{"id":4164,"date":"2013-06-20T08:18:25","date_gmt":"2013-06-20T12:18:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/?p=4164"},"modified":"2013-06-20T08:20:22","modified_gmt":"2013-06-20T12:20:22","slug":"telecommunications-rules-and-rates-ga-psc-2013-06-18","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2013\/06\/telecommunications-rules-and-rates-ga-psc-2013-06-18.html","title":{"rendered":"Telecommunications rules and rates @ GA PSC 2013-06-18"},"content":{"rendered":"

\r\nTelecommunications rules and rates were deferred and scheduled at\r\n\r\nthe Georgia Public Service Commission meeting Tuesday 18 June 2013<\/a>.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nFirst item on the regular agenda was\r\n\r\nDocket # 35537<\/a>\r\n

\r\nTitle: \tNotice of Proposed Rulemaking to Promulgate Rules Governing Eligible Telecommunications Carriers 515-12-1-.35\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nThere was lengthy discussion about the database provision and the\r\n$5 minimum charge in those rules.\r\n\r\nCommissioner Wise didn’t like<\/a> the database as proposed and asked\r\nfor an indefinite hold until they had a database that was verifiable.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nCommissioner Echols asked whether the current proposal would be like\r\na hold anyway, since it would involve another hearing. Staff said yes.\r\nCommissioner Everett asked if with the hold proposed by Wise\r\nwouldn’t that be two holds? Staff said yes.\r\nChairman asked if Wise would be willing to put it up for a vote.\r\nWise said he would abide by the will\r\nof the Commission for a vote, but he would vote against the proposal\r\nbecause it didn’t have a verifiable database that wasn’t confusing\r\nto the customers.\r\nBubba McDonald said he was pleased with some of the changes and approaches\r\nthe cell phone providers had made to solve this problem, which he\r\nseemed to indicate was to stop fraud and abuse.\r\nChairman said he didn’t feel comfortable unilaterally putting it on hold because at least one\r\nCommissioner had objected to that, but the Commission could vote to do\r\nput it on hold.\r\nCommissioner Everett said they’d had six hearings already;\r\nit wouldn’t come into effect until October; and while he wanted to get it right,\r\nhe wanted to go ahead and be sure those who were abusing the system were dealt with.\r\nEchols withdrew his objection to putting it on hold.\r\nChairman announced it was on indefinite hold.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n<\/a>\r\n\r\n<\/a>\r\nTheir next item was\r\n\r\nDocket # 35068<\/a>\r\n

\r\nTitle: \trate cases on the Track 2 companies.\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n

\r\nI think they voted to schedule a hearing on that for 6 August 2013.\r\nThen one commissioner indicated\r\n\r\nthere were ways the parties could resolve a related discovery dispute<\/a>.\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\nHere’s a video playlist<\/a>:\r\n<\/p>\r\n

\r\n