19970331_1.docx

MINUTES OF DECISION MEETING
March 31, 1997 - 1:30 p.m.
In attendance at this meeting were Commissioners Ralph Nelson, Marsha H. Smith and Dennis Hansen and staff members Don Howell, Brad Purdy, Weldon Stutzman, Scott Woodbury, David Scott, Stephanie Miller, Birdelle Brown, Bev Barker, Randy Lobb, Marge Maxwell and Myrna Walters. Also in attendance were Michael Creamer, Attorney at Law; Ron Lightfoot of U S West; and Woody Richards, Attorney at Law.
Items from the March 31, 1997 Decision Meeting Agenda were discussed and acted upon as follows.
1. Brad Purdy’s March 21, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. GTE-T-97-1; In the Matter of the Application of GTE to Revise Toll Rates and Introduce Two New Intralata Calling Plans.
Commissioner Nelson said he thought he would give GTE the okay if it permits only residential customers to subscribe to those intended for them, and submit plan for revised access rates.
Commissioner Hansen said this raised a question in my mind about access rates. Got several letters of opposition to it. Wondered what the urgency was to approve it now. Was leaning toward deferring approval until we see GTE come forth with a plan to revise their access rates and what effect these revisions would have on the local rates. See some areas of concern and wondered if there is urgency to approve it.
Commissioner Smith said they probably can’t bring it in any quicker than the FCC order (that is what everyone is waiting for. Kind of hate to deny customers this rate relief. High cost rates in GTE territory has been a chronic complaint for years. So you are torn between giving customers some options that would save them money and doing something that will probably be incorrect in 6 months.
Commissioner Nelson said you are lumping all the bands together...but you really eliminated some of the shorter routes.
Birdelle Brown said people who choose calling plans don’t have long distance in close areas.
Commissioner Hansen asked if it would only be a look at access rates?
Birdelle Brown said she didn’t see how you could look at access rates without having a full blown rate case.
Commissioner Nelson commented Commissioner Hansen is for delaying it. Said he couldn’t see a good reason to deny it.
Commissioner Hansen said - we would be approving something that could be short term. Once we get some information regarding revision to their access rates then this could change. Asked if the reason the commissioners would approve it is savings to customers right now?
Commissioner Nelson said it looks like there would be an advantage to some and others could dial around.
Commissioner Smith said she noticed this has already been in-house for over three months. Did GTE respond to AT&T comments?
They have not.  
Staff was asked if they were satisfied that GTE’s cost studies reflect reality?
Birdelle Brown said - are satisfied that there access rates are below the overall aggregate toll rates. They have two impute their access rates. Those are less than aggregated toll charge by a small amount.  
Staff was asked how the discount times proposed compared to what other companies have.
Birdelle Brown responded - think most of the discount periods for other companies are the same as GTE has now. Gave examples of the calling periods. Don’t think any of them go down to 45% discount, though.
Commissioner Hansen asked - if commission approves this ..will information be brought to our attention later that it is unnecessary. Concern in not approving it is to see what information they file in regard to their access rates. Do have the concern that AT&T thinks it is anti-competitive.  Not being sure is why he was holding off.
Commissioner Smith asked how the Commission could get the information to get answers.
Commissioner Hansen commented he could go with No. 4 - order GTE to submit a plan.
Commissioner Smith asked if anyone had asked GTE what their reaction would be if the commission turned it down?
Birdelle Brown said the company told here they would not remove residential-only restriction.
Commissioner Smith said maybe residential calls are longer in duration and at different times of the day. Perhaps they could make a case that there is distinction between residential and business toll calls.
Commissioner Hansen asked - isn’t it a fact that access rates up there are some of the highest in the state? He was not so sure where the benefit would come. Seemed to him there has always been the complaint is high access rates.
**Commissioner Smith asked that the item be held until next week’s decision meeting.
2. Weldon Stutzman’s March 24, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Applications of U S West for Approval of Wireless Interconnection Agreements; Case No. USW-T-97-8 and USW-T-97-10.
Commissioner Smith made a motion that they be processed by modified procedure.
3. Birdelle Brown’s March 25, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Citizens Telecommunications Company of Idaho Tariff Advice ID-97-03 to Add Distinctive Ring and New Number Referral Service Effective April 14, 1997.
Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve the filing; Commissioner Hansen seconded it; Commissioner Nelson concurred.
4. Birdelle Brown’s March 25, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Rural Telephone Company to Revise its Local Exchange Maps to Reflect the Boundary Change Adjacent to Tipanuk Exchange; and 5. Birdelle Brown’s March 25, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: U S West Advice 97-04-S to revise its Local Exchange Maps to Reflect the Boundary Change Adjacent to the Tipanuk Exchange Operated by Rural Telephone Company, Effective March 20, 1997.
Commissioner Smith made a motion to approve items 4 and 5. Commissioners Hansen and Nelson agreed.
6. Birdelle Brown’s March 27, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Citizens Telecommunications Company of Idaho Tariff Advice ID-97-02 to Revise its Custom Calling Service Tariff Effective April 11, 1997.
Approved.
7. Marge Maxwell’s March 28, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Gary Sutton, Jr. Formal Complaint Requesting the Commission Decide His Cost to Receive Telephone Service.
Commissioner Smith said she had the answer to this matter and it shouldn’t involve action by the Commission. U S West should have the service installed before the sale is finalized and the purchasers should pay their $377.36(their subdivision charge) and if it is not done before the sale closes there should be an agreement by the parties that whatever the cost of the service installation, it should be made by the seller to the purchaser and customers still pay the $377.36.  All customers in a similar situation should be treated the same way.  
It should not require a formal case before the Commission.
Commissioner Hansen said he agreed 100%.  
Commissioner Smith commented the Commissioners were told that installations were not going to be held up. If they ( U S West) doesn’t agree, it can be made a formal case.
Commissioners asked that the matter be held until the next decision meeting until U S West responds to the Commissioners’ directive.
8. Marge Maxwell’s March 28, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: South County Water Company’s tariff Advice 97-01, Requesting to Lower Its Collection of Fees to Fund DEQ’s Public Drinking Water Program.
Commissioner Hansen made a motion to approve; Commissioners Smith and Nelson concurred.
9. Scott Woodbury’s March 28, 1997 Decision Memorandum re: Case No. UWI-W-97-1 - United Water Company - Amendment to Certificate of Convenience and Necessity No. 143.
Staff had recommended modified procedure; commissioners agreed to that.
10. Silver Star’s Application for Approval of a Special Services Contract, Case No. SIL-T-97-1.
Commissioner Smith quoted from the Federal Communications Act.
Commissioner Hansen suggested a prehearing conference as a good starting place to get the parties together.
Commissioner Smith said it might be beneficial to have oral arguments. It doesn’t matter who owns it they have a right to provide service. Franchises are a thing of the past. It might be helpful to have oral argument on that point. Don’t know if there are any factual matters in dispute here.
Commissioner Nelson said he would feel better if we gave parties a chance to argue this.
Oral Argument will be scheduled.
Commissioner Smith also suggested asking the parties what bearing the certificate statute has on this, if anything.
Meeting was adjourned. Dated at Boise, Idaho, this 1st day of April, 1997.
Myrna J. Walters
Commission Secretary