PO BOX 2720
BOISE, ID 83702-2720
DEAN J MILLER
McDEVITT & MILLER LLP
PO BOX 2564
BOISE, ID 83701
(PERSONAL SERVICE)
WELDON STUTZMAN
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
IPUC
PO BOX 83720
BOISE, ID 83720-0074
MARL IN D ARD
WILLARD L FORSYTH
HERSHNER, HUNTER, ET AL
180 E 11th AVE PO BOX 1475
EUGENE, OR 97440-1475
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
ADAM L SHERR
QWEST
1600 7th AVE, ROOM 3206
SEATTLE, WA 98191
CLAY R STURGIS
MOSS ADAMS LLP
601 W RIVERSIDE, SUITE 1800
SPOKANE, W A 99201-0663
BRIAN THOMAS
TIME WARNER TELECOM
223 TALORAVENORTH
SEATTLE, WA 98109
DEAN RANDALL
VERIZON NORTHWEST INc.
17933 NW EVERGREEN PKWY
BEA VERTON, OR 97006-7438