WASHINGTON-The Federal Communications Commission Oct. 24 told a federal appeals court that it is not dilly-dallying in responding to a request from the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association to set out criteria for wireline-to-wireless local number portability.
“It is not necessary for the commission to resolve the three issues raised by CTIA in its mandamus petition before Nov. 24, in order for wireless porting to go forward. Resolution of the issues raised by CTIA-the size of the service area, the need for an interconnection agreement and the length of the porting interval-may facilitate implementation of wireless LNP. But CTIA has not established that a failure to resolve these three issues before Nov. 24 would prevent or delay the implementation of wireless number portability,” said the FCC.
CTIA asked the FCC in January and again in May to resolve the issues because it asserts that a main goal of LNP is wireline-to-wireless portability to increase competition in the residential landline market. It said the issues had to be resolved by Sept. 1 or LNP could not go forward as scheduled Nov. 24. When the commission did not respond, it asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to order it to do so. Cingular Wireless L.L.C. and AT&T Wireless Services Inc. have asked the D.C. Circuit to delay the Nov. 24 mandate until or unless the FCC responds. The two requests are moving on separate but related tracks at the D.C. Circuit.
In another development Tuesday, key lawmakers from the Senate Commerce Committee urged the FCC to “redouble its efforts” to issue wireline-to-wireless rules.
“We have a growing concern regarding the absence of clear and comprehensive rules that would allow consumers to port telephone numbers between wireline and wireless carriers. Such intermodal porting was clearly contemplated by the FCC when its initial order implementing local number portability was issued in 1996 and is consistent with Congress’ stated goal under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 of opening the local exchange market to competition. Giving consumers the ability to port telephone numbers between competing telephone services will facilitate additional head-to-head competition between wireless and wireline providers,” wrote Sens. Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii).
The FCC responded to some of the implementation issues earlier this month when it said that rural wireless carriers cannot refuse to port a telephone number to another wireless carrier that does not have an interconnection agreement with them. Rural wireless carriers, which fear that nationwide players will steal customers, have said porting outside of a rate center is unacceptable. A rate center is a geographic area used in the wireline context to determine how much a customer should be charged for a call.
The rate center issue is the same as the service-area issue the FCC mentioned in its brief to the D.C. Circuit. Currently, wireline carriers are only required to port a number to a carrier with a presence in the same rate center. CTIA argues that this should be changed to require porting if a wireless carrier services a rate center even if it does not have a switch in each rate center.
The FCC told the D.C. Circuit that it is drafting a response to the wireline-to-wireless LNP issues, but it did not say when it would be released.
