This is an ongoing saga that many of us are watching closely and some might want a little recap…

The Minnesota PUC decided to continue to move forward looking at revoking LTD Broadband’s ETC designation. (Background: LTD was awarded an opportunity to apply for$311 million in federal RDOF funding. They needed the ETC designation from the MN PUC to qualify; industry folks asked the MN PUC to rethink their designation because there were concerns about LTD being able to fulfill the contract. Last month, their application for RDOF was rejected.)

In early September, the PUC asked LTD to share their long form RDOF application. They also invited folks to send comments (by Sep 16) in advance of a prehearing conference call planned for Sep 20. Several folks did response including the Institute for Local Self Reliance.

Here’s LTD’s response to ILSR’s offer to act as proposed intervenor…

LTD Broadband, LLC (“LTD”) respectfully objects to the Motion to Intervene filed by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (“ILSR”) because ILSR has not met the standard set forth in Minn. R. 1400.6200. ILSR’s Motion does not make the showings required by that rule, and ILSR has also failed to demonstrate that its alleged interests will not be adequately represented by other parties to this proceeding such as the Minnesota Department of Commerce (“Department”) or the Office of the Attorney General—Residential Utilities Division (“OAG[1]RUD”). Under Minn. R. 1400.6200, subp. 1., a person who desires to intervene in a contested case proceeding must submit a petition that meets four requirements: the petition “[1] shall show how the petitioner’s legal rights, duties, or privileges may be determined or affected by the contested case; [2] shall show how the petitioner may be directly affected by the outcome or that petitioner’s participation is authorized by statute, rule, or court decision; [3] shall set forth the grounds and purposes for which intervention is sought; and [4] shall indicate petitioner’s statutory right to intervene if one should exist.” If the petition makes these showings, it should be granted “unless the judge finds that the petitioner’s interest is adequately represented by one or parties participating in the case.” Minn. R. 1400.6200, subp. 3. ILSR’s Motion fails to make the required showings.

The response is longer but continues in the same theme. This is the tactic that LTD Broadband took in the live meeting at the PUC earlier this year too. They focus on the formalities of the process rather than addressing the issues of the case.