9. Comments on Proposed Decision

The proposed decision of ALJ Galvin in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Section 311 of the Pub. Util. Code and comments were allowed under Rule 14.3 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed by CPSD on September 21, 2009, and reply Comments were filed by ADMA on September 28, 2009.

In its comments CPSD has reiterated the actions and concerns identified in its protest. ADMA in its reply comments endeavors to minimize the same actions as not being cause for Commission concern. As noted in the decision body, we are not unmindful of the potential import of these past actions, however technically labeled, and we wish to make clear to ADMA that the regulatory events in Florida and with the FCC, while not taken here, at this time, to lead us to deny a CPCN, are of concern. We expect utilities operating in California to not split hairs over definitions with our staff but to be forthcoming with any information that may be relevant to our oversight.

While these activities occurred in the past, we put ADMA on notice that we will not tolerate actions that are harmful to customers or to our regulatory processes. If, through CPSD's diligent oversight or any other avenue, we become aware of ADMA harming customers or being lax in its regulatory responsibilities - including tardiness in the submission of reports or payment of fees - will not hesitate to take appropriate corrective steps.

We are mindful of CPSD's concerns and the need to review the screens that we use for applicant's pursuing the registration and applications processes. While the registration authorization is being granted in this application, we strongly support CPSDs vigilance in bringing to our attention concerns that may impact an applicant's fitness for operating authority in California.