Key: (1) language to be deleted (2) new language
Laws of Minnesota 1989
CHAPTER 74-H.F.No. 1056
An act relating to utilities; regulating
noncompetitive and competitive telephone services;
amending Minnesota Statutes 1988, sections 237.07;
237.081; 237.295, subdivisions 1 and 2; 237.57,
subdivision 1; 237.58, subdivision 1; 237.59,
subdivisions 1, 2, 3, and 6; 237.60, subdivisions 1
and 2; 237.62, subdivisions 1 and 2, and by adding a
subdivision; 237.63, subdivision 1, and by adding
subdivisions; and 237.64, subdivisions 1 and 2; Laws
1987, chapter 340, section 26; proposing coding for
new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 237; repealing
Minnesota Statutes 1988, sections 237.075, subdivision
1a; and 237.081, subdivision 3.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:
Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.07, is
amended to read:
237.07 [SCHEDULE OF RATES FILED FILING REQUIREMENTS.]
Subdivision 1. [FILING OF CHARGES.] It shall be the duty
of Every telephone company to shall keep on file with the
department a schedule of its exchange rates, tolls, and
charges specific rate, toll, or charge for every kind
of noncompetitive service and a price list for every kind of
service subject to emerging competition, together with all rules
and classifications used by it in the conduct of the telephone
business, all of which shall be kept on file by the department
subject to public inspection. including limitations on
liability. The filings are governed by chapter 13. When a
company sells services subject to emerging competition on an
individually priced basis, it shall file a statement of the
charges to its customers with the commission and the
department. The department shall require each telephone company
to keep open for public inspection, at designated offices, so
much of these schedules rates, price lists, and rules as it
deems necessary for the public information.
Subd. 2. [SEPARATE PRICING.] When competitive services or
service elements or services on an individually priced basis are
sold in conjunction with noncompetitive services or service
elements, the telephone company shall file or have on file with
the commission and the department separate prices for its
services subject to emerging competition and noncompetitive
services or service elements. Telephone services or service
elements must be offered on a nondiscriminatory basis.
Sec. 2. [237.071] [SPECIAL PRICING.]
Except as prohibited by section 237.60, subdivision 3,
prices unique to a particular customer or group of customers may
be allowed for noncompetitive services and for services subject
to emerging competition when differences in the cost of
providing a service or a service element justifies a different
price for a particular customer or group of customers.
Individual pricing for services subject to emerging competition
may be allowed when a uniform price should not be required
because of market conditions. Unique or individual prices for
services or service elements in effect before the effective date
of this section are deemed to have been approved under this
section.
Sec. 3. [237.076] [SETTLEMENTS; PROCEDURES.]
Subdivision 1. [SETTLEMENTS.] In proceedings before the
commission, interested parties are encouraged to enter into
settlements of their disputes. If a settlement is reached
before a contested case hearing has been ordered and the
commission rejects the settlement, the commission shall order a
contested case hearing if a significant issue has not been
resolved to the commission's satisfaction. When a contested
case hearing has been ordered under this chapter, the office of
administrative hearings, before conducting the hearing, shall
convene a settlement conference including all the parties to
encourage settlement of issues in the contested case. If a
stipulated settlement is not reached before the contested case
hearing, the office of administrative hearings may, at its
discretion or a party's request, reconvene the settlement
conference during the hearing or after its completion. If all
parties agree to a stipulated settlement of the case or a part
of the case, the settlement must be submitted to the commission.
Subd. 2. [PROCEDURES.] The commission may accept a
settlement upon finding that to do so is in the public interest
and is supported by substantial evidence. If the commission
does not accept a settlement, it may issue an order modifying
the settlement, subject to the approval of the parties. A party
has ten days after entry of the order, or of an order disposing
of a petition for reconsideration, in which to reject the
proposed modification. If no party rejects the proposed
modification, the commission's order becomes final. If the
commission rejects a settlement or if a party rejects the
commission's proposed modification of a settlement, the matter
must be referred to the administrative law judge assigned to the
case for further proceedings.
Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.081, is
amended to read:
237.081 [SUMMARY INVESTIGATIONS OF INADEQUATE SERVICE.]
Subdivision 1. [COMMISSION INVESTIGATIONS.] Whenever the
commission shall believe believes that any a service is
inadequate or cannot be obtained or that an investigation of any
matter relating to any telephone service should for any reason
be made, it may on its own motion summarily investigate the same
service or matter with or without notice, except that the
commission shall give notice to a telephone company before it
investigates the level of rates charged by the company.
Subd. 1a. [COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION.] Upon a complaint made
against any cooperative telephone association, a telephone
company, or a municipal telephone utility by any other provider
of telephone service, by the governing body of any a political
subdivision, or by no fewer than five percent or 100, whichever
is the lesser number, of the subscribers or spouses of
subscribers of the particular cooperative telephone association,
telephone company, or municipal telephone utility, that any of
the rates, tolls, tariffs, charges, or schedules, or any
regulation, measurement, practice, act, or omission affecting or
relating to the production, transmission, delivery, or
furnishing of telephone service or any service in connection
therewith with telephone service is in any respect unreasonable,
insufficient, or unjustly discriminatory, or that any service is
inadequate or cannot be obtained, the commission shall proceed
to make an investigation. If the commission finds that all
significant issues raised have not been resolved to its
satisfaction, it shall order a hearing., after notice to the
telephone company, shall investigate the matters raised by the
complaint.
Subd. 2. [PROCEEDINGS AFTER INVESTIGATIONS.] (a) If, after
making such summary an investigation under subdivision 1 or 1a,
the commission becomes satisfied that sufficient grounds exist
to warrant a formal hearing being ordered as to the matters
investigated, it shall set a time and place for a hearing.
finds that a significant factual issue raised has not been
resolved to its satisfaction, the commission shall follow the
appropriate procedure prescribed by this subdivision.
(b) For an investigation concerning the reasonableness of
the rates for noncompetitive services of a telephone company
whose general revenue requirement is determined under section
237.075, the commission shall order the company to initiate a
rate proceeding in accordance with section 237.075. The
commission shall allow the company at least 120 days after the
date of the commission's order to initiate the proceeding.
(c) For other investigations, the commission shall order
that a contested case hearing be conducted under chapter 14
unless the complainant, the telephone company, and the
commission agree that an expedited hearing under section 237.61
is appropriate.
Subd. 3. Notice of the time and place for such hearing
shall be made to all interested parties by postage paid, first
class mail.
Subd. 4. [ESTABLISHMENT OF RATES AND PRICES.] Whenever the
commission shall find finds, after a proceeding under
subdivision 2, that any (1) a service which that can be
reasonably demanded cannot be obtained, or (2) that any of the
rates, tolls, tariffs, charges or schedules rate, toll, tariff,
charge, or schedule, or any regulation, measurement, practice,
act, or omission affecting or relating to the production,
transmission, delivery, or furnishing of telephone service or
any service in connection therewith with telephone service, is
in any respect unreasonable, insufficient, or unjustly
discriminatory, or (3) that any service is inadequate, the
commission shall make an order respecting the rates, tolls,
tariffs tariff, regulation, act, omission, practice, or service
that is just and reasonable and, if applicable, shall establish
just and reasonable rates and prices.
Subd. 5. [SERVICE; NOTICE.] A copy of such an order shall
issued under this section must be served upon the person against
whom it runs or the person's attorney, and notice thereof
shall of the order must be given to the other parties to the
proceedings or their attorneys.
Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.295,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [PAYMENT FOR INVESTIGATIONS.] Whenever the
department or commission, in a proceeding upon its own motion,
on complaint, or upon an application to it, shall deem considers
it necessary, in order to carry out the duties imposed on it, to
investigate the books, accounts, practices, and activities of,
or make appraisals of the property of any, a telephone company,
or to render any engineering or accounting services to any a
telephone company, the telephone company shall pay the expenses
reasonably attributable to the investigation, appraisal, or
service. The department and commission shall ascertain the
expenses, and the department shall render a bill therefor for
those expenses to the telephone company, either at the
conclusion of the investigation, appraisal, or services, or from
time to time during its progress, which. The bill shall
constitute constitutes notice of the assessment and a demand for
payment. The amount of the bills so assessed by the department
shall under this subdivision must be paid by the telephone
company into the state treasury within 30 days from the date of
assessment. The total amount, in any one a calendar year, for
which any a telephone company shall may become liable, by reason
of costs incurred by the department and commission within that
calendar year, shall may not exceed two-fifths of one percent of
the gross jurisdictional operating revenue of the telephone
company in the last preceding calendar year. Direct charges may
be assessed without regard to this limitation until the gross
jurisdictional operating revenue of the telephone company for
the preceding calendar year has been reported for the first
time. Where, pursuant to under this subdivision, costs are
incurred within any a calendar year which that are in excess of
two-fifths of one percent of the gross jurisdictional operating
revenues, the excess costs shall are not be chargeable as part
of the remainder under subdivision 2, but shall must be paid out
of the general appropriation of the department.
Sec. 6. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.295,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [ASSESSMENT OF COSTS.] The department and
commission shall quarterly, at least 30 days before the start of
each quarter, estimate the total of its their expenditures in
the performance of its their duties relating to telephone
companies, other than amounts chargeable to telephone companies
under subdivision 1 or 5. The remainder shall must be assessed
by the department to the several telephone companies operating
in this state in proportion to their respective gross
jurisdictional operating revenues during the last calendar
year. The assessment shall must be paid into the state treasury
within 30 days after the bill has been mailed to the several
telephone companies, which shall constitute. The bill
constitutes notice of the assessment and demand of
payment thereof. The total amount which that may be assessed to
the telephone companies, under authority of this subdivision,
shall may not exceed one-eighth of one percent of the total
gross jurisdictional operating revenues during the calendar
year. The assessment for the second quarter of each fiscal year
shall must be adjusted to compensate for the amount by which
actual expenditures by the commission and department for the
preceding fiscal year were more or less than the estimated
expenditures previously assessed. A telephone company with
gross jurisdictional operating revenues of less than $5,000 is
exempt from assessments under this subdivision.
Sec. 7. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.57,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [SCOPE.] The terms used in sections 237.57
to 237.68 this chapter have the meanings given them in this
section.
Sec. 8. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.58,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [APPLICABILITY.] This section and sections
237.59,; 237.60, and subdivisions 1, 2, and 5; 237.62; and
section 18 do not apply to a telephone company unless the
company notifies the commission in writing of its decision to be
subject to all of those sections. The company may not revoke
its decision to be subject to those sections before January 1,
1994.
Sec. 9. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.59,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [EMERGING COMPETITIVE SERVICES.] The
following services provided by the telephone company are subject
to emerging competition unless and until reclassified as
noncompetitive or subject to effective competition under this
section:
(1) apartment door answering services;
(2) automatic call distribution;
(3) billing and collection services;
(4) call waiting, call forwarding, and three-way calling
services for businesses with three or more lines;
(5) central office-based pricing packages providing
switched business access lines which substitute for private
branch exchange systems which may or may not share intelligence
with customer premises equipment;
(6) command link-type services for network reconfiguring to
rearrange cross-connections between channel services;
(7) custom network services and special assemblies;
(8) digicom switchnet services for full duplex,
synchronous, information transport;
(9) direct customer access services for telephone number
information services video display;
(10) group access bridge services;
(11) inter-LATA and intra-LATA message toll service;
(12) inter-LATA and intra-LATA private line services;
(13) inter-LATA and intra-LATA wide area telephone service;
(14) mobile radio services;
(15) operator-handled intercept services;
(16) public pay telephone services, excluding charges for
access to the central office;
(17) seminars;
(18) services not previously offered prior to August 1,
1987;
(19) services which generate a service that generates an
annual revenue equal to or less than the greater of one-tenth of
one percent or $100,000 of a telephone company's annual gross
revenues in the year the company elects to be covered by this
section;
(20) special construction of facilities;
(21) studies;
(22) systems for automatic dialing; and
(23) versanet-type service access line involving continuous
monitoring and transmission of data from customer's premises to
the central office.
Sec. 10. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.59,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [PETITION.] A person telephone company, or the
commission on its own motion, may petition to have a service
of a that telephone company classified as subject to effective
competition or emerging competition. The petition must be
served on the commission, the department of public service, the
office of the attorney general, and any other person designated
by the commission. The petition must contain at least:
(1) a list of the known alternative providers of the
service available to the company's customers;
(2) an estimate of the company's current market share;
(3) identification of barriers to entry or exit from the
market for the service; and
(4) a description of affiliate relationships with any other
provider of the service in the company's market.
Sec. 11. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.59,
subdivision 3, is amended to read:
Subd. 3. [EXPEDITED PROCEEDING.] A person who files
telephone company that is the subject of a petition under
subdivision 2 may request that the commission determine the
classification of the service through an expedited proceeding
under section 237.61 or a contested case hearing. If an
expedited proceeding is requested, the commission must provide
interested persons an opportunity to comment on the
appropriateness of the process and the merits of the petition.
When an expedited proceeding is requested, the commission
must shall make a final determination within 60 days of the date
on which all required information required pursuant to under
subdivision 2 is filed, unless during the 60 days the commission
finds that a material issue of fact is in dispute, in which case
it must shall order that a contested case hearing be conducted
to evaluate the petition.
Sec. 12. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.59,
subdivision 6, is amended to read:
Subd. 6. [BURDEN OF PROOF.] The person that files the
petition under subdivision 2 has the burden of proving that
competition exists and that classifying the classification of a
service as other than noncompetitive will serve the public
interest. may not be changed so as to result in lessened
regulation unless it is demonstrated by a preponderance of the
evidence that the criteria of subdivision 5 have been met.
Sec. 13. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.60,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [EFFECTIVE COMPETITION.] A company whose
service has been determined by the commission to be subject to
effective competition may:
(1) decrease the rate for that service effective without
notice to its customers or the commission,; and may
(2) increase the rate for that service effective upon
notice to its customers at least 30 days in advance of the
increase.
A company whose service is declared subject to effective
competition is not subject to the requirements of section
237.07, subdivision 1, for that service.
Sec. 14. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.60,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [EMERGING COMPETITION.] (a) A telephone company
whose service has been determined to be subject to emerging
competition must file a price list with the commission and the
department. The price list must contain the rates, tolls, and
charges for the service together with the rules, regulations,
and classifications used in providing that service. This
chapter does not prohibit a telephone company from including
limitations on liability as terms or conditions in the price
lists.
(b) A company may decrease the rate for a service subject
to emerging competition that is listed in the price list,
effective ten days after filing a new price list with the
commission. and the department, along with an incremental cost
study demonstrating that the proposed price is above incremental
cost. The commission shall prevent a proposed price reduction
from going into effect if, after receiving a complaint or on its
own motion, under section 237.081, the commission finds that the
proposed rate is below incremental cost or that the proposed
rate is not just and reasonable.
(b) A company may increase the rate for a service subject
to emerging competition that is listed in the price list
effective 30 days after notice is given to affected customers,
the commission, and the department. The notice and new price
list filing to the commission and the department for a rate
increase must include an incremental, or other acceptable cost
study as determined by the commission, supporting the
increase demonstrating that the proposed price is above
incremental cost. The department shall investigate an
increase or decrease in rates for services subject to emerging
competition, and report its findings to the commission within 30
days of the filing. The commission may, within 60 days after
the date of the filing, order that the rate increase is interim
in nature and subject to refund. If interim rates are not
ordered, the rate increase is not refundable. If a rate is
subject to refund, the commission, after a contested case
hearing or an expedited hearing under section 237.61 if there
are no material facts in dispute, order the company to adjust
its rates or charges for a service subject to emerging
competition if the commission finds that the price charged is
excessive. The commission may, must make a final decision
regarding the propriety of the rate increase within ten months
of the date a the price change went into effect, order was
filed. If the commission does not do so, the price adjustments
retroactive to the date the change went into effect and order
the company to make any necessary refunds to affected
customers is deemed approved.
(c) If language describing a rate, term, or condition of
service in a price list is changed without substantially
altering the application of the price list, the change may take
effect upon one-day notice to the commission.
(d) If a term or condition of service in a price list is
changed in a way that results in a substantial change in the
application of the price list, but the price is not changed, the
change in the price list is effective at the same time as a
price decrease under paragraph (a).
(e) If a new pricing plan is proposed for a service that is
currently offered by a telephone company, the change in the
price list is subject to the same schedules governing a price
increase under paragraph (b). For purposes of this paragraph, a
new pricing plan is a proposal that bundles rate elements for a
service, alters the definition of the rate elements for a
service, or includes increases for some rate elements and
decreases for other rate elements.
(f) A telephone company may offer a new service to its
customers ten days after it files a price list and incremental
cost study for the service with the department and the
commission.
(g) A change in a price list not covered by paragraphs (a)
to (f) must be reviewed according to the schedule prescribed for
a price increase under paragraph (b).
(h) An incremental cost study required by this section and
section 237.62 must be a long-run incremental cost study unless
the commission has allowed the telephone company required to do
the study to set rates based on a variable cost study. A
telephone company may include a petition to file a variable cost
study instead of a long-run incremental cost study with its
notice of price change or its filing of a new service. The
commission shall grant the petition if the company demonstrates
that a long-run incremental cost study is burdensome in relation
to its annual revenue from the service involved, that the
company has a low market share, that the service is no longer
being offered to new customers, or if the company shows other
good cause. A petition must be accompanied by a variable cost
study. If the petition is denied, the company shall withdraw a
filing made under this section.
(i) For purposes of this section and section 237.62, (1)
long-run incremental cost means the change in total cost
associated with a change in volume of the service, expressed on
a per-unit basis, and (2) variable cost means the change in
total cost, excluding fixed costs, associated with a change in
volume of service, expressed on a per-unit basis.
Sec. 15. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.62,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS.] Paragraph (a) or
(b) This subdivision governs a proceeding initiated under
section 237.075 or 237.081 to change the rates for
noncompetitive services. Subdivision 1a governs a proceeding
under section 237.075 or 237.081 to change the rates for
noncompetitive services and for services subject to emerging
competition. The company shall elect that rate changes be made
in accordance with either paragraph (a) or (b) this subdivision
or subdivision 1a, and that election is binding on the
commission in all respects.
(a) The A company electing to use this subdivision may
demonstrate the revenue requirement for its noncompetitive
services by providing:
(1) revenues, expenses, and embedded investments directly
related to the provision of the noncompetitive services;
(2) a reasonable portion of the net income generated
jointly or arising from jointly competitive and noncompetitive
services, and net income received by a telephone company as a
result of the sale of telephone number listings, charges and
advertising for use in white pages, yellow pages, other
directory and other related services, must be treated as arising
jointly from competitive and noncompetitive services; and
(3) a reasonable portion of the company's total joint and
common costs to be attributable to the provision of the
noncompetitive services.
(b) Alternatively, the company may demonstrate the revenue
requirement for its noncompetitive services by providing:
(1) revenues, expenses, and embedded investments related to
all of its services; and
(2) to the extent that the company's embedded costs for
competitive services, and a reasonable portion of the joint and
common costs attributable to the competitive services, exceed
the revenues produced by those competitive services, the
difference must be added to the company's total revenues.
For purposes of this subdivision, when a telephone company
uses an investment to provide competitive services to end-user
customers and another company provides a competing service that
requires, in part, the use of a similar investment to provide
the telephone company's noncompetitive services or service
elements, the telephone company shall treat both investments and
related costs as though they are providing noncompetitive
services and shall attribute revenues to the noncompetitive
category using the rates for the noncompetitive service or
service elements multiplied by the appropriate current volumes
for the telephone company's competitive service instead of
determining the investment, associated expenses, and common and
joint costs under clauses (1) and (3) to determine the revenue
requirement for the noncompetitive category.
Sec. 16. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.62, is
amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 1a. [ALTERNATIVE METHOD.] (a) A telephone company
electing to use this subdivision shall demonstrate the combined
revenue requirement for its noncompetitive services and services
subject to emerging competition in accordance with paragraphs
(b) to (d).
(b) The telephone company shall use the procedures
prescribed by subdivision 1 to allocate and remove the cost of
providing services that are subject to effective competition,
except that those procedures do not apply to central
office-based dial switching systems that, by January 1, 1984,
have been approved by the commission as obsolete and that are
not available to new customers.
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (d), a combined revenue
requirement for noncompetitive services and services subject to
emerging competition must be determined under section 237.075.
Once the revenue requirement has been established, the
commission shall determine the telephone company's rates for
services subject to emerging competition and noncompetitive
services so that the revenue requirement can be met. The
telephone company shall provide an embedded direct cost and an
incremental cost study for each service subject to emerging
competition that generates annual revenues in excess of the
greater of one-tenth of one percent or $100,000 of the company's
annual gross revenues for the test-year period. An embedded
direct cost is the sum of current expenses and a return of and a
return on the current net book investment directly incurred to
provide a service.
(d) On the date that a telephone company becomes subject to
this section under section 237.58, the company shall begin an
accounting of rate changes for services generally offered before
January 1, 1988, that are subject to emerging competition. If
the net effect of those rate changes is a lower revenue amount
than would have been realized had the rates remained unchanged,
the combined revenue requirement established under paragraph (c)
must be reduced by an amount equal to the difference in
revenues. The commission shall, as part of these proceedings,
permit the telephone company to increase the prices for services
subject to emerging competition to recover the revenue
reduction. To determine whether a rate change has resulted in
lower or higher revenues from a service subject to emerging
competition, the rate in effect when the accounting requirement
prescribed by this paragraph became effective must be subtracted
from the rate in effect on the date the rate proceeding is
commenced. For services priced on an individual basis, the
change in rates must be calculated by subtracting the average
revenue per unit for the service on the date the accounting
requirements of this paragraph became effective from the average
revenue per unit for the service in the test year used in the
rate case. The difference for both individually priced and
nonindividually priced services must be multiplied by the number
of units sold in the test year used in the rate case. A rate
change resulting from a pass-through of cost increases or
decreases, approved or reallocated by a government entity, must
be excluded from the revenue calculations under this paragraph.
Sec. 17. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.62,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [CROSS-SUBSIDIZATION.] A telephone company
shall may not subsidize its competitive services from its
noncompetitive services through allocations of costs,
cost-sharing agreements, or by other means, direct or indirect.
When an investment is for both noncompetitive and competitive
services, the company shall demonstrate that the benefits
received by the noncompetitive customers justify the allocation
of costs its proposed by the company. Allocations and cost
assignments must be reviewed at least every five years and a
report detailing the methods and results must be filed with the
department and the commission. An independent telephone company
or a municipality or cooperative telephone association is not
required to file a report as required by this subdivision
provided that its allocations and cost assignments are subject
to review upon order of the commission methods of cost recovery
between competitive and noncompetitive services are reasonable.
If the commission determines that the methods chosen by the
company are not satisfactory reasonable, the commission may
order changes in the methods used and make necessary prospective
adjustments in noncompetitive rates being charged to reflect the
changes in cost.
Sec. 18. [237.625] [INCENTIVE REGULATION.]
Subdivision 1. [INCENTIVE PLANS.] (a) A telephone company
whose general revenue requirement is determined under section
237.075 may petition the commission for approval of an incentive
plan. The incentive plan must apply to the noncompetitive
services of a company covered by section 237.62, subdivision 1,
and must apply to noncompetitive services and services subject
to emerging competition if the company has chosen to be governed
by section 237.62, subdivision 1a. The purpose of the plan is
to provide an incentive to the company to improve its operating
efficiency while maintaining or improving the quality of its
service. If a telephone company is able to increase its
earnings, the telephone company shall share the increased
earnings with its customers to the extent and in the manner set
forth in the commission-approved plan. The commission may not
approve a plan that does not meet the requirements of this
paragraph and paragraphs (b) to (e).
(b) A telephone company shall share increased earnings
during the term of the incentive plan with its customers either
by giving them credits against bills or by lowering rates. The
division of increased earnings between the company and the
customers must reflect the degree to which the company has
assumed a risk of earning less than its revenue requirement and
the degree to which the customers have assumed a risk of rate
increases.
(c) The incentive plan must be in effect for at least two
years.
(d) The incentive plan must provide for periodic reporting
to the commission to document that the sharing requirements of
the plan are being properly implemented. The company's rates
and earnings under the plan are not subject to section 237.081,
subdivision 2, paragraph (b), except to the extent necessary to
enforce the sharing provisions of the incentive plan.
(e) An incentive plan may not permit rate increases except
under other provisions in this chapter. The plan may, however,
permit the direct pass-through of cost decreases and increases
approved or reallocated by a governmental entity, except for
changes in intrastate depreciation schedules.
Subd. 2. [ADOPTION OF A PLAN.] Before acting on a petition
for approval of an incentive plan, the commission shall conduct
any public meetings it may consider necessary. The commission
shall require the petitioning telephone company to provide
notice of the proposed plan to its customers, along with a
summary description of the plan provisions and the dates, times,
and locations of public meetings scheduled by the commission.
In addition to public meetings, the commission shall conduct a
proceeding under section 237.61 to decide whether to approve the
plan. The commission shall issue findings of fact and
conclusions concerning the appropriateness of the proposed plan
and the terms and conditions of the sharing of increased
earnings between the company and its customers. The commission
may approve, reject, or modify a proposed plan, but may not
order that a modified plan take effect without the agreement of
the petitioning telephone company. The commission shall reject
a plan if it has substantial reason to believe that existing
rates are inappropriate. The commission shall issue its
decision on a plan within six months after receiving the
petition to approve the plan. If the commission does not act
within six months, the plan is deemed withdrawn unless the
commission and the petitioning company agree to an extension of
the time for commission action.
Sec. 19. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.63,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [GENERAL.] Notwithstanding A telephone
company whose general revenue requirement is determined under
section 237.075, may also set or change its rates for
noncompetitive services may be set or changed subject to under
this section.
Sec. 20. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.63, is
amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 4a. [SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN CONDITION OF SERVICE.] If
the terms or conditions of service in a tariff are changed in a
way that substantially changes the application of the tariff,
but the price is not changed, the change in the tariff may take
effect according to the schedule governing rate reductions in
subdivision 4.
Sec. 21. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.63, is
amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 4b. [NEW SERVICES.] A telephone company may offer a
new service to its customers ten days after it files a tariff
with the department and the commission.
Sec. 22. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.63, is
amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 4c. [OTHER CHANGES.] A tariff change not covered by
subdivisions 1 to 4b and not requiring a review of a telephone
company's gross revenues must be reviewed in accordance with
section 237.075, subdivisions 1 and 2, except that the
commission may order the company to provide whatever notice to
potentially affected customers that the commission considers
appropriate.
Sec. 23. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.64,
subdivision 1, is amended to read:
Subdivision 1. [REGISTRATION.] A person, firm, or
corporation seeking to offer a telephone service to the public
that is classified as competitive become a telephone company, as
defined by section 237.01, subdivision 2, and not required to be
certified under section 237.16, shall register with the
department and the commission 30 90 days before beginning
operation in the state. The commission may review the proposed
rates and services and the financial conditions of the telephone
company and may, under section 237.081, investigate any other
matter it considers appropriate to protect the public interest.
A telephone company that has been authorized by the commission
to provide telephone services in this state prior to August 1,
1987, is not required to register under this subdivision. A
person, firm, or corporation seeking to offer a noncompetitive
service to the public must obtain authority from the commission
under section 237.16.
Sec. 24. Minnesota Statutes 1988, section 237.64,
subdivision 2, is amended to read:
Subd. 2. [BOND.] Telephone companies offering services
that have been found to be competitive registered under
subdivision 1 shall maintain a bond if the company requires
advance payments or deposits from its customers, unless waived
by the commission. The bond must be issued by a surety company
admitted to do business in this state in the principal sum of
all deposits and advance payments to be held by the company.
The department shall determine the amount of the bond and may
require the company to supply information to determine the
appropriate amount of the bond. The bond must be in favor of
the state for the benefit of any customer who suffers the loss
of a deposit or advance payment due to insolvency, cessation of
business, or failure to return any unused portion of the deposit
or advance payment. The bond must be filed with the department.
Sec. 25. Laws 1987, chapter 340, section 26, is amended to
read:
Sec. 26. [EFFECTIVE DATE.]
Sections 1 2 to 12 are effective August 1, 1987, and are
repealed effective August 1, 1992 1994.
Sec. 26. [REPEALER.]
Minnesota Statutes 1988, sections 237.075, subdivision 1a,
and 237.081, subdivision 3, are repealed.
Sec. 27. [EFFECTIVE DATE.]
Sections 1 to 26 are effective July 1, 1989. Sections 8 to
18 are repealed, effective August 1, 1994.
Presented to the governor May 5, 1989
Signed by the governor May 8, 1989, 2:28 p.m.
Official Publication of the State of Minnesota
Revisor of Statutes