III. Comments on Draft Decision

In order to expeditiously address a potential inconsistency among similarly situated carriers, public necessity requires that the comment period for this draft decision be reduced. We therefore reduced to six days period for comments on draft decisions set forth in Pub. Util. Code § 311(g)(3) as well as the comment period in Rule 77.7. (See Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure 77.7 (f)(9).) Comments were required to be filed on or before April 4, 2005.

SBC comments that consistent with D.05-03-028, the draft decision should be modified to change the deadline for new serving arrangements for existing customers to May 1, 2005 rather than May 9, 2005. We decline to make the eight day change suggested by SBC based on the circumstances of this open arbitration proceeding. The May 9 deadline was established based on the 60 day negotiation period agreed upon by SBC and XO in their existing interconnection agreement and it pertains to different UNEs than those addressed in D.05-03-028. It is reasonable to preserve the May 9 deadline, as well as the further process for dispute resolution that the ALJ has already arranged with the parties in this ongoing arbitration proceeding, because it allows the parties a reasonable period to resolve their dispute before it returns to the Commission for resolution in this arbitration.²

XO comments that the draft decision should be modified to clarify that the FCC's order regarding high capacity transport, loops and dark fiber only applies in certain wire centers based on the number of business lines served and the number of facilities-based competitors collocated in those wire centers. Therefore, SBC must continue to process and provision new orders for high capacity transport, loops and dark fiber consistent with the requirements set forth by the FCC in the TRRO. This modification is reasonable and has been incorporated.