The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About200304253rd Response of the Commission.pdfWELDON B. STUTZMAN DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION PO BOX 83720 BOISE, IDAHO 83720-0074 (208) 334-0318 ISB NO. 3283 Street Address for Express Mail: 472 W. WASHINGTON BOISE, IDAHO 83702-5983 Attorney for the Commission Staff, RECE\\lED '1..f\LED lUG3 ~?R 25 p~ 2: 29 ";U i PU1)l\C 01 \L'\f\ lS- CO Mr\ \ S S \ ON BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF QWEST CORPORATION FOR DEREGULATION OF BASIC LOCAL EXCHANGE RATES IN ITS BOISE, NAMPA, CALDWELL, MERIDIAN, TWIN FALLS, IDAHO FALLS, AND POCATELLO EXCHANGES. CASE NO. QWE-O2- COMMISSION STAFF RESPONSE TO QWEST' THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS The Staff of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission by and through its attorney of record Weldon B. Stutzman, Deputy Attorney General, hereby responds to Qwest Corporation s Third Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to Staff filed April 18, 2003. INTERROGATORY NO.: Following up on Staffs response to Qwest' Interrogatory 2-, does Dr. Johnson contend that Dr. Lincoln s value proposition theory - as defined in Dr. Lincoln s testimony starting at page 7, line 1 is incorrect? Please fully explain your answer and identify all facts and documents upon which you rely in formulating your answer. STAFF'S RESPONSE TO QWEST'S THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS APRIL 25, 2003 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO.: Dr. Johnson does not contend that Dr. Lincoln s "value proposition theory , as set forth on page 7, line 6 through page 8, line 8 of Dr. Lincoln s direct testimony, is incorrect. He does, however, disagree with Dr. Lincoln application of that theory to the present context, and/or Dr. Lincoln s assumptions concerning how that theory is relevant to the issues in this proceeding. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.: Please produce all documents identified in response to Interrogatory No. RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.: No documents identified. INTERROGATORY NO. 3-: Following up on Staffs response to Qwest Interrogatory 2-, does Staff contend that a wireless customer subscribing to an unlimited usage plan will, or is more likely to, experience poorer service quality than a wireless customer ofthe same carrier who subscribes to a limited usage plan? RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3-: No. While it may be technically possible for a carrier to provide a different quality of service to subgroups of its customers, Staff does not have any reason to believe any carriers do so. INTERROGATORY NO. 3-: In response to Qwest Interrogatory 2-, Staff states (b Jased upon Staff s understanding of the propogation of wireless signals, the basic theory of the design of cell systems and the locating of towers, as well as reports from other states of pockets within residential neighborhoods, where signals are not available, Staff has reason to believe additional such locations exist in these seven exchanges." Specifically identify each location in the seven exchanges Staff has reason to believe is a pocket wherein wireless service is not available. STAFF'S RESPONSE TO QWEST'S THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS APRIL 25 , 2003 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3-Staff has not attempted to identify specific pockets where wireless service is not available. This would entail a very complex and sophisticated study. Such a study would also require information on the location and operating parameters of each of the cell towers of each of the carriers, information that each carrier regards as proprietary. Staff simply notes that the references previously provided indicate that such pockets do typically exist, and Staff does not believe service in Idaho is unique enough to not also contain such pockets. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3-Produce all studies, surveys, data, maps facts or documents supporting Staff s opinion that wireless service is not available in the pockets identified in Interrogatory No. 3- RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3-No additional documents identified. INTERROGATORY NO. 3-As a matter of public policy, identify all reasons, aside from the possibility/likelihood that Qwest will increase basic local exchange service rates support Staff s position that approving Qwest's application in this case is not in the public interest. To be clear, Qwest is not asking for Staff to recite the reasons why Qwest does not satisfy the requirements of Section 62-622(3)(b) that functionally equivalent, competitively priced alternatives be reasonably available nor is Qwest seeking legal analysis. Qwest isfocusing in this request solely on the public interest analysis. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3-The public interest is not served if Qwest is deregulated prematurely - before it faces sufficient, actual competition to replace regulation that has long been in place to protect the public interest. The public needs to be protected from monopoly power until such time as that power has greatly diminished due to sufficiently intense robust and lasting competition. Staff has presented testimony that refutes the Company contention that wireless competition is sufficient to replace regulation in protecting the public interest. The lack of effective competition to Qwest's local services , and the subsequent ability STAFF'S RESPONSE TO QWEST'S THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS APRIL 25 , 2003 of Qwest to raise rates is, in and of itself, sufficiently contrary to the public interest to deny its petition. In addition, price regulation provides the Commission with another tool, which is probably more effective than fines enforced through the courts, for ensuring Qwest maintains service quality, does not place added pressure on customers to purchase bundled services, and also does not engage in discriminatory or anticompetitive practices. Until competition has developed to ensure the market will effectively provide that role, it is in the public interest for the Commission to maintain price regulation. DATED at Boise, Idaho, this "'day of April 2003. L.------~ Weldon B. Stutzman Deputy Attorney General Technical Staff: Wayne Hart Ben Johnson WS:WH::umisc/prdreg/response/qwetO2,25response to QWE 3ws STAFF'S RESPONSE TO QWEST'S THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS APRIL 25 , 2003 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I HAVE THIS 25TH DAY OF APRIL 2003 SERVED THE FOREGOING COMMISSION STAFF RESPONSE TO QWEST'S THIRD INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, IN CASE NO. QWE-02-, BY MAILING A COpy THEREOF, POSTAGE PREPAID TO THE FOLLOWING: MARY S HOBSON STOEL RIVES LLP SUITE 1900 101 S CAPITOL BLVD BOISE, ID 83702 ADAM L SHERR QWEST 1600 7TH AVE, ROOM 3206 SEATTLE, WA 98191 CONLEY WARD GIVENS PURSLEY LLP 277 N 6TH ST, SUITE 200 PO BOX 2720 BOISE, ID 83701-2720 CLAY R STURGIS MOSS ADAMS LLP 601 W RIVERSIDE, SUITE 1800 SPOKANE, W A 99201-0663 DEAN J MILLER McDEVITT & MILLER LLP PO BOX 2564 BOISE, ID 83701 BRIAN THOMAS TIME WARNER TELECOM 223 TAYLOR AVE NORTH SEATTLE, WA 98109 SUSAN TRAVIS WORLDCOM INe. 707 17TH STREET, SUITE 4200 DENVER, CO 80202 MARY JANE RASHER AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF THE MOUNTAIN STATES INC. 10005 S GWENDEL YN LANE HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80129-6217 MARLIN D ARD WILLARD L FORSYTH HERSHNER, HUNTER, ET AL 180 E 11TH AVE PO BOX 1475 EUGENE, OR 97440-1475 DEAN RANDALL VERIZON NORTHWEST INe. 17933 NW EVERGREEN PKWY BEA VERTON, OR 97006-7438 JOHN GANNON ATTORNEY AT LAW 1101 W RIVER, SUITE 110 BOISE, ID 83702 BEN JOHNSON BEN JOHNSON ASSOCIATES INC. 2252 KILLEARN CENTER BLVD TALLAHASSEE, FL 32308 Jo CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE