E. Comments on Draft Decision
The draft decision of the ALJ in this matter was mailed to the parties in accordance with Pub. Util. Code § 311(g)(1) and Rule 77.7 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure. Comments were filed on _________ and reply comments on _________. We have taken the comments into account, as appropriate in finalizing this order.
1. Pursuant to D.00-09-072, the 13 small telephone companies that are parties to this proceeding must file GRCs by the end of 2001 in order to retain their year 2002 CHCF-A funding at the 100% level.
2. Pursuant to D. 01-02-018, the replacement revenue for the 13 Small LECs is subject to the CHCF-A's waterfall provision.
3. The replacement revenue represents from 30 to 80% of each company's intrastate revenue requirement.
4. It would place a significant strain on Commission resources to process GRCs for the 13 small LECs in the same year.
1. The six small companies receiving the highest STA payments from Pacific-- Evans, Happy Valley, Ponderosa, Sierra, Siskiyou and Volcano--should be subject to the CHCF-A waterfall provision in 2002 if they do not file GRCs by the end of 2001.
2. The waterfall provision established in D.88-07-022 should be modified on a one-time basis to extend the 100% funding for an additional year, to 2002 for the following seven Small LECs: Calaveras, Cal-Ore, Ducor, Foresthill, Hornitos, Kerman and Pinnacles.
IT IS ORDERED that:
1. The waterfall provision governing draws from the California High Cost Fund "A" shall be extended for one year to 2002 for the following small telecommunications carriers which are parties to this proceeding: Calaveras Telephone Company, Cal-Ore Telephone Co., Ducor Telephone Company, Foresthill Telephone Co., Hornitos Telephone Company, Kerman Telephone Company, and Pinnacles Telephone Company.
2. This proceeding is closed.
This order is effective today.
Dated ______________________, at San Francisco, California.
