Verizon and the D.C. Public Service Commission continue to debate...
Verizon and the D.C. Public Service Commission continue to debate in FCC filings the problems the PSC perceives in the telco’s access recovery charge (ARC). PSC Chairman Betty Ann Kane faulted the FCC Wireline Bureau’s lack of action on her…
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.
earlier concerns. “Since the [bureau] has not acted, the Kane Application seeks a Commission determination of the question of whether a price cap ILEC can exempt all residential customers in a state from paying the ARC when the residential rate ceiling has been reached in only a few exchanges,” she said in a filing posted Friday in docket 12-9 (http://xrl.us/boaevd). Verizon dismissed the idea of Kane’s challenges earlier last week and referred to the PSC’s attempt to “inappropriately inject a policy dispute into this tariff proceeding” (http://xrl.us/boaevm). Kane compared D.C. with Virginia and looked at how certain differences affected the calculation of the ARC. “While it is true that there are no lost intrastate revenues to recover in the District, the purpose of the ARC is broader,” Verizon said. The PSC’s real dispute is with the FCC rules and not with the telco’s calculation of the tariff, the company said. Kane continued to say the way the ARC is calculated places an “unfair burden upon those customers in states where the Residential Rate Ceiling has not been met, since they pay a higher ARC to account for customers who could pay an ARC but who are exempted by the price cap ILEC."