The FCC should deny a petition by 8 CLECs asking it to forbear fr...
The FCC should deny a petition by 8 CLECs asking it to forbear from applying deregulatory actions it took earlier this year in the UNE Remand Order, USTelecom said. In comments filed Mon., USTelecom said forbearance is the wrong…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
way to address the CLECs’ concerns. “The true nature of the filing is a request to revisit the Commission’s findings that were adopted or reaffirmed in its [UNE Remand Order],” USTelecom said. The association said forbearance is used to eliminate the application of regulation and in this case “there is no regulation from which to forbear.” Since the FCC decided not to require Bells to unbundle network elements the CLEC petition targeted, “a grant of forbearance from a rule that states a carrier is not required to unbundle certain elements cannot then require a carrier to unbundle those elements.” The CLECs’ March 28 petition asked the FCC to forbear from applying: (1) The wire center-based test for DS1 loop impairment if CLECs use the DS1 loops to serve “predominantly residential” or “small office” buildings. (2) The DS1 dedicated transport cap. (3) Eligibility criteria for use of Enhanced Extended Links (EELs). However, PaCLEC, a small CLEC in Pa., told the Commission forbearance from at least one of those limitations -- use of EELs -- would be a great help to “CLECs serving smaller communities expand their business in a cost-effective way.” PaCLEC said CLECs expand their business by installing a switch and using it to extend service in other central offices. “To grow a CLEC to a sufficient level to enable the installation of a switch” requires colocating in several central offices, the PaCLEC said. CLECs in smaller communities often can’t gather enough business customers in the new central offices to justify multiple colocations, PaCLEC said. EELs enable a CLEC to serve customers outside its colocated central offices before it’s economical for the CLEC to install its own switch, PaCLEC said. “Under the Commission’s existing regulations, however, EELS cannot be used by CLECs that are providing data service without voice service.” The CLEC petition was filed by XO Communications, Birch Telecom, BridgeCom, Broadview Networks, Eschelon Telecom, NuVox, SNiP LiNK and Xspedius.