CXW/JCM/eap 7/12/2002
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Order Instituting Rulemaking on the Commission's Own Motion to Establish Consumer Rights and Consumer Protection Rules Applicable to All Telecommunications Utilities.
Rulemaking 00-02-004
(Filed February 3, 2000)
ASSIGNED COMMISSIONER AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE'S RULING ON MOTION TO MODIFY COMMENT PROCEDURE
AND SCHEDULE WORKSHOPS
This ruling grants in part and denies in part a joint motion by a group of telecommunications carrier representatives to modify the procedure for submitting comments on the draft decision of Commissioner Wood in this proceeding.
The Motion
On June 6, 2002, Assigned Commissioner Carl Wood served his draft decision for public review and comment. Assigned Administrative Law Judge McVicar subsequently granted a request for an extension of the due dates for comments and replies to comments, to July 16th and July 26th respectively, and expanded the page limits for comments and replies. On June 27, 2002, the Moving Parties1 filed a motion seeking to modify the schedule. Moving Parties would have the Commission cancel the currently scheduled comments and replies, and in their place schedule eleven days of workshops in four separate sessions during July, August and September, followed by a staff report, a revised draft decision, and comments and replies to comments.
Responding parties2 filed seven responses to the motion. The two carrier responses supported Moving Parties' motion; the remaining five opposed it.
1 The Moving Parties are listed as Nextel Communications, Inc., Pacific Bell (U 1001 C), Verizon California, Inc. (U 1002 C), Verizon Wireless (consisting of California RSA 4, LP (U 3038 C), Cellco Partnership (U 3029 C), Fresno MSA, LP (U 3005 C), GTEM of CA, LP (U 3002 C), GTEM of Santa Barb [sic], LP (U 3011 C), Los Angeles SMSA LP (U 3003 C), Modoc RSA LP (U 3032 C), Sacramento Valley LP (U 3004 C), and Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC (U 3029 C)), the Small and Mid-Sized Local Exchange Carriers (consisting of Roseville Telephone Company (U 1015 C), Citizens Telecommunications Company of California Inc. (U 1024 C), Citizens Telecommunications Company of Tuolumne (U 1023 C), Citizens Telecommunications Company of Golden State (U 1025 C), Citizens Telecommunications Company (U 5429 C), Electric Lightwave, Inc. (U 5377 C), Calaveras Telephone Company (U 1001 C), Cal-Ore Telephone Co. (U 1006 C), Ducor Telephone Company (U 1007 C), Evans Telephone Company (U 1008 C), Foresthill Telephone Co. (U 1009 C), Kerman Telephone Co. (U 1012 C), The Ponderosa Telephone Co. (U 1014 C), Sierra Telephone Company, Inc. (U 1016 C), The Siskiyou Telephone Company (U 1017 C)), Cingular Wireless (U 3060 C), AT&T Communications of California, Inc. (U 5002 C), AT&T Wireless Service of California LLC (U 3010 C), Sprint Communications Company, L.P. (U 5112 C), Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. (U 3064 C), Sprint Spectrum, L.P. as agent for WirelessCo, L.P. (U 3062 C), VoiceStream Wireless, Inc. dba T-Mobile, Cricket Communications, Inc. ( U 3076 C), and the Cellular Carriers Association of California.
2 Working Assets Funding Service, Inc. (dba Working Assets Long Distance (U5233C) and Working Assets Wireless (U4308C)), Cox California Telecom, L.L.C. dba Cox Communications, the California Attorney General, The Utility Reform Network jointly with Utility Consumers' Action Network, the National Consumer Law Center jointly with the Latino Issues Forum, Wireless Consumers Alliance, Inc., and the Commission's Office of Ratepayer Advocates.
