Verizon, AT&T and Qwest have to deal with questions on forbearanc...
Verizon, AT&T and Qwest have to deal with questions on forbearance rules, retention-marketing practices and other matters in a Sept. 30 letter from House Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, D-Mich. Dingell, who introduced HR- 3914 to abolish the “deemed…
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.
granted” rule, said the policy “perverts the forbearance process and does not serve the best interests of consumers.” He spoke out against the rule at a Telecom Subcommittee hearing in July (CD July 23 p1), but his bill hasn’t passed. The letter asked the carriers whether they have forbearance petitions that would come up between November and “well into 2009,” when only four commissioners’ positions probably will be filled. If that’s the case, is it “appropriate” for the FCC to allow deemed granted petitions without an accompanying written order,” Dingell asked. Verizon was asked whether its retention-marketing practices are “consistent” with section 222 (b) of the Communications Act, which prohibits carriers from using proprietary information received from other carriers for marketing purposes, the letter said. All the companies were asked whether they thought consumer privacy and retention-marketing provisions in the Communications Act should be changed. Noting Verizon’s possible plan not to maintain copper where it installs fiber (CD July 15 p8), Dingell asked the companies what their plans are in cases like that. Verizon was asked how it would reconnect customers to copper lines if they cancel fiber service and whether customers would have to pay the costs. The companies were asked whether the FCC should set a uniform rate for pole attachments and how it would be figured. On number porting, Dingell asked the carriers if a 48-hour interval for intermodal shifts is appropriate. USTelecom told the subcommittee in July that many of its members receive from competitors porting requests which “don’t fall within the four business day standard,” the letter said, asking the companies if they do, too. Would consumers be “well-served if the Commission established a two-day porting interval for the three largest incumbent phone companies,” the letter asked. Responses are due in three weeks. AT&T said it has no forbearance petitions pending. The company is reviewing the letter and “will respond accordingly,” a spokesman said. Verizon and Qwest said they were preparing responses to the letter.