4. The Amendment to the Application

The Applicants filed an amendment to A.04-05-034 on June 29, 2004, pursuant to a ruling issue by the assigned Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on June 4, 2004. Notice of the amendment appeared in the Daily Calendar on July 1, 2004. There were no protests or other responses to the amendment.

The amendment provided the following information in response to the ALJ ruling. First, to demonstrate that Dominion is financially and technically qualified to assume indirect control of RRLD, the amendment contained (1) a bank statement that shows Dominion has at least $25,000 of cash, (2) an assertion that Dominion has sufficient additional financial resources to cover all deposits required by other telecommunications carriers, and (3) the qualifications of two of Dominion's key personnel (i.e., Robert Sorrentino and Christine M. Stein).

Second, to demonstrate that Dominion is fit to assume indirect control of RRLD, the amendment provided the following information:

· Robert Sorrentino, the owner of Dominion, previously owned of Nationwide Telecom, Inc., a telecommunications carrier that went bankrupt. The Applicants assert that the bankruptcy was the result of a contractual dispute and not mismanagement.

· With respect to RRLD, Visia, Dominion, or any affiliate, officer, director, partner, or owner of more than 10% of any of these entities, the Applicants assert that they are not aware of (1) any complaints against these persons or entities alleging fraud or significant wrongdoing that have been decided by, or are currently pending at, the Commission, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), or other state commissions; (2) any sanctions against these persons or entities imposed by the Commission, the FCC, or other state commissions for failure to comply with any regulatory statute, rule, or order; or (3) any current investigations or any finding of criminal liability against these persons or entities for a violation of Section 1700 et seq., of the Cal. Business and Professions Code that involved misrepresentations to consumers.

Third, to demonstrate that approval of A.04-05-034 will not have a significant effect on the environment, the amendment states that the indirect transfer of control of RRLD will not result in any new construction or changes in (i) operations, or (ii) the use of existing property or facilities.

Finally, the Applicants admit in the amendment that the indirect transfer of control of RRLD occurred "in early 2004" without Commission authorization. As required by the ALJ ruling, the amendment provided certain information useful for determining whether, and to what extent, RRLD should be fined for the unauthorized transfer of control.