Coincidental to Monday’s final ruling by the Iowa Utilities Board...

asked in August for input on a petition by alleged pumpers Great Lakes Communications and Superior Telephone for a declaratory ruling that state regulators lack standing to bring action in such matters. That bid for federal pre-emption is “another in a long series of misguided filings and presentations by traffic pumping local exchange carriers,” AT&T said. “Even a cursory review of the IUB’s written order indicates that the Petition’s predictions that the IUB’s written order would be ‘extraordinarily expansive’ and ‘flatly inconsistent with the rulings and policies of this Commission’ were wrong.” The Iowa board sees the LECs’ petition as “premature, based upon incorrect speculation, and without basis,” it said in a filing. USTelecom agreed in its filing, which urged the FCC to dismiss. International VoIP provider Futurephone wants the FCC to use its ruling on the matter to clarify “that domestic terminating access tariffs apply to services such as Futurephone’s, that Futurephone is an ISP or an ‘Enhanced Service Provider,’ and that inbound calls to Futurephone’s portal terminate in the U.S.,” its filing said. “Absent clear guidance from the FCC on this legal matter, we may be facing a long series of inappropriate rulings from various state regulatory entities as well as from state and federal courts.” Verizon and Verizon Wireless said in a joint filing that the FCC should “put an end to these disingenuous arguments by issuing an order or a declaratory ruling in its existing Access Stimulation NPRM proceeding holding that it is an unjust and unreasonable practice … for LECs to assess terminating interstate switched access charges on traffic that is subject to a revenue-sharing arrangement.” The alleged pumpers’ case for preemption is “patently absurd” and shows “contempt” for the agency’s integrity, Sprint said in its filing. Iowa-based RLECs Farmers Mutual Telephone, Interstate 35 Telephone and Dixon Telephone, which are parties to the utility board proceeding, filed joint comments saying the FCC should set ground rules for service to conference bridge companies and the associated access charges to interexchange companies. “It is imperative that the Commission provide the necessary guidance and determination which have formed the basis for the IXCs’ continuous refusal to pay the terminating access charges” they're due, the companies said.