The Rules - Four Years After Telecom Act

Posted 07/2000

Four Years After Telecom Act
'LAST MILE' ACCESS STILL RIFE WITH PROBLEMS

When the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was passed, it promised to break down the barriers to competition in local telecom markets. One of the act's most important goals was eliminating the ILEC stranglehold on "last mile" facilities that connect individual homes and offices to the networks that carry traffic locally and across the country. Four years later, CLECs still face seemingly intractable problems in obtaining unbundled loops from ILECs. Here's a brief overview of the testiest issues.

Replacement of clean copper with integrated digital loop carrier (IDLC): The FCC has ordered the ILECs to provide unbundled loops capable of carrying broadband signals generated by the various flavors of digital subscriber line (xDSL) equipment. This equipment has to have a direct copper line running from the CO (or wherever the CLEC places its DSL equipment) to the end-user premises to work. The trouble is, the ILECs are busy deploying IDLC systems in which the loop is comprised of two components--fiber optic cable running from the CO to a midpoint, and copper running the rest of the way to the customer premises. IDLC may eliminate direct copper connections from the CO to the end user, preventing CLECs from deploying their DSL equipment in COs and forcing them to come up with alternative loop strategies. The result is more delay and cost, keeping broadband loops out of the hands of competitive carriers.

Jonathan E. Canis Attorney at Law Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Enhanced Extended Links (EELs): The FCC also ordered ILECs to provide combinations of loops and interoffice transport, called EELs. To date, no action has been taken. The ILECs have raised the argument that EELs, if not restricted, will result in the loss of too much ILEC revenue from special access services the EELs can replace. This has triggered months of negotiations over how EELs will be restricted to minimize ILEC revenue loss--and the debate continues at the time of this writing--delaying EEL deployment.

There is some good news. Regardless of this delay, CLECs are placing orders for EELs. This will allow CLECs to sue ILECs for the difference between the higher prices they paid for special access circuits and the lower EEL rates CLECs would have paid if the ILECs provided EELs when they were requested.

UNE Platforms (UNE-P): UNE-P is a combination of all elements needed to provide dial-tone service to individual end users, and it also has been ordered by the FCC. In states where ILECs were ordered by state regulators to provide UNE-P--like New York and Texas--CLECs have been announcing dramatic success in turning up UNE-P circuits. In most other states, however, UNE-P remains generally unavailable due to a lack of procedures for ordering and provisioning.

In an attempt to address these provisioning problems, the FCC has been holding open meetings on the IDLC issue and soon will issue an order clarifying EEL restrictions. The FCC also is urging CLECs to use its formal and informal enforcement procedures to resolve deployment issues.

Jonathan E. Canis writes a monthly column on regulatory issues. He can be reached at jcanis@kelleydrye.com.

Share this article: Email, Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, Yahoo!MyWeb, Windows Live Favorites, Furl
Add this article feed to: RSS, My Yahoo, Newsgator, Bloglines