DE 98-072
                         BUSINESS COMMUNICATIONS 
                           NETWORKS CORPORATION
                  Application for Certification as a CLEC
                Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part 
                    a Motion for Proprietary Treatment 
                         O R D E R  N O.  22,954  
                               June 8, 1998
         On May 5, 1998, Business Communications Networks
     corporation, d/b/a Lightship Telecom (Lightship) filed with
     the New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission (Commission),
     pursuant to RSA 374:22-g and N.H. Admin. Rules Chapter Puc
     1300, an application for authority to operate as a
     Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) in New Hampshire. 
     On the same date, Lightship filed a Motion for Confidential
     Treatment to exempt from disclosure Exhibit 3 of the
     application pursuant N.H. Admin. Rule Puc 204.06. Lightship
     does not indicate that it has sought concurrence from the
     Office of the Consumer Advocate or the Commission Staff.
         Lightship filed the application in redacted form
     as well as full, unredacted copies.  Pursuant to Puc
     204.05(b), documents submitted to the Commission or Staff
     accompanied by a motion for confidentiality are not
     disclosed to the public and are maintained as provided in
     Puc 204.06(d) until the Commission rules on the Motion for
     Confidential Treatment.
         In its motion, Lightship argues that Exhibit 3
     contains confidential financial information, specifically a
     balance sheet and proforma income statement, which is within
     the exemptions from disclosure permitted by RSA 91-A:5,IV,
     as demonstrated by information submitted pursuant to N.H.
     Admin. Rule Puc 204.06(b) and (c).  Specifically, Lightship
     avers that the proforma income statement is based on
     internal projections, not available to the general public,
     which would reveal the financial condition of the company
     with greater particularity than is revealed by compliance
     with the minimum capitalization requirement of Puc
     1304.01(b)(1).  Puc 1304.01(b)(1) adequately protects the
     public interest by assuring the financial integrity of
     CLECs, according to Lightship, whereas further disclosure of
     confidential financial information would be harmful. 
     Lightship describes the benefits of nondisclosure as the
     protection of commercial information and encouragement of
     additional CLEC applications.   
         We review Lightship's motion by the standards set
     forth in Puc 204.06.  Insofar as Exhibit 3 contains
     projected financial information which is valuable to
     competitors, i.e., the pro-formed income statement,
     Lightship has demonstrated that the information, if made
     public, would likely create a competitive disadvantage,
     pursuant to Puc 204.06(c)(1).  Insofar as Exhibit 3 contains
     financial information which would otherwise be filed as part
     of an annual report, i.e., the balance sheet, Lightship has
     failed to meet any of the requirements of Puc 204.06(c). 
     Lightship does not demonstrate any competitive disadvantage;
     customer information is not implicated; and, efforts to
     prevent dissemination of the information have not been made
     in the ordinary course of business.
         Based on the Company's representations, under the
     balancing test we have applied in prior cases, e.g., Re US
     WEST Interprise America, Inc., Order No. 22,642 (July 7,
     1997); Re New England Telephone Company (Auditel), 80 NHPUC
     437 (1995); Re Bell Atlantic, Order No. 22,851 (February 17,
     1998); Re EnergyNorth Natural Gas, Inc., Order No. 22,859
     (February 24, 1998), we find that the benefits to Lightship
     of non-disclosure in this case outweigh the benefits to the
     public of disclosure with regard to the proformed income
     statement but not to the balance sheet.   
         Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
         ORDERED, that Lightship's Motion for Confidential
     Treatment of Exhibit 3 is granted in part and denied in
     part; and it is
         FURTHER ORDERED, that this Order is subject to the
     ongoing rights of the Commission, on its own motion or on
     the motion of Staff, any party or any other member of the
     public, to reconsider this Order in light of RSA 91-A,
     should circumstances so warrant.
         By order of the Public Utilities Commission of New
     Hampshire this eighth day of June, 1998.
       Douglas L. Patch    Bruce B. Ellsworth   Susan S. Geiger
           Chairman           Commissioner       Commissioner
     Attested by:
     Thomas B. Getz
     Executive Director and Secretary