NARUC PUSHED TO ADOPT BROADBAND POSITIONS REJECTED BY STAFF
State commission telecom staffs gathered for NARUC winter committee meetings in Washington refused Sun. to support broadband-related policy resolutions on access to local rights of-way-and on pending EchoStar takeover of Hughes in satellite deal. But in unusual move for NARUC, some state commissioners pushing for those resolutions said they would ask Telecom Committee today (Feb. 12) to adopt resolutions despite staffs’ disapproval.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Rights-of-way (ROW) resolution says while most local govts. are reasonable in their rates, terms and conditions for telecom access to their rights-of-way and public lands, “certain governmental entities” have imposed unreasonable and discriminatory ROW conditions that are impeding deployment of broadband and new narrowband telecom network facilities, creating potential barrier to competitive entry.
Resolution asks all govt. entities to consider carefully any plan that would charge telecom carriers above-cost compensation for local ROW and public land access. It asks all owners and managers of local ROW and public lands to provide prompt, nondiscriminatory access to requesting carriers at reasonable rates and terms, consistent with environmental stewardship and other management responsibilities. It calls for vigorous nondiscriminatory enforcement of existing ROW access laws, adoption of ROW access laws where none exist and review or reform of existing policy to ensure local ROW access isn’t barrier to broadband competition.
Resolution met defeat by 2-1 majority at staff subcommittee because of concerns language might be read as general indictment of local ROW management, as call for state preemption of localities’ ROW authority or as NARUC meddling in areas of state tax policy and state-local jurisdictional relationships that are outside state utility commissions’ scope of authority. Defeat came despite unusual direct plea for staff support by Mich. PSC Comr. Robert Nelson. ROW access is big issue in Mich., which has had several state court cases against localities, and pending state legislation (SB-880) that would preempt local ROW authority over telecom.
Language voted down by staff subcommittee was considerably milder than originally proposed, but still was unsatisfactory to some local govt. interests. After staff subcommittee meeting, Nelson of Mich. and Comr. Bob Rowe of Mont. PSC sat down with staff, other commissioners, industry and local representatives to try to craft more acceptable language that could be taken to Telecom Committee for vote today (Tues.).
Industry representatives urged NARUC to move forward with resolution, but rural incumbents urged inclusion of language addressing their ROW access problems with federal land management agencies. Local interests wanted changes in language on cost-based rates. Juan Oterro of National League of Cities said resolution “sets my members’ teeth on edge” because it appears to completely disregard legitimate reasons localities might have for using value-based, rather than cost-based, pricing for ROW access. Local interests expressed willingness to work with NARUC on issue and wanted inclusion of language calling for some kind of further discussion. Comr. Marilyn Showalter of Wash. Utilities & Transportation Commission said ROW resolution raised fundamental national policy question: “Should we promote broadband at all costs? This brings in a host of other economic and policy issues.”
Heated debate also flared Sun. around resolution on satellite deals, narrowly rejected by telecom staffs, that will reappear before Telecom Committee today. Resolution said states were concerned about effects EchoStar acquisition of DirecTV might have on broadband competition in rural areas and urged FCC to review carefully its potential effect on rural broadband market. Resolution ran into trouble at staff subcommittee because many states felt it was either improper or waste of state resources to get involved in policymaking area that was far outside states’ jurisdiction. Opponents also objected to tone of language for implying prejudgment that satellite deal invariably would harm rural broadband market. Supporters said NARUC should make its opinion heard because satellite decision could have direct impact on broadband providers that were under state jurisdiction. After staff subcommittee meeting, industry, staff and commissioners met to try to develop more balanced language regarding pros and cons FCC should consider. Question whether NARUC should take any position at all on that issue was left to Telecom Committee’s discretion.