DATE:	January 31, 2008
TO:	Office of Commission Clerk (Cole)
FROM:	Division of Competitive Markets & Enforcement (Pruitt) Office of the General Counsel (Poblete)
RE:	Docket No. 070738-TL – Joint petition of BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. d/b/a AT&T Florida and ITS Telecommunications Systems, Inc. to transfer territories in Martin County and to amend certificates.
AGENDA:	02/12/08 – Regular Agenda – Proposed Agency Action – Interested Persons May Participate
COMMISSIONERS ASSIGNED:		All Commissioners
PREHEARING OFFICER:		Administrative
CRITICAL DATES:		None
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:		None
FILE NAME AND LOCATION:		S:\PSC\CMP\WP\070738.RCM.DOC

 

 Case Background

On December 10, 2007, BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. d/b/a AT&T Florida (AT&T) and ITS Telecommunications Systems, Inc. (ITS) filed, as required by Rule 25-4.005 (1), Florida Administrative Code (F. A. C.), a notice of intent to file a joint petition seeking approval to transfer a portion of ITS’ territory to AT&T.  The two incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) filed a joint petition on December 21, 2007, and on January 7, 2008, an amended joint petition (petition) was filed.[1]

The territory in question consists of a small section (six single family lots) of the Sunlight Ranch development in Martin County which is part of the ITS Indiantown Exchange.  The current boundary line divides the planned subdivision and individual lots.  No subscribers currently live in the area to be transferred.  The petition states that the transfer of this territory to the AT&T Stuart Exchange would render the boundaries more usable in the provision and administration of service.

The Commission is vested with jurisdiction in this matter pursuant to Section 364.335, Florida Statutes.  Petitions for territorial transfers are governed by Rule 25-4.005, F. A. C., which is appended to this recommendation as Attachment A.

Discussion of Issues

Issue 1: 

 Should the petition filed by AT&T and ITS for approval of a territorial agreement to modify the Stuart Exchange and the Indiantown Exchange boundaries and to amend the companies' local exchange certificates be approved?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  The petition filed by AT&T and ITS should be approved because it meets the requirements of Rule 25-4.005, F. A. C., Transfer of Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity as to All or Portion of Service Area.  AT&T and ITS should file tariffs reflecting the exchange boundaries changes within 60 days of the issuance of the consummating order. (Pruitt)

Staff Analysis: 

 The petition requests that six single family lots in a planned development be moved from the Indiantown Exchange to the Stuart Exchange thereby placing all lots and portions of lots in the subdivision in the same exchange.  All future customers in the subdivision would then be under the same AT&T General Subscriber Services Tariff.

In compliance with Rule 25-4.005, F. A. C., the petition states that neither AT&T nor ITS hold any deposits or deposit interest since there are no customers in the subject territory, there are no pending applications for service at this time, and no financial exchange has or will be given for the transfer of the territory in question.

Rule 25-4.005, F. A. C., requires that a notice of intent be provided to the Public Counsel and the governing bodies of any affected municipalities or counties in addition to this Commission.  The rule also requires the publication of a notice in an area newspaper on two separate occasions, at least two weeks prior to filing the petition.  A sworn affidavit stating the notice of intent had been properly provided to the required officials, and a sworn affidavit of publication with a copy of the legal advertisement were included with the petition. 

Accordingly, staff recommends that the petition to modify the exchange boundaries of AT&T’s Stuart Exchange and ITS’ Indiantown Exchange be approved.  Staff believes the request is in the public interest and would eliminate future provision of service confusion in the subdivision such as which ILEC is the appropriate local service provider and what repair service, calling scopes, and rates apply. 

Issue 2: 

 Should this docket be closed?

Recommendation: 

 Yes.  If no person whose substantial interests are affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of the order, a consummating order should be issued.  The docket should be closed administratively upon filing with the Division of Competitive Markets and Enforcement, within 60 days of the issuance of the consummating order, tariffs reflecting the exchange boundaries changes.  (Poblete)

Staff Analysis: 

 This docket should be closed administratively upon the filing of tariffs, within 60 days of the issuance of the consummating order, by AT&T and ITS reflecting the exchange boundaries changes.

25-4.005 Transfer of Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity As to All or Portion of Service Area.

(1) Request for approval by the Commission of transfer of any certificate of public convenience and necessity (or portion thereof) shall be made by joint petition of the certificate holder and transferee after reasonable notice has been given to all subscribers affected by the proposed transfer. Requests for approval shall be accompanied by an affidavit that notice of intention to file the petition has been given:

(a) By mail or personal delivery to the governing bodies of the counties and municipalities affected, to the public counsel, and to the Commission,

(b) By a legal advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in the area affected and published on two (2) separate occasions at least two (2) weeks prior to the filing of the joint petition on the proposed transfer, and

(c) By written notice subject to Commission approval, issued to each subscriber in the area to be transferred concurrent with the filing of the petition.

(2) Upon approving a transfer of certificate, or portion thereof, the Commission will cancel same and reissue in the name of the transferee or amend the description of the service area or both.

(3) Such joint petitions shall include detailed descriptions of the affected boundaries; the number of subscribers, if any, in each petitioned area; changes in rates; service being provided by either petitioner in areas to be transferred; pending applications for service held by either petitioner; changes in calling scope; customers to be transferred; deposits and deposit interest; any financial exchange or consideration for the proposed change, and a list by name and telephone number of all customers who will be exempt from the proposed change.

(4) Any subscriber or group of subscribers of a telephone company may petition the Commission for transfer from the service area of such telephone company to that of another telephone company serving contiguous territory.

(5) If a customer survey is conducted by a telephone company among customers affected by the proposed transfer, return postage shall be paid by the company serving the affected customer and survey ballots shall be returnable to the Public Service Commission, Attention: Division of Competitive Markets and Enforcement, for tabulation.

Specific Authority 350.127(2) FS. Law Implemented 364.335 FS. History–New 12-1-68, Amended 5-4-81, Formerly 25-4.05, Amended 9-16-99.