Opposition to USTelecom Forbearance Petition Backed by Individual Consumers

We found more than 8,000 comments posted Aug. 28 through Thursday. Our spot checks of more than 100 found individual consumers and small-business owners opposing or concerned about the USTelecom petition. Our initial review turned up no individual in favor. The comments weren't form letters and often expressed appreciation for competitive services they feared could be harmed by FCC deregulation. The vast majority we saw came from California, mostly the Bay area, with many touting Sonic Telecom's service.

Incompas and allies asked consumers and businesses to share their stories and support for "more broadband choice," said a release. Incompas provided a website for submitting comments with "key points" suggested, but users had to write their own letters. "These consumers and small business voices join a number of states, lawmakers, consumer groups, schools, libraries, and the Small Business Administration (see 1808030026) who are speaking out to save the bridge to broadband," said CEO Chip Pickering. “We hope the FCC will listen to these thousands of customers ... and reject USTelecom's effort to cut off competition and raise prices."

USTelecom urged the FCC to grant the petition and forbear from requiring ILECs to provide CLECs with discounted leased access to incumbent systems as unbundled network elements (UNEs), among other obligations. The group said the 1996 Telecom Act's mandatory wholesale duties are no longer justified because ILECs are no longer dominant, serving 11 percent of the voice market. "Cable operators, wireless carriers, and others have stepped into the breach," said its reply comments. "Some CLECs contend that they require UNEs as a 'steppingstone' to deployment, but they provide no sense of how long they will need them before they are able to succeed in the marketplace without UNEs, as so many other providers have." USTelecom said critics mischaracterize and misconstrue the law and unbundling policy, and CLECs have no right to lease UNEs to provide broadband access -- an "information service" -- because unbundling was for "telecom service."

AT&T said the portion of consumers served through UNEs is "minuscule." CLECs "using unbundled loops account for only two percent of all fixed (wireline) lines -- a percentage that drops to one-half of one percent once wireless is factored in," it replied. "Competition is here, widespread, and durable. All that is left are the well-recognized harms associated with these requirements." Other ILECs filing support were Verizon, CenturyLink, Frontier Communications and Puerto Rico Telephone.

Initial comments were "nearly unanimous in concluding that USTelecom has failed to make a prima facie showing that forbearance ... is warranted under the Commission’s traditional forbearance analysis," replied Public Knowledge with the National Hispanic Media Coalition, The Utility Reform Network and two others. USTelecom "failed to demonstrate that enforcement of these regulatory requirements is not necessary," they said.

Incompas and three other competitor groups cited "overwhelming opposition" to USTelecom’s petition. UNE-based and resale services "provide vital competitive choices for voice and fixed broadband services and promote facilities-based investment, especially in underserved urban and rural communities," said their reply. "Oftentimes upgrading old lines that have been abandoned by incumbent carriers, [CLECs] are able to establish a customer base in underserved communities." Numerous other competitor interests opposed the petition, including state associations (from California, Michigan and Texas), Sonic, Uniti Fiber, Granite Telecommunications, GCI Communication, GeoLinks, U.S. TelePacific and others, and Access Point and others.

Opposition was also voiced by regulatory commissions of California, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts and Puerto Rico. Oregon's Public Utility Commission urged "careful scrutiny" and "market-by-market" analysis of USTelecom's request for "sweeping relief."