DE 98-048
Investigation Into Public Interest Pay Phones
Order Establishing Procedural Schedule and Extending
Time Limits For Intervention and Preliminary Statements
of Position
O R D E R N O. 22,940
May 18, 1998
On April 10, 1998, the Public Utilities Commission
(Commission) issued an Order of Notice in this matter and
opened this docket to investigate, pursuant to Section
276(b)(2) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Tact),
whether public interest pay phones should be maintained in
New Hampshire and, if so, to ensure that such public
interest pay phones are funded fairly and equitably.
The TAct defined a public interest payphone as a
payphone which 1) fulfills a public policy objective in
health, safety, or public welfare, 2) is not provided for a
location provider with an existing contract for the
provision of a payphone, and 3) would not otherwise exist as
a result of the operation of the competitive marketplace.
The Federal Communication Commission (FCC)
directed each state to evaluate by October 7, 1998 whether
it needs to take any measures to ensure that pay phones
serving important public interests will continue to exist in
light of the elimination of subsidies and other competitive
provisions established pursuant to 276.
The FCC also determined that the states should
administer and fund public interest payphone programs in a
manner that is competitively neutral, and which fairly and
equitably compensates entities providing public interest pay
phones. States have discretion on how to fund their public
interest pay phone programs, so long as the funding
mechanism 1) fairly and equitably distributes the costs of
such a program, and 2) does not involve the use of the
subsidies prohibited by 276(b)(1)(B) of the Tact.
The Order of Notice set forth certain issues which
are raised by this docket, scheduled a prehearing conference
for May 5, 1998, required publication of the Order of Notice
no later than April 15, 1998, required the parties to
summarize their positions for the record and set deadlines
for intervention and objections thereto.
The Order of Notice was published in the
Manchester Union Leader on April 22, 1998, 7 days later than
required in the Order of Notice. The prehearing conference
was held on May 5, 1998. Motions to intervene were filed by
Union Telephone Company, certain Independent Telephone
companies (Independent Telephone Companies), the New England
Public Communications Council, Inc. (NEPCC) and New
Hampshire Legal Assistance (NHLA), each detailing the basis
of their interest in the subject matter of the docket.
At the prehearing conference on May 5, 1998, the
parties in attendance discussed a procedural schedule and
collectively proposed a schedule as follows:
PUC Press Release to be Issued
June 15, 1998 1:30 pm Public Hearing
July 15, 1998 Written Comments Filed by all Parties/Staff
July 28, 1998 Discussion/Technical Session
with
Community Action Groups
August 18, 1998 Written Recommendations and
Reply Comments By All
Parties/Staff
August 26, 1998 Settlement Discussions, 10:00
A.M.
September 22-23, 1998 Hearings, 10:00 A.M.
We find the proposed procedural schedule to be
reasonable and, barring any change which occurs as a result
of late requests for intervention, statements of position or
comments on the procedural schedule, as provided below, we
will order this schedule for the duration of the proceeding.
At the prehearing conference the parties attending
stated for the record their preliminary positions.
By way of stating its preliminary position at the
prehearing conference, Bell Atlantic-NH (Bell Atlantic)
contended that there were limited situations where phones
would not be economically self sufficient and that often
those locations would be part of a profitable group of pay
phone locations controlled by a city or town. Bell Atlantic
suggested that public interest pay phone service could be
provided on a competitive bid process basis but that it was
unclear whether a need existed for such pay phones since
there has been only a fairly brief period of time under
deregulated pay phone service to assess such a need.
NEPCC stated that deregulation was new to the pay
phone world and that there was limited experience at which
to look.
Certain independent telephone companies stated
that there was limited experience with deregulation and the
receipt of compensation. The companies had not formulated a
specific position and they were interested in hearing from
public interest groups affected, in investigating a
compensation mechanism and in looking at the competitive
viability of phones in these locations.
NHLA stated an interest in access to phone use by
low income clients, especially those clients in the
northern, rural parts of the state and those who needed
affordable phone service. Specific locations were important
and possible removal of phones a concern to its clientele.
Union Telephone stated no position.
The Office of Consumer Advocate shared the
concerns of the other parties and was interested in an
analysis of whether health, safety or public interest policy
objectives were involved in pay phone locations. The OCA
did not currently have information regarding whether there
should be public interest pay phones but stated that other
low-income advocates were interested in the issue.
The Commission Staff (Staff) was interested in
investigating the positions taken in other states and
indicated that further research and input of community
action groups in NH was necessary. Staff indicated that it
took no position and did not make a specific recommendation
at this time.
The OCA provided a copy of a letter, which was
also sent directly to the Commission, from the New
Hampshire Coalition for the Homeless. In that letter, the
Coalition indicates that it received notice too late to
intervene, but nonetheless comments that homeless people
throughout the state rely on pay phones in many aspects of
their lives, and that being able to petition for a pay phone
location would be beneficial to this group.
Because of the delay in publishing the Order of
Notice, the deadline for submitting motions for intervention
shall be extended to June 5, 1998. Parties who request late
intervention shall be permitted to file comments on or
before June 5, 1998 concerning the procedural schedule as
ordered herein and may submit as well a written statement of
their preliminary position regarding the docket. Objections
to late motions to intervene shall be filed on or before
June 10, 1998.
Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED, that unless otherwise ordered following
the Public Hearing scheduled for June 15, 1998, the
procedural schedule as set forth above is adopted for the
duration of the case; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that the petitions to intervene
filed by Union Telephone Company, certain Independent
Telephone Companies, the New England Public Communications
Council, Inc. and New Hampshire Legal Assistance are
granted;
FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to N.H. Admin.
Rules Puc 203.01, the Executive Director of the Commission
shall notify all persons desiring to intervene in this
matter by publishing a copy of this Order no later than May
22, 1998, in a newspaper with statewide circulation; and it
is
FURTHER ORDERED, that pursuant to N.H. Admin.
Rules Puc 203.02, any party seeking to intervene in this
proceeding who has not previously intervened shall submit to
the Commission an original and eight copies of a Petition to
Intervene with copies sent to the Office of the Consumer
Advocate on or before June 5, 1998, such Petition stating
the facts demonstrating how its rights, duties, privileges,
immunities or other substantial interests may be affected by
the proceeding, as required by N.H. Admin. Rule Puc 203.02
and RSA 541-A:32,I(b); and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that any party seeking to
intervene on or before June 5, 1998 may file with its
petition to intervene, a written preliminary statement of
its position regarding the subject matter of the docket and
any comment it would like considered regarding the
procedural schedule as agreed to by the parties attending
the prehearing conference on May 5, 1998 and as set forth
above; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that any party objecting to a
late Petition to Intervene make said Objection by filing an
original and 8 copies thereof, with a copy provided to the
Office of Consumer Advocate, on or before June 10, 1998.
By order of the Public Utilities Commission of New
Hampshire this eighteenth day of May, 1998.
Douglas L. Patch Bruce B. Ellsworth Susan S.
Geiger
Chairman Commissioner Commissioner
Attested by:
Claire D. DiCicco
Assistant Secretary