FCC Chmn. Powell and Comr. Abernathy applauded an agreement SBC and Sage Telecom reached on access to unbundled network elements (UNEs) over the weekend. Calling the 7-year deal that covers all 13 states comprising SBC’s local phone territory “an encouraging sign,” Powell said the agreement demonstrated that “commercial, market-based agreements can be accomplished. I hope this paves the way to further negotiations and contracts -- so that America’s telephone consumers have the certainty they deserve.”
Customs Duty
A Customs Duty is a tariff or tax which a country imposes on goods when they are transported across international borders. Customs Duties are used to protect countries' economies, residents, jobs, and environments, by limiting the flow of imported merchandise, especially restricted and prohibited goods, into the country. The Customs Duty Rate is a percentage determined by the value of the article purchased in the foreign country and not based on quality, size, or weight.
The Justice Dept., FBI and Drug Enforcement Administration petitioned the FCC last week to launch a rulemaking to resolve outstanding Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) issues. They argued that even if broadband access providers and IP telephony operators aren’t deemed telecom carriers under the Communications Act, they could still fall under a broader definition of telecom carriers under CALEA.
Competitors quickly criticized FCC Chmn. Powell’s call Wed. for industry negotiations on competitive use of UNEs to replace rules a federal court threw out last week (CD March 3 p1) and expressed even more concern that Powell’s comments signaled a proposal to phase out the UNE-P option. Speaking at NARUC’s meeting in Washington, Powell suggested that the industry try to negotiate UNE terms for 30 days, and if that doesn’t work, “I will propose to my colleagues that the FCC adopt an interim set of rules to protect against precipitous disruptions that might result after day 60 because of the court’s ruling.”
State regulators are struggling to untangle the effects of the U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., ruling that struck down the FCC’s Triennial Review Order (TRO) delegation to the states of authority to determine the competitive need for network unbundling (CD March 3 p1). Some state regulators told us the states should continue with their TRO cases, while others said the state reviews should either be discontinued or refocused.
As state lawmakers get down to the serious business of their 2004 sessions, regulatory reform bills advanced in 6 states. They would alter PSC procedures and deregulate phone rates.
With demand for VoIP services increasing in Europe, govts. at both the pan-European and national level are beginning to focus on whether -- and how -- IP-based telephony should be regulated. The U.K. Office of Communications (OFCOM) has set a meeting later this month on regulatory and consumer protection issues involving Voice- over-Broadband (VoB). A recently announced March 15 European Commission (EC) workshop will review a 187-page report on VoIP and related convergent services. Both bodies say the key issue is ensuring VoIP doesn’t hamper consumer access to emergency services.
The 2004 state legislative sessions have seen introduction of bills in Hawaii, Wash., Colo. and Ida. to change the makeup of state commissions or the scope of their duties. Meanwhile, carphone safety bills are moving in Colo., Md. and Utah.
The FCC called for comments on a petition by ASAP Paging for preemption of a Tex. PUC’s order on retail rating of local calls to commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) carriers. The Tex. Commission had ruled in favor of CenturyTel, an ILEC, which had changed its switch translations so end users calling ASAP customers were required to dial 1+ and assessed intraLATA toll charges by CenturyTel. However, ASAP said the order: (1) Deprived it and consumers of several CMRS-related rights guaranteed by federal law. (2) Confused the essential distinctions between retail rating and wholesale carrier compensation. (3) Misconstrued the character of expanded local calling service (ELCS) and the duties of ILECs serving ELCS areas. (4) Made wrong conclusions about state regulatory authority over the service that ASAP provided to its Internet service provider customers. Comments are due March 23, replies April 23 (WC Doc. 04-6).
The U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., rejected a challenge Tues. from a wireless consumer who argued that the Communications Act barred mobile operators from offering unadvertised deals to lure customers. Citing special deals used by Verizon Wireless in Cleveland, consumer Jacqueline Orloff contended the Act’s prohibitions against unjust and unreasonable rates meant carriers couldn’t tempt subscribers with unadvertised offers. But the court disagreed, saying: “Haggling is a normal feature of many competitive markets. It allows consumers to get the full benefit of competition by playing competitors against each other.”
In briefs challenging the FCC’s Triennial Review Order, USTA and the Bells urged the U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., to end the Commission’s unbundling regime and enforce the court’s 2 prior mandates to the agency. “Once again, the FCC has failed to follow the law and the courts’ mandate as it continues to force artificial competition on an already dynamic, competitive telecommunications market,” USTA Pres. Walter McCormick said. Oral argument in USTA v. FCC is set for Jan. 28.