DT 99-003
BELL ATLANTIC
Special Contract with Vitts Networks, Inc.
Order Clarifying Order No. 23,138 and Denying the Re-filed
Special Contract Without Prejudice
O R D E R N O. 23,184
April 2, 1999
On January 7, 1999, Bell Atlantic-New Hampshire (BA-NH)
filed a special contract with Vitts Networks, Inc. (Vitts) to
provide Frame Relay Service (FRS) and Digital Data Service (DDS).
By Order No. 23,138, issued February 8, 1999, the Commission
denied BA-NH's petition for approval of the Vitts special
contract without prejudice because the Commission could not
determine at the time the appropriate "incremental cost" to use
to evaluate the pricing in the special contract. The Commission
indicated in Order No. 23,138 that a docket, DT 99-018, had been
opened to investigate fully and expeditiously the proper
incremental cost study to use when evaluating special contract
filings pursuant to RSA 378:18-b. The Commission stated that
BA-NH could refile the special contract with Vitts, after a
decision in DT 99-018 was rendered or, in the alternative, if
certain conditions were met. Order No. 23,138 at 5.
On March 3, 1999, BA-NH re-filed the special contract
with Vitts along with the same cost support, billing and service
information. In its re-filed petition made pursuant to RSA
378:18-b, BA-NH states that it has obtained the customer's
authorization to disclose customer proprietary network
information in order to meet the Commission's requirement that
BA-NH may re-file the special contract "after it discloses the
number of units for each type of service contained in the
proposed agreement." Order No. 23,138 at 5. BA-NH represents
that Vitts would prefer to maintain the information as
confidential, but in the interest of obtaining the services it
has agreed to disclose the number of units. According to BA-NH,
Vitts cannot wait for resolution of DT 99-018 as Vitts, a
competitive local exchange provider, would like to use the
special contract as a means to enhance its service offerings to
its customers that are unavailable through the tariff.
On March 25, 1999, The Destek Group, Inc. (Destek)
filed a Motion for Late Intervention as a Full Party and urged
the Commission to postpone a decision on the special contract
between BA-NH and Vitts pending resolution of DT 99-018. Destek
stated in its Motion that special contracts such as the one
between BA-NH and Vitts are "discriminatory and minimize or
eliminate the ability for other companies, like Destek, to
compete." Moreover, Destek avers that such special contracts
negatively affect the development of competitive
telecommunications in New Hampshire.
After having considered the re-filed special contract
between BA-NH and Vitts, we recognize the need to clarify Order
No. 23,138. In making the instant filing, BA-NH reads disclosure
of the "number of units purchased for each type of service" to be
the only condition that it must meet to re-file the special
contract. Mistakenly, BA-NH does not take into account the
additional condition contained in the next sentence of that
order. That sentence reads: "[I]n addition, Bell Atlantic may
re-file after supplementing its cost study indicating the
proposed rates exceed TELRIC costs as stipulated in DE 97-171".
Order No. 23,138 at 5. Thus, under the terms of Order No.
23,138, if BA-NH chooses not to wait for resolution of the
special contract docket, it needs to disclose the number of units
purchased for each type of service and supplement the cost study
indicating that the proposed rates exceed the TELRIC costs
stipulated in DE 97-171. If BA-NH meets both of these
conditions, we will expeditiously approve the Vitts special
contract provided that BA-NH adequately addresses the concerns
raised by Destek. Because BA-NH has not met these conditions, we
will deny approval at this time.
Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED, that the Special Contract between Bell
Atlantic-NH and Vitts Networks is DENIED without prejudice; and
it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that the Motion for Intervention filed
by Destek is GRANTED.
By order of the Public Utilities Commission of New
Hampshire this second day of April, 1999.
Douglas L. Patch Susan S. Geiger Nancy Brockway
Chairman Commissioner Commissioner
Attested by:
Thomas B. Getz
Executive Director and Secretary