telecom.pdf

2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 1 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 22002
ANNUAL REPORT
Telecommunication Utilities Under
IPUC Rate Jurisdiction
Albion Telephone Corp (ATC)
P.O.Box 98
Albion, Idaho 83311-0098
208/675-5335
Cambridge Telephone Company
P.O.Box 86
Cambridge, Idaho 83610-0086
208/257-3314
CenturyTel of Idaho, Inc.
P.O.Box 1007
Salmon, Idaho 83467
208/756-3300
CenturyTel of the Gem State, Inc.
P.O.Box 9901
805 Broadway
Vancouver, Washington 98668
360/905-5800
111 A Street
Cheney, Washington 99114
509/235-3170
Citizens Telecommunications
Company of Idaho
4 Triad Center, Suite 220
Salt Lake City, Utah 84180
801/321-6602
P.O.Box 926
201 Lenora Street
McCall, Idaho 83638
208/634-6150
Inland Telephone Company
103 South Second Street
P.O.Box 171
Roslyn, Washington 98941
509/649-2211
Fremont Telecom, Inc.
110 E. Main Street
St. Anthony, Idaho 83445
208/624-7300
Midvale Telephone Exchange, Inc.
P.O.Box 7
Midvale, Idaho 83645-0007
208/355-2211
Verizon Northwest, Inc.
17933 N.W. Evergreen Parkway
P.O.Box 1100
Beaverton, Oregon 97075
503/629-2281
208/765-4351 (Coeur d’Alene)
800/483-4100 (Moscow)
208/263-0557, Ext. 204 (Sandpoint)
Oregon-Idaho Utilities, Inc.
P.O.Box 190310
Rincon Station
San Francisco, California 94119-0310
415/597-7811
714 Main Street
P.O.Box 1406
Caldwell, Idaho 83605
208/454-7800
Pine Telephone System, Inc.
P.O.Box 706
Halfway, Oregon 97834
541/742-2201
Potlatch Telephone Company
P.O.Box 138
702 E. Main Street
Kendrick, Idaho 83537-0138
208/835-2211
Rockland Telephone Company, Inc.
P.O.Box 269
147 W. 4th Avenue
Rockland, Idaho 83271
208/548-2345
Rural Telephone Company
704 W. Madison Avenue
Glenns Ferry, Idaho 83623
208/366-2614
Silver Star Telephone Company,
Inc.
P.O.Box 226
Freedom, Wyoming 83120
307/883-2411
Troy Telephone Company
P.O.Box 138
702 E. Main Street
Kendrick, Idaho 83837-0138
208/835-2211
Teton Telecom Communications
P.O.Box 900
Driggs, Idaho 83422
208/354-3300
Qwest Communications
North and South Idaho
P.O.Box 7888 (83723)
999 Main Street
Boise, Idaho 83702
800/244-1111
2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 3 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Idaho Telecommunications
Competitive Local
Exchange Carrier
Certificates
Approved in FY02
3
Amended in FY02
2
Total Approved
(as of 7/1/02)
63
A list of companies
issued certificates to
provide basic local
exchange service is
available at
www.puc.state.id.us/
FILEROOM/
UTILITIES.pdf
Interconnection
Agreements
Agreements or
Amendments
Approved in FY02
101
Waiting for competition
It has now been more than six years since the passage of the federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996 made it legal for competition to develop
for local exchange services, but making competition legal has not made it
happen. Although regulatory barriers to competition in Idaho have been
eliminated, many Idaho consumers still do not have a choice, and those who
do have choices are not enjoying the full advantages of competition envi-
sioned by Congress.
Market forces, and not legal or regulatory barriers, are the primary
factors leading to the slow progress of competition in Idaho. The Idaho
Public Utilities Commission approved three more applications for Certificates of
Public Convenience and Necessity to provide competitive local exchange
service during the year covered by this report, and had granted a total of 61
companies with certificates by June 30, 2002. In addition, two certificates were
amended to include wider service areas. However, only a handful of these
competitive local exchange companies (CLECs) have made the market decision
to actually provide service to Idaho customers.
In the year covered by this report, the commission also approved over
100 interconnection agreements and amendments to previous agreements
between incumbent telephone companies and competitors, including those
providing wireless or paging services. These agreements specify the terms and
conditions for connecting one company’s system to the others so that calls may
transfer seamlessly from one company to the next. They also include the terms
and conditions under which an incumbent will sell its services, or the individual
network elements that CLEC’s may use to provide competitive services without
duplicating the existing facilities.
The Idaho Telecommunications Act of 1988 allowed telephone
companies to elect modified regulation for all but basic local exchange
service to customers with five or fewer lines at one location. U S WEST
chose partial deregulation under Title 62 for its territory in southern Idaho,
beginning April 1, 1989. All telecommunications companies that only
provide long distance services also come under the provisions of Title 62.
These companies set their own prices and file price lists with the commis-
sioners for informal purposes.
Approximately 400 long distance companies have price lists on file
with the commission, although the number actually providing service to Idaho
customers is estimated to be only a fraction of that. After years of increasing
growth in the number of price lists on file, this number remained relatively stable
this past year. The general economic downturn and the acute downturn in the
technical sector was visible here with the number of new filings matched by the
number of price lists withdrawn due to mergers, bankruptcies and decisions to
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 42002
ANNUAL REPORT
Approximately 400
companies had Title
62 price lists on file
with the Commission
at the end of June,
2002.
cease operations in Idaho.
Services provided by the new CLECs are not rate-regulated, but, in
accordance with the provisions of Title 62, are subject to the commission’s
rules. Telecommunications companies not providing basic local service,
such as a long distance company, are also not subject to rate-setting author-
ity of Title 61, but must comply with Title 62 rules. Upon complaint, the com-
mission may hold hearings and order changes if the public interest is adversely
affected, and may resolve disputes between companies. Title 62 regulations
require that price lists be filed with the commission.
Commission staff reviewed more than 375 price lists or revisions to
price lists during the year. While the commission does not review the actual
prices in the price lists, staff checks the terms and conditions of the price list for
compliance with applicable commission rules. The commission retains the
authority to review the quality, availability, terms and conditions of service
offered by economically deregulated Title 62 companies.
Until the commission determines that incumbent local exchange compa-
nies (ILEC) face effective competition throughout an exchange, basic local
exchange service provided by an ILEC to residential and small business cus-
tomers remains under the commission’s Title 61 rate-setting authority.
Only one major rate review was conducted during the year, for Inland
Telephone. As Inland is a recipient of state universal service support, customer
rates were increased to the statewide average. A net result was a reduction in
the amount of high cost support Inland would receive going forward.
More than 90 tariff revisions for price regulated services were reviewed
and approved by the commission during this year. Most of these involved the
introduction of new vertical or advanced services or adjustments to prices or
fees made necessary by orders of the Federal Communications Commission or
IPUC orders.
June 11, 2002
PUC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF QWEST APPLICATION
Case No. USW-T-00-3
Before the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, Qwest and
Verizon were restricted from carrying long distance calls outside their own
market areas or LATAs (Local Access Transport Area). This restriction was a
result of the breakup of AT&T. Such interLATA calls were carried by other
long distance companies. However, as GTE (now part of Verizon) was not part
of the original AT&T, the act lifted the restrictions on GTE, so Verizon North-
west may now carry both interLATA and intraLATA calls.
The Bell Operating Companies, including Qwest, remain restricted
from carrying interLATA calls until they can demonstrate that they have irrevers-
ibly opened their markets to competition for local exchange customers by
2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 5 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
complying with the items specified on a checklist contained in Section 271 of the
Telecommunications Act. Although the decision is made by the FCC, it must
consult with the state commissions. Under the procedures established by the
FCC, the state commission is responsible for establishing the record on which
the FCC will base its decision.
In June 2002, the commission concluded its Section 271 proceedings,
which began over two years ago, and filed comments with the FCC supporting
Qwest’s application to enter the interstate long distance market as this reporting
period was coming to a close. The commission reached this conclusion after
participating in multi-state collaborative proceedings as well as holding its own
hearings to determine whether Qwest was in compliance with the checklist. In
late December 2002, the FCC approved Qwest’s re-entry into the long dis-
tance market in Idaho and eight other states.
OSS test
One of the multi-state efforts was a 13-state effort to conduct a third-
party test to determine whether Qwest’s operational support systems (OSS)
are open to competitors in a non-discriminatory manner. This multi-million
dollar test was conducted by KPMG Consulting, with Hewlett-Packard
Consulting acting as a pseudo-competitive company placing orders using
Qwest’s OSS. Liberty Consulting conducted an audit of Qwest’s perfor-
mance reporting procedures.
The test was conducted in what is known as “military style, or “test
until pass” basis. As the testing revealed problems with Qwest’s processes,
procedures or systems, Qwest was provided an opportunity to fix the
problem, and then the fix was tested. As is to be expected with such complex
systems, over 500 concerns and deficiencies were identified, and Qwest made
several improvements to its systems and processes as a result of the test.
KPMG Consulting, Hewlett-Packard and Liberty released their final
reports in May, concluding that Qwest’s overall systems were open to
competitors and providing non-discriminatory service. While the overall conclu-
sion was positive, a few concerns remained. The commission will continue to
monitor Qwest’s performance in these areas.
271 checklist
A second effort involving seven states examined Qwest’s compliance
with the non-OSS related issues. The Telecommunications Act identified a 14-
point checklist that Qwest needed to demonstrate it met before it would be
allowed to provide interlata service. This multi-state collaborative process
examined these checklist items in detail.
This process involved the use of a facilitator, Liberty Consulting, which
acted as an arbitrator for the proceedings. All proceedings were conducted on
the record, so as to develop a thorough record upon which the individual
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 62002
ANNUAL REPORT
Troy Telephone
Company
Ave. Residential Rate
= $12.67
Ave. Business Rate
= $19.00
Potlatch Telephone
Company
Ave. Residential Rate
= $11.75
Ave. Business Rate
= $17.65
Ave. Residential Rate
= $15.77
Ave. Business Rate
= $27.75
Midvale Telephone
Exchange
Ave. Residential Rate
= $22.47
Ave. Business Rate
= $40.95
commissions based their final decisions. This process was a collaborative effort
and, where possible, a consensus approach was used to resolve issues.
Although the majority of issues were resolved without requiring a
decision of the arbitrator, the scope of the issues involved was broad enough
that several issues remained unresolved. The overall proceedings were exten-
sive and time consuming. This process entailed many steps for each of the
checklist items, including:
* pre-filed positions by the parties
* responses to the prefiled positions
* oral arguments, including cross examination by the other parties.
These occurred in four- to five-day sessions, held at least once a
month, and twice a month a few times.
* post argument briefs, (and sometimes reply briefs),
* a decision by the arbitrator
* comments, exceptions and briefs on arbitrator’s decision.
The arbitrator had issued reports on checklist items 1 through 14
last year, and during this year addressed overall public interest issues,
including the Performance Assurance Plan, or PAP. It included methods for
ensuring Qwest’s market-opening efforts are maintained after it has obtained
permission to cross LATA boundaries.
The PAP identifies performance levels that the service Qwest provides
to CLEC’s must meet, and includes financial penalties if Qwest fails to meet
them. Performance levels are measured and reported for nearly a hundred
different measures across many different product lines. Penalties increase if
performance falls below the performance levels repeatedly. The financial
penalties under the PAP provide a significant deterrent to letting performance
slip, as they could reach as much as 1/3 of Qwest’s retail revenues.
QWEST WHOLSALE RATE CASE ONGOING
Case No. QWE-T-01-11, Orders No. 28748, 28834
One other issue that required considerable attention was the wholesale
rates that Qwest charges CLECs (local exchange competitors) for the use of its
network, or for individual pieces of the network. These individual pieces are
knows as Unbundled Network Elements, or UNEs. The FCC has established
procedures for the pricing of UNEs, but it is the responsibility of the state
commissions for actually setting the rates. The FCC requires that rates be
established using these procedures before it will approve a 271 application.
Qwest had been offering its services under rates established through
arbitrated negotiations with AT&T in 1998. However, these rates did not meet
the current FCC requirements, and a proceeding was initiated to establish more
current wholesale rates. These rates are to be “forward looking’’ and cover the
cost of service plus a reasonable margin.
2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 7 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Direct
Communications
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
Ave. Business Rate
= $42.00
Inland Telephone
Company
Ave. Residential Rate
= $21.63
Ave. Business Rate
= $40.68
Fremont Telcom
Company
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
Ave. Business Rate
= $42.00
ATC
(Albion Telephone
Company)
Residential = $24.10
Business = $42.00
Cambridge
Telephone Company
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
Ave. Business Rate
= $42.00
Forward-looking rates are established by using complex models that
estimate the cost of providing service through a network that is designed using
today’s technologies, rather than enhancing the existing network. Qwest devel-
oped its model, AT&T developed a different model, other parties developed
even other models. The FCC developed what is known as the consensus
model, as it combines different parts of each model into a single model. The
different models each produce different results and each is highly dependent
upon the inputs used to drive the models.
In spite of numerous efforts to narrow the differences between the
competing models, including a hearing before the commission with competing
experts defending each model and the inputs used by each party, the gap could
not be completely closed. At the conclusion of the OSS test, Qwest decided to
propose Idaho wholesale rates that were indexed to rates that had recently been
set by the Colorado commission. The FCC had accepted rates established in a
similar manner in a previous case, and the Idaho commission agreed that such
rates would be sufficient for interim rates pending the conclusion of Idaho’s cost
proceedings.
December 9, 2002
COMMISSION DENIES PETITION FOR TOLL-FREE CALLS
Case No. GNR-T-00-30, Order No. 29166
Addressing customer petitions for expanding the calling areas that could
be accessed with a local call continued to require considerable commission
resources. In December, the commission denied a request by Ontario, Oregon,
area residents for toll-free calling into the Treasure Valley.
The commission said that not enough “community of interest” standards
between the Ontario and Treasure Valley exchanges existed to justify all Qwest
customers in eastern Oregon and southern Idaho paying higher rates to meet the
$800,000 annual cost to provide toll-free calling between Ontario and the
Treasure Valley. To meet that cost, all of Qwest’s southern Idaho customers
would have had a monthly increase of 17 cents added to their flat rate.
Cases involving the Potlatch, Shoup and Three Creek exchanges are
also under investigation. New cases were filed for toll-free service between the
Pine and Featherville exchanges and the Bruneau and Grandview exchanges.
Unserved areas
Investigating options for providing service to previously unserved areas
also required considerable attention. Families living in remote areas that currently
do not have telephone service, such as the old mining areas of Pearl and Cobalt,
as well as a group of farms near the Castleford exchange and pockets of
residences outside the existing service area in the exchanges of Elk City and
Craigmont, sought commission assistance in obtaining service.
The commission has approved tariffs for most telephone companies that
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 82002
ANNUAL REPORT
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
Ave. Business Rate
= $42.00
Ave. Residential Rate
= $17.50
Ave. Business Rate
= $35.10
CenturyTel of Idaho
Ave. Residential Rate
= $21.75
+ $3.50 rural adder
Ave. Business Rate
=$39.77
+ $3.50 rural adder
CenturyTel of the
Gem State
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
+ $3.50 rural adder
Average Business
Rate
= $39.77
+ $3.50 rural adder
require new customers who request service at locations outside of the existing
network to share the cost of extending the network to their location. In these
instances, the costs are high, and the number of customers so low, that the cost
per customer is prohibitive. In spite of analyzing a number of different alterna-
tives, including different routes for cables, wireless, radio carriers, and varying
levels of customer provided installation, solutions remain to be found.
Local exchange companies
In addition to the North Idaho service area of Qwest which remains
fully regulated and subject to the provisions of Title 61, there are 16 other
local exchange companies whose services are still fully regulated by the com-
mission. Qwest’s Southern Idaho operating company is by far the largest local
exchange company, with more than 67 percent of the customer lines (approxi-
mately 500,000) in the state. Verizon is a distant second, with nearly 130,000
access lines (about 18 percent). The Qwest North service area is the third
largest, with 36,000, or 5 percent.
Citizens is Idaho’s third largest local exchange carrier with more than
20,000 access lines (3 percent). Fourteen other regulated telecommunications
companies also serve Idaho residents, as well as six mutual or cooperative
companies. These 20 companies serve the remaining 7 percent.
2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 9 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Idaho’s Universal Service Fund
Telephone companies operating in Idaho have been required since July
1988 to contribute to a Universal Service Fund (USF) to ensure that the high
costs of small telephone companies do not result in rates that exceed the
statewide average by more than 25 percent. These local and long distance
companies are permitted to recover their contributions from local and long-
distance customers. Local exchange companies may apply for assistance from
this fund. They must submit proof to the commission that when they set their
local rates at 125 percent of the statewide average, they still do not fully re-
cover their cost of providing local service. The commission evaluates the
circumstances and determines whether and for what amount the company may
receive Universal Service funds.
Long distance companies connecting in-state long distance calls in
Idaho are required to remit a 0.25 cent ($0.0025) surcharge for each in-state
long distance minute. Those companies are also required to submit periodic
reports detailing their minutes of in-state toll usage. Local exchange companies
are required to remit on a monthly basis 8 cents (residential) and 13 cents
(business) for each line served. This is a decrease from previous levels.
Universal Service Fund Facts
July 1, 2001 -- June 30, 2002
Residential Business Toll Access
Statewide average $17.61 $32.42 $0.0529
125 percent of average $22.01 $40.53
Monthly surcharge rate $0.08/line $0.13/line
LD/WATS surcharge rate $0.0025/min
Fund Activity
Balance 7/01/01 $ 510,300
Collections Disbursements
Local Surcharge $1,231,353 ATC $514,238
Toll Surcharge $1,266,744 Cambridge $167,381
Total $2,498,097 Direct Comm $221,847
Fremont $110,081
Disbursements $2,178,303 Inland $ 43,161
Admin/Amort/ $ 29,096 Midvale $362,364
Bank/Brkr Rural $316,128
Interest Earned $ 18,140 Silver Star $163,101
$1,898,303
Balance 6/30/02 $ 1,099,550
Ave. Residential Rate
= $18.82
Ave. Business Rate
= $36.14
Qwest South
Ave. Residential Rate
= $17.21
Ave. Business Rate
= $32.05
U S WEST North
Ave. Residential Rate
= $15.53
Ave. Business Rate
= $29.36
Teton
Communications
Ave. Residential Rate
= $24.10
Ave. Business Rate
= $42.00
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 102002
ANNUAL REPORT
June 25, 2002
FEE TO AID LOW-INCOME IDAHOANS INCREASES
Case No. GNR-T-02-10, Order No. 29056
A surcharge on all residential, wireless and business phone lines will
increase from 8 cents per line per month to 10 cents effective July 1.
The Idaho Telephone Service Assistance Program (ITSAP), commonly
referred to as a “lifeline” program, provides credits to low income households
to assist them in obtaining and maintaining telephone service. Because the value
of telephone service increases as more households have a telephone, a small
contribution from all non-participating households is used to fund this program.
In response to federal changes to the program, the Idaho Legislature opened the
program to all low-income households.
The credits include $3.50 per month per household in state funds, plus
$3.50 in matching funds from the federal government. In addition, the federally
imposed subscriber line charge of $6 is waived for ITSAP participants. The
combined value of federal and state credits is $13 per month per household.
The Department of Health and Welfare established and administers
application procedures and eligibility determinations. Utilities are provided a list
of the telephone numbers for qualifying households and automatically provide
qualifying households with the credits.
The commission is responsible for maintaining the fund and reimbursing
the telephone companies for the cost of providing these credits. Based upon the
estimates of the number of households eligible for the credits, the commission
established the monthly surcharge paid by all telephone users, including wireless
customers, at 10 cents per line effective July 1, 2002. The surcharge was
increased partly due to the growing number of households that qualify. Prior to
the July 1 increase, there was an 8 percent increase in qualifying households
from the previous quarter.
The ITSAP surcharge is assessed on residential, business, and wireless
users. The gross surcharge revenue is netted against the assistance credits paid
to eligible customers and the company’s administrative costs. Gross surcharge
revenues collected by telecommunications companies during the year totaled
$581,714,of which $357,517 (61 percent) was assessed on local exchange
services and $224,197 (39 percent) was assessed on wireless/cellular services.
At the start of the fiscal year, 26,090 households were participating in
the program. 27,069 households received the credit in September 2002. The
total value of the credits received by Idaho households, including the federal
match, was more than $3 million dollars.
ITSAP
Summary
Sept, 01 - Sept, 02
Credits Provided
Idaho Share
= $838,098
Federal Match
= $ 2,273,740
Total Value
of Credits
= $3,111,838
Fund Balance
As of 9/30/02
= $7,780
2002
ANNUAL REPORTPage 11 IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
TRS service is
available statewide
and may be reached by
voice by dialing
1-800-377-1363.
Contact with a
text-telephone
operator may be
made by dialing
1-800-377-3529.
As of October 1, 2001,
TRS can be accessed
from any phone simply
by dialing 711.
Questions or
comments regarding
the use of TRS
may be directed
from either a
text or voice
telephone to
1-800-368-6185.
Idaho’s Telephone Relay Service
Idaho inaugurated telephone relay service (TRS) on Dec. 1, 1992, for
the hearing- and speech-impaired. TRS requirements were created by the
Federal Communications Commission under Title IV of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. The 1992 Idaho Legislature established the manner in
which TRS has been implemented.
Under Idaho rules, the Idaho Public Utilities Commission established a
seven-member telephone industry committee to help select and advise a TRS
administrator. In 1992, the commission appointed Robert Dunbar as its first
TRS administrator.
This year, Mr. Dunbar began the federally required re-certification
process for the Idaho relay. This process is required every five years by the
FCC and addresses the operational standards, service offerings and perfor-
mance requirements of relay service.
In accordance with an FCC requirement, Idaho’s local exchange
companies implemented 711 dialing access to TRS service on October 1, 2001.
A TRS call may be initiated by a text telephone user or a standard
phone user. The caller dials 711 or a toll-free number to access the TRS center
and reaches a Communications Assistant (CA) who will process the call. The
caller gives the CA the number of the person to be called and the CA places the
call. The CA will type to the person with the text telephone and speak to the
person with the standard phone, relaying what is spoken/typed by each party.
“The idea is to allow as close to normal telephone service as possible
for hearing- and speech-impaired persons,” according to Dunbar.
Callers only pay the cost of the telephone call, as if the call was placed
directly between the telephones. Long distance calls are billed based upon the
points of origination and termination and many long distance companies bill them
on a reduced rate basis. No charge is assessed local calls.
TRS service is available statewide and may be reached by voice by
dialing 711 or 1-800-377-1363. Contact with a text-telephone operator is
made by dialing 1-800-377-3529. Questions or comments regarding the use of
TRS may be directed from either a text or voice telephone to 1-800-368-6185.
Information on Idaho’s TRS program is also available via the Internet at:
www.hamilton.net/relay/id/itrs.htm
All Idaho local exchange companies pay 4 cents per access line per
month. In-state long distance companies pay $0.0007 per bill minute to support
the TRS. The commission did not change this rate in 2002.
IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Page 122002
ANNUAL REPORT
Case No. GNR-T-00-36, Orders No. 28924, 28982
In May, 2001, an administrator appointed by the Federal Communications
Commission notified the commission that Idaho’s only area code would run out
of telephone numbers during the third quarter of 2003. In response, the com-
mission held public workshops and received public comments during October
and November of 2001 to gather public input regarding the best way to imple-
ment a new area code in Idaho.
At the same time, the commission and its staff began pursuing several
number conservation measures that could forestall the need for a new area
code if timely implemented.
First, telephone number reclamation began in January 2002. This process
allows the state to reclaim blocks of telephone numbers that are not being used.
Second, "rate center consolidation," which allows telephone companies to
serve larger areas with fewer telephone numbers, was instituted in Qwest’s
southern territory in July 2002.
Finally, the commission petitioned the FCC to help Idaho forestall the
exhaust of area code 208 by bringing "thousands-block number pooling" to
Idaho sooner than the originally scheduled March 2003.
Thousands-block number pooling assigns smaller blocks of 1,000 telephone
numbers to companies rather than blocks of 10,000 as has historically been
done. If pooling could not be brought to Idaho in time to extend the life of area
code 208, the commission asked that Idaho be geographically split into three
regions and two new area codes be introduced to the state.
On April 24, 2002, the FCC announced that Idaho was moved ahead in
the national thousands-block pooling roll-out schedule and would receive
pooling in August 2002. As a result of this and other factors, Idaho’s new
projected exhaust of area code 208 is during the fourth quarter of 2009.
August 8, 2002
IDAHO DELAYS NEED FOR NEW AREA CODE
October 5, 2001COMPLAINT LEADS TO $1.2 MILLION QWEST REFUND
The commission and Qwest Corp resolved a consumer complaint
regarding improper charges for toll restriction service by agreeing to a plan that
provides $1.2 million in refunds and payments into a special account.
During the past three years, Qwest charged 90,073 customers a
$13.50 setup fee for toll restriction service. Under a 1998 agreement, no
charge was to be imposed for the service if obtained at the same time service is
initiated.
Qwest agreed to refund 42,396 customers a total of $572,346. The
other 47,677 customers who were improperly billed could not be refunded
because they have been disconnected or reassigned. Qwest agreed to pay the
$643,639 improperly charged these customers into a special account to be
used for a purpose that will later be designated by the commission.
Case No. USW-S96-5, Order No. 28862