DOCSLIB.ORG

\\10.0.10.115\Eti\States\CA\2018-ORA\LLS Testimony\LLS Testimony Sprint T-Mo 01-05-19 NO FOOTER .Wpd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
\\10.0.10.115\Eti\States\CA\2018-ORA\LLS Testimony\LLS Testimony Sprint T-Mo 01-05-19 NO FOOTER .Wpd Before the CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION In the Matter of the Joint Application of Sprint Communications Company L.P. (U-5112) and T-Mobile USA, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, For Approval of Transfer of Application 18-07-011 Control of Sprint Communications Company L.P. Pursuant to California Public Utilities Code Section 854(a). And Related Matter. Application 18-07-012 Direct Testimony of LEE L. SELWYN on behalf of the Public Advocates Office at the California Public Utilities Commission January 7, 2019 REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION DIRECT TESTIMONY OF LEE L. SELWYN TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY viii INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY 1 Qualifications, background and experience 1 Assignment 6 The public interest and other issues identified in the Scoping Memo 7 ISSUE 1. How would the merger impact competition for services currently provided by Sprint or T-Mobile in any metropolitan area or other geographically distinct market? 8 The mobile wireless telecommunications market in California and throughout the US is already highly concentrated, and further market consolidation is neither warranted nor in the public interest. 8 An analytical framework for assessing the level of market concentration 15 As a general matter, wireless service price levels in the US are decidedly higher than in other western countries where multiple facilities-based carriers are present and where competition appears more intense. 22 ISSUE 3. What are the relevant markets to consider? 27 To properly utilize the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) to assess the level of market concentration, one must firmly establish a proper definition for the relevant product and geographic market. 27 The relevant geographic market for mobile wireless services is fundamentally local in nature. 29 The merger-driven increase in market concentration far exceeds the industry-wide HHI change when the geographic scope is properly limited to relevant local markets. 33 Prepaid and Postpaid wireless services constitute separate and distinct relevant product markets. 59 ii ECONOMICS AND REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) If the merger goes forward, New T-Mobile will control roughly 59% of the prepaid services market, and the prepaid market HHI will jump by 1468 points – more than seven times the HMG's 200-point threshold. 64 The CPUC has previously adopted a series of tests for the presence of effective competition in the mobile wireless telecommunications market. 66 ISSUE 9. Would the merger increase the market power of the incumbent local exchange carriers and their wireless affiliates? 72 The merger of Sprint and T-Mobile will enhance the market power of New T-Mobile as well as that of all of the large national CMRS providers. 72 The Joint Applicants' already engage in some parallel conduct vis-à-vis their larger rivals, and the merger will create additional incentives and opportunities for the post-merger New T-Mobile to expand into new areas of parallel conduct going forward. 74 A post-merger New T-Mobile will have overwhelming dominance of the prepaid services market, which may diminish its interest in supporting MVNOs and enable it to raise prices for prepaid services that, for many low-income consumers, are the only type of wireless service for which they are qualified. 85 A facilities-based carrier’s incentives to allow and to affirmatively support resale of their services diminishes as its market power increases. 85 Resellers such as MVNOs offer nondominant service providers the ability to expand their retail distribution channels and, in particular, to address customers that might otherwise fall outside of their own marketing efforts. 89 The presence of mandatory arbitration/class action waiver provisions in the Joint Applicants’ existing consumer contracts is yet another indication of parallel conducts in the market for mobile wireless services. 96 The Joint Applicants’ econometric models purporting to empirically assess the likely competitive effects of the proposed merger are driven by numerous unsupported and patently incorrect assumptions, and if anything confirm that the merger’s effect upon competition will be negative. 99 Claims that New T-Mobile and the other two mobile wireless service providers confront competition from cable MSOs is highly speculative, certainly premature, and cannot provide a basis for viewing the mobile wireless service market as contestable. 125 ISSUE 5. What merger-specific and verifiable efficiencies would be realized by the merger? 132 iii ECONOMICS AND REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) The Joint Applicants’ “economic benefits” theory 132 The efficiency benefits being claimed by the Joint Applicants are largely speculative and, in any event, they have failed to demonstrate that, in the context of a three-firm oligopoly, any significant portion of such efficiencies that do arise will be flowed through to consumers. 133 The Joint Applicants’ claims that the merger will dramatically increase the efficiency of their (joint) operation over that which exists under the two separate firms, even if true, is not a sufficient basis to overcome the potential anticompetitive effects that the merger will foster. 135 ISSUE 2. What new services, if any, that are not currently provided by T-Mobile or Sprint, are contemplated to be provided by the merged entity? How would the merger impact competition for such services in any metropolitan area or other geographically distinct market? 142 Nationwide or even California statewide availability of 5G is in no sense dependent upon the merger of T-Mobile and Sprint and, since this merger is likely to diminish competition in the US mobile wireless market, it is more likely to retard, rather than facilitate, 5G deployment. 142 ISSUE 10. How would the merger impact the quality of, and access to, service to California consumers in metropolitan areas, rural areas, or other geographically distinct markets? What services would be affected? 156 Both Sprint and T-Mobile individually possess more than sufficient spectrum capacity to serve rural areas, and nothing in either the merger or in the characteristics of 5G technology can bring down the amount of capital investment required to provide service in rural areas. 156 Even if integrating the two companies’ networks would facilitate the transition to 5G, the incremental benefits of such integration are not sufficient to overcome the potential competitive harms that would result from the elimination of a competitor in this market. 161 ISSUE 13. Would the merger preserve the jurisdiction of the Commission to effectively regulate those utilities and their operations in California? 167 As a technical matter, the merger does not directly affect the jurisdiction that the Commission presently retains, but the increased concentration and diminution of competition that would result may warrant renewed examination of the Commission's regulatory role with respect to certain wireless carrier terms and conditions. 167 iv ECONOMICS AND REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ISSUE 14. Would the benefits of the merger likely exceed any detrimental effects? 173 The potential impact of the merger on New T-Mobile’s ability to deploy massive 5G capacity relative to what the two companies could achieve on a stand-alone basis is overblown. 173 The potential anticompetitive impacts of the proposed merger of Sprint and T-Mobile far exceed any benefits than can realistically be expected to arise, and for that reason the merger should not be allowed to go forward. 177 ISSUE 15. Should the Commission impose conditions or mitigation measures to prevent significant adverse consequences and, if so, what should those conditions or measures be? 178 Any approval of the proposed merger should be expressly conditioned upon the Joint Applicants’ agreement to eliminate all mandatory arbitration and class action waiver provisions in their adhesion contracts with residential and small business customers. 179 Conclusion 186 DECLARATION 188 Tables and Figures Table 1: Wireless HHIs for California Economic Areas 2011-2015 19 Table 2: Illustrative Wireless Rates in Selected Countries with 3 to 5 MNOs 24 Table 3: Licensed Bandwidth by Spectrum Block 41 Table 4: California Wireless Carrier Spectrum Bandwidth Allocation Shares by County and Technology 45 Table 5: Changes in HHI That Would Result from Sprint/T-Mobile Merger Based upon FCC Wireless Carrier Deployment Data Weighted by Licensed Bandwidths 46 Table 6: Wireless HHIs for California Economic Areas and for Selected Counties Within Those EAs 48 Table 7: Changes in HHI That Would Result from Sprint/T-Mobile Merger Based upon FCC Wireless Carrier Availability Data for Areas of Different Densities Within Selected Counties 51 v ECONOMICS AND REDACTED FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Table 8: The number of census blocks in each California county where service is currently being provided by 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 carriers. 54 Table 9: Facilities-based Wireless Carrier Total and Prepaid Market Shares and HHIs as of December 31, 2017 65 Table 10: Wireless Carrier Revenues 2010-2016 77 Table 11: Wireless Carrier Revenue Market Shares 2010-2016 79 Table 12: Average Revenue per Unit 81 Table 13: Average EBITDA per Unit 83 Table 14: Retail and MVNO Subscribers Being Served by the Four Major Facilities-based Carriers – First Quarter 2018 90 Table 15: Cornerstone Estimates of Wireless Carrier Prices and Marginal Costs 120 Table 16: Carrier Spectrum Holdings in Selected California Counties 159 Table 17: Estimated Total Connections 2010-2016 175 Figure 1. FCC HHI estimates 2004-2015, from 19th Annual CMRS Report. 18 Figure 2. Prices for wireless voice and data services have been steadily decreasing, while Basic Cable prices have steadily risen. Index (2008=100) of Basic Cable average service price and Average Revenue per Mixed Unit for CMRS.. 21 Figure 3. FCC Economic Areas that include portions of California. 30 Figure 4. FCC “Basic Trading Areas” in California. 32 Figure 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subject : Verizon Partner Solutions Industry Letter: Notice of Price
    April 16 , 2021 Audience: CLEC,ISP,IXC,Resellers,Wireless,ILEC Subject : Verizon Partner Solutions Industry Letter: Notice of Price Changes for certain Interstate Special Access Services in Verizon Business Data Services (BDS) Product Guide This is to provide notice of rate increases for certain interstate special access services offered under Verizons Business Data Services (BDS) Product Guide. Effective May 1, 2021, Verizon[1] will: (i) increase by approximately 30 percent certain rates in Regions 1 and 11 for interstate Voice Grade Service, Digital Data Services (DDS) and DIGIPATH® digital service II (DDS II) channel terminations, and fixed and per mile channel mileage and (ii) increase by approximately 20 percent certain rates in Regions 14 and 16 for interstate DS3 channel termination, fixed and per mile channel mileage and multiplexer, and DS1 multiplexer. Rates for Clear Channel Capability in Region 14 will also increase. In addition, certain nonrecurring charges for interstate DS1 channel terminations in Region 1 and interstate DS3 channel terminations in Regions 1 and 11 will increase. The BDS Product Guide changes will be available at verizon.com/productguides[2] on May 1, 2021. For additional information, please see verizon.com/productguides or contact your account manager. [1] The Verizon Telephone Companies include Verizon Delaware LLC, Verizon Maryland LLC, Verizon New England Inc., Verizon New Jersey Inc., Verizon New York Inc., Verizon North LLC, Verizon Pennsylvania LLC, Verizon South Inc., Verizon Virginia LLC, and Verizon Washington, D.C. Inc. [2] To access the BDS Product Guide, go to the web page at the above link, click the United States flag and select the X for Verizon Telephone Operating Companies Product Guides.
    [Show full text]
  • SMS/800 FUNCTIONS ISSUING CARRIERS Thomas Caldwell Vice
    THE BELL OPERATING COMPANIES TARIFF F.C.C. NO. 1 9th Revised Title Page 2 Cancels 8th Revised Title Page 2 SMS/800 FUNCTIONS ISSUING CARRIERS Thomas Caldwell T Vice President, Marketing & Sales T Verizon Communications Inc. One Verizon Way, 2nd Floor T Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 T For Verizon Delaware Inc. Verizon Maryland Inc. Verizon New England Inc. Verizon New Jersey Inc. Verizon New York Inc. Verizon Pennsylvania Inc. Verizon Virginia Inc. Verizon Washington DC Inc. Verizon West Virginia Inc. Kelly Boggs Manager – Pricing BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. 675 West Peachtree St. N.E., Room 34S91, Atlanta, Georgia 30375 For the States of: Alabama Florida Georgia Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee This page filed under Transmittal No. 29 T The names, titles and address of the tariff's Issuing Officers are located on Title Pages 2 through 4 Issued: May 31, 2006 Effective: June 15, 2006 THE BELL OPERATING COMPANIES TARIFF F.C.C. NO. 1 10th Revised Title Page 4 Cancels 9th Revised Title Page 4 SMS/800 FUNCTIONS ISSUING CARRIERS Patrick Doherty T Director – Access Regulatory T AT&T Inc. T Four SBC Plaza, Room 1921, Dallas, Texas 75202 T For Ameritech Operating Companies Nevada Bell Telephone Company Pacific Bell Telephone Company Southwestern Bell Telephone Company The Southern New England Telephone Company Susan S. Henson T Staff Advocate - Public Policy T on behalf of N Wendy M. Moser N Vice President - Public Policy N Qwest Corporation 1801 California Street, Room 4700, Denver, Colorado 80202 For the States of: Arizona Colorado Idaho Iowa Minnesota Montana Nebraska New Mexico North Dakota Oregon South Dakota Utah Washington Wyoming This page filed under Transmittal No.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 in the Matter of ) ) Offer of Comparably Efficient ) Inter
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Offer of Comparably Efficient ) Interconnection to Providers of ) Enhanced Directory Assistance Service ) COMPARABLY EFFICIENT INTERCONNECTION PLAN I. Introduction and Summary The Verizon telephone companies (“Verizon”) hereby propose to offer comparably efficient interconnection (“CEI”) to competing providers of wholesale Enhanced Directory Assistance (“EDA”) Service.1 Verizon will comply fully with the nonstructural safeguards that apply to the offering of enhanced services on an integrated basis by the former Bell Operating Companies .2 One of these 1 This plan is being filed by the Verizon telephone companies that were formerly affiliates of Bell Atlantic Corporation and are identified in Attachment A. Other Verizon telephone companies that were formerly affiliates of GTE Corporation are not required to post a CEI plan before offering an enhanced service. 2 See Amendment of Section 64.702 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, (Computer III), CC Docket No. 85-229, Phase I, 104 FCC 2d 958 (1986) (Phase I Order), recon., 2 FCC Rcd 3035 (1987), further recon., 3 FCC Rcd 1135 (1988) Reconsideration Order, second further recon., 4 FCC Rcd 5927 (1989) (Phase I Second Further Reconsideration), Phase I Order and Phase I Reconsideration Order vacated, California v. FCC, 905 F.2d 1217 (9th Cir. 1990); Phase II, 2 FCC Rcd 3072 (1987) (Phase II Order), recon., 3 FCC Rcd 5927 (1988) (Phase II Further Reconsideration Order), further recon., 4 FCC Rcd 5927 (1988) (Phase II Further Reconsideration Order), Phase II Order vacated, California v. FCC, 905 F.2d 1217; Computer III Remand Proceedings, 5 FCC Rcd 7719 (1990) (ONA Remand Order), recon., 7 FCC Rcd 909 (1992), pets.
    [Show full text]
  • Telecommunications Provider Locator
    Telecommunications Provider Locator Industry Analysis & Technology Division Wireline Competition Bureau February 2003 This report is available for reference in the FCC’s Information Center at 445 12th Street, S.W., Courtyard Level. Copies may be purchased by calling Qualex International, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY- B402, Washington, D.C. 20554, telephone 202-863-2893, facsimile 202-863-2898, or via e-mail [email protected]. This report can be downloaded and interactively searched on the FCC-State Link Internet site at www.fcc.gov/wcb/iatd/locator.html. Telecommunications Provider Locator This report lists the contact information and the types of services sold by 5,364 telecommunications providers. The last report was released November 27, 2001.1 All information in this report is drawn from providers’ April 1, 2002, filing of the Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet (FCC Form 499-A).2 This report can be used by customers to identify and locate telecommunications providers, by telecommunications providers to identify and locate others in the industry, and by equipment vendors to identify potential customers. Virtually all providers of telecommunications must file FCC Form 499-A each year.3 These forms are not filed with the FCC but rather with the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), which serves as the data collection agent. Information from filings received after November 22, 2002, and from filings that were incomplete has been excluded from the tables. Although many telecommunications providers offer an extensive menu of services, each filer is asked on Line 105 of FCC Form 499-A to select the single category that best describes its telecommunications business.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 9 RECAPITULATION of PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES BY
    Table 9 RECAPITULATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES BY COUNTY Actual and Equalized Property Values for Calendar Year 2003 REAL - PROPERTY PERSONAL - PROPERTY TOTAL-REAL-AND-PERSONAL COUNTY ACTUAL EQUALIZED ACTUAL EQUALIZED ACTUAL EQUALIZED Adams AT&T Communications 674,844 639,752 1,585,989 1,562,199 2,260,833 2,201,951 AT&T Wireless Service of Wa Inc 1,697,548 1,672,084 1,697,548 1,672,084 Avista Corp - Gas 17,012 16,127 4,018,018 3,957,747 4,035,030 3,973,874 Avista Corporation - Electric 1,518,509 1,439,548 18,519,270 18,241,481 20,037,779 19,681,029 Big Bend Elec Coop Inc 971,203 920,700 5,434,236 5,352,719 6,405,439 6,273,419 BNSF - Tax Dept 13,979,631 13,252,691 13,352,510 13,152,222 27,332,141 26,404,913 Cascade Natural Gas Corp 5,600 5,309 1,816,098 1,788,856 1,821,698 1,794,165 Century Tel of WA, Inc (T141) 232,628 220,532 11,343,841 11,173,683 11,576,469 11,394,215 Chevron Pipe Line Co 17,602 16,687 1,609,607 1,585,463 1,627,209 1,602,150 Columbia Basin Railroad Co Inc 1,029,963 1,014,515 1,029,963 1,014,515 Eastern Sub RSA Ltd Partnership 573,300 543,488 2,185,619 2,152,834 2,758,919 2,696,322 Federal Express Corp 2,257 2,223 2,257 2,223 Inland Power & Light Co 296,878 292,423 296,878 292,423 MCI Worldcom Network Services Inc 5,641 5,556 5,641 5,556 Nextel West Corp 176,256 173,612 176,256 173,612 Northwest Pipeline Corp 4,677 4,433 14,925,650 14,701,766 14,930,327 14,706,199 Pacific Bell Wireless Northwest LLC 330,461 325,504 330,461 325,504 Palouse River & Coulee City Railroad 19,788 18,759 5,834 5,746 25,622 24,505 Pioneer
    [Show full text]
  • 101 Merrimac LLC 101 Huntington Avenue 5Th Floor Boston, MA
    101 Merrimac LLC 101Continental Partners LLC 1st Rate Plumbing Heating Llc 101 Huntington Avenue Attn Richard Johnson 71 Littleton Road 5th Floor 3 Hamilton Landing Suite 200 Chelmsford, MA 01824 Boston, MA 02199 Novato, CA 94949 1st Source Parts Center 1st Source Parts Center 21st Century Pool Patio West Inc 101 E Nakoma St PO Box 671589 3736 Vestal Parkway East San Antonio, TX 78216-2737 Dallas, TX 75267-1589 Vestal, NY 13850 2xl Corporation 3 G Media LLC 3 Wire Restaurant Appliance 2415 Braga Dr Gulf Coast Bride Magazine 22322 20th Ave S E Broadview, IL 60155-3941 1400 Commerce Boulevard Suite 25 Bothell, WA 98021 Anniston, AL 36207 3J Happy Floors 3Wire Golden State 4 Contract Design 5099 N W 195 Lane Nw7964 10271 Pua Drive Miami Gardens, FL 33055 Box 1450 Huntington Beach, CA 92646 Minneapolis, MN 55485-7964 4Realcrazydeal Com Llc/Koby Dumas 7 Seas Tours Travel A 1 Asphalt Care Inc 125 Arbor Dr 1 210 Franz Dr 50 Wilson Ave San Diego, CA 92103 Freedom, PA 15042 Ivyland, PA 18974 A 1 Event and Party Rentals A 1 Fire A 1 Fire Equipment Corp 251 East Front Street Gary B Goldman PO Box 370926 Covina, CA 91723 c/o Law Offices of Gary B Goldman Miami, FL 33127 17071 W Dixie Hwy N Miami Beach, FL 33160 A 1 Fire Equipment Inc A 1 Ice Equipment Dist Inc A 1 Locksmiths 1002 Central Ave N 1143 Central Avenue 2685 Walnut Hill Lane Kent, WA 98032 Albany, NY 12205 Dallas, TX 75229 A 1 Ocean Breeze Inc A 2 Z Plumbing Services Inc A A C United Fire Safety Eq 26845 Oak Avenue PO Box 147 305 S W 15th Ave Unit 16 Placentia, CA 92871 Pompano Beach, FL
    [Show full text]
  • Table 9 RECAPITULATION of PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES BY
    Table 9 RECAPITULATION OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES BY COUNTY Actual and Equalized Property Values for Calendar Year 2002 REAL PROPERTY PERSONAL PROPERTY TOTAL REAL & PERSONAL COUNTY ACTUAL EQUALIZED ACTUAL EQUALIZED ACTUAL EQUALIZED Adams AT&T Communications 674,844 622,206 1,333,731 1,333,731 2,008,575 1,955,937 AT&T Wireless Service of Wa Inc 1,563,091 1,563,091 1,563,091 1,563,091 Avista Corp - Gas 17,012 15,685 1,957,074 1,957,074 1,974,086 1,972,759 Avista Corporation - Electric 1,518,509 1,400,065 18,762,528 18,762,528 20,281,037 20,162,593 BNSF - Tax Dept 22,592,355 20,830,151 6,612,293 6,612,293 29,204,648 27,442,444 Big Bend Elec Coop Inc 971,203 895,449 4,831,818 4,831,818 5,803,021 5,727,267 Cascade Natural Gas Corp 87,154 80,356 1,860,758 1,860,758 1,947,912 1,941,114 Century Tel of WA, Inc (T141) 232,628 214,483 11,706,679 11,706,679 11,939,307 11,921,162 Chevron Pipe Line Co 17,602 16,229 594,409 594,409 612,011 610,638 Columbia Basin Railroad Co Inc 849,183 849,183 849,183 849,183 Eastern Sub RSA Ltd Partnership 573,300 528,583 2,558,855 2,558,855 3,132,155 3,087,438 Inland Power & Light Co 296,527 296,527 296,527 296,527 MCI Worldcom Network Services Inc 9,289 9,289 9,289 9,289 Nextel West Corp 177,175 177,175 177,175 177,175 Northwest Pipeline Corp 4,677 4,312 13,799,475 13,799,475 13,804,152 13,803,787 Palouse River & Coulee City Railroad 29,804 27,479 5,208 5,208 35,012 32,687 Pioneer Telephone Co 15,620 15,620 15,620 15,620 Puget Sound Energy/Elec 167,825 167,825 167,825 167,825 Spacenet Inc 1,192 1,192 1,192 1,192
    [Show full text]
  • VERIZON DELAWARE LLC PSC-Del.-No. 35 Preface
    VERIZON DELAWARE LLC P.S.C.-Del.-No. 35 Preface (T) First Revised Sheet 1 Canceling Original Sheet 1 The name Verizon Delaware Inc. has been changed to Verizon Delaware LLC. All (T) references throughout this Tariff to Verizon Delaware Inc., “the Telephone Company” or “the Company” shall read as Verizon Delaware LLC. ISSUED NOVEMBER 15, 2006. EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 15, 2006. VERIZON DELAWARE INC. P.S.C.-Del.-No. 35 Index (T) Sixth Revised Sheet 1 Canceling Fifth Revised Sheet 1 INDEX Page No. - 900 - 900 ACCESS SERVICE: Description ....................................................... 141 NXX Codes ......................................................... 171 Network Controls .................................................. 145 Nonrecurring Charge ............................................... 116 Service Arrangement ............................................... 96 Technical Specifications .......................................... 144 Usage Measurement ................................................. 186 - A - Abbreviations........................................................ 8 Acceptance Testing/Switched Access................................... 117 Access Connections................................................... 99 Access Order......................................................... 82 Access Order Modifications........................................... 86 Access Order Service Date Intervals.................................. 85 Access Order Billing Information..................................... 250 Acts of God, Credit
    [Show full text]
  • Verizon Communications Inc
    Verizon Communications Inc. Section 272 Biennial Agreed Upon Procedures Report for the engagement period January 3, 2001 to January 2, 2003. (Redacted Version) TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A Procedures for Verizon Long Distance, Verizon Enterprise Solutions, Verizon Global Networks, Inc., Verizon Select Services Inc, and Verizon Global Solutions, Inc. Appendix B Procedures for CODETEL International Communications Inc., TELUS Communications Inc., TELUS Communications (Quebec) Inc., Compania Anonima Nacional Telefonos de Venezuela, and Telecom New Zealand USA Limited Appendix B-1 Procedures for Former GTE Section 272 affiliates, Step D Appendix C Follow-up Procedures on the Prior Engagement Appendix D Procedures for Subsequent Events Attachment A Objective VIII: Performance Measure Results Attachment B Objective VIII: Linear Graphs Attachment C Verizon’s Response to Comments on the Biennial Section 272 Report filed on June 2001 As part of Verizon’s response to the Follow-up Procedures on the Prior Engagement (Reference Appendix C), Verizon included their response, dated June 11, 2002, to comments on the Verizon Biennial Section 272 Reports filed by PricewaterhouseCoopers on June 11, 2001 and June 18, 2001. Attachment D General Standard Procedures for Biennial Audits Required Under Section 272 of the Communications Act of 1934, as Amended Attachment E Verizon’s Comments on the Verizon Biennial Section 272 Report filed on June 12, 2003 PUBLIC VERSION – REDACTED Appendix A enumerates the procedures performed in connection with the Bell Operating Companies (“Verizon BOC”)1 and Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (“ILEC”)2 of Verizon Communications, Inc. (collectively referred to as the “Verizon BOC/ILEC” or the “Company” or “Management”), and the Section 272 affiliates3.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes of the Board of Trustees Meeting
    MM II SANTA MONICA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES NN REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, AUGUST 4, 2003 Santa Monica College UU 1900 Pico Boulevard Santa Monica, California 5:30 p.m. – Closed Session TT Business Building Room 111 7:00 p.m. - Public Meeting Board Room EE Business Building Room 117 The complete minutes may be accessed on the Santa Monica College website: SS http://www.smc.edu/admin/trustees/meetings/ \ BOARD OF TRUSTEES REGULAR MEETING August 4, 2003 SANTA MONICA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT MINUTES A meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Santa Monica Community College District is scheduled be held in the Santa Monica College Board Room (Business Building Room 117), 1900 Pico Boulevard, Santa Monica, California, on Monday, August 4, 2003. The agenda included the following items: (Items for action - recommendations - are listed numerically; items for information are listed alphabetically). I. ORGANIZATIONAL FUNCTIONS A Call to Order B Roll Call II. CLOSED SESSION III. PUBLIC SESSION - ORGANIZATIONAL FUNCTIONS (Continued) C Pledge of Allegiance #1 Approval of Minutes: July 7, 2003 (Regular meeting) July 26, 2003 (Retreat) IV. MAJOR ITEMS OF BUSINESS #2 Public Hearing: Madison Theater Project #3 A Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Santa Monica Community College District Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report on the Santa Monica College Madison Theater Project #4 A Resolution of the Board of Trustees of the Santa Monica Community College District Making CEQA Findings Necessary to Approve Development of the Santa Monica College Madison Theater Project, Adopting Statement of Overriding Considerations, Adopting a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and Approving Madison Theater Project V.
    [Show full text]
  • G:\6X9 Folder\192154Folder\1921
    Nos. 04-277 & 04-281 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION, et al., Petitioners, - and - FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioners, v. BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES, et al., Respondents. _______________________________ ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS THE VERIZON TELEPHONE COMPANIES, GTE.NET LLC d/b/a VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTIONS, and VERIZON INTERNET SERVICES INC. IN SUPPORT OF REVERSAL WILLIAM P. BARR ANDREW G. MCBRIDE MICHAEL E. GLOVER Counsel of Record EDWARD SHAKIN EVE KLINDERA REED JOHN P. FRANTZ KATHRYN COMERFORD TODD VERIZON WILEY REIN & FIELDING LLP 1515 N. Courthouse Road 1776 K Street, NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20006 Arlington, VA 22201 (202) 719-7000 (703) 351-3860 Attorneys for Respondents the Verizon telephone companies, GTE.Net LLC d/b/a Verizon Internet Solutions, and Verizon Internet Services Inc. i QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the court of appeals erred in holding that the statutory definitions contained in the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. § 151, et seq., prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from classifying broadband Internet access service as only an “information service,” subject to minimal regulatory constraints, without a separately regulated “telecommunications service” component. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING Pursuant to Rule 24.2 of the Rules of this Court, Respondents adopt the list of parties to the proceeding in the court of appeals that is contained in the Brief of the Federal Communications Commission and the United States, with the exception of the “Verizon” respondents, which are identified below pursuant to Rule 29.6.
    [Show full text]
  • Board Meeting Packet
    Board of Directors Board Meeting Packet November 21, 2017 Clerk of the Board YOLANDE BARIAL KNIGHT (510) 544-2020 PH MEMO to the BOARD OF DIRECTORS (510) 569-1417 FAX EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT East Bay Regional Park District Board of Directors BEVERLY LANE The Regular Session of the November 21, 2017 President - Ward 6 Board Meeting is scheduled to commence at 1:00 p.m. at the EBRPD Administration Building, DENNIS WAESPI 2950 Peralta Oaks Court, Oakland Vice President - Ward 3 AYN WIESKAMP Treasurer - Ward 5 ELLEN CORBETT Secretary - Ward 4 Respectfully submitted, WHITNEY DOTSON Ward 1 DEE ROSARIO Ward 2 COLIN COFFEY ROBERT E. DOYLE Ward 7 General Manager ROBERT E. DOYLE General Manager P.O. Box 5381 2950 Peralta Oaks Court Oakland, CA 94605-0381 (888) 327-2757 MAIN (510) 633-0460 TDD (510) 635-5502 FAX www.ebparks.org AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 21, 2017 BOARD OF DIRECTORS EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT The Board of Directors of 11:30 a.m. ROLL CALL (Board Conference Room) the East Bay Regional Park District will hold a regular meeting at District’s PUBLIC COMMENTS Administration Building, 2950 Peralta Oaks Court, Oakland, CLOSED SESSION CA, commencing at 11:30 a.m. for Closed Session and 1:00 p.m. A. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6 for Open Session on Tuesday, November 21, 2017. 1. Agency Negotiator: Robert E. Doyle, Ana M. Alvarez Agenda for the meeting is Employee Organizations: AFSCME Local 2428, listed adjacent. Times for agenda Police Association items are approximate only and Unrepresented Employees: Managers and Confidentials are subject to change during the meeting.
    [Show full text]