2. Adopted Notice Requirements
The notice requirements adopted in today's decision derive in substance from General Rule 4.2, Telecommunications Industry Rules 3-3.3, and related definitions in the assigned Administrative Law Judge's Draft Decision (ALJ Draft) issued on February 14, 2001. Parties have had four opportunities to comment on the ALJ Draft, and we have modified the notice requirements in response to some of the comments.
Briefly, the notice requirements specify how, when, and in what circumstances a telecommunications utility (i.e., a public utility that is a telephone corporation under the Public Utilities Code) must give prior notice to those customers who would be affected by a change the utility proposes to make by advice letter.3 Specifically, a utility must give prior notice whenever the utility proposes to (1) transfer some or all of its customers, (2) withdraw a service, or (3) raise rates or charges or impose more restrictive terms or conditions. In the case of a transfer, the utility must give this notice at least 30 days before the proposed transfer; otherwise, the utility must give this notice on (or before) a date that is at least 25 days before the requested effective date of the advice letter proposing the change, or the date when the utility submits the advice letter, whichever date is earlier.4
A utility may give notice by one or a combination of means. These include bill inserts, notices printed on bills, separate notices sent by first-class mail, and e-mail to those customers who receive bills from the utility by e-mail.
We have made non-substantive modifications to the notice requirements as set forth in the ALJ Draft so that they are complete in a stand-alone format. We have also made two substantive changes. The ALJ Draft does not expressly authorize e-mail notice; both utility and consumer commenters noted that many customers now receive their bills by e-mail, and these commenters suggest that e-mail notice is appropriate for such customers. We agree, and we have clarified the notice requirements accordingly.
We also agree with comments that the ALJ Draft's requirement for notice of a proposed transfer is overbroad.5 Not all transfers subject to our approval likely would affect the transferring utility's customers. The notice requirement we adopt today covers only those transfers that would have the effect of replacing the transferor with another service provider. A transfer that would not move customers but that would have the effect of withdrawing or reducing service or raising rates would have to be noticed to affected customers under the provisions governing withdrawals of service and rate increases.
3 Today's decision does not address the scope of changes for which a utility may seek approval by advice letter. Depending on the kind of change and the nature of the service that would be affected, a utility may have to file a formal application to obtain Commission approval of the proposed change. Similarly, today's decision does not address customer notice and other procedural requirements pertaining to formal applications. These requirements go beyond the purview of this rulemaking to revise GO 96-A; however, we expect to deal with them, as appropriate, in R.00-02-004. 4 In effect, submission of the advice letter will be the triggering event for notice purposes under current procedures. If and when GO 96-B is adopted as proposed in the ALJ Draft, utilities will have authority to implement some kinds of changes immediately upon submission of the advice letter. In that circumstance, a utility exercising that authority would have to notify its affected customers 25 days in advance of submitting its advice letter. 5 See, e.g., Pac-West Telecomm, Inc., Opening Comments, pp. 13-14.
