WASHINGTON-The Federal Communications Commission would like to see wireless companies compete in the local exchange carrier market, but this is not likely to happen on a large scale, especially in rural America, if the FCC does not tell individual states that wireless carriers are eligible for universal service support, Western Wireless Corp. recently told the FCC.
Western Wireless has asked the FCC to “clarify the requirements that states must follow in designating [eligible telecommunications carriers] … The [FCC] should also consider designating wireless carriers as ETCs for federal support.”
Such a clarification could clear up issues such as what Western says is happening in Texas and Nevada. In these states the public service commissions have said wireless carriers are not eligible for ETC status because the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which opened up the LEC market to competition, did not envision wireless-to-wireline competition but rather wireline-to-wireline competition.
This issue is one of many Western has presented to the FCC for clarification. The company said it doesn’t expect the FCC to solve all the problems at once but does expect the agency to move forward on the issues. “Western acknowledges that it has pointed out many different issues and that the FCC can’t [solve all of these problems in the near future] but that doesn’t mean Western should sit back and wait … We have pointed out some areas that we hope the FCC will act on sooner,” said Michele Farquhar, Western’s outside counsel.
Western elevated publicly another issue that is holding up ETC status in South Dakota. Western Chief Executive Officer John Stanton implored the FCC to make a decision on a petition to grant Western interim operating authority for a section of rural South Dakota that is served by only one cellular carrier. The South Dakota case dates back to the lottery in late 1994 for cellular rural service areas. The lottery selectee’s application still is pending at the FCC. Western is precluded from offering service in an area where it does not hold a license but also cannot negotiate with the lottery winner because it doesn’t have the license either.
Because of the jam, Western last fall asked the FCC to grant it interim operating authority so that the area could be served by at least two cellular carriers. The FCC said it has never received such a request.
Stanton called such instances where the FCC has not acted “forgotten spectrum.”
The FCC expects to make a decision in the South Dakota case within the next year. “The Rapid City cellular license issue is an example of the backlog of items that are still pending before the [FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. WTB] has committed to [FCC] Chairman [William] Kennard that it will resolve these types of issues by March 1, 2000. However, many such issues will be resolved well before then and [WTB] is actively working to resolve this matter,” said Meribeth McCarrick, WTB spokeswoman.
Western has “a valid beef,” said Paul Misener, chief of staff to FCC Commissioner Harold Furchtgott-Roth. “As a result of our inaction, the thing is in limbo,” Misener said.
However, Misener said his boss does not think the FCC should tell the states who should or should not be ETC-certified. The telecom act gave the states exclusive authority over making that designation and the FCC should not overstep its bounds. “If we don’t have the authority, we simply can’t [give such clarification] … why would taxpayers pay bureaucrats to give advice?” he added.
