*Pages 1--2 from  Microsoft Word - 37721*
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  04-  97 
 STATEMENT  OF  COMMISSIONER  JONATHAN  S.  ADELSTEIN 


 Re:  Petition  for  Declaratory  Ruling  that  AT&  T’s  Phone-  to-  Phone  IP  Telephony  Services  Are  Exempt  from  Access  Charges,  WC  Docket  No.  02-  361,  Order 
 I  support  this  Order  clarifying  the  application  of  the  Commission’s  access  charge  rules  because  it  provides  critical  guidance  on  an  issue  of  importance  to  the  long  distance  and  local 
 telephone  industries  and  ultimately  to  consumers.  Through  this  Order,  we  address  the  regulatory  status  of  a  distinct  but  increasingly  prevalent  form  of  communications  –  long  distance  telephone 
 calls  that  employ  some  form  of  protocol  conversion  in  the  backbone  of  a  carrier’s  network  but  which  in  all  other  significant  respects  are  the  same  as  traditional  phone  calls.  Despite  the 
 technical  nature  of  the  questions  we  address  here,  this  Order  preserves  many  of  the  Commission’s  highest  priorities. 


 This  Order  makes  clear  that  the  service  in  question  –  which  is  marketed  as,  and  is  identical  in  all  significant  respects  to,  traditional  long  distance  service  –  is  a  telecommunications 
 service.  As  a  result,  consumers  will  enjoy  the  protections  of  our  rules  for  telecommunications  services  and  local  phone  providers  will  receive  adequate  compensation  for  carrying  these  calls. 
 Were  the  Commission  to  reach  another  result  –  classifying  this  service  as  an  information  service  –  providers  could  avoid  the  obligation  to  observe  consumer  protection  rules,  to  comply  with 
 public  safety  and  law  enforcement  provisions,  and  to  contribute  to  the  universal  service  fund,  which  ensures  access  to  essential  services  for  low  income  consumers  and  consumers  in  rural 
 areas.  If  the  Commission  had  avoided  this  question  or  simply  permitted  providers  to  avoid  our  access  charge  rules  for  this  service,  we  would  have  removed  substantial  amounts  of  support  for 
 the  local  phone  providers  which  ultimately  carry  these  calls  to  consumers.  This  support  is  particularly  vital  for  smaller  providers  serving  Rural  America. 


 Carriers  deserve  proper  compensation  for  use  of  their  network.  We  must  continue  to  promote  and  create  incentives  for  the  deployment  of  new  technologies,  but  these  innovative 
 services  will  not  be  able  to  reach  their  full  audience  or  potential  if  we  undermine  the  ability  of  providers  to  support  their  networks. 


 By  issuing  this  Order,  we  answer  the  calls  of  participants  throughout  the  industry  who  asked  for  guidance  on  the  Commission’s  rules.  Indeed,  the  one  point  of  unanimity  in  our  record 
 was  the  desire  for  a  Commission  decision.  While  some  parties  have  asked  us  to  go  further  and  address  more  of  the  issues  raised  in  our  recent  Notice  of  Proposed  Rulemaking  on  Voice  over 
 Internet  Protocol  (VoIP),  delay  in  answering  the  question  at  hand  would  serve  only  to  create  instability  for  the  long  distance  industry  and  to  increase  the  rapidly-  growing  stakes  for  each  side. 


 I  welcome  the  opportunity  to  address  the  wide  scope  of  issues  raised  in  the  VoIP  rulemaking  and  to  consider  the  issues  raised  in  the  broader  intercarrier  compensation  debate. 
 This  Commission  must  make  sure  that  it  employs  a  framework  that  continues  to  foster  innovation  and  that  enables  our  rules  to  evolve  as  the  services  and  technologies  of  the  industry 
 evolve.  The  Order  we  adopt  today  preserves  the  Commission’s  flexibility  to  address  the  broader  issues  raised  in  these  rulemakings  and  to  revise  our  rules  as  necessary.  As  we  move  forward  to 
1
 Federal  Communications  Commission  FCC  04-  97 
 2 
 address  these  broader  issues,  I  am  committed  to  a  process  that  takes  into  account  the  needs  of  consumers,  who  often  are  not  directly  included  at  the  industry  bargaining  table,  and  the  needs  of 
 those  in  hard-  to-  serve  areas  of  Rural  America.  Through  this  proceeding  and  through  our  broader  rulemakings,  we  must  ensure  that  we  preserve  the  affordable  and  universally-  available 
 communications  services  that  American  consumers  and  businesses  have  come  to  rely  on  and  that  Congress  has  mandated. 
2