MWCOM Comments/Commission Responses

1. Public review and comment should be implemented for resolutions on advice letter filings, including those filed by telecommunications service providers, and waiver of the review and comment period should not be automatic. (Reply Comments, pp. 1-4.)

Response: Agree (no change necessary).

2. Comments on a resolution should not be limited to those issues raised in protests regarding the underlying advice letter; among other concerns, the resolution itself may deal with an issue in such a way as to raise a different issue. (Reply Comments, pp. 4-5.)

Response: Agree (no change necessary).

3. There are "additional categories" of decisions for which waiver or reduction of the review and comment period may be appropriate. An example of such a category is a decision rendered pursuant to the Expedited Dispute Resolution Procedure to which the parties have stipulated in R.97-10-016. (Reply Comments, pp. 5-8.)

Response: Agree in part and reject (without prejudice) in part. Agree that there are additional categories of decisions for which the Commission may waive or reduce the review and comment period. (See Rule 77.7(f)(3)-(9).) No change necessary.) However, it is premature to decide whether the category of decision cited by MWCOM is such a category. R.97-10-016 is still in progress; the present rulemaking is not an appropriate forum for considering how public review and comment should or should not be incorporated in the expedited procedure under development in R.97-10-016.