Intercarrier Compensation Plan Moves Forward
Enough telecom industry representatives voted for a proposed intercarrier compensation plan to move it forward, NARUC’s Intercarrier Compensation Task Force said late Fri., which was the vote deadline (CD April 21 p1). NARUC said the task force now can review the plan. Meantime, the proposal may continue to go through “negotiations and refinement,” NARUC said.
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.
Task Force Chmn. Ray Baum of the Ore. PUC said NARUC encourages participants in the negotiations to keep talking “in hopes of broadening support” for the plan, which the group calls the “Missoula plan” because early talks took place in Missoula, Mont. The plan emerged in months of talks by a core group of 11 participants, representing a variety of firms and some associations, such as NASUCA. Baum urged participants to keep the plan’s contents confidential until “final details” are set, which he said would take 4-6 weeks. At that time the plan will be filed with the FCC, he said.
It was clear at our deadline that not all parties voted for the plan. NASUCA representative Billy Jack Gregg said his organization “is absolutely opposed to the… plan prepared by the rump group of landline carriers.”
CTIA voted against the plan early last week when balloting began, Paul Garnett, asst. vp-regulatory affairs, said. Among CTIA complaints: (1) The plan would “continue to include discriminatory points of interconnection and discriminatory forms of compensation,” for example setting higher rates for wireless-to-wireline interconnection than the other way around. (2) It would “significantly increase the size of the Universal Service Fund.” Garnett said CTIA supports NARUC’s effort and might be willing to continue talking. But the plan now is basically a “wireline proposal” that could add “more inefficiency, more regulatory distinctions,” he said. CTIA had hoped for one that encouraged efficiency, included non-discriminatory points of interconnection and was able to evolve as the industry changes, Garnett said.