II. Scope of This Phase
The Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) for this proceeding calls for us to examine the service quality results for Pacific and Verizon in Phase 2B, and consider regulatory changes - including alteration of the NRF framework to account for any problems we find - in Phase 35:
In Phase 2 of this proceeding, the Commission will assess how service quality has fared under NRF. This assessment will focus on the quality of service provided to end users by Pacific and Verizon. Issues that are beyond the scope of this proceeding include the following: (1) the quality of service provided by Pacific and Verizon to other carriers; (2) requests for relief that are better addressed in complaint proceedings or enforcement OIIs; and (3) issues regarding universal service.
. . .
In Phase 3, the Commission will consider whether and how NRF should be revised to achieve the Commission's goal of high-quality service. Parties will have an opportunity in Phase 3 to recommend specific revisions to NRF that should be considered by the Commission in light of the record developed in Phase 2 regarding how service quality has fared under NRF. There will not be an opportunity in Phase 3 to litigate issues of fact regarding service quality. All litigation of factual issues pertaining to service quality must occur in Phase 2.6
. . .
Parties may also offer recommendations in Phase 3 regarding how NRF should be revised to promote the availability of high quality services, such as a system of financial carrots and sticks tied to measurements of service quality.
Therefore, in this decision, we make factual findings regarding the service quality performance of Pacific and Verizon over the NRF period (January 1, 1990 to the present), but do not propose regulatory changes at this juncture. Because the NRF period is lengthy, we do not simply focus here on the carriers' most recent performance. Rather, we examine their performance over the entire NRF period, and where we find evidence of problems with the service quality of either company at any time during that period, we identify the problem. In some cases, the most recent data may indicate that quality is improving, and if that is the case we point it out. By the same token, if the positive trend is of short duration, and past problems endured over a significant period of time, we point this out as well.
We do not address or prescribe regulatory changes in this phase of the proceeding. In Phase 3B of this proceeding, parties' recommendations may include, among other things, improvements in the way, under NRF, the Commission monitors service quality, creates incentives for carriers to improve service, and imposes remedies to counteract poor performance.
5 In a September 2002 ruling, the Assigned Commissioner divided this proceeding into two sub-phases. Assigned Commissioner's Ruling Revising the Schedule and Clarifying the Scope of Phase 3, dated Sept. 23, 2002. Phase 3B will deal with any changes to NRF necessitated by the service quality findings we make here. Parties should interpret any reference to Phase 3 or 3B in this decision to include any new phase the Commission designates for consideration of remedies for the service quality results we find here. 6 Rulemaking (R.) 01-09-001, 2001 Cal. PUC LEXIS 842, Appendix A.
