DIS - Case Record for 96-1402-TP-PEX Skip to main content

Case Record For:

96-1402-TP-PEX

Case Title: WILLIAM MCKENNEY/GTE/CBT/AMERITECH
Status: AR-Archived
Industry Code: TP-TELEPHONE
Purpose Code: PEX-Petition for extended area service
Date Opened: 12/23/1996
Date Closed:
Printable Docket Card Service List
View per page
Date FiledSummaryPages
07/28/2009Memo requesting case be closed and archived effective 07/28/09.1
11/24/2000Correspondence letter supporting the petition, filed by Donald Werring.2
10/31/2000Correspondence letters requesting the PUCO to review this case, filed by various consumers. (16 pgs.)16
10/26/2000Entry denying the application for rehearing; that this matter be dismissed and closed of record; that the motion to extend time filed by Cincinnati Bell is denied.10
10/19/2000Request fo rrehearing filed by Nancy Montgomery. (2 pgs.)2
10/19/2000Request for rehearing filed by Kenneth Staker. (1 pg.)1
10/19/2000Request for rehearing, filed by Shannon VanWinkle. (2 pgs.)2
10/18/2000Letter to Commission relative to EAS to the Georgetown/Cincinnati area by M. Eugene Hamilton.16
10/18/2000Entry granting rehearing.3
10/18/2000Entry granting rehearing for the sole purpose of allowing the Commission additional time to consider the merits of the complainants' application for rehearing and the respondents' memorandum contra.3
10/18/2000Entry ordering that the rehearing in this matter is granted for the sole purpose of providing the Commission additional time to consider the merits of the complainants' application for rehearing and the respondents' memoranda contra. (3 pgs.)3
10/16/2000Memorandum contra to the application for rehearing, filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by R. Wentz. (4 pgs.)4
10/16/2000Correspondence letter supporting the petition, filed by Gary Utter. (1 pg.)1
10/10/2000Letter requesting a rehearing of the case denying the 378 exchange's flat-rate extended calling plan on 8/24/2000. Filed by V. Lewis (21 pgs)21
10/10/2000Correspondence letter filed by D. Utter (1 pg)1
10/06/2000Letter regarding some major concerns on the EAS issue. Filed by, State Senator D. White (25 pgs)25
10/04/2000Reply to supplemental information response of Verizon North, Inc., filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (4 pgs.)4
10/04/2000Motion for extension of time to file memorandum contra complainants' application for rehearing and memorandum in support, filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by R. Shank. (4 pgs.)4
10/03/2000Correspondence letter regarding the petition, filed by Donna Wood. (2 pgs.)2
10/03/2000Correspondence letter regarding the petition, filed by Sharon Richmond. (1 pg.) (filed 9/29/00)1
09/29/2000Response letter to the 378 exchange toll free extended area service. Filed by S. Richmond (1 pg)1
09/29/2000Letter requesting a rehearing of the case denying the 378 exchange's flat-rate extended calling plan on 8/24/2000. Filed by V. Lewis (1 pg)10
09/29/2000Memorandum contra to application for rehearing, filed on behalf of Verizon North by W. Keating.10
09/22/2000Supplemental information response filed on behalf of respondent, Verizon North, by W. Keating. (2 pgs.)2
09/22/2000Application for rehearing filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (28 pgs.)28
09/22/2000Cost information filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by J. Harrison. (4 pgs.)4
09/22/2000Supplemental information response filed on behalf of respon- dent, Verizon North, by W. Keating. (2 pgs.)2
09/22/2000Application for rehearing and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainant by W. McKenney. (27 pgs.)27
09/22/2000Cost information response filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell Telephone Co., by J. Harrison. (3 pgs.)3
09/22/2000Cost information response filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by J. Harrison.3
09/07/2000Entry Nunc Pro Tunc ordering that the August 24, 2000 Opinion & Order is amended nunc pro tunc in accordance with Finding 2.3
08/24/2000 Opinion & Order that the request for two-way, nonoptional, flat-rate EAS between the Georgetown Exchange and the Aber- deen, Bethany, Bethel, Cincinnati, Clermont, Decatur, Hamil- ton, Little Miami, Mowrystown, Newtonsville, Williamsburg, and Fayetteville exchanges is denied; that two-way, non- optional, measured-rate EAS between the Georgetown Exchange and the Bethel, Cincinnati, and Clermont exchanges is grant- ed, contingent upon the review of cost data to be provided by GTE and Cincinnati Bell; that Ameritech and Little Miami are dismissed as parties to this proceeding; that GTE and Cincinnati Bell file within 60 days of this order cost data for implementing two-way, measured-rate EAS between the Georgetown Exchange and the Bethel, Cincinnati, and Clermont exchanges in the format set forth in this order. Dissenting Opinion of Commissioner Graig A. Glazer. (40 pgs.) 44
08/24/2000Opinion and order that GTE and Cincinnati Bell may file within 30 days a statement that neither exceptionally high costs nor exceptionally heavy investments in facilities would be required to provide measured-rate EAS.38
08/07/2000Correspondence letter filed by Senator D. White.1
08/07/2000Correspondence letter supporting the petition, filed by State Representative Rose Vesper. (1 pg.)1
08/07/2000Correspondence letter regarding the petition, filed by Representative Rose Vesper. (1 pg.)1
08/07/2000Correspondence letter regarding the petition, filed by Senator Doug White. (1 pg.)1
06/19/2000Affidavit of LaTrischa C. Miles filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. L.P. by L. Miles.2
03/20/2000Evidence (exhibits) filed. (FILED 12/99)0
03/07/2000Reply to respondents' briefs, filed on behalf of complain- ants by W. McKenney. (21 pgs.)21
03/07/2000Reply to respondents briefs, filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKinney.21
02/22/2000Reply to petitioner's brief filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by R. Shank. (9 pgs.)9
02/22/2000Brief filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (6 pgs.)6
02/22/2000Brief filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by C. Rawlings.6
02/22/2000Brief filed on behalf of GTE North by W. Keating.16
02/22/2000Brief filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keat- ing. (16 pgs.)16
02/22/2000Answer brief filed on behalf of respondent, Little Miami Communications Corp., by T. Mazzola. (4 pgs.)4
02/22/2000Reply to petitioners brief, filed on behalf of Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company by R. Shank.9
02/22/2000Answer brief filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications Corporation's by T. Lodge.4
02/18/2000Information response regarding calling statistics, filed on behalf of Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company by E. King.56
02/08/2000Reply to memorandum contra cost studies, filed on behalf of complainant by W. McKenney. (12 pgs.)12
02/08/2000Reply to memorandum contra cost studies filed on behalf of complainant by W. McKenney.12
02/01/2000Brief filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (33 pgs.)33
02/01/2000Memorandum contra motion to request cost information, filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (6 pgs.)6
02/01/2000Memorandum contra complainant's motion to request cost information, filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by R. Shank. (6 pgs.)6
02/01/2000Memorandum contra motion to request cost information, filed on behalf of GTE North, Inc. by W. Keating.6
02/01/2000Memorandum contra complainant's motion to request for cost information, filed on behalf of Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company by R. Shank.6
01/28/2000Memorandum in response to motion to request cost information, filed on behalf of Ameritech Ohio by C. Rawlings.4
01/28/2000Memorandum in response to motion to request cost infor- mation, filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (4 pgs.)4
01/25/2000Memorandum contra complainant's request for cost studies argument, filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications by T. Mazzola. (3 pgs.)3
01/12/2000Motion to request cost information and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (8 pgs.)8
01/12/2000Motion to request cost information, filed by complainant D. McKenney.8
01/02/2000Brief filed by complainant W. McKenney.33
12/27/1999Transcript filed for hearing held December 10, 1999, (DJ), 122 pgs., Submitted. (PUCO-Columbus, OH) (Volume II)177
12/16/1999Memorandum contra complainant's request for cost studies agreement, filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications by T. Mazzola.3
12/16/1999Response filed on behalf of GTE North by P. Cook.1
12/16/1999Response filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by P. Cook. (1 pg.)1
12/16/1999Entry ordering that the parties may file briefs; the com- plainants shall serve and file their bried by February 1, 2000; the respondents may serve and file an answer brief by February 22, 2000; the complainants may serve and file a reply brief by March 7, 2000; the motion for cost studies shall be served upon all parties and filed by January 12, 2000; memoranda contra shall be served and filed by Febru- ary 1, 2000; complainants reply shall be filed within seven days of service of the memoranda contra. (AE) (3 pgs.)3
11/15/1999Correspondence letter regarding the petition, filed by Representative Rob Portman. (1 pg.)1
11/02/1999Entry ordering that the conclusion of the hearing in this proceeding shall begin on Friday, December 10, 1999, at 10:00 a.m. at the Commission offices. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
11/01/1999Transcript filed for hearing held 10/7/99, (LDJ), 277 pgs. (Georgetown, Ohio)277
10/06/1999Proof of Publication filed. (1 pg.) (Warren County)1
10/04/1999Memorandum contra complainants' motion to compel response and discovery and request for expedited ruling, filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications Corporation by G. Cooper.5
10/04/1999Memorandum contra complainants' motion to compel response and discovery and request for expedited ruling filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications by G. Cooper (5 pgs)5
10/01/1999Testimony of Mitchell R. Proctor filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications Corp. by G. Cooper. (5 pgs.)5
10/01/1999Entry ordering that, in accordance with Finding 8, the motion to compel filed by the complainants on September 27, 1999, is granted in part and denied in part. (AE) (4 pgs.)4
09/30/1999Testimony and attachments of Patricia J. Cook filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (18 pgs.)18
09/30/1999Direct testimony of Evelyn W. King filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by E. King. (15 pgs.)15
09/30/1999Testimony of Jacqueline M. Young filed on behalf of respon- dent, Ameritech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (17 pgs.)17
09/28/1999Proof of Publication filed. (2 pgs.) (Clermont County)2
09/27/1999Motion of complainants to compel response and discovery and request for expedited ruling, filed by W. McKenney. (20 pgs.)20
09/23/1999Proof of Publication filed. (2 pgs.) (Clermont County)2
09/22/1999Proof of Publication filed. (1 pg.) (Adams County)1
09/21/1999Proof of Publication filed. (1 pg.) (Hamilton County)1
09/20/1999Response to complainants' 9/1/99 discovery request, filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (6 pgs.)6
09/01/1999Legal Notice faxed to: Peoples Defender ( Adams Co.); News Democrat (Brown Co.); Journal News (Butler Co.); Clermont Community (Clermont Co.);Cincinnati Enquirer (Hamilton Co.); Western Star (Warren Co.)0
08/30/1999Entry scheduling a public hearing at 10:00 a.m. on October 7, 1999 at the Adams-Brown County Economic Opportunities Building, Georgetown, Ohio; that any person or entity re- questing intervention do so by September 23, 1999; that any party intending to present direct expert testimony comply with Rule 4901-1-29(A)(1)(j), O.A.C. (AE) (4 pgs.)4
02/18/1999Information response, filed on behalf of Little Miami Communications Corporation by G. Cooper.5
02/18/1999Information response filed by G. Cooper on behalf of Little Miami Communications Corporation. (5 pgs)5
02/18/1999Information response filed by E. King on behalf of Cincin- nati Bell Telephone Company. (55 pgs)56
02/17/1999Second information response of GTE North, Inc. by W. Keating.42
02/17/1999Second information response filed by W. Keating on behalf of GTE North. (42 pgs)42
02/16/1999Affidavit of Judith B. Sanders.1
02/16/1999Affidavit of Judith B. Sanders.1
02/16/1999Entry ordering that the complainants' application for rehearing is denied and that this matter is dismissed and closed of record; that the motion to extend time filed by Cincinnati Bell is denied.15
02/16/1999Affidavit filed by J. Sanders on behalf of MCI WorldCom. (1 pg)1
02/16/1999Affidavit filed by J. Sanders on behalf of MCI. (1 pg)1
02/09/1999Affidavit of Elizabeth Finnerty.4
02/09/1999Affidavit of Elizabeth Finnerty filed on behalf of AT&T Communications of Ohio by E. Finnerty. (4 pgs.)4
02/08/1999Affidavit filed on behalf of LCI International by K. Logue.2
02/08/1999Affidavit of Kim Logue filed on behalf of LCI International Telecom Corp. by K. Logue. (2 pgs.)2
01/21/1999Affidavit of GTE Communications Corp. filed by G. Cooper.3
01/21/1999Affidavit of GTE Communications Corp. filed by G. Cooper. (3 pgs.)3
01/19/1999Affidavit of LaTrischa C. Miles filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Co. L.P. by L. Miles. (2 pgs.)2
01/06/1999Entry ordering that the motion of Ameritech for an order relieving it of the requirement to file calling rate data is granted; that GTELD shall be granted until January 25, 1999, to provide calling data to the respondents pursuant to the attorney examiner's entry issued December 4, 1998. (AE)6
01/06/1999Entry ordering that the motion of Ameritech for an order relieving it of the requirement to file calling data is granted; that GTELD shall be granted until January 25, 1999 to provide calling data to the respondents pursuant to the attorney examiner's entry issued December 4, 1998. (AE) (3 pgs.)3
12/28/1998Motion of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, for an order relieving it of the requirement to file calling rate data, filed by C. Rawlings. (4 pgs.)4
12/28/1998Motion of GTE Communications Corp. dba GTE Long Distance, respondent, for extension of time and request for expedited ruling and memorandum in support, filed by G. Cooper. (7 pgs.)7
12/04/1998Entry stating that complainants motion to defer the filing of cost data is granted; that AT&T, MCI, LCI (or Qwest), Sprint, Worldcom, GTELD, and CBLD shall provide the information required by Finding 19 on or before 1/19/99; that GTE, Cincinnati Bell, Little Miami, and Ameritech provide the information required in Finding 22; in accordance with Finding 23 the complainants' requests for additional information are denied except to the extent contained in this entry. (DJ) (13 pgs)13
04/20/1998Response of GTE North to motion of complainants to request additional information, recompute calling rates, and compel response, filed by W. Keating. (3 pgs.)3
04/02/1998Memorandum contra a portion of motion of complainants to request additional information, recompute calling rates and compel response filed on behalf of respondent, Ameri- tech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (5 pgs.)5
03/24/1998Motion to request additional information, recompute calling rates and compel response and memorandum in support filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (6 pgs.)6
10/21/1997Reply to responses of GTE North, Little Miami Communications and Ameritech Ohio to motion of the complainants to compel response and to request additional information, filed on behalf of complainants by W. McKenney. (6 pgs.)6
10/10/1997Motion of the complainants for extension of time filed by W. McKenney. (4 pgs.)4
09/29/1997Response to motion of the complainants to compel response and to request additional information, filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (7 pgs.)7
09/26/1997Memorandum in opposition to motion of the complainants to compel response and to request additional information, filed on behalf of respondent, Little Miami Communications, by T. Lodge. (5 pgs.)5
09/25/1997Memorandum of Ameritech Ohio in response to motions of complainants filed by C. Rawlings. (5 pgs.)5
09/10/1997Motion of complainants to proceed with community of interest hearing and to hold filing of cost data until after said hearing and memorandum in support filed by W. McKenney. (6 pgs.)6
09/10/1997Motion of complainants to compel response and to request additional information and memorandum in support filed by W. McKenney. (7 pgs.)7
06/20/1997Entry ordering that GTE's motion for a waiver of the requirement to file cost data is granted; that, as to all other respondents in this proceeding, the require- ment to file cost data shall be waived until further notice. (AE) (2 pgs.)2
06/09/1997Information response filed on behalf of respondent, Cin- cinnati Bell, by J. Harrison. (56 pgs.)56
06/09/1997Information response filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (59 pgs.)59
06/09/1997Information response filed on behalf of respondent, Little Miami Telephone Communications Corp., by T. Lodge. (7 pgs.)7
06/09/1997Motion for waiver and memorandum in support filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keating. (3 pgs.)3
06/04/1997Information response filed on behalf of respondent, Ameri- tech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (3 pgs.) (FILED 6/3/97)3
06/02/1997Affidavit of Judith B. Sanders filed on behalf of MCI Tele- communications Corp. by J. Sanders. (1 pg.)1
05/20/1997Entry ordering that the settlement conference in this matter is rescheduled for June 30, 1997 at 10:00 a.m. (AE) (2 pgs)2
05/08/1997Affidavit of LaTrischa C. Miles filed on behalf of Sprint Communications Company L.P. (2 pgs.)2
05/06/1997Information response filed on behalf of respondent, Ameri- tech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (28 pgs.)28
05/06/1997Entry ordering that the motions to extend time filed by Sprint and MCI are granted; that Sprint and MCI shall be granted until May 9, 1997, to provide to GTE, Cincinnati Bell, and Little Miami the information requested in Finding 3 of the entry issued February 7, 1997, in this case; that Sprint and MCI file affidavits by May 13, 1997, verifying that the requested information has been submitted to GTE, Cincinnati Bell, and Little Miami; that GTE, Cincinnati Bell, and Little Miami be granted until June 9, 1997, to file the requested calling data; that the prehearing con- ference scheduled for May 13, 1997, is canceled and shall be rescheduled at a later date. (AE) (3 pgs.)3
04/30/1997Affidavit of Kenton J. Pfister field on behalf of AT&T Com- munications of Ohio by K. Pfister. (12 pgs.)12
04/23/1997Motion for extension of time and memorandum in support filed on behalf of respondent, Sprint Communications Company L.P., by M. Jenkins. (4 pgs.) (FILED 4/22/97)4
04/18/1997Motion of MCI Telecommunications Corporation for extension of time filed by J. Sanders. (4 pgs.)4
04/14/1997Notification by Allnet Communications Services, Inc. dba Frontier Communications Services that on April 9, 1997 Frontier provided calling data (for the month of October 1996) to GTE, Cincinnati Bell and Little Miami as required in this proceeding, filed by M. Nighan. (1 pg.)1
04/11/1997Affidavit of Pam Melton filed on behalf of LCI International Telecom Corp. by P. Garavito. (2 pgs.)2
02/27/1997Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Ameritech Ohio, by C. Rawlings. (3 pgs.)3
02/26/1997Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Little Miami Communi- cations Corp. by T. Lodge. (4 pgs.)4
02/26/1997Answer filed on behalf of respondent, Cincinnati Bell, by J. Harrison. (4 pgs.)4
02/19/1997Answer filed on behalf of respondent, GTE North, by W. Keat- ing. (3 pgs.)3
02/07/1997Entry ordering that the respondents shall file their answers or other pleadings with the commission and serve copies upon the spokesperson for the complainants by February 27, 1997, it is further ordered that ALLNET, AT&T, CBLD, LCI,MCI and Sprint shall provide information required by finding (3) to GTE, Cincinnati Bell, and Little Miami and file an affidavit with the commission on or before April 8, 1997, it is further ordered that GTE, Cincinnati Bell, and Little Miami comply with finding (5), it is further ordered that the respondents provide to the Commission and to the spokesperson for the complainants by May 6, 1997, the information required by finding (6), it is further ordered that respondents shall provide to the Commission and to the spokesperson for the complainants by June 3, 1997, the information required by finding (7), it is ordered that the parties comply with finding (8) and that a settlement con- ference be scheduled in accordance with finding (9). (AE) (8 pgs.)8
12/23/1996In the matter of the petition of William D. McKenney and subscribers of the 378 Georgetown exchange for two-way, optional extended area service between Georgetown and the following exchanges: Bethany, Bethel, Cincinnati, Clermont, Hamilton, Little Miami, Newtonsville, and Williamsburg (Cin- cinncati Bell); Decatur and Mowrystown (GTE North); Aberdeen (Ameritech); and Fayetteville (Little Miami Communications). (52 pgs.)52