NARUC leaves door open to FCC pre-emption

State regulators this week voted for resolutions indicating that the FCC may be best suited to have jurisdiction over some aspects of communications.

Approved during the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) conference in Nashville, the resolutions were passed a week after the FCC asserted sole jurisdiction over voice-over-IP (VoIP) services like those offered by Vonage. Although a resolution specifically addressing VoIP jurisdiction was tabled, NARUC approved changes to its telecommunications policy that indicated it will not automatically oppose all FCC pre-emption efforts.

"NARUC is open to the possibility that, as markets evolve and local products and services take on more national and international characteristics, traditional jurisdictional principles may need to be re-evaluated," one of the NARUC resolutions stated.

Many industry analysts expected NARUC to challenge in court any FCC attempt at pre-emption--a perception that the organization hopes to dispel with these resolutions, according to Tom Welch, chairman of the Maine state commission and a member NARUC’s telecommunications committee.

"I think the support for these resolution indicates that NARUC is prepared to put more things on the table than previously seemed to be the case," Welch said.

But the resolutions should not be interpreted as an indication that NARUC or any individual state has dismissed the notion of litigating the FCC decision on Vonage or a potential decision in the IP-enabled service proceeding, Welch said.

Indeed, other resolutions approved at the NARUC conference indicated that state regulators believe they should have a role in the development of a unified intercarrier-compensation plan. Meanwhile, another resolution indicated a stronger statement.

"States must retain the authority to protect consumers from the exercise of market power in the even unregulated monopolies or other anti-competitive situations develop," according to the new NARUC language. "States must not be prevented from imposing requirements necessary to preserve and advance universal service, protect the public safety and welfare, ensure the continued quality of telecommunications services, safeguard the rights of consumers and ensure that rates are just and reasonable."