Scoping Memo and Schedule for Phase I

We initiate a rulemaking for purposes of resolving the foregoing issues. We categorize this proceeding as "ratesetting" as the term is defined in Rule 5(d) in recognition that many of the issues concern potential rate changes for SBC and Verizon.

The proposed schedule for Phase I of this proceeding is as follows:

Opening Comments September 25, 2003

Reply Comments October 15, 2003

Prehearing Conference October 22, 2003

The Assigned Commissioner or administrative law judge may change the schedule for the sake of fair and efficient proceeding management, either by ruling or at a prehearing conference. The schedule for Phase II will be established at a later date either by ruling or Commission decision.

We do not anticipate holding hearings in Phase I. Parties may, however, propose hearings for Phase I in their opening comments. Any party who seeks hearings in Phase I has the burden to show a need for hearings by specifying material issues of fact that are disputed and the evidence that would be presented in a hearing in pursuit of resolving those controversies. We expect to hold hearings on issues identified as topics in Phase 2. Parties may address the need for hearings in response to future pleadings, testimony, Commission decisions or rulings.

Pursuant to Rule 6 (c)(2), any party filing opening comments may object to (1) the categorization of this proceeding as ratesetting, (2) the preliminary determination that there is no need for hearings in Phase I and the need for hearings in Phase II, (3) the scope and schedule for the proceeding, and (4) the categorization of this proceeding as ratesetting with hearings.