FTC and inadequate time Part 2

Well I tried.
I wrote the Fair Trading Commission this week and protested against what I considered to be inadequate time for prospective Intervenors in the electricity rate hearing to apply for status and at the same time require that interrogatories be submitted along with the details about why they should be granted such status.
I reminded the FTC that the application was 700-plus pages and it was unlikely that prospective Intervenors would have had time to assemble experts, study the case and formalise pertinent questions in the time allowed.
The FTC responded in a letter signed by its acting General Legal Counsel by citing various items of legislation under which it operates but did not respond to the substantive points raised that included the advantage provided to the applicant and disadvantage to prospective Intervenor. It said it wanted to get an understanding of the areas of the application that persons were most concerned about. And it stated that further interrogatories could be submitted. It noted that persons have been given six weeks to submit their letters of intervention.
But there was no response to my argument that the time was inadequate. How does the FTC expect that within six weeks persons would have studied the 700-plus pages along with their experts in engineering, economics and chartered accountancy and come up with an indication of areas they "are most concerned about" unless they are given adequate time. I indicated that I was aware of an organisation that had started early but had not had time to identify experts to study the 700-plus pages - even at this time.
I have also made this complaint in other matters before the Commission. But one does not need to be told that you are butting your head against a stone wall.
I however have a hard head so I will keep butting.

Hallam Hope
caritel@hallamhope.com
(246) 822-1414

FTC offers Inadequate time for consumers

There were two disturbing developments recently where the question may be raised about the consideration the Fair Trading Commission has for consumers.
CARITEL, my private consultancy, is taking part in the Reference Interconnect Offer (see earlier posts for background). We were given one week to sudy various documents in detail, conduct additional research and prepare and send a follow-up submission to the FTC as it relates to new arguments.
We protested as we did in the first submission that this was inadequate and a month was requested. A RIO is a highly granular proceeding, requiring regional and international research as well as correspondence with contacts such as regulators elsewhere. The issues are quite wide and therefore require considerable time to investigate and respond to arguments, in this case made by Cable & Wireless. Cable & Wireless has an entire department and regional staff to deal with such matters.
Well, the FTC said you have another week in an email sent minutes before the close of business Friday, the deadline for the actual follow-up submission. I had written the Commission the Wednesday since time was needed to read the documents from Cable & Wireless (LIME), Digicel, TeleBarbados and Blue Communications and study the implications.
Another matter of even greater concern has to do with the rate application by the electricity company.
If one reads the advertisement from the FTC reminding consumers that they have until June 25th to indicate a desire to be granted Intervenor status, of concern is Section 2. which states "Any written questions (interrogatories) and the supporting documentation must be included in the letter of intevention.
The key word here is "must".
This is both unprecedented, places undue burden on consumers interested in applying for Intervenor status, provides the applicant with an unfair advantage and runs contrary to a fair and reasonable process.
In the previous rate hearing, the application dealt with an application for Intervenorn status and nothing else. Subsequently, the matter of interrogatories was raised.
The rate application is 700-plus pages and is available only on a website or at the offices of the FTC and applicant for reading only. There is no provision for a hard copy to be made available to any interested party so one could study it at one's leisure.
And it is also an extremely detailed matter. How can one possibly assemble a team, study in detail the 700-plus pages and have a chance of offering a thorough set of questions (interogatories)?
Again, the FTC is being extremely unreasonable to consumers.

Hallam Hope
(246) 822-1414
caritel@hallamhope.com