Second, neither nor nor any of the other prior MCI, New Cingular Wireless, Commission decisions the Court cites to in footnote 27, support argument that AT&T’s the Commission may award compensation only for the reasonable costs an intervenor incurred in preparing or presenting whatever contentions or recommendations the Commission actually adopted in some order or decision. In almost all of those decisions, the Commission only adopted one procedural recommendation of the intervenors, yet awarded all or nearly all of the requested compensation. In other words, those decisions demonstrate that as long as the Commission grounds its authority in a textual reading of (section 1802(i)), the Commission may then exercise its “substantial contribution” discretion on a case by case basis to decide the extent of the substantial intervenor’s contribution and the amount of the award based upon the policy rationale set forth in section 1801.3. Based on the above, we find that allegations that and Allen/Warner MCI AT&T’s are irrelevant lack merit. Hence, rehearing is denied on these issues. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, we modify D.17-04-007 as discussed above and set forth in the Ordering Paragraphs below. Attachment A to decision today’s incorporates the modifications made to D.17-04-007. Rehearing of D.17-04-007, as modified, is denied because no legal error has been demonstrated. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. D.17-04-007 shall be modified as follows: On page 2, second full paragraph, third sentence, after the words Commission “The invited” insert: parties, including intervenors, to participate in the OII, and to file On page 3, first full paragraph, fourth sentence, after the words the Commission did affirm all of its prior insert: “But, rulings”
Second, neither MCI, nor New Cingular Wireless, nor any of the other prior Commission decisions the Court cites to in footnote 27, support AT&T’s argument that the Commission may award compensation only for the reasonable costs an intervenor incurred in preparing or presenting whatever contentions or recommendations the Commission actually adopted in some order or decision. In almost all of those decisions, the Commission only adopted one procedural recommendation of the intervenors, yet awarded all or nearly all of the requested compensation. In other words, those decisions demonstrate that as long as the Commission grounds its authority in a textual reading of “substantial contribution” (section 1802(i)), the Commission may then exercise its discretion on a case by case basis to decide the extent of the intervenor’s substantial contribution and the amount of the award based upon the policy rationale set forth in section 1801.3. Based on the above, we find that AT&T’s allegations that Allen/Warner and MCI are irrelevant lack merit. Hence, rehearing is denied on these issues. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, we modify D.17-04-007 as discussed above and set forth in the Ordering Paragraphs below. Attachment A to today’s decision incorporates the modifications made to D.17-04-007. Rehearing of D.17-04-007, as modified, is denied because no legal error has been demonstrated. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. D.17-04-007 shall be modified as follows: On page 2, second full paragraph, third sentence, after the words “The Commission invited” insert: parties, including intervenors, to participate in the OII, and to file On page 3, first full paragraph, fourth sentence, after the words “But, the Commission did affirm all of its prior rulings” insert:
198403889.docx