Verizon plans to file Sec. 271 application with FCC for Me. next ...

Va. was planned for Fri. and by end of March all state filings should be made. Assuming quick state action, Del. is expected to go to FCC in June-July, Va. and W.Va. in summer, Md. and D.C. in Aug.- Sept., he said. “I think we've gotten the systems thing down,” he said, noting that there hasn’t been as much discussion about operations support systems in recent Sec. 271 filings with FCC. Instead, TELRIC (Total Element Long- Run Incremental Cost) pricing has been focus of debate, he said. Asked which venue Verizon was targeting -- Hill or FCC -- in battle to win regulatory relief for broadband, he responded: “I don’t care if the decision is made in the courts, the FCC or the Hill, whatever forum is available. We're in all forums.” Because of opposition by Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. Hollings (D-S.C.) to broadband bill passed in House, Tauke acknowledged that “we have tough sledding” there. Asked whether Verizon would settle for weaker form of broadband relief if Senate were willing to do that, Tauke said “anything is an improvement over the status quo.” He said Hill action was preferable because Congress had more power to preempt states: “Congress can do it more cleanly and completely.” Tauke said he was uncomfortable talking about state preemption, being from company that was heavily regulated at state level, “but this is a national policy.” Crux of briefing was on state of competition in communications. Tauke and Asst. Vp Link Hoewing said there was growing trend toward substitution of traditional landline services through wireless, broadband, Internet services. Popularity of instant messaging by teens, as well as availability of easier-to-use IP telephony, is indication of even more substitution down road, they said. Verizon executives said company’s 2% drop in access lines last year was indication of that trend. Some of substitution is result of drop in 2nd lines as Verizon sells customers DSL service, Tauke acknowledged. But he said DSL sales didn’t fully offset access line loss because company still lost money on DSL, which was common with new technologies.