Roseville Comments/Commission Responses

1. Modify proposed Rule 77.7(c) to allow for reply comments on draft resolutions; suggest schedule for such reply comments. (Opening Comments, pp. 2-4.)

[AT&T, GTE, and Pacific Bell support.]

Response: Agree. See Response to ORA Comment #1. Adopted schedule parallels existing Rule 77.5 (replies to comments on proposed decisions).

2. Amend existing second paragraph of Rule 77.2 to allow requests for extension of time to comment on a proposed decision to be made orally or by letter to an Administrative Law Judge (under Rule 48) rather than requiring a noticed motion. (Opening Comments, pp. 2, 4-5.)

[GTE opposes.]

Response: Reject. The Commission has not proposed to change the long-standing rule regarding extensions of time for comment on proposed decisions. Requiring a motion in these circumstances is appropriate in order to put others on notice of the request for extension. Prompt notice is particularly important, given the tight time constraints for proposed decisions. Requests for extension of time to comment on a draft resolution are governed by proposed Rule 77.7(c), not Rule 77.2.

3. Modify proposed Rule 77.7(c) to require the Commission's Docket Office to administer the filing of comments on draft resolutions. (Opening Comments, pp. 2, 5.)

[AT&T and Pacific Bell support.]

Response: Reject. The Docket Office administers filing of documents only in the Commission's formal proceedings. Historically, any filing in connection with a resolution has been administered by the Commission division that prepared the resolution. The proposed Rule 77.7(c) would continue this practice. In addition, historically, most resolutions have responded to advice letters. The Commission division reviewing an advice letter is also the place within the Commission where protests and replies to protests on the advice letter are filed. It would be confusing and potentially disruptive to have part of the filings relating to an advice letter lodged with a Commission division and another part of such filings lodged with the Docket Office. Finally, the Docket Office currently has neither the staff nor the facilities to undertake additional filing responsibilities.