SUSPND.docx

DONALD L. HOWELL, II
Deputy Attorney General
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
PO Box 83720
Boise, ID  83720-0074
Tele:  [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Attorney for the Idaho Public Utilities Commission
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC. FOR AUTHORITY TO INCREASE ITS RATES AND CHARGES FOR REGULATED TITLE 61 SERVICES.

U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
Appellant,
v.
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION,
Respondent.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
SUPREME COURT  
DOCKET NO.  24349
STIPULATED MOTION TO
SUSPEND APPEAL 
COME NOW U S WEST Communications, Inc. and the Idaho Public Utilities Commission through their respective counsels of record and request that the Court suspend the appeal in this matter pursuant to I.A.R. 13.2.  As outlined in greater detail below, the parties maintain that there is good cause to suspend the appeal so that the Commission may reconsider (as requested by U S WEST) its decision regarding one of the underlying issues in this appeal.
STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF SUSPENSION
A.  Background
On December 16, 1997, U S WEST Communications filed a Notice of Appeal in its last general rate case before the Commission, Case No. USW-S-96-5.  The parties are in agreement that the sole issue on appeal is the Commission’s decision that “toll blocking” or toll restriction service be re-regulated and become subject to the Commission’s regulatory authority found in Idaho Code, Title 61.(footnote: 1)  Toll blocking prohibits a customer from gaining access to a long-distance carrier or, in other words, from making long-distance telephone calls.  Tr. at 1213.
On February 25, 1998, the Commission Secretary served the proposed appellate record on the parties.  The Commission Staff filed a timely Answer and Objection to U S WEST’s request to include many of documents in the record on appeal.  In conformance with Appellate Rule 29, the Commission scheduled a hearing on the Staff’s objections for April 1, 1998. Both U S WEST and the Staff presented arguments at the hearing.  In addition, U S WEST also submitted a written response to Staff’s Answer and Objection at the start of the hearing.
B.  The Decision to Grant Reconsideration
After reviewing the parties’ oral arguments, their pleadings, the hearing record below and the proposed appellate record, the Commission found that the underlying record was inadequate as it pertained to one of the issues encompassed in this appeal.  Consequently, the Commission, on its own motion, amended its prior Order No. 27152 denying reconsideration and instead granted U S WEST’s Petition for Reconsideration.   Idaho Code § 61-626.  More specially, the Commission decided to reconsider whether it has authority under Idaho Code § 62-605(5) to require that toll restriction be removed from the Commission’s Title 62 jurisdiction and re-regulated under Title 61.   See Order No. 27659  attached to this Motion.  In other words, the Commission is granting the Company’s request for an additional evidentiary hearing to reconsider a matter in this appeal.
The Commission acknowledged that granting reconsideration at this time is “an unusual occurrence” but gives U S WEST exactly what it previously sought—an opportunity to present evidence regarding the claw-back issue.  The Commission also noted that granting reconsideration will negate the Court from having to review “issues which have not been reviewed sufficiently by the Commission.  In addition, [the Commission believes] that the time restriction imposed by our reconsideration statute will secure a just, speedy and inexpensive redetermination of this issue.”  Order No. 27659 at 9.
Appellate Rule 13(e) provides that unless stayed, the Public Utilities Commission “shall have continued jurisdiction of the matter and the parties consistent with the provision of applicable statutes. . . .”  Idaho Code § 61-624 provides that the Commission “may at any time, upon notice to the public utility affected, and after opportunity to be heard . . . rescind, alter or amend any order or decision made by it.”  Pursuant to this section, the Commission has amended its final Order on Reconsideration No. 27152 and partially granted the Company’s Petition  for Reconsideration. The Commission intends to receive additional evidence and reconsider its decision to “claw-back” toll restriction service to its Title 61 jurisdiction pursuant to Idaho Code § 62-605(5).
In considering a suspension on appeal the parties must disclose the duration of the requested suspension.  I.A.R. 13.2.  Idaho Code § 61-626 requires the Commission to complete its rehearing of this matter within thirteen (13) weeks.  Assuming that four weeks have already passed when the Commission issued Order No. 27152, the Commission calculates that it must complete its rehearing in nine weeks or by October 2, 1998.  The Commission then has 28 days (or until October 30, 1998), in which to issue its final Order on reconsideration.  Order No. 27659 at 9-10.  The Commission’s decision on reconsideration may abrogate U S WEST’s need to appeal. The parties contemplate that shortly after the Commission issues its final Order on reconsideration, U S WEST will be in a position to determine whether it will continue the appeal.  Consequently, the parties request that the Court suspend the appeal until November 11, 1998.
PRAYER
In summary, the parties respectfully request that the Court suspend the appeal until such time as the Commission has completed its reconsideration.  Granting the motion will allow the parties to fully litigate this issue before the Commission and possibly negate the need for an appeal or, in the alternative, providing a more concise record if the appeal is continued.  Consequently, there is good cause for the Court to suspend the appeal in this matter until November 11, 1998, pursuant to I.A.R. 13.2.  
Respectfully submitted this                     day of July 1998.
For the IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

Donald L. Howell, II
Deputy Attorney General
For
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC

STOEL RIVES LLP
Mary S. Hobson
Robin L. Denison
101 S. Capital Blvd., Ste 1900
Boise ID 83702-9011
vld:N:USW-S-96-5.dh6
CERTIFICATE  OF  SERVICE
I  HEREBY  CERTIFY  THAT  I  HAVE  THIS               DAY  OF JULY  1998,  SERVED  THE  FOREGOING STIPULATION TO SUSPEND APPEAL,  IN SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 24349/IPUC CASE  NO. USW-S-96-5,  MAILING  A  COPY  THEREOF,  POSTAGE  PREPAID  UNLESS  OTHERWISE  INDICATED,  TO  THE  FOLLOWING:
MARY S. HOBSON
ROBIN L. DENISON                  
STOEL RIVES LLP         
STE 1900
101 S CAPITOL BLVD
BOISE ID 83702-5958

Secretary
FOOTNOTES
1:
The Commission’s traditional rate setting authority is found in Title 61 of the Idaho Code.  The Idaho Telecommunications Act of 1988 added a new chapter to Title 62 and created a modified form of regulation. Idaho Code  § 62-604(2) allows telephone companies to remove telecommunications services other than “basic local exchange service” from the Commission’s Title 61 rate or price setting authority. In March 1989, U S WEST elected to remove its non-basic local services from Title 61and have these services regulated under the Commission’s Title 62 jurisdiction.  The rates for Title 62 services are not set by the Commission.