SBC/Pacific Bell took exception to Cal. PUC’s recent proposed dec...

compliance conditions beyond those prescribed by Telecom Act and FCC for entry into state’s $11.5 billion interLATA long distance market. Pac Bell took issue with PUC’s finding (Case 93-04-003) that compliance with Point 11 requires that carrier implement automated enhancement to its number portability administration system to mechanically verify local customer has successfully migrated, ensuring customer doesn’t lose dial tone during transition between local service providers. Pac Bell said no Bell company to date has been required by FCC to demonstrate implementation of mechanized migration verification as prerequisite for Sec. 271 approval. Pac Bell also disputed PUC’s finding that removal of all restrictions on DSL resale by it and its DSL affiliate is mandatory for compliance with Point 14. Pac Bell said FCC expressly addressed DSL resale issue and “ruled that offering DSL transport is not a requirement” for compliance with Point 14. Pac Bell said it stands in full compliance with Points 11 and 14 as FCC has defined them. Cal. PUC also would impose 2 conditions relating to joint marketing and carrier selection processes to satisfy requirements of state law for authorizing Pac Bell as intrastate interLATA carrier. Those state-law-specific conditions, intended to ensure Pac Bell’s entry doesn’t impair intrastate interexchange competition, aren’t something FCC must consider in determining Pac Bell’s 271 compliance. PUC could reach final decision on draft order as early as Aug. 22. Meanwhile, group called Americans for Competitive Telecom (ACT) issued report concluding that Pac Bell’s Sec. 271 application should be approved because it has “fully complied” with 14-point checklist and other requirements of Telecom Act, and its market entry will benefit public. ACT is known for its “Making the Grade” reports on telecom competition.