20050621Comments.pdf

oM ~ t
' \
. I ,..,L.. II..."f
. .
ILED
Ii!r-!
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISS~ JIJN21 Ai"'1 ~:50
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF
WWC HOLDING CO., INC. DBA CELLULAR-
ONECID SEEKING DESIGNATION AS AN
ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
CARRIER THAT MAY RECEIVE FEDERAL
UNIVERSAL SERVICES SUPPORT
10;1\1'10 PUBLIC
ilL I TIES COf1t1IsS'rON
CASE NO. WST-O5-
VERIZON COMMENTS REGARDING THE FCC'S ETC REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission s ("Commission ) May 27, 2005
Notice of Request For Additional Public Comment, Verizon Northwest Inc. ("Verizon
provides the following comments regarding whether the Commission should adopt the FCC'
recently amended eligible telecommunications carrier ("ETC") standards and requirements 1 in
determining whether to grant ETC status to an applying carrier.
INTRODUCTION
On January 1 , 1998, Verizon was designated as an ETC by the Commission in Case No.
GTE- T -97 -12 for its service area. Verizon believes new regulatory burdens would not be
warranted because, as a wire line incumbent local exchange carrier ("LEC"), V erizon is already
subject to customer relations rules and to numerous financial reporting requirements established
by the Commission. Thus, Verizon is in a different situation from a wireless carrier or a non-
incumbent wireline ETC that is not already subj ect to these detailed requirements. Verizon urges
the Commission to not impose new, more burdensome requirements upon Verizon in order to
maintain its ETC status.
1 Report and Order In the Matter of Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service; CC Docket No. 96-45; FCC
05-46 (reI. March 17 2005) ETC Order
II. FCC ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS
The FCC has adopted additional eligibility requirements for ETCs that include:
providing a five-year plan that demonstrates how high-cost universal service support will be used
to improve coverage, service quality, or capacity in every wire center for which it seeks
designation and expects to receive universal service support; 2) demonstrate its ability to remain
functional in emergency situations; 3) demonstrate that it will satisfy consumer protection and
service quality standards; 4) offer local usage plans comparable to those offered by the
incumbent local exchange carrier in areas for which it seeks designation; and 5) acknowledge
that it may be required to provide equal access if all other ETCs in the designated service area
relinquish their designation pursuant to 47 USC 214(e)(4). ETC Order at 2. Although Verizon
supports the principles of competitive and technological neutrality as significant considerations
in the overall public interest analysis that the Commission must undertake for ETC designation
there are circumstances in Idaho that require a departure from the FCC's ETC eligibility
requirements at the state level.
First, because Verizon is already subject to detailed financial reporting requirements, an
additional requirement to provide a "five-year plan" showing what it would do with universal
service funds would be redundant and unnecessary. Second, the FCC's requirement for an ETC
to "demonstrate its ability to remain functional in emergency situations" would be unnecessary
because as an incumbent LEC with Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) responsibilities, Verizon is
already committed to maintain service in the face of weather and other emergencies. Third, the
FCC's new requirement for an ETC to "demonstrate its commitment to meeting consumer
protection and service quality standards" would be redundant with existing state customer
protection rules already in place in Idaho.Therefore there is no need for the Commission to
adopt this new FCC standard.Fourth, the FCC's eligibility requirement for an ETC to
demonstrate that it offers a local usage plan comparable to the one offered by the incumbent
LEC in the service areas for which the applicant seeks designation" makes no sense when the
ETC is also the incumbent LEC, such is Verizon. Finally, the FCC eligibility requirement for
ETC applicants to acknowledge that the FCC may require equal access in the event that no other
ETC is providing equal access within the same service area also is not applicable to an
incumbent LEC, such as Verizon, because it is already subject to equal access requirements.
However, if a CLEC ETC serves an area where equal access is not available, it should be ordered
to provide it.
III. FCC ANNUAL CERTIFICATION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The FCC has created annual reporting requirements for ETCs including: 1) progress
updates on its five-year service quality improvement plan; 2) detailed information on network
outages caused by emergencies; and 3) a count of unfulfilled customer requests for service and
number of complaints per 1 000 handsets or lines. ETC Order at 3. These requirements should
not apply to an incumbent LEC, such as Verizon, for the same reason that the underlying
requirements should not apply, as discussed above.
CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, the Commission should not Impose new, more
burdensome ETC requirements upon incumbent LECs, such as Verizon.
Dated: June 17 2005
2 IDAPA 31.41.01.