SBC said in a July 30 letter to the FCC that AT&T’s exclusive con...
SBC said in a July 30 letter to the FCC that AT&T’s exclusive contract with the Defense Dept. (DoD) should be examined. AT&T has petitioned the FCC to have its long distance calling card be classified as an information…
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!
service rather than a telecom service, which would prevent the carrier from meeting universal service fund and access charges requirements (CD July 26 p1). SBC said AT&T was engaged in “unethical and illegal acts” because it wasn’t collecting the charges on the cards, which are used by military personnel, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. “DoD should hold AT&T to the terms of its procurement contract and/or launch an investigation into whether the representations AT&T made in bidding on that contract, or AT&T’s performance under the contract, violate federal laws and regulations.” SBC said DoD would set a “dangerous precedent” if it gave the contract to suppliers that offer lower prices by violating the law. SBC said AT&T’s threat to raise rates would mask dodging of USF payments. SBC said: “Providers that play by the rules likely will seek a refund of their USF payments or copy AT&T’s charade.” AT&T has said that since the service includes a prerecorded advertisement, it’s an informational service. SBC disagreed. The letter was signed by Paul Mancini, SBC senior vp-asst. gen. counsel.