5. AT&T's Advice Letters
We will not resolve in this decision the issues raised by protests to AT&T's Advice Letters 28800 and 28982 - including whether to permit these advice letters modifying Rule 12 tariff to remain in effect.128 TURN contends that evidentiary hearings are necessary to resolve issues raised by the protests to AT&T advice letters. We will address TURN's request for evidentiary hearings shortly by a separate ruling in this proceeding before issuing a decision on the remainder of the protest issues.
TURN also argues that "the advice letter process is an inappropriate procedural vehicle to modify or eliminate the marketing disclosure requirements" that were imposed through a prior Commission decision.129 Pub. Util. Code Section 1708 permits the Commission, if it has given notice and opportunity to be heard pursuant to Section 1708, to modify or alter existing decisions and orders. We have provided notice in Resolution No. L-339 and in the December 2006 Assigned Commissioner's Ruling and Revised Scoping Memo to all interested parties (including those in the URF rulemaking and those in the consolidated complaint case C.98-04-004) that we would be addressing in Phase II the issue of whether AT&T's advice letters could modify its Rule 12 tariff. This notice alerted interested parties that issues raised by the protests (including whether AT&T's Rule 12 tariff may be modified) would be addressed in this proceeding. Accordingly, we may consider the issues raised by the protests in this proceeding. However, as noted, we will first address the request for evidentiary hearings by a separate ruling before we resolve the issues.
128 However, given our clarification of Ordering Paragraph 21 in the URF Phase I decision, to the extent that AT&T desires on a going-forward basis to remove any remaining marketing restrictions or conditions contained in its Tariff Rule 12, we direct it to file a petition for modification of the underlying decision imposing such requirements.
129 TURN Comments on Phase 2 at 31.
