Intel's January 4, 1996 filing before California PUC regarding PacBell's proposed ISDN rate hike. BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of Pacific Bell for ) Authority to Increase and Restructure ) A.95-12-043 Certain Rates of its Integrated ) Services Digital Network Services ) ___________________________________________) EX PARTE MOTION FOR EXTENSION FOR FILING OF PROTESTS I. Introduction and Summary Intel Corporation ("Intel") hereby moves to extend the date for filing protests to the above-captioned application (the "Application") from January 19, 1996 to February 19, 1996. In the Application, Pacific Bell is seeking to increase the rates for its Integrated Services Digital Network services ("ISDN services"). This motion should be granted because: (i) Intel first received a copy of the Application on January 3, 1996 (para. 2, attached Declaration of Dhruv Khanna ("Khanna Decl.")) -- almost a full month after it was originally filed; (ii) this Application is of enormous public significance; (iii) numerous high-technology companies, Internet access providers, on-line service providers and users of personal computers ("PCs") and others have a vital stake in this Application -- who have not been served with the Application, and will require adequate time to review the Application and respond accordingly (para. 3., Khanna Decl) ; (iv) the public interest will be served by participation of PC industry and on-line community in this proceeding; (v) the due process rights of the PC and on-line industry participants should be safeguarded; and (vi) Pacific Bell will not be unfairly prejudiced by the grant of this motion. II. Public Interest in ISDN PC Communications and this Application Intel, a leader in the computer industry, is playing an instrumental role in transforming the PC into a powerful, interactive, PSTN-connected communications tool. Over the years, Intel has roughly doubled the computing power of PC microprocessors available every 18 months at constant prices. As a result, PCs are increasingly able to provide high-quality performance of a variety of interactive multimedia applications, including access to the Internet and other on-line services, remote-Local Area Network ("LAN") access, and simultaneous data, audio and videoconferencing. More than a third of all U.S. households have PCs. Internet use is increasing dramatically. The use of telecommuting, videoconferencing and remote LAN access is also poised to increase dramatically. However, the only affordable bandwidth that is currently available ubiquitously on the PSTN is limited to analog POTS (plain old telephone service). Analog POTS affords limited bandwidth, and recent developments in the PC industry and in customer preferences are highlighting the inadequacies of analog POTS as means for PC communications. For example, access to the Internet, access to commercial online services, remote-LAN access and videoconferencing over analog POTS is significantly inferior (4 times as slow) than over ISDN services. While analog POTS affords up to 28.8 kilo bits per second ("kbps") transmission speeds over 28.8 kbps POTS modems, ISDN provides digital connectivity at up to 128 kbps (two 64 kbps channels) over the same ubiquitous copper local loop and digital switches that are currently used for analog POTS. Many PC users have already invested in powerful, multimedia-capable PCs. The PC industry (hardware and software companies), the on-line service industry and others have invested heavily and continue to invest heavily in a wide array of ISDN-related products. An entire industry is poised to deliver mass-market ISDN products. Unreasonable ISDN pricing, as proposed by Pacific Bell in this Application, may preclude the development of a mass-market ISDN industry, and will certainly retard its growth. III. Service of this Application on the PC Industry and On-line Community Intel and other PC companies and on-line industry participants have not historically been actively involved in the regulatory processes related to telecommunications carriers at this Commission or elsewhere. Based on Intel's previous, and highly limited, but ISDN-focused, participation in regulatory matters at the Commission, Pacific Bell should have reasonably known that service of this Application at least on Intel, and on similar PC industry participants and on-line service providers was necessary when it was filed on December 5, 1995. (Para. 4, Khanna Decl.) Intel was not served with this Application when it was filed and obtained a copy on January 3, 1996 only after making repeated requests. (Para. 2, Khanna Decl.) Thus Intel has received the Application almost a whole month after it was originally filed. Intel believes that other PC industry participants who are selling ISDN hardware and software, and on-line service providers also have not been served with the Application, even though Prodigy in 1993 submitted a formal protest to Pacific's ISDN tariff as originally proposed. (Para. 3, Khanna Decl.) Granting this motion is in the public interest: the Commission, the state of California and the California public have an enormous stake in the rapid growth of ISDN-based PC communications: The growth of ISDN-based PC communications will directly and substantially enable the continued growth of California's (and the nation's) high-technology industry. It will also deliver educational, environmental, productivity, competitive, and a host of related benefits to the California public -- school children, teenagers, seniors, small and large businesses, health care providers, and others -- and quality of life benefits to telecommuters and the online community. The growth of ISDN-based PC communications will be severely retarded unless ISDN rates in California are reduced. The Commission and the public will benefit from the considered participation of the PC industry, on-line industry, and the on-line community in this matter. The Commission should allow for more time for the PC industry, on-line industry and the vast community of on-line users to receive, review, consider and respond to Pacific's Application, and not accept Pacific's invitation to proceed with haste on this Application. IV. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, Intel respectfully requests that the Commission extend the deadline for the filing of protests to this Application through February 19, 1996. Intel respectfully requests that the Commission issue a ruling extending the current deadline of January 19, 1996 as soon as feasible and fax such ruling to Intel counsel indicated below. Date: January 4, 1996 Respectfully submitted, INTEL CORPORATION ____________________________ Dhruv Khanna, Esq. Intel Corporation Mail Stop: HF3-03 5200 N.E. Elam Young Parkway Hillsboro, OR 97124 (503) 696-7162 fax: (503) 696-1809 Attorney for Intel Corporation