BEFORE THE WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION In re the Investigation On the ) Commission's Motion ) DOCKET NO. UT-940171 ) PAY TELEPHONE CALL ) NOTICE OF INQUIRY RESTRICTION ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission establishes this inquiry, on a subject of possible rulemaking, to discover information and to evaluate options to reduce disruptive or illicit activity at locations of public pay telephones in the State. In 1993, U S WEST Communications, Inc. (U S WEST), requested a declaratory ruling that WAC 480-120-138, the Commission's principal pay telephone rule, allowed the company to configure pay telephones so that location providers or adjacent businesses could temporarily disable the telephones' ability to accept coins. [1] The Commission entered an order on June 2, 1993, declaring that existing rules did not permit the proposed action. The order recognized the interests involved, and suggested that if U S WEST wished to pursue the issue, it come forward with more information to seek either a waiver of the existing rule or a change in the rule. The company did request a rule change. [2] On December 9, 1993, it petitioned the Commission to change WAC 480-120-138 to allow it to restrict certain pay telephones (at the request of the subscriber, community, space provider, or law enforcement agency) from accepting coins between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Emergency access and operator assistance would be available from the coin restricted instruments, and the phones would be clearly posted. The Commission found that it still did not have information sufficient to satisfy it that the proposal was the most appropriate way to handle the varied interests involved. The company withdrew the proposal with the Commission's consent at its open public meeting on February 9, 1994. The Commission has recognized the troublesome nature of complex conflicting public interests: in public safety and freedom from illicit activity, on the one hand, and in convenient and predictable telephone access, on the other. The Commission also recognizes that complete removal of a pay telephone is a possible alternative if other measures, including law enforcement intervention, cannot control illicit activity that interferes with personal security or public safety. When that happens, no public telephone service at all is available. The existing rule allows restriction of a pay telephone to one-way service upon written request by a law enforcement agency. Many of the affected phones have already been restricted to one-way service, the illicit behavior is still occurring, and some space providers have asked U S WEST to remove the phones. To learn more about these pay telephone problems and to consider options, the Commission has ordered that this Notice of Inquiry be issued and that the Commission and its Staff gather information and promote dialogue aimed at understanding and resolving conflicting public interests. The Commission has attached to this notice a summary of background factors and potential issues, and a list of questions for commenters to address. Interested persons have the following opportunity to present comments to the Commission: Written comments should be sent to Steve McLellan, Secretary, Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, 1300 Evergreen Park Drive S.W., Olympia, WA 98504-7250, to reach the Commission by March 9, 1994. Please mark all comments with Docket No. UT-940171. Informal work sessions will be held after public comment is received, to allow representatives of affected groups or institutions to discuss information and explore solutions. The Commission also anticipates holding one or more meetings to receive oral comment when specific rule amendments are being evaluated. It will notify every commenter, and every other person who asks for the notification, of the time and place of those meetings. DATED at Olympia, Washington this 9th day of February 1994. WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Steve McLellan, Secretary ************************************* Endnotes: 1. Docket No. UT-930430. 2. Docket No. UT-931556. It also requested a waiver of the rule to allow coin disabling at limited locations, which the Commission is considering in Docket No. UT-931491. ************************************* INQUIRY ON PAY TELEPHONE COIN RESTRICTION DOCKET NO. UT-940171 INTERESTS AT ISSUE; SPECIFIC QUESTIONS The Commission invites interested persons to address comments to the following issues and specific questions. Please note that this is not a ballot in which votes will be counted, but a way to identify public opinion and hear suggestions for further discussion. If you see other interests or have comments not addressed to the questions, please describe those to the Commission. Every comment is valuable. AFFECTED INTERESTS The Commission has identified the following interests affected by illicit pay phone use and its consequences: * Illicit activity at a pay telephone site can be disruptive to a neighborhood, a potential source of crime and a strong deterrent to law-abiding customers' patronization of nearby businesses. * Reasonable access to pay phones is needed by consumers. Some may not have residential phone service, and pay telephones may be their only source of telecommunications. Some may be tourists or visitors in the community. * Reasonable public telecommunications access is also needed for personal emergencies not involving a direct threat to life or property, such as auto breakdowns, delays, etc. * Areas most prone to illicit behavior near public telephones may be areas in which public telephones are most needed. * Non-emergency calls may be routed to emergency 911, simply because the caller does not have a calling card, coins are not accepted, and the only coin-free access is to 911. Such calls could interfere with emergency 911 service. * Coin restriction also results in higher, operator-assisted rates. Some consumers, for some calls, may be unable to call collect or bill a third party. * Some alternate operator service companies may charge higher than the prevailing operator assisted rates, perhaps paying a commission to the location owner or charging a location surcharge that directly benefits the location owner. This could provide an economic incentive to restrict coin use. * Complete removal of telephones may reduce the public's telecommunications convenience and emergency access. POSSIBLE OPTIONS: The Commission has identified the following possible options. Please describe any experiences you have had with these or other options, state any statistics you have regarding success or failure, and describe public response. Please state your opinion of the various options, and add any additional ideas you may have about the effectiveness of any option. * Allowing coin restriction from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. at the option of the pay phone provider, space provider, law enforcement agency, or other decider. * Allowing coin-restricted hours varying by location, when the problem specifically occurs at that telephone location. * Offering debit cards through local merchants. * Replacing coin telephones with credit-only phones. * Replacing touch-tone telephones with rotary dial phones, although this would limit access to tone generated services such as voice mail, bank by phone, out-dialling to pagers. * Disabling key pads after X number of digits are entered -- also limiting use of tone-generated services. * Locating pay phones only in well lighted, clean areas. * Video monitoring the phone (with a notice on or near the phone stating that callers are monitored). * Playing distracting music near the pay telephone. * Reducing the number of phones in a bank of phones. * Removing telephones completely at locations experiencing problems. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS: The Commission asks interested persons to address any potential solutions identified above, and to answer any questions in the following list that are pertinent to your situation. * Do you have residential telephone service? Do you have a calling card? Do you use pay telephones? How often? At what time, in general -- daytime, evening, or night, or a combination? When you use pay telephones, generally, do you use coins to make your call, a calling card, or other billing? (Please specify) * Have you been frightened to use a telephone or to patronize a business, because of behavior near a pay telephone? If so, please describe the circumstances. * How would you feel about restricting coin calling from some pay telephones between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., if 911 emergency and operator assistance are available? Would you feel differently if the time were shortened, say between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.? Would any other times affect your answer? Why? * What circumstances (if any) justify coin restrictions? If a pay telephone were coin restricted, would the problem simply move to a different pay telephone? Would the problem still exist around a coin-restricted pay telephone? * How would a coin restricted phone affect persons in the neighborhood, who may not have a phone? If you have no residential telephone service, do you rely on pay telephones? For what kinds of calls do you use the pay telephone? How do you think a coin restricted phone would affect other residents in the neighborhood? Would locally- available debit cards offer effective alternative access to coin restricted phones, or would they defeat the purpose of coin restriction in the first place? * Should coin restriction be allowed only when operator services are offered at or below prevailing rates, or at coin rates? * Is the consumer best served by allowing a form of restriction on the use of pay telephone, or simply by removing the phone? * Is it a law enforcement responsibility to work with the companies and affected groups about this issue, rather than the Commission's responsibility? * How may we measure the effectiveness of any solution? What criteria can be used? Please add any other comments about this issue. For more information please contact Suzanne Stillwell, Consumer Affairs section, at 1-800-562-6150.