Preliminary Scoping Memo

This rulemaking will be conducted in accordance with Article 6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. As required by Rule 7.3, this order includes a preliminary scoping memo as set forth below.

The issues to be considered in this proceeding are, as more fully described earlier in this order:

1) Should NDIEC registrants be required to post a performance bond? If so, what type and how much? What activities and types of expenses should a performance bond be required to cover? How should the size of the bond for registrants be determined? Should pre-paid debit card providers that are required to register pursuant to Pub. Util. Code § 885(a) be subject to the same performance bond requirement as other NDIEC registrants that provide only long distance services?

2) Should registration certificates be granted for a limited duration of three years or for some other limited period? Should registration applicants, as a condition of renewal or transfer, be required to make a showing to prove good standing?

3) Should fingerprint, criminal background checks and/or other showings be required for the officers and directors of registration applicants? If so, what should be required?

4) Should expanded fiscal and civil responsibility checks be performed? If so, what should they include? Should this requirement be applied to the applicant's officers and directors? Should resumes listing all employment be required from officers and directors? Should the applicant be required to state whether it has entered into any settlement agreements in resolution of any corrective action by any regulatory body, agency, or attorney general?

5) Should the application fee for registration be increased to $500 or some other amount? If $500 is not an appropriate application fee, what should the registration application fee be and why? Should the Commission establish a minimum $100 annual user fee for NDIEC registrants? If $100 is not an appropriate minimum annual user fee, what should the minimum annual user fee be and why?

6) Should the "registration CPCN" be renamed a "registration certificate" or "registration license"?

Pursuant to Rule 7.1(d), we preliminarily determine the category of this rulemaking proceeding to be quasi-legislative as the term is defined in Rule 1.3(d).

We do not anticipate that evidentiary hearings will be required. We do not intend to hold public participation hearings to gather input from the general public. If parties believe either is necessary they should so indicate in their comments, describing specifically the reasons evidentiary and/or public participation hearings are needed and, in the case of evidentiary hearings, describing the facts the party would present.

For purposes of meeting the scoping memo requirements and to expedite the proceeding, we establish the following schedule:

Day 1 Order Instituting Rulemaking issued

Day 16 Deadline for requests to be on service list

Day 35 Initial Comments filed and served

Day 49 Reply Comments filed and served

1st Quarter 2010 Proposed decision on Commission agenda

The assigned Commissioner through his/her ruling on the scoping memo and subsequent rulings, and the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) by ruling with the assigned Commissioner's concurrence, may modify the schedule as necessary during the course of the proceeding. In no event do we anticipate this proceeding to require longer than 18 months from the issuance of the scoping memo to complete.

The assigned Commissioner will issue a ruling which determines the category, need for hearing, and schedule for this rulemaking, and designates the principal hearing officer (Rule 13.2). The ruling, only as to category, may be appealed under the procedures in Rule 7.6.

Any person filing comments on an order instituting rulemaking shall state any objections to the preliminary scoping memo regarding the category, need for hearing, issues to be considered or schedule. (Rule 6.2.)

Previous PageTop Of PageNext PageGo To First Page