Eligibility

To be eligible for compensation, a participant in a formal Commission proceeding, such as this one, must establish that it is a "customer" and that participation without compensation would pose a significant financial hardship.

Customer Status

Section 1802(b) defines the term "customer" as:

"[A]ny participant representing consumers, customers, or subscribers of any electrical, gas, telephone, telegraph, or water corporation that is subject to the jurisdiction of the commission; any representative who has been authorized by a customer; or any representative of a group or organization authorized pursuant to its articles of incorporation or bylaws to represent the interests of residential customers . . . ."

Thus, there are three categories of customers: (1) a participant representing consumers; (2) a representative authorized by a customer; and (3) a representative of a group or organization authorized in its articles of incorporation or bylaws to represent the interests of residential customers. The Commission requires a participant to specifically identify in its NOI how it meets the definition of customer and, if it is a group or organization, provide a copy of its articles or bylaws, noting where in the document the authorization to represent residential ratepayers can be found. (Decision (D.) 98-04-059, mimeo., at pp. 30-32; see, also, fn. 13-16.)

Raw Bandwidth states it is a customer, because it is a participant representing consumers or customers and all of the issues in the complaint allege wrongdoings that affect all independent Internet Service Providers (ISP) that subscribe to the Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) Transport Service provided by SBC California, Inc. and SBC Advanced Solutions, Inc. Raw Bandwidth also states that most of the issues in the complaint also affect residential customers who are end-users of DSL service from the independent ISPs.

Defendants oppose Raw Bandwidth's NOI, because Raw Bandwidth raises issues that are part of its ongoing business relationship with Defendants and its own business concerns, not the concerns of any consumers.

The Commission allows intervenor compensation in complaint proceedings. However, a complainant acting solely in an individual capacity and seeking a personal remedy is not entitled to seek compensation. (D.98-04-059, mimeo., pp. 21-22; Grinstead v. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., D.95-10-050, 62 CPUC 2d 202.) Raw Bandwidth raises issues that apply to other ISPs, such as discrimination in the provision of DSL Transport. However, Raw Bandwidth's complaint also raises issues that arise from its business relationship with Defendants, such as the CD ROM billing dispute.

The Commission has found that a business meets the definition of customer when it pursues issues relating to its status as a consumer of utility services, especially when it is advocating for changes to a tariff under which the business takes service. (Rulemaking Re The Line Extension Rules of Electric and Gas Utilities, D.00-04-026, 2000 Cal. PUC LEXIS 203 *18.) A business is not a customer when it is a competitor advocating for changes expanding its opportunities to compete. (Id.) Competitors that have a clear and substantial competitive interest in an issue should not receive ratepayer funding for advocating on that issue. (Id. at *19.) Raw Bandwidth raises both issues relating to its status as a customer, such as unreasonable delay when moving DSL service from one address to another, and competitive issues, such as portions of the issues relating to disconnection of DSL Transport service after the voice line has been disconnected.

Raw Bandwidth has shown that it is a participant representing consumers or customers, as set forth in § 1802(b). Although Raw Bandwidth raises issues that have personal and competitive impacts, most of the issues raised by Raw Bandwidth have broader applicability.