Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
2. Each and every reason set forth by the Office of the <br />Attorney General in its Motion Joining the Public Staff's Motion <br />for Reconsideration. The Attorney General's Motion was filed <br />herein on October 30, 1991. <br />3. For the reason that the Commission failed to follow its <br />own procedures regarding requests for EAS, which are codified as <br />Rule R9. -7 of the Rules and Regulations of the North Carolina <br />Utilities Commission. <br />(a). Specifically, the-Commission erred in its application of <br />Sub -- section (c)(1) of Rule R9 -7 in that broad -based support was <br />shown to the Public Staff and to the Commission for the <br />Hillsborough exchange, the Chapel Hill exchange, and that portion <br />of the Mebane Home exchange included in the proposal offered by the <br />Public Staff; that is, the Orange County portion of the Mebane Home <br />exchange. By terminating the process short of polling -- apparently <br />on the grounds that broad based support was not shown by persons <br />in the entire Mebane Home exchange- -the Commission abused the <br />discretion vested upon it by its Rule R9- 7(c)(1). This is <br />especially so because the notion of "splitting" an exchange <br />according to a community of interest is logical, in the public <br />interest, and consistent with prior decisions of the Commission. <br />See Argument 2.c. of the Motion for Reconsideration of the Public <br />Staff filed in this Docket. <br />As pointed out by the Public Staff on page four of its Motion <br />for Reconsideration, the idea of splitting the Mebane Home exchange <br />did not originate with this EAS Proposal or with the Public Staff. <br />