AT&T, MCI ask for new local access
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET NEWS.COM
November 23, 1998, 3:15 p.m. ET
AT&T and MCI WorldCom asked California regulators today to pry
open another piece of that state's local phone market, in a move that
could eventually shave a few dollars off local monthly phone bills.
At issue this time are local toll calls--calls made between cities such as Oakland and
San Francisco, which aren't far enough to be true long distance, but which are still
billed at a higher rate than calls made within the same city.
In California, these calls are usually handled by the dominant local telephone company,
Pacific Bell. Callers may use one of the long distance carriers by dialing a seven-digit
access code for a local call--but most simply dial 1 plus the area code for such calls.
The long distance companies say they want equal footing with the local
companies--without the need for callers to dial special access codes to use their
services. Regulators have already given them this power in 21 states, prompting a drop
in the prices of local toll calls there, as companies compete for business.
Do you want to know more?
View story in The Big Picture
Go to Message Boards
Search News.com
The issue stems from a provision in the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which says
states can break up the baby Bells' default access to these local toll calls as soon as the
Bells have won access to the long distance markets, or three years after the passage of
the Act, whichever comes first.
No baby Bell has yet won approval to enter the long distance market in its home
territory. The three-year anniversary of the Telecommunications Act is February 8, and
the long distance companies say it's time for state regulators to act.
"We didn't want to wait until February to say flip the switch, turn this on, knowing that
this would be a long process," said James Peterson, a spokesman for AT&T. "Our
goal is to raise the level of awareness and attention and let everyone know we're
serious."
For their part, Pacific Bell executives say the long distance companies shouldn't be
given the local edge until Bell companies are allowed to offer long distance service in
their own home markets. "Our position is that this is supposed to happen when we're
allowed into long distance," said Mike Moffett, a spokesman for SBC Communications
, Pacific Bell's parent company.
Potential rivals say, however, that the Bells are the cause of their own slow entry into
long distance. "They already have the power to get into interstate markets," said MCI
WorldCom spokeswoman Barbara Gibson. "All they have to do is open up their local
markets to competition. But they haven't done that yet."
Pacific Bell asked California state regulators earlier in the
year for approval to enter the long distance markets. Utility
commissioners said the baby Bell had yet to complete
enough of the items on a federal 14-point checklist
measuring how far it has opened its local markets to rivals.
In California, the long distance companies' request is
supported by the state's Office of the Ratepayer
Advocate, a consumer protection body affiliated with the
Public Utility Commission. The office has sent a letter to
the commission supporting the AT&T/MCI bid.
"We are clearly, affirmatively supporting the filing," said
Michael McNamara, senior manager at the Office of the
Ratepayer Advocate. "This would remove a substantial
impediment to competition for local phone service."
The issue is also percolating through regulatory bodies in other states. Peterson said
AT&T would bring the issue to the fore in any state where regulators haven't already.
"As a national company, it's in our best interest to have the same set of services
available wherever possible," Peterson said.
Monday's hearing in California was the first face-to-face meeting between
commissioners and the long distance companies on the issue. A decision could be
issued within the next several weeks. |
