TELECOM POLICY UPDATE: Impact of the FCC USF NPRM MTIA Industry Affairs Conference May 17, 2011 Steve Kraskin

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Anne Hurley, CEO Communications Alliance Seeing beyond the horizon CommsDay Summit 2008 Industry Futures Symposium.
Advertisements

CANADIAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS IN TRANSITION Ariane Siegel.
WORKERS COMPENSATION, WORKPLACE SAFETY AND JOB RELATED DISABILITIES This presentation will focus on legal and procedural issues related to workers compensation,
Universal Service Funding An Overview of the Connect America Fund Marsha Spellman, JD Oregon Connections Conference October 25,
Telecommunications Law CLE State Deregulation at the PUC December 2014 Pete Kirchhof Colorado Telecommunications Association.
Dennis Weller Chief Economist Verizon Progress and Freedom Foundation 1 March 2007 Modernizing Universal Service: Meeting America’s Universal Service Goals.
The Economic Benefits of a Green Chemical Industry: Renewing Manufacturing Jobs While Protecting Health and the Environment James Heintz and Robert Pollin,
Different approaches before and after Telecom Act Before Telecom Act –Implicit cross subsidies –Based on rate of return approach –ILECs only receivers/IXCs.
Wireline Competition Bureau 2004 Promoting Real Consumer Choice and Investment in Broadband Facilities.
FCC Broadband Workshop “State and Local Government Toolkits and Best Practices” September 1, 2009 Commissioner Ray Baum Oregon Public Utility Commission.
Electricity Distributors Association The Voice of Ontario’s Electricity Distributors OEB Consultation on the Electricity Distribution Sector February 17,
MOSS ADAMS LLP | 1 © Moss Adams LLP | April 2012 V2 Rural Telecom Revenues FCC Reform Spring 2012 Presented to ABC Communications.
An analysis of the FCC’s USF and ICC Broadband Reform Proposals.
MOSS ADAMS LLP | 1 Tribal Telecom 2013 Federal Telecommunications Regulatory Updates.
Principles of Good Tax Policy Annette Nellen San José State University.
FCC Rural Broadband Trials: Funding to Connect Rural America Panelist: Jonathan Chambers, Chief Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis Federal.
Intercarrier Compensation. Nextel calls to BellSouth BellSouth pays to terminate Nextel calls In aggregate, it may cause BellSouth to increase capacity.
1 Keeping Consumers Connected Washington State and Universal Service WUTC Workshop May 5, 2010 John F. Jones CenturyLink Vice President State Government.
Page 1 15th ITS World Conference September 2004 Dr. Jan Krancke T-Mobile International Who is afraid of Market Dynamics ? The Regulatory Leviathan.
Regulation of Media Industries Regulation Generally speaking, why does the government regulate businesses and industries? Ensure free markets.
Revenue Decoupling: A proposed solution to the utilities’ traditional incentive to encourage wasteful energy use Christopher Grubb
ADDING VALUE - BRINGING VALUE A Presentation from RD and D Sales Engineering.
The Care Act 2014 Barbara Booton
Unified Intercarrier Compensation – An Old Problem 1980 FCC Tentative Access Plan (pre- divestiture) Found the wide variety of existing access compensation.
NASUCA 2015 MID-YEAR MEETING The Utility Push To Increase Customer Charge: What’s Wrong With It and How To Respond To It. Glenn A. Watkins, CRRA Senior.
1 THE RATE CASE PROCESS A Blend of Science and Superstition Presentation to the Mongolian Energy Regulatory Board By Burl Haar Executive Secretary Minnesota.
Support For Rural America William Maher Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau July 2, 2003 Universal Service and The FCC.
Joint Board Recommendation USF Reform NARUC Winter Meeting February 2008 Ray Baum Commissioner Oregon Public Utility Commission State Chair USJB.
Chapter 6 Equity and Income Distribution
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Cai Zhenzhen, Wang Xinyue Regulatory Dualism in Brazil.
Energy Efficient Digital Networks Rich Brown Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Presentation to DOE State Energy Advisory Board Meeting August 14, 2007.
The Voice of the Industry Water and Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Association.
Wireline Competition Bureau State of the Bureau Presentation January 20, 2006.
Modernizing Universal Service Dennis Weller Chief Economist VerizonNARUC Summer Meetings July 2007.
Demand Response Workshop September 15, Definitions are important Demand response –“Changes in electricity usage by end-use customers from their.
Proposal for Reforming the Intercarrier Compensation and Universal Service Systems CTIA – The Wireless Association™ May 18, 2005.
Financial Considerations in the New World!! GTA Annual Meeting Hilton Head, SC June 19, 2012 Leo Staurulakis – Executive Vice President.
Comptel/ASCENT February 17, Tom Sugrue Vice President Government Affairs T-Mobile.
National Tribal Telecommunications Association Derek E. White President June 19, 2008.
THE NEW FCC NPRM THE CHALLENGES, THE RESPONSES AND THE PLAN OF ATTACK A Briefing Provided By The Rural Broadband Alliance STEPHEN G. KRASKIN and DIANE.
© 2007 AT&T Knowledge Ventures. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Knowledge Ventures. Confronting Tough Questions About.
Overview of a Water Action Plan: California Public Utilities Commission Paul G. Townsley, President Arizona American Water January 18, 2011.
The Australian Energy Regulator Public Forum NSW electricity distribution & transmission revenue proposals July 2014.
BROADBAND ACCELERATION INITIATIVE: POLES, ROW State and Local Government Webinar (FCC) Oct. 5, 2011.
Competitive Implications of Forbearance Petitions (Cost Assignment and ARMIS) and the Special Access Debate Presentation to NARUC Staff Subcommittee on.
1 Wireline Competition Bureau Competition and Universal Service in a in a Dynamic Marketplace.
The Nation Broadband Plan & Its Effects on USF and ICC Reform Krista K. Tanner Iowa Utilities Board June 7, 2010.
Universal Service and USF Reform: Establishing a Rational and Efficient System Presentation to NASUCA Mid-Year Meeting San Antonio, TX June 28, 2011.
USF Reform NARUC Panel Presentation Dale Lehman Director, Executive MBA in Information and Communication Technology Alaska Pacific University
1 Intercarrier Compensation May 27, 2004 Glenn Brown
October, 2015 PREPA’s Transformation A Path to Sustainability.
1 TINF 2010 Tuesday 30 November 2010 Present and Future Regulation of Electronic Communications Vesa Terävä European Commission Information Society & Media.
Intercarrier Compensation: Rate of Return Carrier Impacts Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission – Workshop February 28, 2012 Jeff Dupree NECA.
Finding the Right Balance for Rural America: Telecom Policy, Politics and Predictions August
Comparative Telecommunications Law Spring, 2007 Prof. Karl Manheim 10: Universal Service Copyright © 2007.
March 24-25, 2005 CONFERENCE “Russia’s Social Sectors under Decentralization: Issues of Financing, Performance and Governance” World Bank Moscow Office.
Constructing An Effective Statutory & Regulatory Framework for Broadband Networks Phoenix Center Symposium December 1, 2005 Disclaimer: Views presented.
Inaugural Workshop, Cape Town, July, 2009 A Vision for a Health OER Network in Africa.
© 2010 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. Intercarrier Compensation.
Meaningful & Genuine Engagement: Perspectives from Consumer Advocates Jo Benvenuti, Executive Officer 27 November 2013.
The Potential Effects of the National Broadband Plan
Agenda Model Accuracy Sufficiency of support and reasonable comparability of rates Standards for Unsubsidized Competitors Disaggregation Caps in the Presence.
Critical Issues.
Discussion of Operating Expense Caps and Other Expense Considerations Resulting From the FCC’s Universal Service Fund Reform Order Prepared by Doug Kitch,
Principles of Good Tax Policy
FCC National Broadband Plan (NBP) and Rural Universal Service Reform
Reciprocal Compensation
CTIA – The Wireless Association™ May 18, 2005
Presentation transcript:

TELECOM POLICY UPDATE: Impact of the FCC USF NPRM MTIA Industry Affairs Conference May 17, 2011 Steve Kraskin

The Perfect Federal Regulatory Report (This is not going to be that) 1. Regulated Service Cost Recovery Stability. 2. Video Services – equitable broadcast retransmission contracts and access to content at fair prices. 3. Wireless – equitable voice and data roaming available to rural wireless carriers and spectrum opportunities for all rural independents in their service areas.

So, What Else Is New? (2007 Joint Board) The Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service (Joint Board) releases the following statement: The Joint Board is taking a fresh look at high-cost universal service support. The Joint Board has tentatively agreed that: 1. Support mechanisms for the future will focus on: a.Voice b.Broadband c.Mobility 2. In addition to the principles set forth in the statute, support mechanisms for the future will be guided by the following principles: a.Cost control b.Accountability c.State participation d.Infrastructure build out in unserved areas 3. The equal support rule will not be part of future support mechanisms. FEDERAL-STATE JOINT BOARD ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE STATEMENT ON LONG TERM, COMPREHENSIVE HIGH-COST UNIVERSAL SERVICE REFORM WC Docket No CC Docket No September 6, 2007

So, What Else Is New? What I hear – “Over the past 10 years, nothing happened at the FCC” and “nothing is going to happen.” That’s Wrong No “big bang” but a slow, steadily increasing debilitating squeeze. Loss of access lines and declining access minutes, capped high cost loop fund

Impact of the “Plan” on Rural Independent Companies The “Plan” threatens the very foundations and underlying policy that has supported the success of the rural industry in bringing universal service to the communities served by rural Independent companies.

Impact the “Plan” on Rural Independent Companies 1. The “Plan” ignores the objective of the Communications Act to establish and maintain universal service in rural America with “services and rates comparable” to those available in urban areas. In place of that objective, the “Plan” establishes a universal service goal for high cost to serve areas that is 1/25 th of the goal set for the rest of the nation.

Impact the “Plan” on Rural Independent Companies 2. In place of the regulatory concept of providing a rural carrier the opportunity to recover its costs including a reasonable return, the “Plan” proposes the end of rate-of-return regulation, and would replace it with “price cap” regulation - a regulatory framework with a proven record of failure if the success of regulation is measured by whether it has fostered “comparable services and rates” in high cost to serve areas.

Understanding The FCC Perspective 1. We don’t want to limit rural areas. We want to bring all rural areas up to the quality of service rural independents have provided. 2. We have limited USF and want to get the biggest most effective use of it we can. 3. “Most rurals can take a haircut” “No Barriers” “You want rate of return?” Boucher/Mattey

Fixing the Problem Begins With Asking The Right Questions

Answering The Question “How do you think we should reform intercarrier compensation and the Universal Service Fund?” But, The FCC was really asking: “Hasn’t the time come to throw out intercarrier compensation and the universal service network support program for rural Independents?”

Everyone in the rural industry should be given the answers 1. Why does your service area require universal service support mechanisms and funding? 2. How should we measure and determine the amount of funding your company should receive from universal service support mechanisms? 3.And why should the universal service funding needed for your community go to your company and not to another carrier? The answers to these three questions hold the key to the substantive aspect of responding to the challenges of the broadband “Plan.” Restoring the grassroots is the key to the political aspect of the challenge.

Fundamental Questions Lead To... Can your company operate successfully and provide universal service within your incumbent service area if you have to rely only on the revenues you obtain from charges to your customers? Do we want to rely on products that are declining (switched access charges and a USF built initially on long distance assessments?) 13

… Our Fundamental Objective The Broadband Plan universal service proposals should be modified to provide for an explicit funding mechanism that provides each rural telephone company with revenues that are sufficient to enable the company to recover the actual expenses, including a reasonable return on investment, that it incurs in the provision of universal services to rural consumers at rates comparable to those charged to consumers in urban areas. 14

What the NPRM Would Do Reduces Interstate Cost Recovery Existing cost recovery is reduced by the arbitrary removal of funding for all corporate expenses The distribution formula for the capped high cost loop fund is changed, creating immediate winners and losers among the rural companies.

What the NPRM Would Do The NPRM also proposes generally maintaining current cost recovery rules (except, of course, for the elimination of funding for corporate expenses and elimination of the safety cap for high cost loop recovery) - this means that rural incumbents may think they are encouraged to continue to invest in loop plant regardless of the fact that the high cost loop fund remains capped. As more rural companies add to aggregate investment levels, the cost recover gap for all rural companies increases as the aggregate investment grows further beyond the cap.

A United Association Industry Plan Unity Driven By Substance To Unify Behind Unity Forged Through Common Objective Based On Accepted Principles That Drive FCC To Our Proposals

The Elephant In The Room

The “elephant” – how to distribute limited funding. Current FCC rules cap the HCLF – investment goes up, recovery down Shuffling the deck chairs does not fix the problem – creates winners and losers

The Elephant In The Room The only way to deal with an elephant in the room is to face the reality, work around it in the short-term, and find a way to remove it in the long-term. Changing the distribution rules and formula only changes the “winners” and “losers” on a year-to-year basis.

The Elephant In The Room “The Alliance submits that the Commission can respond to the issue of cost recovery of established rural rate-of-return carrier universal service expenses in a manner that not only provides predictability and stability, but that is also responsive to the Commission’s intent to ensure accountability, encourage efficiencies and provide an alternative optional incentive option for carriers subject to rate of return regulation.”

NPRM Response Objectives 1) Propose rational common-sense alternatives that ensure cost recovery of established investment and operational expenses incurred in providing universal service.

NPRM Response Objectives 2) Develop and propose a mechanism to ensure stability for recovery of needed additional investment and operational expenses during the interim period during which the Commission deliberates a long-term broadband USF solution.

NPRM Response Objectives 3) Seek broad-based support and understanding that the nation’s ability to achieve the full vision of the National Broadband Plan will ultimately require an increase in the size of the USF. Objection from an association advocate: “Key changes is to get away from explicit advocacy of increasing USF (even if you used the caveat of "ultimately") and just make it more about putting USF on a solid contribution base. This positions the fund for the longer-term objectives that may very well (almost certainly?) require expansion, but doesn't specifically push it on policymakers at this point. I also suggest ceasing references to the NBP, as the FCC has indicated that it views the NPRM as moving "beyond" the NBP.”

An Interim Stability and Incentive Plan Assure existing interstate revenues (access and USF) Transition Access Rates, USF Establish interim Broadband USF level Provide ROR failsafe safety valve Special Access alternative incentive

I no longer sit on company Boards or have an ownership interest, but...