VIII. Comments on Alternate Proposed Decision

The alternate proposed decision of Commissioner Loretta Lynch in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Pub. Util. Code § 311(d), and Rule 77.7 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Both CPSD and Clear World filed comments on the PD and the Alternate. CPSD generally supported the PD and Alternate, but felt that they did not go far enough. Clear World opposed both. All comments were considered. To the extent that the PD or Alternate contained errors, they have been corrected. To the extent that revisions were necessary, we have made them. However, there are a few of Clear World's allegations that warrant a separate discussion.

Clear World alleges that the PD improperly evaluates the actions of Worldwide, including the agreement between Worldwide and WTS without including Worldwide or WTS as parties to this proceeding. Clear World is incorrect. The actions of Worldwide, and the agreement between it and WTS are addressed only as they relate to Joseph and James Mancuso. Joseph Mancuso, the owner of Worldwide, had ample opportunity to participate, and James Mancuso did participate in this proceeding. In addition, neither this decision nor the PD takes any action against Worldwide or WTS.

Clear World says that the PD improperly holds it responsible for the actions of Christopher Mancuso. This is incorrect. The PD holds Clear World responsible for its actions, and the actions of Joseph, James and Michael Mancuso.

Clear World says that the PD fails to address its financial, technical and managerial qualifications. Since we find that Clear World is not fit to provide local exchange services, its financial and technical qualifications are moot. It is not in the public interest to grant the application.

Clear World objects to the PD's order to show cause (OSC) why it should not be fined for slamming, and have its existing CPCN revoked. We believe an OSC is appropriate here, and preferable to an OII because : (1) the OSC is based on the notion, reaffirmed as recently as last week in the Commission's Titan decision, that the Commission should jealously guard the integrity of its processes whether or not ongoing harm to consumers is occurring (and a fortiori should certainly intervene when such harm is shown); (2) the Modified and Alternate Decisions both find that the Mancusos are unfit to manage a local exchange utility, which poses the immediate and related question whether they are fit to manage a long-distance reseller; and (3) as any OII will depend to some extent on the findings of the Commission in the instant case, keeping all the litigation within one proceeding will prevent the splintering of disputes and possible inconsistency between results.