1. Date of Prehearing Conference: 08/08/17 Verified 2. Other specified date for NOI: 3. Date NOI filed: 6/5/17 Verified 4. Was the NOI timely filed? Yes Showing of eligible customer status (§ 1802(b) or eligible local government entity status (§§ 1802(d), 1802.4): 5. Based on ALJ ruling issued in proceeding number: A.16-08-006 Verified 6. Date of ALJ ruling: November 28, 2016 Verified 7. Based on another CPUC determination (specify): N/A 8. Has the Intervenor demonstrated customer status or eligible government entity status? Yes Showing of “significant financial hardship” (§1802(h) or §1803.1(b)) 9. Based on ALJ ruling issued in proceeding number: D A.16-08-006 Verified 10. Date of ALJ ruling: November 28, 2016 Verified 11. Based on another CPUC determination (specify): N N/A 12 12. Has the Intervenor demonstrated significant financial hardship? Yes Timely request for compensation (§ 1804(c)): 13. Identify Final Decision: D.17-10-003 Verified 14. Date of issuance of Final Order or Decision: 10/18/17 Verified 15. File date of compensation request: 12/15/17 Verified 16. Was the request for compensation timely? Yes Additional Comments on Part I: # Intervenor’s Comment(s) CPUC Discussion 3, 4 Given the delay between the initial filings in the proceeding and a Ruling setting a PHC, TURN filed its NOI prior to the PHC out of an abundance of caution. The August 15, 2017 Scoping Memo explicitly states that any NOIs filed before the prehearing are considered timely filed. Confirmed on page 6 of the Scoping Memo. PART II: SUBSTANTIAL CONTRIBUTION
data and financial information to better understand the impact of the merger on overall capital investment by the Applicants as well as network infrastructure. The resulting settlement includes specific and concrete commitments by the company to invest $323 million in California over three years. Additionally, the parties agreed to a workshop process to identify specific projects to place broadband infrastructure in unserved or underserved communities. The only other active part to the proceeding, CETF, urged the Commission to reject the settlement because they argued that the infrastructure investment elements of the settlement did not go far enough in their commitments. TURN filed joint reply comments to CETF’s opposition defending the settlement. The Commission found that that the settlement “goes beyond the Joint Applicants’ original proposal” and resolves the concerns contained in the Joint Protest. 3. Settlement- service quality and reporting Section 854 (c) requires the Commission to determine if the proposed transaction will, “maintain or improve the quality of service” for the transaction to be in the public interest. The Joint Protest urged the Commission to ensure that this transaction will not interfere with the Applicants’ ability to maintain a robust network that can withstand serious threats to public safety, support call completion obligations and minimize outages. The Joint Protest specifically requested that the Commission require robust outage reporting. Joint Protest of the Application for Approval of Transfer of Control, submitted May 5, 2017, p. 4, 7 Applicants’ Reply to Consumer Joint Protest, filed May 15, 2017, p. 3, 14, 19 Motion for Approval of Settlement, June 30, 2017, p. 5, 7. Final Decision at p. 25, 29 Verified
Within 30 days of the effective date of this decision, Broadwing Communications, LLC, Global Crossing Local Services, Inc., Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc., IP Networks, Inc., Level 3 Communications, LLC, Level 3 Telecom of California, LP, WilTel Communications, LLC, Level 3 Communications, Inc., and CenturyLink, Inc. shall pay The Utility Reform Network their respective shares of the award. Payment of the award shall include compound interest at the rate earned on prime, three-month non-financial commercial paper as reported in Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.15, beginning February 28, 2018, the 75th day after the filing of The Utility Reform Network’s request, and continuing until full payment is made. The comment period for today’s decision is waived. This decision is effective today. Dated _____________, at San Francisco, California.