Electronic Comment Filing System

ECFS Filing Proceeding: 00-256
Name of Filer: Common Carrier Bureau
Author: Dorohty T. Attwood
Lawfirm: FCC
View Filing:
View (2)
Type of Filing: ORDER
Exparte Presentation: NO
Date Received: 3/5/01
Date Posted: 3/8/01 12:48 PM
DA Number: DA 01-581
Address: 445 12th Street S.W. Washington, DC 20554

Federal Communications Commission DA 01-581 Before the i L Y,:'6tJ1.f i I. i= COPV ORIGINAl Federal Communications Commission' Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter 0 f Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service Prescribing the Authorized Rate ofReturn For Interstate Services ofLocal Exchange Carriers Access Charge Reform for Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers Subject to Rate-of-Return Regulation -n-'l "fR ! P 1)8 LuUI ,':1-\ - t) . CC Docket No. 00-256 CC Docket No. 96-45 CC Docket No. 98-77 CC Docket No. 98-166 ) ) Multi-Association Group (MAG) Plan for ) Regulation ofInterstate Services of ) Non-Price Cap Incumbent Local Exchange ) Carriers and Interexchange Carriers ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Order Adopted: March 5, 2001 Released: March 5, 2001 By the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. On February 21, 2001, the Illinois Commerce Commission filed a motion seeking an extension oftime in which to file comments and reply comments in the above-captioned rulemaking proceedings pursuant to sections 1.46(b) and 1.47 ofthe Commission's rules.] Specifically, the Illinois Commerce Commission requests that the date on which comments are due be extended from February 26, 2001, to March 7. 2001, and that the date on which reply comments are due be extended from March 12.2001, to March 21,2001. 2 In support of its request, it states that the next regularly scheduled meeting ofthe Illinois Commerce Commission at which its comments could be considered is set for March 7, 2001. It further states that no party will be prejudiced by a grant of this extension oftime. 2. We deny the request ofthe Illinois Commerce Commission that the dates for filing comments and reply comments be extended. The Commission does not routinely grant extensions oftime and the Illinois Commerce Commission's unique situation does not warrant extending the comment and reply comment dates for all parties. Moreover, the motion with respect to the comment filing date is moot because the filing date has passed. Under these I 47C.F.R. §§ 1.46(b) and 1.47. 2 Motion for Extension ofTime to File Initial and Reply Comments ofthe Illinois Commerce Commission, CC Docket No. 00-256 (filed Feb. 21, 2001). Federal Communications Commission DA 01-581 circumstances, the Illinois Commerce Commission may, if it chooses, file comments late pursuant to an individual waiver request as discussed in Section 1.46(b) ofthe Commission's rules." Because we are not extending the due date for comments, we find no reason on the present record to extend the date on which reply comments are due. 3. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 1.46(b) and 0.92 ofthe Commission's rules,4 that the motion for extension oftime filed by the Illinois Commerce Commission IS DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Q /'. I L I J~4dl,~ Dorothy T. Attwood Chief, Common Carrier Bureau 47 c.r.R. § 1.46(b). 4 47 C.F.R. §§1.46(b) and 0.92.