Calling Upon State and Federal Regulators To Require Strict Proof That The
Local Telecommunications Market Is Open To Competition
Before Granting A Bell Operating Company’s Request
To Provide In-Region InterLATA Service
WHEREAS, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Act) has as its primary purpose the opening of all telecommunications markets to effective competition;

WHEREAS, to implement its competitive policies the Act sets forth a statutory scheme to open the monopoly local exchange to local competition through interconnection, resale and unbundled access;

WHEREAS, the Act requires that all barriers to entry to any telecommunications market be removed, with the exception that Bell operating company entry into in-region interLATA service be prohibited until certain competitive conditions set forth in Section 271 of the Act are met;

WHEREAS, since the Act recognizes that competition in all telecommunications markets is desirable, it specifically requires that the local service monopoly must meet certain minimal competitive conditions before a Bell enters the interLATA market;

WHEREAS, the promise of interLATA entry is a very significant incentive for a Bell operating company to open its network to competition;

WHEREAS, premature entry would provide a Bell operating company with a distinct competitive advantage over potential entrants because of its market power in the local exchange, its ability to bundle long distance and local services, and its ability to cross subsidize competitive and non-competitive services;

WHEREAS, premature entry into the interLATA market would provide a Bell operating company with very strong incentives to delay opening its network to competition and to impede the development of local competition;

WHEREAS, the public interest requires that local markets are opened to effective competition before a Bell operating company is permitted interLATA entry pursuant to Section 271 of the Act;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that NASUCA calls upon state and federal regulators to scrutinize Bell operating company requests for interLATA entry pursuant to Section 271 and require each Bell operating company to demonstrate: that an interconnection agreement is in place with an operational facilities based competitor providing alternative basic local service to residential and business customers; that the Bell operating company has met the Section 271(c)(2)(B) checklist in such a way that each checklist item is commercially available and equally accessible to all facilities based local competitors; and that residential and business consumers throughout the Bell operating company’s service area have a choice of carriers that provide local services comparable in price and quality to the Bell operating company’s local services.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NASUCA calls upon state regulators to develop an adequate record to verify that Section 271 conditions have been met so that the Department of Justice and the FCC can properly perform their responsibilities under the Act regarding a determination that all Section 271 conditions have been met.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NASUCA authorizes its Executive Committee to develop specific positions and to take appropriate actions consistent with the terms of this resolution. The Executive Committee shall advise the membership of any proposed action prior to taking action if possible. In any event the Executive Committee shall notify the membership of any action pursuant to this resolution.

Approved by NASUCA:

Charleston, South Carolina

June 11, 1997

Submitted by:

NASUCA Telecommunications Committee

Martha Hogerty (MO), Chair
Regina Costa (CA)
Thor Nelson (CO)
Julie Rones (DC)
Charlie Beck (FL)
Alice Hyde (IA)
Tim Seat (IN)
Theresa Czarski (MD)
Mike Travieso (MD)
Wayne Jortner (ME)
Garth Morrisette (MN)
Karen Long (NC)
James Anderson (NH)
Heikki Leesment (NJ)
Rich Wiener (NM)
Charles Van Dyke (NV)
B. Robert Piller (NY)
Douglas Elfner (NY)
Karen Hardie (OH)
Elliot Elam (SC)
Suzi Ray McClellan (TX)
Amy Schwab (VA)
Robert Manifold (WA)