DE 98-085
BELL ATLANTIC
PETITION TO EXPAND THE PLAINFIELD (675) EXCHANGE
Order Granting Opportunity to Poll Citizens
O R D E R N O. 23,037
October 7, 1998
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On May 5, 1998, the New Hampshire Public Utilities
Commission (Commission) received a petition from Margaret Drye
and Laura Wilder (Petitioners) requesting expansion of the
Plainfield 675 local calling area, also known as Extended Area
Service (EAS), to include the New Hampshire exchanges of Hanover,
Lebanon, West Lebanon, and Meriden; and the White River Junction,
Vermont exchange.
On May 5, 1998, the Commission issued an Order of
Notice scheduling a hearing on August 6, 1998. The Order of
Notice indicated that EAS petitions are subject to a standard
established by Order No. 22,204 issued June 18, 1996 which
includes consideration of community of interest, the effect on
telecommunications competition within New Hampshire, and
consistency with state and federal law. The Order of Notice also
indicated that written comments would be accepted until one week
after the hearing, that is, until August 15, 1998.
On August 6, 1998, at the Plainfield Town Hall, the
Commission received written and oral comments from residents of
the area, including State Representatives Clifton Below, Peter
Hoe Burling, Larry Guaraldi, and Merle Schotanus. The Commission
heard comments from the New England Telephone & Telegraph Company
d/b/a Bell Atlantic and hereinafter referred to as Bell Atlantic.
The Commission announced its decision in a public meeting on
August 17, 1998. On September 11, 1998, one of the Petitioners,
Margaret Drye, filed a letter commenting on the Commission's
decision.
II. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES
A. Petitioners
A number of Plainfield and Cornish residents submitted
comments at the hearing, both written and oral, in support of
expanding the Plainfield Exchange to include the petitioned
exchanges. In addition, the Commission received a number of
letters from Plainfield Exchange residents who did not attend the
hearing. The primary argument put forth is that a community of
interest exists between Plainfield and the five petitioned
exchanges. The commenters supported their argument with
information about the percentage of Plainfield residents who work
in Lebanon and Hanover, the fact that Plainfield residents attend
Lebanon High School and use Hanover medical and educational
facilities, and their inability to call major business centers
in Lebanon and West Lebanon without incurring a toll charge. In
addition, commenters pointed out that the elderly, who can least
afford a rate increase, would benefit by eliminating their toll
expenses to doctors and medical facilities. A number of
commenters stated that the Plainfield calling area which provides
no toll-free calling to the North or East, is inferior to most
calling areas in New Hampshire and this results in higher than
average toll billing for Plainfield customers. Several
residents, aware of the Bell Atlantic proposal to expand EAS to
the contiguous exchanges of Meriden and West Lebanon, said those
exchanges represented only a small percentage of the calling area
expansion that Plainfield subscribers need.
B. Bell Atlantic
Based on the comments at the hearing and letters
submitted by Plainfield subscribers, Bell Atlantic acknowledged
that over time calling areas have not always keep pace with
changing and evolving communities of interest. Bell Atlantic
recognizes that New Hampshire is a different place today than it
was even 20 years ago. Bell Atlantic pointed out that its
proposal to add all contiguous exchanges to local calling areas
throughout the state, which has been approved by the Commission
and is in the process of implementation, is a response to that
situation. The Bell Atlantic Home and Contiguous plan, in
combination with a reduction in the number of rate groups,
attempts to develop a balanced plan that meets the needs of the
greatest number of people throughout the state. Bell Atlantic
stated that the EAS rules recently established by the Commission
also attempt to balance customers sometimes conflicting needs and
that the Company will comply with the outcome of these rules.
Bell Atlantic will support that as well.
II. COMMISSION ANALYSIS
This petition is before us for analysis in light of our
prior decisions regarding expansion of EAS, the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TAct) and the actual changes in
telecommunications markets in New Hampshire.
Our orders in DE 97-046, DR 97-038 and DR 97-075,
recounted the lengthy EAS investigation which resulted in our
refusal to impose a statewide change to EAS, finding instead that
increased competition in the toll market as a result of intraLATA
presubscription and other changes mandated by the TAct would
effectively reduce toll charges. Order No. 20,107 (April 15,
1996). By Order No. 22,204, issued June 18, 1996, we also found
that carriers and communities retained the right to petition for
EAS expansion and articulated the standard for assessing an EAS
petition. The standard applies a community of interest approach
as defined in FCC Docket No. 96-45, In the Matter of Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Report and Order, FCC 97-157, released May 8, 1997 and hereinafter referred to as the
Universal Service Order. In the FCC's opinion, a calling area
which reflects the community of interest is one which "allows
subscribers to call hospitals, schools and other essential
services without incurring a toll charge." Further elaborating
on the issue of affordability, the FCC states in its Universal
Service order that "...affordability is affected by the amount of
toll charges a consumer incurs to contact essential service
providers such as hospitals, schools, and government offices that
are located outside of the consumers local calling area...".
We use the FCC definitions to facilitate examination of
the Plainfield petition. From the comments made by customers in
the Plainfield Exchange at the public hearing on August 6, 1998,
the exchange does not appear to encompass their community of
interest. Further, we are convinced that the anticipated
addition of the contiguous exchanges of West Lebanon and Meriden
will not fully capture the community of interest for at least a
sizeable group of residents of Plainfield for the purposes of
meeting their medical, educational, and business needs. We will
therefore grant the Petitioners' request that there be a poll of
their fellow residents on the issue of expanding EAS for the 675
exchange to include Hanover and Lebanon Exchanges. No reciprocal
ballot of Hanover and Lebanon customers is necessary because
expansion of the Hanover and Lebanon EAS to include Plainfield
will not result in a rate group increase, nor will it
substantially advance the date of any future increase.
The question upon which residents will be polled will
be limited to the rate increase caused by the change in rate
group which results from the increased number of lines reachable
without paying a toll charge. No surcharge for lost revenues is
appropriate at this time. As we stated in Order No. 22,675 in DR
97-046, given the advent of competition in the toll market the
goal of revenue neutrality is elusive.
As in our decisions in DE 97-038, DE 97-046, DE 97-075
and DE 97-193, in order to insure maximum effective response by
customers, the polling ballot will be designed, distributed, and
tabulated by the Commission. The ballot question shall include a
statement of the increased rate necessitated by the expanded
calling area. The poll shall be considered valid if ballots are
returned by 25% or more of the customer base. The outcome of a
valid vote will be determined by a simple majority of the
returned ballots.
We find that no community of interest was established
between Plainfield and White River Junction, Vermont. While
virtually all comments supported the need for the Hanover,
Lebanon and West Lebanon Exchanges, relatively few mentioned the
need for White River and these few comments were unconvincing.
Furthermore, if Plainfield subscribers vote in favor of the
ballot question we propose, they will have a choice of the
Claremont, Windsor, Hanover, Lebanon and West Lebanon exchanges
for their community of interest. We find that the presence of
some residents who choose not to utilize one of those five
communities of interest, and who prefer the White River Junction
exchange, does not constitute a community of interest for the
majority of Plainfield residents. Finally, while not a factor in
our decision regarding White River Junction, we wish to make
Plainfield subscribers aware that attempts to add that exchange
would require actions by Bell Atlantic-Vermont and the Federal
Communications Commission's approval.
Petitioner Margaret Drye filed comments September 11,
1998, urging us to add White River Junction, Vermont to the
ballot. These comments were filed after our oral deliberations
of this case. Although the comments may be characterized as a
premature motion for reconsideration, we will nonetheless address
them. We remain convinced that a community of interest was not
established between White River Junction and Plainfield. As
clearly described in the letter, some residents simply choose to
utilize educational, medical or business opportunities in White
River instead of the potential five communities of interest that
will be available to them. We reiterate that it is not uncommon
that some residents will choose to utilize services beyond the
calling area but that does not establish a community of interest
for the majority of customers.
Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby
ORDERED, that a vote on the EAS issue shall be
conducted as described above for expansion of the Plainfield
exchange to include the Hanover and Lebanon exchanges; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that Bell Atlantic shall provide the
Commission with a list of Plainfield Exchange customers, names,
addresses and telephone numbers, and to the extent technically
possible, in mailing label or PC format by October 20, 1998.
By order of the Public Utilities Commission of New
Hampshire this seventh day of October, 1998.
Douglas L. Patch Bruce B. Ellsworth Susan S. Geiger
Chairman Commissioner Commissioner
Attested by:
Thomas B. Getz
Executive Director and Secretary