State
regulators join forces in defense of UNE-P, states' rights
DEARBORN, Mich.,
Wednesday, Oct. 30 —
FCC chairman Michael Powell's office met with disapproval and resistance on
Monday, as state regulators from across the nation voiced opposition to any
attempt by the FCC to preempt states' rights to legislate critical
telecommunications issues within their states. Regulators from a dozen states at
a National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners ("NARUC") meeting
rebuked the recent notion by SBC and other Baby Bells that the Bells are losing
money on the unbundled network element platform ("UNE-P").
Wisconsin
commissioner Joe Mettner said the assertion does not correlate well with the
evidence. "There is recovery of costs. In setting costs there is cost of capital
consideration. There is profit margin. There is a return on equity," he said.
Unbundled network elements can and have been a profit center for the Bell
companies, he said. "The idea that they're not recovering even so much as their
costs is difficult to accept having looked at the evidence that I have."
The unified
consensus of the state regulators was that they have been zealous in their
states to ensure UNE prices in their states reflected reality. Regulators voiced
a coordinated call for the FCC to give UNE-P a chance to work before making
further changes. Repeatedly, state regulators said there had seen scant evidence
to support Bell company claims that UNE rates did not cover Bell company costs.
"California
and the other states have a critical role to play in deciding which UNEs should
be offered in their individual states in order to promote competition," said
Carl Wood, a commissioner from the California Public Utilities Commission.
"Given our long history of examining the cost of the phone network, state
regulators, we think, are intimately familiar with the conditions in their own
local markets. The FCC should not preempt the states in their efforts to
implement the Telecommunications Act of 1996." Wood added, "The FCC should not
preempt UNEs without input from the states….We think it would be a mistake to
make changes that would limit access to UNE or to the switching UNE."
"UNE-P is
important, there's no doubt about it," said Glen Thomas, chairman of the
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. He said that nearly half of
Pennsylvania's CLECs use UNE-P, "We've talked to several people who truly depend
on UNE-P as an initial mode of entry."
Michigan
Public Service Commissioner David Svanda reported that states have expended
great resources reviewing UNE rates and the need for unbundling. As a result, he
said the states were better positioned to create the record necessary to reflect
real market conditions. Contrary to
Bell
companies' pleas for removing UNEs, Commissioner Svanda said it is critical for
the FCC to provide the maximum flexibility for state action to add to the UNE
list.
North Dakota
Public Service Commissioner Tony Clark reported that 10% of the lines formerly
controlled by Qwest Communications were being served by competitors. Clark said
that would have been impossible without UNE-P. Clark said that Qwest, as with
the other Bell companies, earned a "very healthy" rate of return on investment
and equity. He said that in 2001, Qwest had a 26.76% return on investment and
that Qwest is recovering the entire stockholder investment in only North Dakota
approximately every four years.
So what
remedy is there for the Baby Bells if they believe they should be charging
higher rates? Laura Chappelle, Michigan Public Service Commission chairman, said
that if the Bell companies have an issue with the rates they can initiate a full
contested rate case. Apparently responding to the recent Baby Bell barrage of
anti-UNE legislation TV and newspaper ads, she added "and that really is the
court where they prove their claim-not through press releases."
Ohio
Commissioner Ronda Hartman Fergus the Ohio commissioners were in step with other
state commissions and NARUC: "…it's not practical to offer a one-size-fits-all
approach to UNE." Fergus said that state commissions should establish specific
rates and be able to amend the FCC's list of UNEs when specific cases require it
in the same way the FCC's total element long-run incremental cost ("TELRIC")
standards are implemented by the states.
NARUC
reported that the states collectively or individually had made 56 UNE-P
pleadings at the FCC. NARUC reported that UNE-P is an increasingly significant
part of competition, with 7.7 million lines provided using UNE-P in June 2002,
7.7 million lines in December 2001, and 4.8 million lines in June 2001.
The conference was also attended by FCC Commissioners Kevin J. Martin and Kathleen Q. Abernathy who said they wanted the FCC to build as clear a record on the issue as possible.
States represented by state commission members at the meeting included Alaska, California, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin.