OT> But like I said earlier, why should the Bells give up home turf, just to get a piece of sod somewhere else?
CAL. PUC STAFF SAYS PAC BELL STILL FLUNKS MOST OF SEC. 271 CHECKLIST
October 8, 1998 COMMUNICATIONS DAILY via NewsEdge
Corporation : After months of work with
Pacific Bell and other parties, staff of Cal.
PUC late Mon. reported that carrier still
hasn't complied with 10 of 14 points on
Telecom Act's local competition checklist for
long distance entry into state that has
nation's biggest telecom market. Pac Bell,
unit of SBC, said in response that PUC staff
wrongly discounted its many market-opening
efforts.
PUC staff said that after series of
informational meetings with parties,
preliminary assessment issued in July and 5
weeks of collaborative sessions this summer
aimed at finding solutions, Pac Bell still had
serious problems with ordering and
provisioning systems used by competitive
local exchange companies (CLECs), with
colocation requirements, and with dispute
resolution.
PUC staff said 5 main problems seemed to be
behind all of Pac Bell's noncompliance with
checklist: (1) Local interconnection
agreements "are not functioning as
commercial contracts but rather as playing
fields for constant litigious behavior" between
parties with unequal bargaining power. (2)
Pac Bell still treats CLECs as adversaries that
it has been coerced into serving. (3) Pac Bell
hasn't demonstrated ability to handle CLEC
service needs on mass-market scale. (4) Pac
Bell "designs solutions only to meet perceived
legal requirements of Section 271" rather
than making sincere effort to meet CLEC
needs. (5) Pac Bell is unable to produce
incontrovertible performance numbers to
prove that its systems and processes are
nondiscriminatory and fair to CLECs.
Staff report, which is 175 pages long,
includes many suggestions for bringing Pac
Bell into full checklist compliance. Among
major suggestions, staff said PUC needs to
reassert its role as neutral 3rd party with
authority to bring about timely settlement of
disputes, while Pac Bell needs to stop
denying its role as wholesale supplier to
CLECs and get on with serving CLECs as
co-carriers. Report also recommends Pac Bell
determine CLEC needs and requirements
before developing any new ordering
interfaces, develop multiple cageless
colocation alternatives, meet with CLECs to
develop solutions to white pages, directory
assistance and 911 ordering concerns.
Administrative Law Judge Jaqueline Reed will
take staff report, along with comments from
Pac Bell and other parties, and recommend
final list of Pac Bell 271 compliance actions
for adoption by full PUC at Nov. meeting.
Staff said that while it can recommend
solutions, only Pac Bell can take necessary
actions. If Pac Bell wants state endorsement
of its long distance entry, PUC staff said, it
must demonstrate compliance with Section
271's intent that local markets be open to
meaningful competition, "not simply that it
has implemented a specific set of corrective
actions."
In addition to key conclusions, staff said Pac
Bell isn't complying fully with Sec. 272
requirements for structural separation of
local exchange and long distance operations
because it hasn't separated personnel and
reporting relationships sufficiently, and has
insufficient safeguards against misuse of
proprietary customer information. In July
report, staff found Pac Bell in compliance
only on nondiscriminatory pole/rights-of-way
access, nondiscriminatory number
assignment, local dialing parity. In ensuing
months, said new report, Pac Bell also has
moved into compliance on reciprocal
compensation.
Pac Bell said it was "disappointed that the
staff report did not reflect today's highly
competitive [Cal.] market and the significant
progress Pacific Bell has made to open the
door to full competition." Company said it has
negotiated "hundreds" of interconnection
agreements, installed 600 colocation cages
for competitors at 150 central offices, faces
about 150 local competitors. Telco said it will
continue forward with its Sec. 271
application and over coming weeks "we will
document and prove we have met the
[Telecom Act] requirements."
AT&T lauded staff report for recognizing that
Pac Bell still is " woefully short" of meeting its
obligations to CLECs and for giving Pac Bell "a
clear road map of the many steps it must
take to open the local market to real
competition." MCI WorldCom said report calls
attention to barriers Pac Bell has erected to
thwart local competition, its attempts to do
bare minimum needed to gain long distance
approval, its inability to meet CLEC needs.
MCI applauded PUC staff for blazing path
that, "if Pac Bell chooses to follow," will bring
competition's benefits to all Californians. |
