Annual Convention News Releases Area Codes Job Board About the MTA Events Publications Committees MTA Membership Safety / Training Annual Reports Contact Us Member Resources HOME PAGE |
MINNESOTA TELEPHONE ASSOCIATION Telecommunications Guide August 2001
An Interview with Commissioner Phyllis
A. Reha Phyllis Reha, appointed earlier this year to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) by Gov. Ventura, talked about telecommunications issues recently with this publication. Reha had been an administrative law judge with the state Office of Administrative Hearings for the last 20 years, specializing in public utility, transportation and environmental regulation cases. She replaced Joel Jacobs, whose term expired Jan. 1. Her six-year term ends Jan. 1, 2007. Born in New York City but raised primarily in Minnesota, Reha graduated from Sandstone High School and earned B.A. (1969) and law (1972) degrees from the University of Minnesota. After three years as an attorney with the Michigan Migrant Legal Assistance Project, she returned to Minnesota as an administrative appeals referee, then supervisor, in the state’s Department of Economic Security from 1975 to 1980. Reha has taught administrative law and process in Hamline University’s Master of Arts in Public Administration program since 1990, and is past chair of the Administrative Judiciary Committee of the National Association of Women Judges and the Administrative Law Section of the Minnesota State Bar Association. She is also a frequent speaker at continuing legal education programs in administrative law, utility regulation and mediation. Reha, 53, lives in Eagan with her husband, Ronald Erickson, and their eight-year-old son. Chosen from among 43 applicants, Reha will earn what all PUC commissioners make – $85,880 annually. The PUC, with legislative and quasi-judicial functions, regulates the rates and services of electric, natural gas and telephone companies through public hearings, contested case hearings and rule-making hearings and by resolving informal complaints. The governor appoints its five members.
Q. How will your experience as an administrative law judge help you as a commissioner? A. I have experience with every type of major case the PUC sees, and I’m aware of the complexities and the technical nature of the issues in many cases, so I was able to hit the ground running. Because of my experience, I’ve learned how to ‘dig out’ people’s positions on issues. I also don’t come to the table with any preconceived political or policy agenda, so I will listen and try to do what’s fair for the citizens of Minnesota. Q. Is any telecom issue of particular importance to you? A. Four years ago, I chaired the first arbitration panel that dealt with unbundling network elements as a result of the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, so I would have to say that bringing competition into the marketplace is important to me. Q. In your view, has the Telecommunications Act of 1996 been a success or failure? A. There’s still a lot of fallout as a result of the act, so I don’t think I have enough information to assess how well it has worked. Q. Is there anything in particular you want to accomplish during your time on the commission? A. I may develop an issue that I feel really needs to be dealt with, but my main goal is to try to make intelligent decisions based on fairness and integrity. The PUC makes critical decisions affecting service quality and costs, so the best thing I can do is listen to all sides on an issue and be as fair as I can be. Q. Telecommunications technology continues to change rapidly. As a result of this, do you see the role of the PUC changing? A. Yes. The old model of turning a difficult decision over to an administrative law judge will still happen, but the commission now has more creative ways to solve problems. In addition to initiating investigations, we can take an issue that may have started with a narrow complaint and open a generic docket, inviting all stakeholders to participate. This might even result in making policy. We can also hold workshop panels, which is a fairly new process. The point is that we have to change the process to accommodate the fact that things change more quickly now. We can’t take 18 months to make decisions. Q. What should the PUC’s role be in the areas of access reform and local competition? A. I haven’t been here long enough to assess the commission’s role in these areas. I can say that the PUC is an oversight organization that tries to see that deregulation is done fairly and according to the law. Q. Do you think that structural separation of the retail and wholesale functions of large telecoms will be necessary for the success of local competition? A. Separation might be necessary, but I’m still learning about this subject. Conceptually, separating functions makes sense to me because incumbent local exchange companies may not have an incentive to provide real competition. By the sheer number of matters before the commission, there seems to be some kind of a problem, but I don’t know if it’s structural. The Minnesota Department of Commerce is investigating non-competitive actions by ILECs, so until I see the results of that investigation, as well as evidence from complaints, I’m reserving judgment on this issue. Q. How would you know if incumbent local phone companies are providing good service to all their customers, including competitive phone companies? A. The only way to know is if the competitive company brings something before the PUC or the DOC investigation provides evidence. Q. Is EAS (Extended Area Service) outmoded? A. We have a lot of EAS matters be- fore the commission. I think there are 43 pending right now. I know the school district EAS provision is sunsetting, but I don’t have enough experience to state that EAS is outmoded. The service has advantages for those who petition for it. I can see a place for it and I think the public wants it. So I’m not at a place where I think its day has come and gone yet, but I want to reserve judgment on this issue, too. Q. Should the state universal service fund be used to subsidize high-speed Internet access in rural areas? A. I’m just now starting to review in- formation to familiarize myself with this issue. It’s very controversial and I’m not up to speed on the issue yet. I’m aware that there will be a rule-making that will have a lot of policy implications. More information about the Minnesota Telephone Association can be found online at www.mnta.org.
(c) 2001 Minnesota Telephone Association
Published by the Minnesota Telephone Association (MTA) |