https://urgentcomm.com/wp-content/themes/ucm_child/assets/images/logo/footer-new-logo.png
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Multimedia
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • Commentary
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • All Things IWCE
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Resources
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • IWCE
    • Conference
    • Special Events
    • Exhibitor Listings
    • Premier Partners
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Register for IWCE
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
    • Cookie Policy
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • Mission Critical Technologies
    • TU-Auto
  • In the field
    • Back
    • In the field
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Internet of Things
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Call Center/Command
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Network Tech
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Operations
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Regulations
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • Organizations
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
Urgent Communications
  • NEWSLETTER
  • Home
  • News
  • Multimedia
    • Back
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • Omdia Crit Comms Circle Podcast
    • Galleries
    • IWCE’s Video Showcase
    • IWCE 2023 Pre-event Guide
    • IWCE 2022 Winter Showcase
  • Commentary
    • Back
    • All Things IWCE
    • Urgent Matters
    • View From The Top
    • Legal Matters
  • Resources
    • Back
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Reprints & Reuse
    • UC eZines
    • Sponsored content
  • IWCE
    • Back
    • Conference
    • Why Attend
    • Exhibitor Listing
    • Floor Plan
    • Exhibiting Information
    • Join the Event Mailing List
  • About Us
    • Back
    • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise
    • Cookie Policy
    • Terms of Service
    • Privacy Statement
  • Related Sites
    • Back
    • American City & County
    • IWCE
    • Light Reading
    • IOT World Today
    • TU-Auto
  • newsletter
  • In the field
    • Back
    • Internet of Things
    • Broadband Push-to-X
    • Project 25
    • Public-Safety Broadband/FirstNet
    • Virtual/Augmented Reality
    • Land Mobile Radio
    • Long Term Evolution (LTE)
    • Applications
    • Drones/Robots
    • IoT/Smart X
    • Software
    • Subscriber Devices
    • Video
  • Call Center/Command
    • Back
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • NG911
    • Alerting Systems
    • Analytics
    • Dispatch/Call-taking
    • Incident Command/Situational Awareness
    • Tracking, Monitoring & Control
  • Network Tech
    • Back
    • Cybersecurity
    • Interoperability
    • LMR 100
    • LMR 200
    • Backhaul
    • Deployables
    • Power
    • Tower & Site
    • Wireless Networks
    • Coverage/Interference
    • Security
    • System Design
    • System Installation
    • System Operation
    • Test & Measurement
  • Operations
    • Back
    • Critical Infrastructure
    • Enterprise
    • Federal Government/Military
    • Public Safety
    • State & Local Government
    • Training
  • Regulations
    • Back
    • Narrowbanding
    • T-Band
    • Rebanding
    • TV White Spaces
    • None
    • Funding
    • Policy
    • Regional Coordination
    • Standards
  • Organizations
    • Back
    • AASHTO
    • APCO
    • DHS
    • DMR Association
    • ETA
    • EWA
    • FCC
    • IWCE
    • NASEMSO
    • NATE
    • NXDN Forum
    • NENA
    • NIST/PSCR
    • NPSTC
    • NTIA/FirstNet
    • P25 TIG
    • TETRA + CCA
    • UTC
acc.com

content


Litigation equals negotiation

Litigation equals negotiation

The saga of paging operators seeking relief from LEC termination charges continues, with lawyers as hired gunfighters. But a new, unexpected sheriff is
  • Written by Urgent Communications Administrator
  • 1st July 2000

The saga of paging operators seeking relief from LEC termination charges continues, with lawyers as hired gunfighters. But a new, unexpected sheriff is in town, urging resolution: the FCC

By now, most local operators have begun to explore their new relationship with their local exchange carrier (LEC). The reason for this exploration might be something other than curiosity. For example, your paging company may have been socked with some bills that you have to wonder about.

These bogus charges are the cost of terminating traffic on your system from the LEC. Although Congress (by changing the communications law) and the FCC (in the form of rule changes) have stated that these charges are improper, the LECs are still charging them. Why? Because it makes them more money than not charging them.

Some operators have continued to pay these charges, albeit with greater resistance. Because it is common for the LEC to threaten to shut off service (which after all, is somewhat integral to the paging business), the local operator continues topay and hope that it all gets straightened out in the long run. If the local operator makes inquiry about why the LEC is entitled to keep charging these costs, the LEC will refer to its local tariff.

If the local operator knows something about the law and asks for a new interconnection agreement under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (a.k.a. 47 U.S.C. 251 and 252), the LEC will oblige the operator with its “standard agreement.” The standard agreement usually says, in essence, “The local operator can continue to pay under the prevalent tariff rate.” In other words- back to square one.

This merry-go-round continues until either the local operator gives up and signs an agreement that will continue the payment of bogus charges, or the local operator gets itself (Dare we say it?) a lawyer. That’s right. This is an ugly problem, and it calls for an ugly solution.

The trunk facility charges for one-way paging, or other services, should not be tolerated. Operators should not pay these charges; they should demand a refund of all monies paid to the LECs for these charges since 1996. And don’t buy the hogwash that these charges are “facilities” charges. The FCC doesn’t buy that LEC dodge, and neither should you.

Although the law and the love of God is on your side, this does not mean that the LECs are willing to roll over and “do the right thing.” Negotiations on an agreement that calls for reciprocal compensation between the paging operator and the LEC can take months to hammer out. (You haven’t seen stalling like this since the Elephant Man’s wedding night.)

So, what do you do? You sue. Not in local court. We have enormous faith in local courts, but this is one you ought to take to the FCC. Why? Because it’s quicker and frankly, the agency is on your side. After all, the agency is the one that passed the rules that the LECs are trying to avoid.

We know that appearing before the administrative law bench is often fruitless. Formal complaints sometimes age like rancid wine in the cellars of the agency. But “hail and welcome” to the new and speedier Enforcement Bureau of the FCC. A formal complaint is filed and-how about this-they actually work on it.

The Enforcement Bureau sets a time for filing pleadings, getting discovery done, articulating stipulations between the parties (like the LEC is a really big company) and actually moving the parties toward a resolution in accord with FCC rules and law. All along, the Enforcement Bureau keeps suggesting that maybe the LEC should just comply with the law and negotiate a reciprocal agreement in accord with the act, rather than have the bureau rule against it.

So, with the hammer of the Enforcement Bureau on your side, a strange thing begins to happen. The LEC now wishes to negotiate a deal. Suddenly, those terms that seemed impossible for the LEC to consider are now possible. The LEC is willing to give back the past payments and is willing to pay for future termination charges. Although there will be discussion about who pays for termination of traffic that does not originate on the LEC’s system, the complaint process has placed the local operator much closer to the promised land envisioned in the Telecommunications Act.

The FCC will encourage settlement between the parties. In this case, settlement discussions mirror the very arms-length, good-faith negotiation that is contemplated under the law. Therefore, by encouraging settlement, the FCC is putting the parties in a position where the law can work as planned.

After you settle your complaint, you will get an agreement that looks pretty much like what Congress thought it should when it created sections 251 and 252 of the Telecommunications Act. OK, so Congress did not think that it would take this long, but it thinks everything is automatic.

One thing you should notice is that your efforts will often avoid the local public utilities commission (PUC). Why? First, local PUCs are sometimes overly influenced by the largest LECs in their area. The most important reason is because most local PUCs are not entirely comfortable with the FCC’s treatment of cases under the Telecommunications Act. The PUC is likely to find more stock in the local tariff than Congress intended under the act, and if the tariff is at odds with the act, the PUC often says that the tariff will bind the parties until it is revised. We believe that this approach by some PUCs is simply: wrong.

Therefore, while the local operator is fighting for fairness in its dealings with a larger LEC, the same operator may find itself educating the local PUC by being a test case for whether a published tariff is relevant to the matter of reciprocal compensation among carriers.

If all of this seems ridiculous-it is. A local operator should not have to pay bogus charges for termination, dance around with an LEC for years regarding a proper reciprocal interconnection deal, get a lawyer who knows the difference between DID lines and DOA tariffs, bring a formal complaint before the Enforcement Bureau and then, and only then, get the LEC to sit down and discuss the kind of deal that the LEC should have offered years before. This isn’t right-or fair.

But we are not talking fairness here. We are talking about the wondrous world where telephone lines meet and tariffs are filed and traffic is terminated and interconnection abounds (in either real or virtual locations) and LATA boundaries define monopolies and where white rabbits fall down holes where DID lines run and the Mad Hatters at the FCC will follow the Queen of Hearts cry of “Off with their heads!” and the Cheshire Cat smiles on and on . No, it’s not Wonderland, it’s the telecommunications industry. n

Tags: content

Most Recent


  • Litigation equals negotiation
    Newscan: Securing the Internet of Things is quite a challenge
    Also: EWA requests dismissal of 900 MHz applications; TIA names tech and policy priorities for 2014; IJIS Institute names Shumate Award winner; App makes bus waits more tolerable; a Blackberry comeback may be in the offing.
  • Litigation equals negotiation
    Newscan: FCC certifies Carlson Wireless's white-space radio
    Also: Congress looks to revamp telecom law; Obama to place some restraints on surveillance; IEEE to study spectrum-occupancy sensing for white-spaces broadband; Major Swedish transport operator opts for Sepura TETRA radios; RFMD to partner on $70 million next-generation power grid project; NENA opens registratiuon for "911 Goes to Washington."
  • Litigation equals negotiation
    Newscan: A look at the critical job of 911 dispatchers
    Also: NYC launches website for tracking 911 response times; Oregon implements 911 on pre-paid cell phones; LightSquared wants to keep spectrum assets; Harris receives multiple government orders; FCC extends rebanding financial reconciliation deadline; Zetron gear at core of communications system upgrade; Ritron debuts wireless access control system; EWA seeks policy review of VHF vehicular repeater system deployments.
  • Litigation equals negotiation
    Newscan: Average peak data rates of 144 MB/s average realized in tests with CAT 4 LTE device
    Also: Verizon, T-Mobile to swap unused spectrum to improve coverage; Internet giants oppose surveillance--but only when the government does it; FCC Chairman says incentive auction will be delayed until middle of 2015; FCC chair announces staff appointments; Alcatel-Lucent names Tim Krause as chief marketing officer; New Jersey county deploys TriTech CAD system; Toronto airport deploys 26-position Zetron console system;

Leave a comment Cancel reply

To leave a comment login with your Urgent Comms account:

Log in with your Urgent Comms account

Or alternatively provide your name, email address below:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Content

  • RugGear: Contributing to the future of mission-critical broadband communication review and market vision
  • Photo gallery: 2014 Communications Marketing Conference (CMC) in Tucson
  • Litigation equals negotiation
    Top 5 Stories - Week of Sept. 22
  • Litigation equals negotiation
    RCA plans to expand this year's Technical Symposium

Commentary


Updated: How ‘sidelink’ peer-to-peer communications can enhance public-safety operations

  • 1
27th February 2023

NG911 needed to secure our communities and nation

24th February 2023

How 5G is making cities safer, smarter, and more efficient

26th January 2023
view all

Events


UC Ezines


IWCE 2019 Wrap Up

13th May 2019
view all

Twitter


UrgentComm

Airbus U.S.: Rebecca Purcell, Bob Baumann discuss MCX, Agnet offerings dlvr.it/SlJNqW

22nd March 2023
UrgentComm

Microsoft Outlook vulnerability could be 2023’s ‘It’ bug dlvr.it/SlC3Hh

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

Getting to know the how–and why–of the telecom cloud dlvr.it/SlBbD1

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

Zipline delivery drone docks, charges by itself dlvr.it/SlBNWy

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

State and local leaders can alleviate the burden on public-safety personnel by tackling three workforce trends dlvr.it/SlBH89

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

6G is shaping up to disappoint, and the industry can blame itself dlvr.it/Sl918J

20th March 2023
UrgentComm

Change is coming to the network detection and response (NDR) market dlvr.it/Sl4cts

18th March 2023
UrgentComm

Telcos need to build businesses, as well as networks dlvr.it/Sl4cRR

18th March 2023

Newsletter

Sign up for UrgentComm’s newsletters to receive regular news and information updates about Communications and Technology.

Expert Commentary

Learn from experts about the latest technology in automation, machine-learning, big data and cybersecurity.

Business Media

Find the latest videos and media from the market leaders.

Media Kit and Advertising

Want to reach our digital and print audiences? Learn more here.

DISCOVER MORE FROM INFORMA TECH

  • American City & County
  • IWCE
  • Light Reading
  • IOT World Today
  • Mission Critical Technologies
  • TU-Auto

WORKING WITH US

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Events
  • Careers

FOLLOW Urgent Comms ON SOCIAL

  • Privacy
  • CCPA: “Do Not Sell My Data”
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms
Copyright © 2023 Informa PLC. Informa PLC is registered in England and Wales with company number 8860726 whose registered and Head office is 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG.