Commission Agendas | previous page
South Dakota Public Utilities Commission Meeting
Wednesday, August 9, 2000; 1:30 P.M.
State Capitol Building, Room LCR1
Pierre, South Dakota
NOTE: If you wish to join this meeting by conference call, please contact the Commission at 605-773- 3201 by 5:00 p.m. on August 8, 2000. Please keep in mind that a limited number of telephone lines are available. Every effort should be made for parties in the same city to be on the same line when calling in.
PLEASE DON'T WAIT until the day of the meeting to contact us for the conference call. NOTE: Notice is further given to persons with disabilities that this Commission meeting is being held in a physically accessible place. If you have special needs, please notify the Commission and we will make all necessary arrangements.
AGENDA OF THE COMMISSION MEETING
Administration
1. Approval Of The Minutes Of The Commission Meetings Held On July 13 and July 20, 2000. (Staff: Mary Giddings.)
Consumer Issues
1. IN THE MATTER OF DISMISSING COMPLAINTS CT00-002, CT00-050, CT00-052, CT00-062, CT00-064, CT00-065, CT00-067, CT00-079, CT00-080, AND CT00-081.
On December 28, 1999, the Commission received a complaint from Dan Grider of Baltic, South Dakota, against Qwest regarding unauthorized switching of services. The complainant alleges that his long distance provider was switched to Qwest without his authorization. Probable cause was found in this matter at the January 18, 2000, regular meeting. A hearing was scheduled for July 19, 2000. The hearing was cancelled.
On March 22, 2000, the Commission docketed a complaint filed by Gary R. and Victoria A. Witcher, Watertown, South Dakota, against U S WEST Communications, Inc. and AT&T Communications of the Midwest, Inc. regarding failure to switch services and unauthorized charges. The complainants indicate that they cancelled their long distance services with AT&T for two phone lines on 09/24/99 and they received a bill from AT&T in February, 2000. The complainants are alleging that either U S WEST failed to order the cancellation or AT&T mishandled the request to cancel the account. If U S WEST was at fault, the complainants are requesting an apology; if AT&T is at fault, the complainants are requesting that this be treated as slamming, since it is services against their authorization. On April 11, 2000, AT&T and U S WEST each filed Motions to Dismiss. The Motions to Dismiss were denied at the May 17, 2000, regular meeting. A hearing was scheduled for July 19, 2000. The hearing was cancel
The Complainant, Phil Edwards, alleges that from May 1999 to January 2000, he was incorrectly billed by AT&T because U S West improperly routed his long distance calls. The Complainant's carrier of choice is Clear Choice. He is seeking restitution of charges in excess of Clear Choice's 5 cent/min. since May 1999. On April 12, 2000, U S WEST filed a Motion to Dismiss. On April 12, 2000, AT&T also filed a Motion to Dismiss. A hearing in this matter is scheduled for July 19, 2000. On July 13, 2000, both Motions to Dismiss were denied. The hearing was cancelled.
CT00-062 IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY MARGERY JENSEN, YANKTON, SOUTH DAKOTA, AGAINST OLS, INC. REGARDING UNAUTHORIZED SWITCHING OF SERVICES. (Staff Analyst: Leni Healy. Staff Attorney: Karen Cremer.)
The Complainant, Margery Jensen, alleges that she received a telemarketing call concerning OLS services and refused the offer. The switch was made without authorization. For a resolution the Complainant requests reimbursement for all charges, plus compensation for time and stress.
The Complainant, Steve Paulson, Business Manager for Yankton Janitorial Supply, alleges that he noticed the phone service had been switched on the 1/25/00 phone bill. He identified charges from OANC and U S Republic Communications. The complainant states that the only person authorized to
switch providers is the business owner, Dixie Church. Ms. Church confirmed that she did not authorize a switch in long distance services. The complainant requests that the PUC talk to U S Republic and get them off of their phone bill and have U S Republic pay for the $50.56 phone charges and other fines the state laws deem.
The Complainant, Vesta Jensen, states that her out-of-state long distance service was switched without authorization on February 24, 2000. She requests that "the Public Utilities Commission should enforce the stiffest fines and penalties to stop the long distance phone companies from changing anyone's service without permission."
The Complainant, Shelly Stagle, alleges that through a deceptive telemarketing call, her long distance service was switched. The Complainant did not receive the rates or plan as outlined by the telemarketer. The Complainant is seeking the maximum fines as compensation.
The Complainant, Fairy Gardner, alleges that her phone services were switched without her authorization and she received bills from Excel for unauthorized charges. The complainant is requesting compensation for the harassment.
On June 26, 2000, the Commission received a formal complaint from Theodore Kamstra on behalf of TECS indicating the telecommunications service was switched without authorization.
The Complainants, Peter and Dorothy Beaudette, allege that unauthorized, non-toll charges from AmeriVision Communications began appearing on their telephone bill in August, 1999. Despite numerous requests and efforts to cancel the account and prevent further charges, AmeriVision Communications has continued to send monthly charges to the complainants. The complainants request that AmeriVision Communications stop sending unauthorized charges; they request to be reimbursed for the charges and for money spent on postage and for AmeriVision Communications to pay $1000.00 in reparation to them for their frustration.
TODAY, if all of the above matters are resolved shall the Commission dismiss the complaints and close the dockets?
The Complainants, Don and Judy Blindauer, allege that they received charges for long distance out of state phone service from Sprint on their December phone bill. They never authorized Sprint to be a carrier and they had a "freeze" on their phone service to prevent being slammed. The charges from Sprint were high, ranging from .57 cents per minute to $3.09 per minute. They received another bill from Sprint in February and they continue to get bills from their chosen carrier I-Link. The complainants are requesting that the Sprint rates be re-rated to the charges they would have received with I-Link and that they be paid $1000.00 for the inconvenience. The complainants would like to see Sprint heavily fined in order to put a stop to this type of thing. The complainants want to be sure that Sprint is off of their phone service and if they have to attend a hearing in Pierre, they feel that Sprint should have to pay their expenses. On July 18, 2000, Sprint filed a Motion to Add U S WEST. A hearing is scheduled for August 24, 2000.
TODAY, shall the Commission add U S WEST as a party? If granted, shall the Commission reschedule the hearing for September 13, 2000?
Complainant alleges that she was talked into changing her long distance services to Qwest through deceptive practices and that she did not authorize the switch to Qwest. She also alleges that she did not authorize Preferred Billing to switch her long distance services. She requests that the companies be liable for the wages of the PUC staff and any costs of changing back to her phone company, including the charges on her phone bill, since she did not ask for their services. On July 31, 2000, USBI filed a Motion to Dismiss.
TODAY, shall the Commission grant USBI's Motion to Dismiss?
Natural Gas
On June 18, 1998, MidAmerican Energy Company (MidAmerican) filed for approval of a waiver of refund plan relating to Kansas ad valorem tax refunds received from Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) with the Commission. On August 5, 1998, the Commission approved MidAmerican's proposal to defer the Kansas ad valorem tax refunds, until MidAmerican determines that the amount received constitutes a final refund or for a maximum of one year, whichever comes first. On August 26, 1999, the Commission again granted deferral of the Northern Natural Gas Company refund with the same condition. On July 14, 2000, MidAmerican again filed to defer the Northern Refund until MidAmerican determines that the amount received constitutes a final refund or for a maximum of one year, whichever comes first.
TODAY, shall the Commission defer the refund?
Telecommunications
On February 10, 2000, the Commission docketed the application of Comm South Companies, Inc. for a Certificate of Authority to provide local exchange services in South Dakota. Comm South Companies, Inc. seeks to provide resold basic local exchange telecommunication services in areas of South Dakota currently served by U S WEST Communications and any other relevant incumbent facilities-based LEC or other authorized local exchange carrier, excluding service areas of rural telephone companies. A majority of the applicant's customers are residential consumers who are unable to obtain local telecommunication services from other local exchange carriers due to credit problems or prior disconnection. Services will include local calling, access to 911 emergency and 800 number services to residential customers on a prepaid basis. Applicant does not permit customers of its local service to access usage-based services, such as direct-dial long distance calls, collect calls, operator-assisted calls and third-number billed calls. On July 11, 2000, Comm South filed a Petition for Declaratory Ruling with the Commission.
TODAY, how shall the Commission proceed?
A first amendment to an amended agreement for local wireline network interconnection and service resale between Dakota Telecom, Inc. and U S WEST Communications, Inc. was filed with the Commission. This amendment is made in order to allow Dakota Telecom, Inc. to originate EAS/local traffic from South Dakota and terminate this traffic in Nebraska. This EAS/local traffic must be within the same local calling areas as defined by U S WEST's current tariff. Parties had until June 21, 2000, to comment.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement?
An interconnection agreement between ServiSense.com, Inc. and U S WEST Communications, Inc. was filed with the Commission. The agreement is a negotiated agreement setting forth certain arrangements to provide, within the geographical areas where U S WEST is the incumbent local exchange carrier, the resale of local telecommunications services. Parties had until July 6, 2000, to comment.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Resale Agreement?
An interconnection agreement between NewPath Holdings, Inc. and U S WEST Communications, Inc. was filed with the Commission. The agreement is a negotiated agreement with the parties adopting the interconnection between Covad Communications Company and U S WEST, Docket TC99-017, which was approved by the Commission effective November 18, 1999. Parties had until July 6, 2000, to comment.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the interconnection agreement?
South Dakota Network filed a cost study revenue requirement and a tariff sheet revision for a rate reduction in Switched Transport. South Dakota Network is requesting an effective date of August 1, 2000.
TODAY, shall the Commission assess a filing fee not to exceed $100,000?
A second amendment to an interconnection agreement between Dakota Telecom, Inc. and U S WEST Communications, Inc. was filed with the Commission. The Commission approved the original interconnection agreement effective August 28, 1998. A first amendment was filed with the Commission on June 1, 2000, and is pending Commission action. The Second Amendment will add reciprocal compensation language to the original agreement. Parties had until July 31, 2000, to comment.
TODAY, shall the Commission approve the Amendment to the Interconnection Agreement?
Announcements
1. A hearing is being scheduled for August 22, 2000, at 8:30am, in Docket CT00-072 (Nelson/USWC/Billing Practices) in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
2. The hearing in Docket CT00-082 (May/FirsTel) will be held on August 22, 2000, following CT00-072 in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
3. A hearing is scheduled in Docket CT00-020 (Jensen/McLeod/USWC) for August 23, 2000, at 1:30pm in Room 412 of the State Capitol.
4. The next regularly scheduled Commission meeting will be held Tuesday, August 22, 2000, at 1:30pm, in Room 412 of the State Capitol Building.
Sue Cichos
Deputy Executive Director
Sue.Cichos@state.sd.us
August 2, 2000
