Staff agrees with the resellers that in isolation, the surcharge may be unreasonable and discriminatory under the Act. However, Staff contends that taken in context, the surcharge is lawful. It arises from a stipulation signed by resellers and USWC and adopted by the Commission in Order No. The stipulation, Staff points out, was designed to resolve all issues related to Centrex resale. In further support of the surcharge's legality, Staff notes that the surcharge is provided under tariff approved by the Commission.
Tariffs are presumptively lawful.
See ORS 756.656. Second, Staff states that the resellers agreed to the imposition of the surcharge in return for other considerations that they found beneficial. All these considerations should be reviewed, according to Staff, if the surcharge is to be changed. Third, Staff points out that the stipulation provides that parties may propose prospective revisions to reflect changes in a number of factors. The resellers did not propose revisions to the surcharge until this series of dockets, although they have known about its possible unlawfulness at least since they first voiced their concerns in February 1996.