4. Substantial Contribution to Resolution of Issues

A party may make a substantial contribution to a decision in one of several ways.² It may offer a factual or legal contention upon which the Commission relied in making a decision,³ or it may advance a specific policy or procedural recommendation that the ALJ or Commission adopted.⁴ A substantial contribution includes evidence or argument that supports part of the decision even if the Commission does not adopt a party's position in total.

We discuss below TURN's and Latino Issues/Greenlining's contributions to each of the decisions issued in this proceeding.

TURN

D.00-03-020

TURN stated that it contributed to the local service disconnection policy adopted in this decision. In addition to TURN's advocacy for a rule only slightly narrower than the one adopted, the Commission also agreed with TURN on the procedural issue of whether that policy could be changed without holding evidentiary hearings.

TURN also stated that it made a substantial contribution to the portions of the decision addressing the role that the local exchange carriers play in protecting customers from unauthorized charges. TURN contended that the Commission adopted the comprehensive approach it urged to the cramming problem, including the critical role of the billing telephone company.

We agree that TURN made substantial contributions to D.00-03-020 in the areas it identified. We adopted TURN's proposals in whole or in part and benefited from its policy discussion on all of those issues that it addressed.

D.00-05-052

In this decision, the Commission denied AT&T, MCI, and Sprint's joint application for rehearing of D.00-03-020, and redocketed it as a petition for modification. TURN stated that the Commission adopted TURN's contention, in its comments filed jointly with the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA), that the applicants had failed to identify any legal error in the decision.

We agree that TURN made a substantial contribution to D.00-05-052 in the narrow issue that decision addressed. We essentially adopted the outcome TURN sought.

D.00-11-015

The Commission here rejected the petition for modification of AT&T, MCI, and Sprint. The Commission agreed with TURN that the proceeding was far too advanced to consider the toll blocking issue as petitioners had suggested.

The primary focus of the decision was to narrow the range of charges for which a local exchange carrier is authorized to disconnect local service. TURN stated that the final rule adopted by the Commission was substantially similar to the one advocated by TURN. The Commission explicitly recognized TURN's contribution to the issue of whether the revision was based on record evidence by finding TURN's reply comments "persuasive." We agree that TURN made a substantial contribution to D.00-11-015 on the issues resolved.

Latino Issues/Greenlining

D.00-03-020

Latino Issues/Greenlining stated they were instrumental in advancing the position that the Commission must abolish the then-existing local service disconnection policy. They say the decision adopts their position that the then-existing policy was anti-consumer, anachronistic since the justification for the policy had expired, and antithetical to preventing slamming and cramming in that customers were afraid not to pay unauthorized charges for fear of losing local service. They also say the decision affirmed, as they advocated throughout the proceeding, that aggressive enforcement against unethical carriers, and heightened staff capacity to gather and track complaints, was essential to curb abuses. Finally, they say the decision adopted their position that community-based organizations, among other means, should be used to help language minority customers to lower the higher rate of service disputes among these customers and carriers.

We agree that Latino Issues/Greenlining made substantial contributions to D.00-03-020 in the areas they identified.

D.00-11-015

In this decision, as noted above, the Commission rejected the petition for modification of AT&T, MCI, and Sprint. Latino Issues/Greenlining stated that the Commission agreed with their contention that the purpose of the no disconnect rule was to protect basic service whether flat or measured. Latino Issue/Greenlining also stated that the Commission adopted their positions that statutory requirements included record-keeping and reporting for billing telephone companies and affiliates, and that billing agents must possess adequate information to permit the Commission to track complaints. In addition, Latino Issues/Greenlining maintained that the Commission adopted their point that customers need to have a legitimate business name by which to identify carriers, whether it be the name on the carrier's certificate of public convenience and necessity, a properly registered fictitious business name, or the name on any Federal Communications Commission certificate or business license. Latino Issues/Greenlining noted that the Commission quoted directly from their reply brief on whether to interject the issue of full toll denial at a late stage in the proceeding.

We agree that Latino Issues/Greenlining made a substantial contribution to D.00-11-015 on the issues there resolved.