B. Background
In Decision (D.) 00-09-072, the Commission granted the motion filed by the 13 small telephone company applicants1 to this proceeding to reset the "waterfall" provision of the CHCF-A to permit those small telephone companies to receive full funding from that source in 2001, without filing a GRC in 2000.
The Commission adopted a further comment cycle to determine whether to establish a two-year cycle for the filing of GRCs by those 13 companies. Parties filed Opening Comments on October 23, 2000, and Reply Comments on November 6 and 7, 2000. The comments addressed the following two questions:
1 The small local exchange companies include: Calaveras Telephone Company, Cal-Ore Telephone Co., Ducor Telephone Company, Evans Telephone Company, Foresthill Telephone Co., Happy Valley Telephone Company, Hornitos Telephone Company, Kerman Telephone Company, Pinnacles Telephone Co., The Ponderosa Telephone Co., Sierra Telephone Company, Inc., The Siskiyou Telephone Company, and The Volcano Telephone Company.a. Should the General Rate Cases for the small telephone companies subject to this proceeding be scheduled over two years: 2001 and 2002?
b. What is an equitable method for determining which small telephone companies should file for rate cases in 2001 versus 2002?
