It’s way too late to reopen Bell Atlantic-GTE merger as requested by WorldNet, Verizon told FCC in comments filed April 25 (CC Docs. 98-141, 98-184). WorldNet, CLEC that’s seeking interconnection in Puerto Rico, has asked FCC to apply merger conditions to Puerto Rican Telephone Co.(PRTC) in order to expand opportunities for CLECs there. Verizon said “extraordinary request” came months after Bell Atlantic and GTE were integrated under Verizon name and long after deadline for filing petitions for reconsideration. It said, “The Commission was… fully aware of Verizon’s ownership interest in PRTC at the time it approved the merger between Bell Atlantic and GTE” and yet adopted merger conditions that didn’t include PRTC. Another reason for turning down request, Verizon said, is that FCC “lacks the statutory authority” to expand merger conditions because “the conditions were voluntary to begin with.”
PanAmSat told FCC in filing Fri. that satellite companies still faced market access problems worldwide. It said privatization of Intelsat along with passage of Orbit Act “will not end” and “could well perpetuate” market access privileges it had enjoyed as intergovernmental organization. PanAmSat customers have asked local regulatory authorities for permission to uplink satellites in Bolivia, Central African Republic, Kenya, Senegal and Uruguay, only to be informed that Intelsat was only organization authorized to provide fixed satellite services. PanAmSat said Intelsat privatization would leave its market advantages intact. It said Commission and U.S. should adopt multifaceted approach to improving market access.
Key question in FCC proceeding on interactive TV (CS 01-07) is whether consumers with cable set-tops will be able to use “triggers” embedded in their broadcast TV signals, broadcast groups said in joint ex parte filing Tues. They said cable modem services had preserved openness, but sought assurances that same would be true in next-generation boxes. “Consumers must remain free to access any [Web] site of their choice,” said filing by ALTV, Disney, MSTV, NAB, Univision, USA Networks.
FCC indecency enforcement should be major topic of confirmation hearings for new Commission nominees, Morality in Media said in letter to members of Congress. Group also said other Senate and House hearings should be held on issue, particularly since TV stations “might as well have diplomatic immunity” on indecency complaints. It said no TV station had been fined in 20 years, and even radio station fines for indecency were rare: “It would appear that the FCC issues just enough [fines] relating to indecent radio broadcasts to deflect most criticism, but never enough in numbers and in amounts to deter indecent programming.”
Ex-FCC Chmn. William Kennard has joined Carlyle Group, private equity firm, as managing dir. of group’s telecom and media practice. Kennard said job would give him opportunity to forward his long-time goal of “expanding communications opportunities worldwide.”
Tentative witness list for Wed. (May 2) Senate Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee hearing on Telecom Act’s impact on competition: Former FCC Chmn. Reed Hundt, senior advisor, McKinsey & Co.; Tex. PUC Chmn. Patrick Wood; Cox Communications CEO James Robbins; Time Warner Telecom CEO Larissa Herda; AT&T Pres. David Dorman. Hearing is 2 p.m. in Dirksen 226.
Under then Chmn. Reed Hundt, FCC was “the most intensely regulatory” of broadcasting of any Commission in the 23 years that former Comr. James Quello was on Commission, Quello said in his new book, My Wars: Surviving WWII and the FCC. “The difference in the way Chairman Hundt and I viewed the First Amendment can be summed up in two sentences,” Quello said. “I see the Bill of Rights as a limitation upon government action; Chairman Hundt apparently saw it as a regulatory mission statement. Second, I considered freedom of expression to be the result of the government’s abstention from editorial decision-making; Chairman Hundt evidently saw it as a gift to be bestowed by politically appointed bureaucrats.” Person Quello called “Attila the Hundt” probably got more mentions in Quello’s book than any other, although it’s studded with mentions of hundreds of others that will be familiar to communications industry. It criticizes Hundt, among other things, for “assumption of unilateral power” at FCC, claiming public interest values were supported by First Amendment, being inflexible on kidvid, pressing FCC indecency actions. Book also repeats many of stories that Quello has used in his speech- making, as well as including detailed analysis of First Amendment and its effect on industry. He devoted nearly half of book to his World War II and broadcasting experiences (before joining FCC), saying that even though FCC can be “blood sport,” his war experiences put it into perspective. Book, just under 150 pages, is available from Alexis de Tocqueville Institution in Arlington, Va.
Mo. PSC suspended for 4 months Southwestern Bell Telephone (SBT) proposed tariff change to introduce 24-cent “payphone use charge” on all calls placed from its payphones using credit cards, prepaid or postpaid calling cards, 3rd-number billing or collect calling. PSC staff said fee would violate terms of SBT price cap regulation agreement that bans increases above current cap levels on local services, including payphones, without cost justification. SBT said fee wasn’t rate increase, just cost recovery mechanism to recoup cost of per-call compensation FCC requires incumbent telcos to pay to other payphone service providers and that FCC expressly allows to be passed on to phone users. PSC said main issue was whether usage fee was appropriate under price cap agreement. Intervenor registration deadline is May 16.
White House formally sent nominations of 2 new FCC Commissioners to Senate. As previously announced, appointees are Kathleen Abernathy, who will fill Comr. Furchtgott-Roth’s slot (5 years from last July 1), and Kevin Martin, who takes former Chmn. William Kennard’s position (5 years from this July 1). Chmn. Powell was nominated last week for an additional 5 years, beginning next July 1. Slate of nominees didn’t include Mike Copps, who White House has said will fill vacant Democratic seat. His name still is expected to be included before Commerce Committee reports nominations.
Holding that municipalities had “very limited and proscribed role” in regulating telecommunications, 9th U.S. Appeals Court, San Francisco, last week struck down telecom ordinances of Auburn and more than dozen other Wash. cities that, among other things, required telecom providers to pay application fees, file detailed disclosure of matters such as maps, corporate policies and financial and technical qualifications and provide cities with network capacity. In challenge to ordinances brought by Qwest, court ruled that Sec. 253 of Telecom Act barred all state and local regulations that “prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting” any company’s ability to provide telecom services unless regulations fell with statute’s “safe harbor” provisions relating to local regulation of rights-of-way. “The preemption is virtually absolute and its purpose is clear -- certain aspects of telecommunications regulations are uniquely the province of the federal government and Congress has narrowly circumscribed the role of state and local governments in this arena,” court said. Three-judge panel conceded that Act didn’t define management of public rights-of-way, but said it relied, as several federal courts had done, on FCC interpretation as meaning “control over rights-of-way itself, not control over companies with facilities in the rights-of-way.” Finding that several provisions violated Sec. 253, court struck down: (1) Requirement that companies submit lengthy and detailed application form to enable cities to determine financial soundness, technical qualifications and legal ability to provide telecom services. Such requirements aren’t related to regulation of public rights-of-way, court said. “The upshot of the application process is to regulate the provision of telecommunications services rather than to regulate the rights-of- way.” (2) Requirements for reporting transfer of ownership and stock. Although cities may want to “have a right to know” who owns shares in the telecom companies that use rights-of-way, court said, municipal regulation of stock transfers “extends far beyond management of rights-of-way.” (3) Requirements that franchisees offer “most-favored-community” statutes (best available rates and terms) and provide free or excess capacity for use of cities. Those requirements bear no relation to rights-of-way management, but focus solely on rates, terms and conditions of service, court said. (4) Provisions giving cities “unfettered” discretion to grant, deny or revoke franchise based on “unnamed factors.” Grant went far beyond limits of anything city deemed to be in public interest, court said, holding that such ordinances were too vague and too broad to comply with Sec. 253. Referring to cities’ argument that stock ownership was linked to company’s financial well-being that ultimately could affect its use of rights-of-way, court said: “Under this semantic 2-step, Sec. 253 will have no limiting principle. The safe harbor provisions would swallow whole the broad congressional preemption. Municipalities could regulate nearly any aspect of the telecommunications business.”