NTCA Adds Voice to Parties Seeking More Time To Review Telcordia LNPA Contract
NTCA asked the FCC to give parties more time to review a proposed Telcordia contract to be next local number portability administrator (LNPA). The rural telco association became the latest group urging the FCC to hold off on approving the…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
pending master services agreement (MSA) between Telcordia (iconectiv) and North American Portability Management (NAPM). "Unfortunately, the LNPA transition thus far has been marked by limited transparency and little opportunity for meaningful input from small and rural carriers," said an NTCA filing Thursday in docket 09-109. "This lack of opportunity for meaningful input in advance of decisions being made extends as well to the iconectiv MSA currently on circulation." NTCA said it may not ultimately have objections to the MSA, but is concerned key decisions are being made by "NAPM members only, in a closed process," with small rural carriers lacking the staff or resources to join NAPM. It lamented NAPM's call for quick FCC approval of the MSA. "NTCA therefore urges the Commission to 'pause' approval of the iconectiv MSA and allow additional time for small carriers and other stakeholders to review it and comment on its provisions," the RLEC group said. "A short window should not delay the process enough to matter in terms of the cost savings to which NAPM refers, as much of the work of preparing for the testing and other transition related activities can continue." In a filing on a meeting with FCC officials, the LNP Alliance and New America's Open Technology Institute voiced their "urgent concerns" with the NAPM call for quick FCC approval of the MSA "without allowing for time for smaller carriers and the public at large to review" the lengthy document. They also elaborated on various arguments they made recently in public comments criticizing NAPM (see 1605020039 and 1605030051). Some other parties also voiced concerns in the docket.