ÿWPC4  :# <U:G % 0 4‡4»ÏÞw@æ 0³& 0DÙ 0Jbg 0To 0Dà 0P 0^W D3µ 0hè 0rP 0| 0†> 0Ä 1uT 0dÉ AQ- Æ~ 0DD 0@ˆ BÈ D/å B 1m1 0cž U*B)+DCT AM—äó®õL£U>ï¶-v~ãvÓa˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ,†r‰AZ‹"Arial RegularX( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Óê‚_#tÔôÔô3|xx\ f\g\Eh\i\«j\k\Dl\tem\Ó€w\x\(DG2¢s$¤¤Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ€°ÒÒÀ°Òà Ø àÔ€ô8›ôXXÔòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô- ù-2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó((3¾¸$§§Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  Ý2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$$$$'ÿÿdxd26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ!"#&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd*#Je37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;³É$´´Ô2JeÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d////7Border 1dd!#0Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌMarch€30,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó éÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ € ÒÒ À Òà àÔ€.ôÔòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAs€a€result€of€legislative€action€in€1995,€the€PSC€ceased€to€exist€on€June€30,€1996.€ÏTherefore,€the€PSC€set€a€commission€conference€for€June€25,1996€to€complete€its€publicÏbusiness.€€On€June€19,€1996,€the€PSC€published€an€agenda€listing€BellSouthððs€tariff€as€ready€forÏdisposition.€€Ì ¤Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ € ÒÒ À Òà àÔ€.ôÔòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThat€statute€provides,€in€pertinent€part,€that€the€Advocate,€ð ðmay,€with€the€approval€of€theÏattorney€general€and€reporter,€participate€or€intervene€as€a€party€in€any€matter€or€proceeding€beforeÏthe€[TRA]€.€.€.€.ððÌ BÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ € ÒÒ À Òà àÔ€.ôÔòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝOn€September€5,€1996,€the€Court€of€Appeals€entered€an€order€in€this€cause€substitutingÏthe€€TRA€in€the€place€of€the€PSC.Ì< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman ¬Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ € ÒÒ À Òà àÔ€.ôÔòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€note€that€the€specificity€required€by€the€Rules€is€supported€by€the€statute€which€grantsÏthe€Advocate€authority€to€intervene.€€That€statute€provides€that€if€the€Advocate€is€ð ðwithout€sufficientÏinformation€to€initiate€a€proceeding,€it€may€petition€the€[TRA],€after€notice€to€the€affected€utility,€toÏobtain€information€from€the€utility.€€The€petition€shall€state€with€particularity€the€information€soughtÏand€the€type€of€proceeding€that€may€be€initiated€if€the€information€is€obtained.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ64„4„118€(c)(2)(B).€€The€General€Assembly€created€a€procedural€mechanism€to€allow€the€AdvocateÏto€obtain€specific€information€before€filing€a€complaint.€€This€statutory€provision€illustrates€theÏimportance€of€specificity.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿáùEG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒÑ ` Ñ›Ñ7€’XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÔ  ÔÑ€ÑØ ØÓ&€XÐd&Óœ›Þ ÞÌà@ àÔ€.¼Ôò òIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÔ€.XÔó óÌÌÌÌÌCONSUMER€ADVOCATE€DIVISION,à à)à àòòò òFOR€PUBLICATIONóóó óÌOFFICE€OF€THE€ATTORNEY€à àà à)à àò òFiled:ó ó€March€30,€1998ÌGENERAL,€STATE€OFà àà àà à)ÌTENNESSEE,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellee,à àà àà àà à)à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àTennessee€Public€Service€à àÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCommission€No.€96„01032€à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌH.€LYNN€GREER,€CHAIR;€SARAà à)à àà àÌKYLE,€DIRECTOR,€and€MELVINà àà à)à àà àà àà àÌMALONE,€DIRECTOR,à àà àà à)ÌCONSTITUTING€THE€TENNESSEEà à)à à€€€à àÌREGULATORY€AUTHORITY,à àà à)à àAppeal€No.à àÌÙ€!ÙœßR€120A1-j|þÿÂ` ç `€€@ÿRß›and€BELLSOUTHà àà àà àà à)à à01S01„9706„BC„00141ÌTELECOMMUNICATIONS,€INC.,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellants.à àà àà àà à)à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌà àÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellants€„€Greer,€Kyle€&€Maloneóó:à àà àòòFor€AppelleesóóÌPaul€C.€Ney€Jr.à àà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌGregory€Mitchellà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌDORAMUS,€TRAUGER€&€NEYà àà àà0 àÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àMichael€E.€MooreÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSolicitor€GeneralÌòòFor€Appellants€„€BellSouthóóÌGuy€Hicksà àà àà àà àà àà àL.€Vincent€WilliamsÌBELLSOUTH€TELECOMMUNICATIONSà àConsumer€Advocate€ÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àOffice€of€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌBennett€L.€RossÌBELLSOUTH€TELECOMMUNICATIONSÌAtlanta,€GeorgiaÌÔ€.„ÔÌÌà@ àO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ€.XÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌCOURT€OF€APPEALS€REVERSED.à àà àà àà àà àDROWOTA,€J.ÇÑ , ÑÓÓà àWe€granted€this€appeal€to€determine€two€issues:€(1)€whether€the€petition€toÏintervene€filed€with€the€Tennessee€Regulatory€Authority€(ð ðTRAðð),€by€theÏConsumer€€Advocate€Division€of€the€Attorney€Generalððs€Office€(ð ðAdvocateðð),Ïconstituted€a€written€complaint;€and€€(2)€whether€the€TRA€is€statutorily€required€toÏhold€a€contested€case€hearing€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint.Ìà àÌà àAfter€careful€consideration,€we€first€conclude€that€the€petition€to€interveneÏfiled€by€the€Advocate€in€this€case€did€not€constitute€a€written€complaint.€€ApplyingÏfamiliar€rules€of€statutory€construction,€we€also€conclude€that€the€TRA€is€notÏstatutorily€mandated€to€conduct€a€contested€case€hearing€in€every€case€in€whichÏa€written€complaint€is€filed.€€Accordingly,€we€reverse€the€judgment€of€the€Court€ofÏAppeals€and€reinstate€the€order€approving€the€tariff.ÌÌà@ àòòò òFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDóóó óÌà àOn€June€3,€1996,€BellSouth€Telecommunications,€Inc.€(ððBellSouthðð)€filedÏwith€the€Tennessee€Public€Service€Commission€(ð ðPSCðð),€a€tariff€introducing€threeÏnew€optional€local€exchange€service€packages€for€BellSouthððs€residentialÍcustomers.€€The€PSC€placed€the€tariff€on€the€agenda€of€its€June€25,€1996,Ïcommission€conference€and,€on€June€19,€1996,€gave€notice€to€the€Advocate€thatÏthe€tariff€would€be€considered€at€the€commission€conference.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€On€June€21,€1996,Ïthe€Advocate€filed€a€petition€to€intervene€in€the€commission€conference€pursuantÏto€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„4„118(c)(2)(A)€(1997€Supp.).× ƒ4 ××  ×€€The€petition€did€notÏinclude€specific€allegations€of€fact€as€to€why€the€tariff€was€unjust€or€unreasonable,Ïbut€rather€simply€stated€that€the€tariff€ð ðmay€prejudice€Tennessee€consumers.ððÌÌà àOn€June€28,€1996,€the€PSC€issued€an€order€approving€the€tariff€andÏdenying€the€Advocateððs€petition€to€intervene.€€On€July€9,€1996,€the€Advocate€filedÏin€the€Court€of€Appeals€a€petition€for€review€pursuant€to€Rule€12,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€ÏThe€TRA,€which€is€the€successor€to€the€PSC€with€regard€to€regulation€of€publicÍutilities€in€this€State,€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€the€petition€for€review€for€lack€ofÏjurisdiction.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€The€Court€of€Appeals€granted€the€motion,€concluding€that€it€had€noÏjurisdiction€to€review€the€order€of€the€PSC€because€the€order€did€not€arise€from€aÏcontested€case.ÌÌà àThereafter,€the€Advocate€filed€a€petition€to€rehear€the€dismissal€of€its€RuleÏ12€petition€for€review.€€The€Court€of€Appeals€granted€the€petition€to€rehear,Ïvacated€its€previous€order,€and€denied€the€TRAððs€motion€to€dismiss€the€appeal.€ÏIn€so€holding,€the€intermediate€court€stated€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àIt€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€that€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€65„5„203(a)€required€the€TRA€to€hold€a€hearing€because€the€[Advocate]Ïfiled€a€written€complaint€with€the€TRA€challenging€the€justness€of€theÏrates€proposed€by€BellSouth.€€Because€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€ðð€65„5„203(a)€required€the€TRA€to€hold€a€hearing,€thisÏCourt€has€jurisdiction€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€4„5„322(a)(1).ÌÌÓÓà àThe€intermediate€court€denied€BellSouthððs€request€to€reconsider€on€theÏgrounds€that€the€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€do€not€provide€for€motions€toÍreconsider.€€In€the€same€order,€the€Court€of€Appeals€reversed€the€PSC€order€andÏremanded€the€case€to€the€TRA€for€the€purpose€of€conducting€a€contested€caseÏhearing.ÌÌà àThereafter,€we€granted€BellSouth€and€the€TRA€permission€to€appealÏpursuant€to€Rule€11,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.,€and€for€the€reasons€that€follow,€nowÏreverse€the€decision€of€the€Court€of€Appeals.ÌÌÌà@ àòòò òSTATUTORY€CONSTRUCTIONóóó óÌà àIn€this€case,€the€Court€of€Appeals€held€that€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„203(a)€(1997€Supp.),€the€TRA€is€always€required€to€convene€a€contested€caseÏhearing€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint€and€the€intermediate€court€also€heldÏthat€the€petition€to€intervene€filed€by€the€Advocate€constituted€a€written€complaintÏwithin€the€meaning€of€the€statute.€€We€first€consider€the€language€of€the€statute,Ïwhich€provides,€in€relevant€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àWhen€any€public€utility€shall€increase€any€existing€individual€rates,Ïjoint€rates,€tolls,€fares,€charges,€or€schedules€thereof,€or€change€orÍalter€any€existing€classification,€òòthe€authority€shall€have€powerÏeither€upon€written€complaint,€or€upon€its€own€initiative,€to€hear€andÏdetermine€whether€the€increase,€change€or€alteration€is€just€andÏreasonable.óóÌÓÓà8 àÌ(Emphasis€added).€€ÌÌà àIn€this€Court,€the€TRA€and€BellSouth€argue€that€the€Advocateððs€petition€toÏintervene€does€not€constitute€a€ð ðwritten€complaintðð€as€that€term€has€been€definedÏby€the€Rules€of€the€TRA.€€Even€assuming€the€petition€to€intervene€had€been€aÏð ðwritten€complaintðð€within€the€meaning€of€the€statute,€the€TRA€and€BellSouthÏargue€that€the€€TRA€had€no€mandatory€statutory€duty€to€convene€a€contested€caseÏhearing.€€In€contrast,€the€Advocate€asserts€that€the€petition€to€interveneÏconstituted€a€written€complaint€and€therefore€triggered€a€mandatory€statutory€dutyÏon€the€part€of€the€TRA€to€hold€a€contested€case€hearing.€ÌÌà àIn€resolving€the€issues€in€this€appeal,€we€are€guided€by€the€followingÏgeneral€rules€of€statutory€construction.€€The€role€of€this€Court€in€construingÏstatutes€is€to€ascertain€and€give€effect€to€legislative€intent.€€òòCronin€v.€Howeóó,€906ÍS.W.2d€910,€912€(Tenn.€1995).€€Whenever€possible,€legislative€intent€is€to€beÏascertained€from€the€natural€and€ordinary€meaning€of€the€language€used,€withoutÏforced€or€subtle€construction€that€would€limit€or€extend€the€meaning€of€theÏlanguage.€€òòIdóó.€€We€must€avoid€strained€constructions€which€would€render€portionsÏof€the€statute€inoperative€or€void.€€òòState€v.€Turneróó,€913€S.W.2d€158,€160€(Tenn.Ï1995).€€Instead,€we€must€apply€a€reasonable€construction€in€light€of€the€purposesÏand€objectives€of€the€statutory€provision.€€òòIdóó.€€Finally,€a€state€agencyððsÏinterpretation€of€a€statute€that€the€agency€is€charged€to€enforce€is€entitled€to€greatÏweight€in€determining€legislative€intent.€€òòNashville€MobilePhone€Co.€Inc.€v.€Atkinsóó,Ï536€S.W.2d€335,€340€(Tenn.€1976).ÌÌà àIn€applying€these€general€rules€in€the€context€of€this€case,€we€first€observeÏthat€the€General€Assembly€has€charged€the€TRA€with€the€ð ðgeneral€supervisoryÏand€regulatory€power,€jurisdiction€and€control€over€all€public€utilities.ðð€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€65„4„104€(1997€Supp.).€€In€fact,€the€Legislature€has€explicitlyÏdirected€that€statutory€provisions€relating€to€the€authority€of€the€TRA€shall€beÏgiven€ð ða€liberal€constructionðð€and€has€mandated€that€ð ðany€doubts€as€to€theÍexistence€or€extent€of€a€power€conferred€on€the€[TRA]€.€.€.€shall€be€resolved€inÏfavor€of€the€existence€of€the€power,€to€the€end€that€the€[TRA]€may€effectivelyÏgovern€and€control€the€public€utilities€placed€under€its€jurisdiction.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€65„4„106€(1997€Supp.).€€The€General€Assembly,€therefore,€hasÏð ðsignaled€its€clear€intent€to€vest€in€the€[TRA]€practically€plenary€authority€over€theÏutilities€within€its€jurisdiction.ðð€€€òòTennessee€Cable€Television€Assððn€v.€TennesseeÏPublic€Service€Commððnóó,€844€S.W.2d€151,€159€(Tenn.€App.€1992).€€€€To€enableÏthe€TRA€to€effectively€accomplish€its€designated€purpose€„„€the€governance€andÏsupervision€of€public€utilities€„„€the€General€Assembly€has€empowered€the€TRA€toÏð ðadopt€rules€governing€the€procedures€prescribed€or€authorized,ðð€including€ð ðrulesÏof€practice€before€the€authority,€together€with€forms€and€instructions,ðð€and€ð ðrulesÏimplementing,€interpreting€or€making€specific€the€various€laws€which€[the€TRA]Ïenforces€or€administers.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„2„102€(1)€&€(2)€(1997€Supp.).€ÌÌò òÔ€6Ôà@ àI.Ô€.Ôó óÌà àActing€in€accordance€with€this€express€authorization,€the€TRA€has€adoptedÏcertain€rules€and€regulations€governing€the€filing€of€petitions€and€complaints€inÍthe€TRA€and€the€conduct€of€TRA€proceedings.€€Particularly€significant€to€thisÏappeal€is€the€TRA€rule€which€delineates€the€required€form€and€contents€of€aÏpetition€or€complaint.€€That€rule€provides:ÌÓÓà8 àPetitions,€applications€or€formal€complaints€to€the€[TRA],€òòwherebyÏthe€originator€of€same€desires€a€hearing€and/or€a€formal€order€fromÏthe€[TRA]óó:€a)€must€be€in€writing;€b)€signed€by€the€petitioner,Ïapplicant,€complainant,€or€by€their€duly€authorized€representative€orÏattorney;Ìà8 àòòc)€óóòòmust€contain€in€clear€and€logical€form€the€allegations,€statementsÏof€facts€relied€upon,€the€fact€or€thing€done€or€omitted,€together€withÏthe€citation€to€any€statutory,€order€or€rules€and€regulations€of€thisÏCommission;€d)€must€conclude€with€the€prayer€specifying€theÏparticular€relief€or€action€sought€from€the€Commission;óó€e)€name€andÏaddress€of€complainant€or€petitioner€and€their€attorney;€and€f)€ifÏapplicable,€the€name€and€address€of€the€defendant€or€respondent,Ïand€may€be€in€the€following€form:€€€ÌÌÓÓRule€1220„1„1„.05(1),€Rules€of€Tennessee€Regulatory€Authority€(hereinafter,Ïð ðTRA€Rules)€(emphasis€added).€€The€rule€is€then€followed€by€a€form€complaint€orÏpetition,€which,€in€one€section,€advises€a€petitioner€or€complainant€toÌÓÓà8 àstate€in€this€and€subsequent€paragraphs€the€matter€or€mattersÏintended€to€be€complained€of,€naming€every€rate,€fare,€charge,Ïclassification,€regulation€or€practice€the€lawfulness€of€which€isÏchallenged,€and€also,€if€practicable,€the€points€between€which€theÏrates,€etc.€complained€of€are€applied€and€other€acts€or€things€doneÏor€omitted,€as€may€be€necessary€to€fully€acquaint€the€[TRA]€with€theÏdetails€of€the€alleged€complaint€or€petition,€etc.ÓÓÌà àÌ€à àIn€determining€that€the€Advocate€had€filed€a€written€complaint€inÏaccordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„203(a),€the€Court€of€Appeals€made€noÏmention€of€the€above„quoted€rules€of€procedure.€€An€examination€of€the€petitionÏto€intervene€reveals€that€it€does€not€specifically€challenge€the€justness€of€theÏrates€contained€in€the€BellSouth€tariff.€€The€opening€paragraph€of€the€petitionÏrefers€only€to€the€need€to€convene€a€contested€case€to€ð ðdetermine€the€justnessÏand€reasonableness€of€the€filingðð€because€the€tariff€ð ðmay€prejudice€TennesseeÏconsumers.ðð€€It€does€not€contain€a€specific€allegation€as€to€how€or€whyÏTennessee€consumers€may€be€prejudiced€by€the€tariff.€€The€Advocateððs€petitionÏprayed€for€leave€to€intervene€and€participate€as€a€party€and€that€the€court€conformÏto€a€stay€issued€in€another€appellate€court€proceeding€in€which€BellSouth€was€aÏparty.€€The€petition€clearly€does€not€conform€to€the€measure€of€specificity€requiredÏof€formal€complaints€by€the€TRA€Rules.ÌÌà àWe€emphasize€that€these€rules€of€procedure€were€adopted€in€accordanceÏwith€an€express€legislative€authorization.€€Moreover,€the€specificity€required€ofÍformal€complaints€is€not€merely€a€matter€of€technical€form.€€Under€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€65„5„203(a),€ð ðthe€burden€of€proof€to€show€that€the€increase,€change,€orÏalteration€is€just€and€reasonable€shall€be€upon€the€public€utility€making€theÏsame.ðð€€In€order€to€meet€that€burden,€the€public€utility€must€be€specificallyÏinformed€of€the€nature€of€the€complaints€about€the€justness€or€reasonableness€ofÏthe€rates.€€A€vague€and€nonspecific€complaint€does€not€afford€the€public€utilityÏsufficient€information€to€allow€it€to€prepare€to€meet€its€burden€of€proof.€€Clearly,Ïthe€specificity€required€of€a€complaint€by€the€Rules€of€the€TRA€serves€anÏimportant€function.€€The€Court€of€Appeals€should€have€evaluated€the€petitionÏagainst€the€requirements€of€the€Rules€in€determining€whether€the€petitionÏconstituted€a€ð ðwritten€complaintðð€within€the€meaning€of€the€statute.€€As€weÏpreviously€observed,€the€interpretation€given€a€statute€by€a€state€agency€chargedÏwith€enforcing€the€statute€is€€entitled€to€deference.€€Clearly,€the€petition€failed€toÏsatisfy€the€specificity€required€by€the€Rules€of€the€TRA;€therefore,€we€concludeÏthat€the€Court€of€Appeals€erred€in€holding€that€the€Advocateððs€petition€to€interveneÍconstituted€a€ð ðwritten€complaintðð€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„2„3(a)€(1997ÏSupp.).× ƒ7 ××  ×€€€ÌÑ < ÑÌà@ àò òÔ€6ÔII.Ô€.Ôó óÌà àEven€though€we€have€determined€that€the€petition€to€intervene€filed€in€thisÏcase€did€not€constitute€a€written€complaint,€we€will€also€consider€whether€the€TRAÏhas€a€mandatory€statutory€duty€to€convene€a€contested€case€hearing€upon€theÏfiling€of€a€proper€written€complaint€because€the€issue€is€likely€to€arise€in€futureÏcases.ÌÌà àIn€our€view,€the€clear€import€of€the€statutory€language,€ð ðthe€authority€shallÏhave€the€power,ðð€is€that€the€TRA€has€the€power€to€convene€a€contested€caseÏhearing€if€it€chooses€to€exercise€the€authority.€€In€other€words,€the€language€usedÍby€the€General€Assembly€implies€discretion.€€Importantly,€the€statute€òòdoesóó€òònotóó€sayÏthat€the€TRA€ð ðshall€hold€a€hearingðð€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint.€€SuchÏlanguage€would€clearly€describe€a€mandatory€duty.€€Once€again,€our€role€is€toÏconstrue€statutes€consistently€with€legislative€intent.€€If€the€Legislature€hadÏintended€to€mandate€a€contested€hearing€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint,€itÏeasily€could€have€utilized€precise€language€to€accomplish€that€€mandate.€ÏIndeed,€in€other€portions€of€the€statutory€scheme€governing€the€TRA,€theÏLegislature€has€employed€such€mandatory€language€€requiring€the€TRA€toÏconvene€a€contested€hearing.€€òòSeeóó€òòe.g.óó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„209(c)€(1997ÏSupp.)€(ð ðthe€authority€òòshallóó€initiate€a€contested,€evidentiary€proceeding€toÏestablish€initial€rates€on€which€the€price€regulation€plan€is€based)€(emphasisÏadded);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„209(d)€(1997€Supp.)€(ð ðthe€authority€òòshallóó,€uponÏpetition€of€the€competing€telecommunications€services€provider,€hold€a€contestedÏcase€proceeding.ðð)€(emphasis€added).€€€The€absence€of€mandatory€words€inÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„203(a),€indicates€an€intentional€legislative€choice.€€òòStateÏv.€Harkinsóó,€88€S.W.2d€79,€82€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àMoreover,€other€related€statutory€provisions€support€our€finding€ofÏdiscretionary€authority.€€For€example,€the€General€Assembly€empowered€the€TRAÏto€ð ð[i]nvestigate,€òòupon€its€own€initiative€or€upon€complaint€in€writingóó,€any€matterÏconcerning€any€public€utility.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„4„117(1)€(1997€Supp.).€ByÏgranting€the€TRA€power€to€investigate,€the€General€Assembly€implicitly€grantedÏthe€TRA€discretionary€authority€to€determine,€after€investigation,€whether€aÏcontested€case€hearing€is€warranted.€€Also,€as€previously€observed,€the€GeneralÏAssembly€has€declared€in€no€uncertain€terms€that€ð ðany€doubts€as€to€the€existenceÏor€extent€of€a€power€conferred€on€the€[TRA]€.€.€.€shall€be€resolved€in€favor€of€theÏexistence€of€the€power,€to€the€end€that€the€[TRA]€may€effectively€govern€andÏcontrol€the€public€utilities€placed€under€its€jurisdiction.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ65„4„106€(1997€Supp.).€€Construing€the€statute€to€afford€the€TRA€discretionaryÏauthority,€rather€than€to€impose€a€mandatory€duty,€is€consistent€with€this€expressÏdeclaration€of€the€General€Assembly.€€Such€a€construction€will€ensure€that€theÏTRA€can€effectively€govern€and€control€the€public€utilities€placed€under€itsÏjurisdiction.€€Therefore,€we€hold€that€the€language€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€65„5„203(a)€does€not€impose€a€mandatory€duty€upon€the€TRA€to€convene€a€contestedÏhearing€in€every€case€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint.€ÌÌà àIn€so€holding,€we€disagree€with€the€Advocateððs€argument€that€the€lastÏsentence€of€the€statute€imposes€a€mandatory€duty.€€That€sentence€provides€thatÏð ð[i]t€shall€be€the€duty€of€the€authority€to€approve€any€such€increase,€change€orÏalteration€upon€being€satisfied€after€full€hearing€that€the€same€is€just€andÏreasonable.ðð€€€In€our€view,€that€language€delineates€the€duty€of€the€TRA€once€itÏhas€decided€to€convene€a€contested€case€hearing€to€consider€whether€or€not€theÏð ðincrease,€change€or€alterationðð€is€just€and€reasonable.€€That€statutory€languageÏis€not€relevant,€in€the€first€instance,€to€whether€the€TRA€has€a€mandatory€duty€toÏconvene€a€contested€case€hearing€upon€the€filing€of€a€written€complaint.ÌÌÌÌà@ àòòò òCONCLUSIONóóó óÌà àFor€the€reasons€herein€stated,€we€conclude€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€erredÏin€reversing€the€order€of€the€TRA€and€remanding€for€a€contested€case€hearing.€ÏAccordingly,€the€decision€of€the€Court€of€Appeals€is€reversed,€and€the€order€of€theÏTRA€approving€the€tariff€is€reinstated.€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àFRANK€F.€DROWOTA,€III,Ìà àà àà àà àà àJUSTICEÌÌÌò òConcur:Ìó óÌAnderson,€C.€J.,ÌBirch,€Holder,€JJ.ÌÌReid,€J.€„€Not€Participating