2. Background and Procedural History
On March 27, 2008, an Assigned Commissioner's Ruling and Scoping Memo for Phase III identified three issues for resolution in this phase of the proceeding: (1) what rules are needed to help "ensure that franchisees' extension requests are timely made and decided;" 1 (2) what changes in rules are needed to "eliminate an unintended and unfair asymmetry in the bond requirement under GO 169;"2 and (3) should the rules be changed to "require reporting of broadband speed `tiers' that state video franchise holders make available."3
Opening Comments were due on April 16, 2008. AT&T California (AT&T), California Cable and Telecommunications Association (CCTA), Calaveras Telephone Company, Cal-Ore Telephone Co., Ducor Telephone Company, Foresthill Telephone Co., Global Valley Networks, Inc., Happy Valley Telephone Company, Hornitos Telephone Company, Kerman Telephone Company, Pinnacles Telephone Co., The Ponderosa Telephone Co., Sierra Telephone Company, Inc., The Siskiyou Telephone Company, Volcano Telephone Company, and Winterhaven Telephone Company (Small LECs), the SureWest Televideo (SureWest), The Utility Reform Network (TURN), and Verizon California Inc. (Verizon) filed opening comments.
Reply Comments were filed on April 21, 2008, by AT&T, CCTA, DRA, Latino Issues Forum and California Community Technology Policy Group (LIF/CCTPG), the Small LECs, TURN, Verizon.
1 Assigned Commissioner's Ruling and Scoping Memo for Phase III (ACR of March 27, 2008), Rulemaking (R.) 06-10-005 (March 27, 2008) at 2.
2 Id.
3 Id.
