There’s no reason for the FCC to delay approval and...

There’s no reason for the FCC to delay approval and release of an order that would allow states to require providers of nomadic VoIP service to contribute to state universal service funds, NARUC said in an FCC filing. Some providers seek a rulemaking to further delay their “obligations” to pay -- as their competitors pay -- to support state programs, NARUC said. They have raised as an issue -- “the unlikely scenario that one or more consumers -- in theory -- might actually pay into two state programs,” it noted. Currently, at least one state requires the in-state USF revenue identification to be based on billing addresses and at least one other State requires revenue identification to be based on primary service address. However, this “unlikely scenario” provides no basis for delay or a drawn out rulemaking, NARUC said, saying there’s no evidence in the record that this circumstance has actually occurred or “even likely to occur.” The group cited Sandy Reams, managing auditor for the Kansas Corporation Commission, saying Kansas is the only state currently assessing nomadic interconnected VoIP providers for state USF purposes. So no conflict between the revenue-identification methods currently exists. Reams also noted once the FCC issues an order and Nebraska and New Mexico implement the assessment on providers of nomadic interconnected VoIP service, it will be rare for a carrier to be assessed on the same revenue by two different states. The nomadic carriers have raised “an unsupported allegation as a fact” -- that a significant quantum of customers may be subject to overlapping state assessments -- as a defense to complying with what the FCC has found to be clear Congressional intent that Vonage contribute to state programs, NARUC said. Vonage (or other nomadic carriers) are the only parties to this proceeding in a position to demonstrate if the claim is true, it said. Vonage has provided no evidence a single customer in any state is in a position to be actually harmed based on the methods suggested by the Nebraska and Kansas commissions (or any other actual State commission rule or proposed rule), NARUC said. Additionally, if it actually does happen, the states will assure the affected customer “is made whole.” Two of the states involved have already specified, in the unlikely case that such a circumstance rises, they will work together to assure the consumer is not harmed. “In the unlikely event that a double assessment actually does occur,” the states can provide a credit to a carrier that is assessed twice on the same revenue,” it said. Meanwhile, states have successfully worked together on the issue for wireless providers, and that’s strong evidence that to the extent that any double billing issue arises, it will be readily resolved by the states’ collaboration, NARUC said.