Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, DC 20554

In the Matter of	)
	)
Application by SBC Communications, Inc.,	)
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company,	) CC Docket No. 00-217
Southwestern Bell Communications Services,	)
Inc, d/b/a Southwestern Bell Long Distance	)
for authorization to Provide In-Region,	)
InterLATA Services in Kansas and Oklahoma	)

COMMENTS OF THE ALLIANCE FOR PUBLIC TECHNOLOGY SUPPORTING SBC'S REQUEST FOR AUTHORITY TO PROVIDE LONG DISTANCE SERVICE IN KANSAS AND OKLAHOMA

The Alliance for Public Technology has consistently urged the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to pursue the goal of Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996¹ in every relevant proceeding by encouraging the reasonable and timely deployment of advanced telecommunications capability to all Americans.² Section 706 authorizes the FCC and state telecommunications commissions to use "measures that promote competition in the local telecommunications market or other regulating methods to remove barriers to infrastructure investment," among other means, to achieve the goal of ubiquitous broadband deployment mandated by the Act.

The Alliance for Public Technology (APT) is a nonprofit organization of more than 300 public interest groups and individuals. APT's members work together to foster broad access to affordable, usable information and communications services and technology for the purpose of bringing better and more affordable health care to all citizens, expanding educational opportunities for lifelong learning, enabling people with disabilities to function in ways they otherwise could not, creating opportunities for jobs and economic advancement, making government more responsive to all citizens and simplifying access to communications technology. To this end, it is APT's goal to:

make available as far as possible, to all people of the United States, regardless of race, color, national origin, income, residence in rural or urban area, or disability high capacity two-way communications networks capable of enabling users to originate and receive affordable and accessible high quality voice, data, graphics, video and other types of telecommunications services.³

The Alliance is not in a position to judge the compliance of any one company with respect to the 14 point checklist of requirements under section 271. We do note, however, that on September 28, 2000 the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC), by a unanimous vote, recommended approval of SBC's application to the FCC to provide long-distance service for Oklahoma customers. The OCC found that SBC is allowing facilities-based competition for both residential and business customers in Oklahoma without discriminating against competing carriers. There is also a "most favored nation clause" in the agreement between the OCC and SBC. This means that if SBC offers better terms in another state that the same terms must be offered to Oklahomans.⁴ Moreover, SBC has proposed a payment plan⁵, involving self-executing payments to both the Oklahoma state treasury and to CLECs, that is nearly identical to the plan approved by the FCC in Texas. The plan puts $44 million at risk during the first year, the same liability measured as a percentage of net revenue that is at risk in Texas.

As APT has indicated in other proceedings, Section 271's interLATA prohibitions constrain the widespread deployment of advanced telecommunications infrastructure and therefore undermine Section 706, which seeks to promote investment in ubiquitous high-speed networks. APT maintains the belief that expeditious approval under Section 271 serves the public interest. The Alliance further contends that such prompt action eliminates a significant barrier to investment in high-speed telecommunications networks that should reach all communities.⁶ As we stated in supporting Verizon's (then Bell Atlantic) Section 271 application for New York, "[s]uch action would advance the goals of Section 706, and reaffirm the Commission's commitment to eliminating regulatory barriers to investment in high-capacity networks."⁷

The Commission again has the opportunity to bolster Section 706's impact by authorizing SBC to provide long distance telephone service in Kansas and Oklahoma. APT strongly urges the Commission to seize this opportunity to increase facilities-based competition for local and long distance service, and promote ubiquitous broadband network deployment so that all Kansas and Oklahoma residents, regardless of their income level, rural residence, or physical disabilities, may improve the quality of their lives through access to new sophisticated telecommunications.

APT has every reason to believe that Kansas and Oklahoma customers, particularly low volume users, will reap the same gains from lower prices and bundled services that Texans are experiencing with SBC's entry into that long distance market. SBC began marketing long-distance service in Texas on July 10, 2000. As of October 18, 2000, SBC had 1.2 million long-distance lines and 1 million long-distance customers in Texas.⁸ Furthermore, in anticipation of and in response to SBC's entry into the Texas long-distance market, incumbent long-distance carriers AT&T, WorldCom, and Sprint began to offer discounts on their regular long-distance plans to customers who also signed up for local service. These discounts are in the form of bundled long-distance monthly fees with local service charges and credits for signing up for a local/long-distance bundle.⁹

In light of recent announcements by AT&T, WorldCom, and Sprint that they will shift business strategy away from the residential consumer markets, it is all the more important that the FCC approve SBC's application for interLATA service to increase vibrant competition.

As SBC deploys its broadband networks, APT implores the Commission to do all that it can to remove the interLATA barriers that inhibit the widest possible extension of these networks to help all Kansas and Oklahoma residents enjoy the benefits of advanced telecommunications capability. APT respectfully recommends that the Commission authorize SBC to provide long distance service in Kansas and Oklahoma.

Respectfully requested,

Pace A. Duckenfield
Counsel
Alliance For Public Technology
919 18th Street, NW, Suite 900
Washington, D.C.

November 14, 2000

¹ 47 USC 157 note.

² See, e.g., Petition of the Alliance for Public Technology Requesting Issuance of Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Implement section 706 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, CC Docket No. 9244 (Feb. 18, 1998) (APT Petition) at 12-13.

³ Alliance For Public Technology, Principles to Implement the Goal of Advanced Service at 3 (1995).

⁴ Jim Palmer, Commission Takes Historic Step Toward Increased Telephone Competition, News from the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, Sept. 28, 2000, at 1.

⁵ Order No. 55 Approving the Texas 271 Agreement, Investigation of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's Entry into the Texas InterLATA Telecommunications Market, Project No. 16251 (Tex. PUC Oct. 13, 1999).

⁶ See, e.g., Id.; and Comments of the Alliance for Public Technology, In the Matter of Petition of Bell Atlantic for Relief from Barriers to Deployment of Advanced Telecommunications Services, CC Docket No. 98-11, Petition of US WEST for Relief from Barriers to Deployment of Advanced Telecommunications Services, CC Docket No. 98-26; and Petition of Ameritech for Relief from Barriers to Investment in Advanced Telecommunications Capability, CC Docket No. 98-32 (April 6, 1998) at 2.

⁷ Comments of the Alliance for Public Technology Supporting Bell Atlantic's Request for Authority to Provide Long Distance Service in New York, In the Matter of Application by New York Telephone Company (d/b/a Bell Atlantic-New York) Bell Atlantic Communications, Inc., NYNEX Long Distance Company and Bell Atlantic Global Networks, Inc., for Authorization to Provide In-Region , InterLATA Services in New York, CC Docket No. 99-295 (Oct. 19, 1999) )(APT NY Comments) at 2.

⁸ SBC Reports Third-Quarter Earnings: Strong Data, Wireless and Long-Distance Operations Highlight SBC's Third-Quarter Results, SBC News Center, October 23, 2000, at 1.

⁹ AT&T bundles residential local and long-distance service with a plan called "AT&T Local One Rate Texas." See http://www.att.com/local_service/tx/html/index.html (visited Oct. 9, 2000); see also< J.G. Smith/Johnson Joint Aff. 43 (AT&T offers this local one rate only in Texas and New York, the two "states in which the incumbent Bell Operating Company has been given access to AT&T's long distance marketplace"). New York was the first state, followed by Texas, where MCI WorldCom started offering its bundled local and long-distance service referred to as "One Company Advantage." See David DeKok, Competitor Calls on Verizon's Mid-State Clients, Harrisburg Patriot-News, Sept. 14, 2000; Bill Sulon, Telephone Companies Prepare for Battle, Harrisburg Partriot-News, Aug. 27, 2000; see J.G. Smith/Johnson Joint Aff. 46. And Sprint currently bundles residential local and long-distance service for Texans in five different configurations. See Sprint Local Service - Texas, available at https://clec.sprint.com/servlet?CLEC?PAGE+TOCOMPARE&MKT=0003? (visited Oct. 9, 2000); see J.G. Smith/Johnson Joint Aff. 45.