BEFORE THE WASHINGTON UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION


In Re Petition of

U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,

for a Declaratory Order Ending Imputation of Revenues Derived from Transferred 
Yellow Pages Publishing Business
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)
	)	
		
		Docket No.  UT-980948
		
		RESPONSE OF U S WEST TO THE PETITION OF TRACER FOR LATE INTERVENTION 

 U S WEST Communications, Inc., (U S WEST) hereby states its opposition to the 
Petition of TRACER for Late Intervention filed on October 26, 1998.  U S WEST 
does not believe that TRACER states a basis in its petition upon which 
intervention may be granted. Pursuant to WAC 480-09-430(1)(b), a petition to 
intervene must disclose the petitioner’s interest in the proceeding.  The 
petition may only be granted if the petition discloses a substantial interest 
in the subject matter of the proceeding or if the participation of the 
intervenor is in the public interest.
 TRACER’s petition to intervene states that the association has a substantial 
interest in this proceeding because the association is comprised of large 
retail customers which are end-users of U S WEST services.  Further, TRACER 
states: “This is so because the issues of whether fair value has been paid for 
the Yellow Pages publishing business and whether imputation of revenues derived 
from that business should be ended affect USWC’s overall revenue requirements 
and, ultimately, the rates it charges for its retail customers.”  
 This interest is not a substantial interest in the proceeding as required by 
rule.  Rather, it is a general interest shared by all retail end-users.  These 
interests are represented by Staff and Public Counsel in this proceeding.  
Thus, TRACER’s participation is not in the public interest and TRACER does not 
state a basis to intervene in this docket.  Further, U S WEST’s rates are not 
at issue in this proceeding, rendering TRACER’s interest premature.  Should 
rates become an issue in the future, TRACER may well state an interest in that 
proceeding, but has not stated such an interest in this docket.
 In addition, TRACER fails to state their position in regard to the matter in 
controversy as required by WAC 480-09-430(1)(b).  While TRACER has stated that 
they do not intend to broaden the issues in this docket, their exact position 
is unknown.  Thus, it is impossible to conclude that TRACER’s participation 
would not broaden the issues, especially in light of TRACER’s stated interests 
in rates, which are not at issue.
 Further, TRACER’s petition is late and should not be granted.  Substantive 
pleadings and testimony have been filed in this matter and a pre-hearing 
conference was held on September 23, 1998.  TRACER believes it “has good cause 
for late intervention because it did not receive a copy of the notice of the 
initial prehearing conference until after the prehearing conference had already 
occurred.”  However, TRACER was well aware of U S WEST’s petition, as TRACER 
was served a notice on July 27, 1998 advising that U S WEST had filed a 
petition for declaratory order.  TRACER was faxed a copy of the Notice of 
Receipt of Petition for Declaratory Order on July 27, 1998 at 5:10 p.m.  In 
addition, a copy of this Notice was sent to TRACER via mail on the same date.  
One of the other parties who received the July 27 notice, MCI, contacted U S 
WEST in a letter dated August 12, 1998 and requested specific pleadings in this 
matter.
 TRACER never took any affirmative steps to become involved in this docket, or 
to be placed on the service list.  The Commission was thus not obligated to 
notify TRACER of subsequent events in this docket.  TRACER’s contention that 
they should be allowed late intervention because they did not receive the 
notice of prehearing conference is not well founded.
 TRACER’s petition for Late Intervention should be denied.
 DATED this    day of November, 1998.

     U S WEST Communications, Inc.


     _______________________________________
     Lisa A. Anderl, WSBA No. 13236