Reacting to Utah Supreme Court decision last week (CD March 8 p7)...

high court backed earlier decision by Utah PSC, which had designated Western Wireless as ETC in nonrural areas served by U S West, with eligibility to receive state universal service support contingent on carrier not charging more than affordable basic rates. Court held it wouldn’t be in public interest to designate Western Wireless as additional ETC in rural areas served by incumbent carriers, saying designation would increase demands on state universal service fund without offsetting public interest benefits. DeJordy said 10 states had designated Western Wireless as ETC in rural areas: Colo., Ia., Kan., Minn., Neb., Nev., N.D., Okla., S.D. and Tex., as well as by FCC on Pine Ridge Reservation in Wyo. Western Wireless submitted “extensive” testimony in Utah PSC public hearing on public interest benefits realized in other states where multiple ETCs had been designated, DeJordy said: “The unfortunate thing about this case is that the consumer is the loser. We have clearly established in the states where we are providing universal service that there are extensive public interest benefits to competition, better prices, better service quality, new services.” DeJordy said it was “unfortunate that the Utah commission has chosen to ignore that and instead chose to protect the incumbent telephone company from competition.” One potential next step for Western Wireless would be to seek rehearing of case before Utah Supreme Court. More likely scenario would be to seek to clarify issues raised in case from FCC, although company hadn’t decided what it would do next, DeJordy said. Western Wireless could raise specific set of issues in Utah case or more generally ask FCC what relevant criteria should be for state commissions to consider in reviewing public interest in such cases, he said.