FCC didn’t do ’thorough analysis’ of cost data before voting to l...

required to carefully weigh ILECs’ forward-looking costs before determining whether SLC should be raised. However, “a significant number of carriers” submitted incomplete or questionable data and FCC didn’t do “its own independent analysis,” he said in dissenting statement. For example, he said, some carriers “submitted summary data without disclosing the inputs used, cost models that were not transparent or, in some cases, models that have been rejected by the state commissions.” In addition, he said, National Assn. of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA) filed data to show why cap shouldn’t increase, but used model that FCC “has cautioned may have limits in establishing costs.” Copps said there may be case for increasing cap because “in all probability, there are many areas of the country in which forward-looking costs exceed $5 [former cap].” However, “we need to obtain the data and conduct our analysis before we act,” he said. Copps said he also was concerned about disparities in line charges between rural and urban consumers. Bells have flexibility to vary those charges, and Copps said he would like Commission to take closer look at resulting geographic disparities. Order released late Wed. concluded that “even the most conservative estimate of forward-looking costs shows that a substantial number of lines exceed both the current $5 SLC cap and the… $6.50 SLC cap” set to go into place next year. FCC said that raising cap didn’t mean SLC would rise for all customers. Consumers Union (CU) said Congress should investigate whether FCC action complied with Telecom Act. Consumers were promised more local competition in return for deregulation but haven’t seen it, group said. “People are paying more for local phone service but we don’t see any real competition.” CU said that 2 years ago, SLC was only $3.50 per month and next year it’s scheduled to rise to $6.50 -- 86% increase in 3 years. “The little guy really got the short end of the stick in this case,” said Michael Travieso, Md. People’s Counsel and chmn. of NASUCA’s Telecom Committee. FCC action “will unnecessarily increase local telephone costs,” he said.