V. Technical Qualifications of Applicant

To be granted a CPCN for authority to resell local exchange service, an applicant must make a reasonable showing of technical expertise in telecommunications or a related business. Applicant supplied biographical information on its management that demonstrates that it has sufficient expertise and training to operate as a telecommunications carrier. Applicant represents that, with one exception, no one associated with or employed by Applicant as an affiliate, officer, director, partner, or owner of more than 10% of Applicant was previously associated with a nondominant interexchange carrier (NDIEC) that filed for bankruptcy or went out of business, or was sanctioned by the Federal Communications Commission or any state regulatory agency for failure to comply with any regulatory statute, rule, or order.

Applicant's subsidiary, Net2000 Communications of Virginia, LLC, formerly known as Ntel Communications, LLC (Ntel), was authorized to provide local exchange service in Maryland on July 22, 1998. Applicant represents that due to an administrative oversight Ntel did not file all of the necessary tax forms for the tax year 1998. Rather, Ntel made appropriate tax filings under the name of Applicant. Ntel did not receive notice of the error from the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation (MDAT). MDAT informed the Maryland Public Service Commission (MPSC) of the error. The MPSC revoked Ntel's authorization. The matter was subsequently resolved with the MDAT, and the MPSC.

Applicant was authorized to offer interexchange service in Maryland. Rather than restoring Ntel's authorization, Applicant decided to expand its own authority to include local exchange service. Such authority was subsequently granted by the MPSC on February 2, 2000.

Since the error by Applicant's affiliate was resolved, and Applicant was subsequently authorized to expand its service in Maryland to include local exchange service, we see no reason that the error by Applicant's subsidiary should prevent Applicant from receiving the requested authority in California.

We find that Applicant has met our requirement that it possesses adequate technical expertise to operate as a CLC.

Commission staff also reviewed Applicant's draft tariffs for compliance with Commission rules and regulations. The deficiencies are noted in Attachment B of this decision. In its compliance tariff filing, Applicant is directed to correct these deficiencies as a condition of our granting approval of the tariffs.