Background
TD is currently conducting an audit of Pacific pursuant to Pub. Util. Code § 314.5 and Decision (D.) 94-06-011, D.96-05-036, D.98-10-019, D.98-10-026, and D.01-02-041. Factual issues associated with TD's audit will be addressed in Phase 2 of this proceeding together with factual issues associated with how service quality has fared under the New Regulatory Framework.1 The current schedule for Phase 2 is as follows2:
Phase 2 Schedule
Event
Date
Pacific and Verizon File Service Quality Compliance Reports
January 15, 2002
TD Files Pacific Audit Report
January 31, 2002
Pacific Files Response to TD's Audit Report
March 29, 2002
Parties Submit Surveys on Service Quality
April 15, 2002
Written Testimony
Opening Testimony: May 1, 2002
Reply Testimony: June 7, 2002
Motions to Strike
Motions to Strike: June 14, 2002
Replies to Motions: June 28, 2002
Evidentiary Hearings
July 8 - July 26, 2002
Briefs re: Phase 2 Issues
Opening Briefs: August 16, 2002
Reply Briefs: August 30, 2002
Draft Decision re: Phase 2
October 2002
On January 11, 2002, Pacific filed a motion to revise the schedule for Phase 2 to provide TD with four additional weeks to file its audit report. Pacific states that the additional time is necessary because it has not yet been able to respond to all of the audit-related data requests it has received from TD. Pacific represents that it has responded to approximately 88% of the 1,297 data requests that it has received thus far, but that it cannot respond to all of the remaining data requests in time for the responses to be reviewed, analyzed, and reflected in TD's audit report that is due on January 31, 2002. Pacific believes that extending the Phase 2 schedule by four weeks will provide adequate time for Pacific to respond to outstanding data requests, and for the auditors to analyze the responses and incorporate the responses in the final audit report.3
The Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) filed a response to Pacific's motion on January 22, 2002. ORA argues that Pacific's motion should be denied because (1) Pacific lacks standing to request a delay in TD's audit, (2) granting the motion would jeopardize the Commission's ability to complete this proceeding within 18 months as contemplated by Senate Bill (SB) 960, (3) extending the schedule would strain ORA's limited resources, and (4) Pacific should have responded sooner to TD's data request.
The Utility Reform Network (TURN) filed a response to Pacific's motion on January 28, 2002. TURN argues that Pacific's motion should be denied because (1) Pacific lacks standing to request a delay in TD's audit, (2) extending Phase 2 by four weeks would adversely affect TURN's ability to participate in Phase 2 due to the schedule constraints of TURN's expert witness, and (3) Pacific should have responded sooner to TD's data request. TURN also states that those parties that have signed Pacific's Non-Disclosure Agreement should be able to receive a copy of TD's audit report as soon as it is available.
TD submitted a letter responding to Pacific's motion on January 28, 2002. TD states that its audit has been delayed by the length of time it has taken Pacific to respond to TD's data requests. According to TD, the average response time has been 75 days. TD also represents that there were approximately 201 outstanding data requests as of January 7, 2002, and that the average age of these requests was 128 days. TD adds that on numerous occasions it has had to send multiple data requests because Pacific's responses were incomplete or unresponsive.
TD states that it remains to be seen if Pacific will actually provide complete and timely responses to the outstanding data requests. TD recommends, therefore, that it issue an audit report based on the information that it has in hand, and that it supplement its report if and when Pacific provides data responses that materially affect TD's audit findings and conclusions.
Finally, TD requests an extension of time from January 31, 2002, to February 22, 2002, to file its audit report. TD asserts that it needs additional time in order to complete, reproduce, and distribute the report. TD states that if it is granted an extension, it will still make every effort to file the report as close as possible to the original due date of January 31, 2002.
1 Order Instituting Rulemaking 01-09-001 and Order Instituting Investigation 01-09-002, pp. 6-7 and Appendix A, pp. A-2 and A-3.
2 Assigned Commissioner's Ruling Determining the Category, Scope, Schedule, Need for Hearing, and the Principal Hearing Officer for the Proceeding, Appendix A, p. A-2.
3 Pacific only asks for modification of the Phase 2 schedule with respect to consideration of TD's audit. Pacific believes that the current schedule can remain in effect for purposes of the Commission's review of service quality.
