Thursday, Sept. 9, 1999 | 11:27 a.m.
The Public Utilities Commission of Nevada today rejected a request to reconsider an order allowing Sprint to pay competitors a credit for each residential line they operate in Southern Nevada.
In a unanimous vote, commissioners rejected a petition from Cox Communications Inc. to reconsider an Aug. 3 order allowing Sprint to pay competitors that use its residential lines $3.65 per line per month -- up to a cap of $2.5 million a year.
Commissioner Judy Sheldrew said Cox offered no new information for the three commissioners to justify reconsideration of the issue.
The credit at issue is only offered to competitors that lease Sprint lines that run into homes. Only MGC Communications leases Sprint lines that run "the last mile" into residences.
The agreement was part of a settlement of a federal antitrust suit filed by MGC against Sprint and was a consideration in a recent Sprint rate increase.
But Cox Communications, the dominant cable television company, is considering local telephone service in Las Vegas and finds the credit agreement an unfair advantage for Sprint and MGC. Cox wouldn't use Sprint lines for its phone service.
Cox intends to offer phone service on its upgraded fiber-optic cable lines that can provide cable television, high-speed Internet access and phone connections over one wire. The company already offers telephone service in its San Diego and Orange County, Calif., markets.
Cox believes the credit gives an unfair pricing advantage to any company that uses Sprint lines while penalizing companies that have their own facilities.
"Subsidies like this don't benefit the competitive marketplace or true competitive providers," said Steve Schorr, a Cox vice president in Las Vegas, at the time the original decision was reached. "We object to this in that it discriminates against carriers like Cox ... it puts us at a competitive disadvantage to other competitors."
On Aug. 17, Cox sought reconsideration on the PUC order.
A draft order prepared for today's PUC meeting said Cox failed to convince the commission that it would be harmed by the Sprint agreement or that the commission's action was unlawful.
archive
