ACS Dismisses Critics of Bid to Declare GCI an ILEC in Anchorage Study Area
Alaska Communications Systems defended its FCC bid to have General Communication, Inc. declared the ILEC under Communications Act Section 251(h)(2), arguing GCI had supplanted ACS as the dominant service provider in the Anchorage study area. Cable groups and GCI opposing…
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.
an ACS petition didn't raise serious questions on the merits or legal analysis (see 1708080048) "so much as they impugn the supposed motive for the filing," said an ACS reply posted Tuesday in docket 17-181. "Rather than a punitive act, appointing GCI as the ILEC will ensure that Section 251(c) of the Act will continue to be satisfied. GCI is the only local exchange service provider in Anchorage with market power. Its dominance is a present threat to competition, and it may become an even greater threat if it is permitted to consummate its proposed merger with Liberty Interactive Corporation without meaningful safeguards." ACS also said it should be relieved of dominant carrier status and its Section 251(c) ILEC duties in the Anchorage study area without being required to make further, "duplicative" filings. Section 251(c) covers the additional obligations of ILECs for interconnection, unbundled (wholesale) access and resale.