FCC: CLEC use of unbundled loops continues to rise

Fifty-one percent of the access lines served by competitive carriers in the local market (10.9 million) as of June 2002 were provisioned via UNE loops leased from incumbents, according to a report issued today by the FCC.

This represents an increase from the 44% (7.6 million lines) provisioned via UNE loops at the same time last year, and the 28% (3.2 million lines) provisioned in June 2000.

The “Local Telephone Competition” report further indicated that 29% of CLECs said they provided local services over their own facilities as of June 2002, down from 33% at the same time last year, while 21% indicated they resold such services, down from the 23% that reported doing so in June 2001.

The report further indicated that ILECs controlled 167.5 million access lines as of June 2002, while CLECs controlled 21.6 million, a 25.3% increase over the 17.3 million lines they controlled in June 2001. Cable companies controlled 2.6 million – or 1% – of the total access lines.

A spokesman for BellSouth said the increased reliance on unbundled elements by competitive carriers is justification for the FCC to change its access rules during the current triennial UNE review. He suggested the commission’s data is conservative, since it only requires carriers with a minimum of 10,000 lines to contribute to the report.

“They’re leaving out an awful lot of niche players,” he said. “In North Carolina, for instance, they show 328,000 lines being used by CLECs, and we know there are 419,000 lines being served by CLECs. Even underreporting they show competition is growing, but not through facilities-based competition, but through this faulty UNE-based competition, which is based on regulatory disparity.”

Predictably, a spokeswoman from AT&T saw the report in a completely different light. She said that while competition “is beginning to take hold,” the Bell companies still control four out of five access lines, which is justification for keeping the current rules in place.

“Without UNEs, there would be no competitive growth in the marketplace and consumers would be left with higher rates and no choice of competitive provider,” she said in a statement.