NARUC urged FCC to deny Verizon Wireless petition for permanent f...

Letter, signed by NARUC Gen. Counsel Bradford Ramsay, said Verizon petition didn’t provide any factual basis justifying forbearance. “Indeed, the only limited empirical evidence available suggests strongly that WNP would significantly enhance, at a minimum, wireless-to- wireless competition,” letter said. Press reports frequently note hesitancy of wireless customers to change carriers because they don’t want to change telephone numbers, even when they are unhappy about service, NARUC said. “Since the Commission first adopted its wireless number portability requirement in 1996, the wireless industry has asked for and received repeated extensions” of Nov. 24, 2002, deadline, letter said. “It is no surprise that they have again sought another extension, albeit on the basis of only ‘recently discovered’ back-office implementation problems and speculative cost estimates.” If FCC decides to approve Verizon petition, it should at least maintain related requirement that wireless number pooling begin as scheduled, letter urged. Pooling is set for same Nov. 24, 2002, deadline. FCC also should “at a minimum,” require wireless carriers “to provide the estimated additional costs that they would experience from porting,” NARUC said. It urged agency to “solicit data on the value wireless customers place on their telephone numbers.” Letter was stimulated by resolution passed at NARUC’s recent convention in Philadelphia that opposed Verizon petition, Ramsay said in letter.