Commenters Agree: FCC Should Drop Proposal to Deregulate Access Charges
NTCA, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) and other commenters told the FCC last week that they dislike a proposal to deregulate telephone access charges more now than they did five years ago, when the agency last sought comment (see 2008050030).
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!
In 2020, the states and industry slammed proposals in an NPRM approved during the first Trump administration. The latest round of comments is aimed at refreshing the record in light of a changing industry (see 2506110029). Replies were due Thursday in docket 20-71.
Mandatory detariffing would hurt both carriers and their subscribers, NTCA said. Detariffing of subscriber line charges (SLCs) and access recovery charges (ARCs) would “increase regulatory uncertainty and create new burdens and confusion for providers and consumers alike.” The group estimated that rural local exchange carriers will recover nearly $185 million through SLCs and ARCs during the current annual tariff cycle.
“Providers would need to look to alternative intrastate methods of revenue recovery that may be practically unavailable, or they would need to explain to customers that ‘we have eliminated this charge over here, but created this new charge over here,’” NTCA said. For smaller providers investing in their networks and delivering services in high-cost rural markets, “regulatory stability and certainty are essential to sustainability, and the implications of regulatory changes must be considered in the context of broader public policy objectives such as universal service.”
Nearly all commenters either oppose the FCC’s proposals outright or suggest major changes, NARUC noted. The top proposal in comments filed in 2020 was the creation of a separately listed interstate surcharge replacing the existing ones that the NPRM suggested eliminating, the group said. “The addition of a brand new separate federal surcharge is unlikely to decrease any alleged consumer confusion -- a confusion documented nowhere in the record of this proceeding.”
The New York Public Service Commission noted that many state regulators complained in 2020 that they had no way of allowing providers to recover interstate access charges through increases in intrastate rates. “That concern remains valid today,” the commission said. “Since 2020, there have been no changes to intrastate rate regulation in New York, and the initial comments” on the current notice “confirm that many other states still lack full rate flexibility.”
The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission said its views haven’t changed since it opposed the proposals in the original NPRM. It “continues to strongly recommend either that the NPRM be abandoned entirely, or that the issues” raised “be referred to the consultative process of the Joint Federal-State Joint Board on Separations and the Joint Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service.”
USTelecom said in the earlier comment round that access charges targeted by the FCC apply to legacy phone service, which is being phased out. "A continued shift away from tariffed legacy services to detariffed services will occur naturally," the group said. "Prematurely" mandating the elimination of access charges “could actually delay this evolution as carriers would need to devote resources to detariffing efforts rather than developing and deploying next-generation networks and advanced communications services.”