| STATE REPORT
|
| The following is a summary of State regulatory documents filed, and
State regulatory action performed, on behalf of Telecommunications Resellers Association (TRA) between mid- June and mid-July 1999. Sixteen filings were made in eight states. If you have any questions or would like a copy of any document discussed below, please contact us. Many TRA state filings may be viewed at TRA’s Internet web site, http://www.TRA.org. FILINGS Alabama - Proposed Amendments to the Telephone Rules of the Commission (Docket 15957) July 7, 1999 A request was filed with the Alabama Public Service Commission to place TRA on the service list in the Commission’s Cramming rulemaking, for purposes of submitting comments on proposed cramming rules. Arizona - US West Communications, Inc.’s Compliance with Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Docket No. U-0000-97-238, T00000A-97-0238) June 21, 1999 Comments were filed with the Arizona Corporation Commission in response to the Commission’s request for comment regarding appropriate OSS standards to be used in evaluating US West Communications, Inc.’s compliance with Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 for in-region interLATA market entry. TRA urged the Commission to develop OSS standards through a collaborative industry process. TRA’s comments included a recent White Paper, Evaluating OSS Availability: A Blueprint for Third Party Testing, prepared by the Competitive Telecommunications Association/ACTA, which outlines key components for effective OSS standards and evaluation supported by TRA. Massachusetts - Inquiry by the Department of Telecommunications and Energy pursuant to Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into the Compliance Filing of New England Telephone and Telegraph Company d/b/a Bell Atlantic-Massachusetts as part of its application to the Federal Communications Commission for entry into the in-region interLATA (long distance) telephone market (D.T.E. 99-271) July 6, 1999 A Letter of Participation was filed with the Department informing the Department of TRA’s intent to participate in the Department’s investigation into Bell Atlantic-Massachusetts in-region interLATA market entry proceeding. June 25 1999 A letter was filed the Chair and Commissioners of the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications (Department) and Energy urging the Department to hold Bell Atlantic-Massachusetts’ compliance filing under §271 of the Telecommunications Act in abeyance pending submission of a complete, independently verifiable compliance record. TRA argued that any purported BA-MA compliance which continues to impede or deny competitors an ability to provide functionally equivalent local services at a parity cannot be deemed in compliance with the Act. Massachusetts - Rulemaking by the Department of Telecommunications and Energy, pursuant to G.L.C. 166, §25A, and 220 C.M.R. §§ 2.00 et seq., to promulgate rules and regulations implementing the law protecting consumers form the unauthorized switching of local and long distance telecommunications providers as 220 C.M.R. §§ 13.00 et seq., (Docket No. D.T.E. 99-18) June 29, 1999 Comments were filed with the Massachusetts Department of Telecommunications and Energy regarding the Department’s proposed rules and regulations implementing legislation to protect consumers from the unauthorized changing of local or long distance service providers. TRA argued against the adoption of a proposed requirement obligating service providers to mail a notification to the end user confirming service provider changes within two weeks of the date on which a carrier change was confirmed through independent third party verification. TRA argued that the requirement has no basis in state or federal law, is of little benefit to the end user, is a burden on the service provider, and is needlessly duplicative of verification safeguards already in place. Missouri - In the Matter of the Application of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company to Provide Notice of Intent to File an Application for Authorization to Provide In-region InterLATA Services Originating in Missouri Pursuant to Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Case No. TO-99-227) July 6, 1999 A letter was sent to Mr. William Voight of the Missouri Public Service Commission Staff offering assistance to Staff in developing performance measurements to be used in the Commission’s investigation into SWBT’s in-region interLATA market entry. TRA’s letter included a recent Competitive Telecommunications Association/ACTA White Paper, Evaluating OSS Availability: A Blueprint for Third Party Testing. TRA urged the Commission to adopt OSS standards and evaluation metrics, consistent with the considerations proposed by CompTel, to ensure a complete and accurate determination of US West’s compliance with the Act. Montana - US West Communications, Inc. Centrex 21 Contractual Limitations (Undocketed) July 13, 1999 A letter was sent to Bob Rowe, Chairman of the Montana Public Service Commission, urging the Commission to institute a proceeding to institute “fresh look” contract provisions and investigate US West Communications, Inc.’s (US West) anti- competitive “Centrex 21” service contract practices. TRA specifically asked the Commission to: 1) institute a proceeding to implement a “fresh look” process that would enable captive US West customers to be released from pre-competition long-term contracts with the advent of competitive alternatives, and; 2) order US West to eliminate its unfair restrictions on Centrex 21 reseller contracts. TRA’s letter followed a letter by TRA member Essen Communications which highlighted a variety of concerns with US West’s Centrex 21 resale provisions. New York - In the Matter of Petition of New York Telephone Company for Approval of its Statement of Generally Available Terms and Conditions pursuant to Section 252 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and Draft Filing of Petition for interLATA Entry pursuant to Section 271 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Case 97-C-0271) June 17, 1999 Responses were filed to a Data Request submitted to TRA by ACI Communications Corporation under the New York Public Service Commission’s Section 271 proceeding. TRA forwarded to ACI a copy of the responses to Bell Atlantic-New York’s Data Requests. June 21 1999 A notice was sent to TRA CLEC members requesting specific information detailing member experiences with Bell Atlantic – New York for incorporation into TRA’s response to Bell Atlantic – New York’s federal application for in-region interLATA market entry anticipated in September. July 2, 1999 Members were notified of a date change in the Commission’s scheduled Technical Conferences Pursuant to a request by Bell Atlantic, the Commission has postponed the final technical conference. July 14, 1999 Responses were filed to a Data Request submitted to TRA by Cablevision Lightpath, Inc. TRA forwarded to Cablevision Lightpath a copy of the responses to Bell Atlantic-New York’s Data Requests. New York - Proceeding on Motion of the Commission to Re-examine Reciprocal Compensation (Case 99-C-0529) June 24, 1999 A letter was filed with the administrative law judge requesting that the Telecommunications Resellers Association be added to the Active Party Service List for the Commission’s Reciprocal Compensation Proceeding. July 8, 1999 A Brief was filed with the New York Public Service Commission urging rejection of the incumbent local exchange carrier proposals to terminate reciprocal compensation for traffic terminating to Internet Service Providers served by CLECs. TRA argued that the proposals ignored economic reality and were merely thinly veiled attempts to reverse long-standing Commission policy and to handicap emerging competitors. TRA argued that the proposals put forth by the incumbents were bad economic policy and bad public policy. Texas - Texas Public Utility Commission Limitations to disconnection of local telephone service Collaborative Workshop (Project No. 21030) July 14, 1999 Members were notified that the Texas Public Utility Commission scheduled a collaborative workshop to begin developing rules governing the disconnection of local exchange service for non-payment of toll services. State law (PURA Section 55.012) enacted earlier this year mandated Commission promulgation of local service disconnection rules which would prohibit disconnection of local service for non-payment of toll charges. Texas - Investigation of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company’s Entry Into the Texas InterLATA Telecommunications Market (Project No. 16251) June 24, 1999 Supplemental Comments were filed with the Texas Public Utility Commission regarding Southwestern Bell’s (“SWBT”) Revised Proposed Interconnection Agreement (“PIA”) and Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) associated with SWBT’s application for interLATA market entry. TRA argued that SWBT’s most favored nations (“MFN”) policy remains flawed, contradictory to federal law and federal regulations, and contradictory even to SWBT’s own MOU. TRA urged the Commission to find SWBT’s MFN policy an unjustifiable constraint of competitive carrier rights under §252(i) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Washington - In the Matter of the Petition of Advanced Telecom Group. Inc., Nextlink Washington Inc., Frontier Local Services, Inc., and Frontier Telemanagement, Inc., for a Declaratory Order or Interpretive and Policy Statement On 47 U.S.C. §252(i) and 47 C.F.R. §51.809 (Docket No. UT-990355) July 6, 1999 A Petition to intervene was filed with the Washington Utility and Transportation Commission for the purpose of participation in the Commission’s proceeding regarding the applicability of USC §252(i) and 47 CFR §51.809, the “pick and choose” provisions. Washington - Rules Relating to WAC 480-120-139, Changes in Local Exchange and Intrastate Toll Services (Docket No. UT-980675) July 15, 1999 Comments were filed with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission regarding the Commission’s proposed rules governing unauthorized changes in end- user telecommunications carriers ("slamming") in Washington. While generally supporting the proposed rules as being consistent with federal slamming regulation, TRA urged the Commission not to adopt a proposed rule making preferred carrier freeze offerings mandatory for all carriers. TRA argued that the provision was burdensome, impractical for resellers, and inconsistent with federal rules which do not impose mandatory freezes. TRA further cautioned the Commission to institute safeguards against incumbent reliance on freezes to engage in anti-competitive behavior by locking customers into the incumbent’s service by requiring the incumbents to tariff primary freeze options. |