WASHINGTON-A recent agreement by giant wireline telcos about how to reduce the charges long-distance companies pay to local exchange carriers to connect their customers’ calls may end up costing the wireless industry, said the Personal Communications Industry Association.
“Wireless is not part of the problem and shouldn’t be counted on as the blank check to pay for this problem,” said Angela Giancarlo, PCIA director of federal regulatory affairs.
PCIA will be critically looking at the proposal and will actively analyze it before forming any formal positions, Giancarlo said.
The agreement by the Coalition for Affordable Local and Long-Distance Service (CALLS) to make explicit how the universal-service fund is financed and to reduce access charges includes a proposal to shift $650 million into the USF. All telecommunications carriers-including wireless-pay into the fund.
CALLS is a coalition of wireline giants, including AT&T Corp., Bell Atlantic Corp., BellSouth Corp., GTE Corp., SBC Communications Inc. and Sprint Corp.
Although wireless associations were kept informed of the negotiations that led up the agreement, they did not participate in the negotiations. Wireless portions of the participating companies apparently were kept informed through internal channels. For example, Bell Atlantic Mobile was “aware of what we were doing through an Internal Management Committee,” said Frank Gumper, vice president for federal regulatory policy for Bell Atlantic. Gumper said he could not speak for BAM as to whether it liked the agreement.
The wireless companies have nothing to fear from the deal because of an earlier appeals court decision that would reduce the amount of money wireless carriers pay into the fund, said John Nakahata, former chief of staff of the Federal Communications Commission, who brokered the agreement.
Giancarlo disagrees, believing the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will only amount to interim relief. “It is like a tube of toothpaste. You can squeeze it from the top or the bottom, but it is still going to come out,” she said.
Wireless companies are sensitive to paying into the USF because they have not had much success in being able to withdraw from the USF.
Western’s quest
One of the reasons for the lack of wireless universal-service success is the difficulty carriers have had in obtaining eligible telecommunications carrier status.
The standard bearer for this effort, Western Wireless Corp., was told by one state it did not have jurisdiction to grant ETC status and had another state fine the incumbent local exchange carrier for turning off Western’s competing service.
The Public Service Commission of Wyoming on Aug. 13 said it did not have jurisdiction to give wireless carriers ETC status.
“The independent companies argue that the Wyoming Telecommunications Act of 1995 is the sole source of this commission’s telecommunications jurisdiction; it does not grant this commission jurisdiction over Western Wireless’ amended application and the proper forum for the amended application is therefore the FCC … The commission finds and concludes that this commission lacks jurisdiction in this matter,” said the Wyoming PSC.
On the other hand, the North Dakota Public Service Commission said Consolidated Telephone Cooperative Inc. had violated several rules when it shut off Western’s service earlier this year.
Western Wireless made news several months ago when it began offering wireless residential service-a hybrid mobile service-in Regent, N.D. The story got sticky when CTC shut off Western’s lines because it said Western had not received the proper authority to be a competitor.
On Aug. 31, the North Dakota PSC sided with Western and fined CTC $1,500. The original fine was $15,000 but $13,500 of that amount was suspended on the condition CTC “not have any further violations for a period of two years from the date of this order,” said the North Dakota PSC.
Additionally, the FCC received comments late last week on a Western petition regarding ETC status in South Dakota. South Dakota had denied Western’s request and Western has asked the FCC to overturn the decision.
