19960417_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
April 17, 1996 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this time were Commissioners Ralph Nelson, Marsha H. Smith and Dennis Hansen and staff members Don Howell, Scott Woodbury, Weldon Stutzman, Ron Law, Judy Stokes, Birdelle Brown, Jim Long, Stephanie Miller, Bill Eastlake, Gary Richardson, Eileen Benner, Terri Carlock, Randy Lobb, Bev Barker, Madonna Faunce, Tonya Clark, Syd Lansing and Myrna Walters.  Also in attendance were: Cathy Brightwell of AT&T; Jim Wozniak and Mary Hobson of U S West; Joe Miller, Attorney at Law  and Mike Creamer, Attorney at Law.
Items from the April 17, 1996 Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1. Regulated Carrier Division Agenda dated April 17, 1996.
Commissioner Hansen made a motion that the RCD agenda be approved; Commissioner Smith seconded the motion; Commissioner Nelson concurred.
2. Weldon Stutzman’s April 15, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. GNR-M-96-1.
Walter Taylor Vision Waiver, Petition for Reconsideration.
Commissioner Nelson reviewed the matter.  
After discussion, Commissioners indicated they could not go against Federal guidelines and could not reverse their previous decision. Petition for Reconsideration was denied.
3. Don Howell and Joe Cusick’s April 12, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Filed by GST Idaho Lightwave, Inc., Case No. GST-T-96-1.
Commissioner Nelson said it appeared staff recommendation was to put this application out on modified procedure and in the meantime ask them to amend their filing to come into compliance with the Commission’s rules.
Commissioner Smith asked if it wasn’t in compliance with Commission rules, why would we be putting it out on modified procedure?
Don Howell clarified staff recommendation. Said it was to put it out as notice of application; ask company to complete filing and if it is correctly filed, then put it out on modified. Explained how it was filed currently. Other option would be for the Commission to issue an order saying it is deficient and they need to refile.
Commissioner Smith said she wandered about saying this was the “first” such application when AT&T has filed. Said from a personal point of view, she would like to have more details on their financial viability. Her concern is customers being taken advantage of the way we saw some so-called long distance providers that buzzed into town and asked for $50 to hook-up and then left -  need rules to protect those customers. Think we need to talk about what we think is important in looking at these companies.
Commissioner Nelson suggested doing a notice of application and asking for more information.  
Discussed what a notice of application does.
Don Howell said it could be the be vehicle to ask for additional information.  
After discussion, decision was to put out the notice of application and cite what the deficiencies are.
4. Jim Long’s April 15, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Potlatch Telephone Company Advice which Revises and Corrects the Company’s ITAP Provisions.
Commissioner Hansen made a motion to approve the filing; Commissioner Smith seconded the motion; Commissioner Nelson concurred.
5. Jim Long’s April 15, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Troy Telephone Company Advice which Revises and Corrects the Company’s ITAP Provisions.
Approved.
6. Scott Woodbury’s April 15, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Case Nos. UWI-W-96-1 and WSM-W-96-1 United Water Purchase of Warm Springs Mesa.
After briefly discussing the filing dates, Commissioner Smith asked why not just schedule a hearing?  
Decision was to do that - go directly to a notice of hearing.
7. Scott Woodbury’s April 16, 1996 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. INT-G-96-2 New Tariff--Schedule T-3 Interruptible Distribution Transportation Service Modification of LV-1, T-1 and T-2 Tariffs Change to General Service Provisions.
Scott explained that the Company asked for a May 1 effective date. If the notice goes out tomorrow (April 18), the 21 day comment period would run to May 9. Next decision meeting after that is May 13.
Okayed staff’s proposed schedule.
Items 8, 9 and 10 were fully submitted matters.
After brief discussion on procedure, was decided that Item 10 needed to go back on the agenda for April 24 and the other two matters could wait until closer to the May 2 deadline to consider the petitions/cross-petitions, etc.
Meeting was then adjourned.
Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 18th day of April, 1996.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary