SBC/Ameritech’s interLATA long distance entry bids in Ohio and Il...
SBC/Ameritech’s interLATA long distance entry bids in Ohio and Ill. are encountering new obstacles. Group of 9 Ohio CLECs filed motion with Ohio PUC for dismissal or suspension of Ameritech’s Sec. 271 case. They said Ameritech’s May 31 proposal…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
to double rates for many unbundled network elements (UNEs) and residential UNE platforms (UNE-Ps), if granted, would reverse recent competitor gains by putting wholesale rates higher than Ameritech’s retail rates. CLECs said FCC rules for approval of Sec. 271 applications required that local market be irreversibly open, and proposed increase effectively would close market. CLECs urged dismissal on ground that Ameritech hadn’t met Telecom Act requirements, or at least suspend 271 case until PUC ruled on Ameritech’s UNE rate increases. In related matter, Ohio PUC refused to reconsider May decision imposing $8.5 million penalty on Ameritech for wholesale and retail service-quality shortfalls in 1999-2001 and reducing its monthly recurring rate for residential loop UNE-P to $11.64 from $13.14. In Ill., KPMG Consulting told Ill. Commerce Commission (ICC) that its tests of Ameritech’s operation support systems (OSS) wouldn’t be completed by current Sept. 20 target. KPMG said it couldn’t predict when tests would be completed. Tests originally were to have been finished in May. KPMG officials said testing was designed to continue until Ameritech passed, but Ameritech still hadn’t met “dozens” of standards, in some cases missing by wide margins. KPMG said misses included Ameritech failure to provide CLECs with accurate updates on customer service records and directory listings, deficiencies in providing timely and accurate responses during tests of order processing, inconsistent handling of CLEC reports of line troubles. KPMG said part of problem was that Ameritech often disagreed with KPMG over test procedures, nature of measurements and whether results should be counted as meeting standards. Ameritech said it had legitimate differences with KPMG over how tests were being conducted and had asked ICC staff to intervene on some matters. Ameritech said it had paid $27 million on KPMG’s tests in its 5 states, and criticized KPMG for poor coordination between Ill. tests and those it was performing in other Ameritech states.