One Outside Party in Frontier/AT&T Won’t Challenge Connecticut’s Draft Approval, But Another is Still ‘Reviewing’ It
One of the parties in Connecticut Public Utilities Regulatory Authority’s review of Frontier Communications’ proposed buy of AT&T’s broadband, video and wireline assets in the state whose proposed conditions didn’t make it into PURA’s draft decision approving the deal said it’s unlikely to challenge the decision, while another said it hasn’t decided. The draft decision, issued Tuesday, would approve the deal in conjunction with a public interest settlement between Frontier and the offices of state Attorney General George Jepsen and Consumer Counsel Elin Swanson Katz, along with additional commitments Frontier made after PURA rejected the initial settlement. The decision denied proposed conditions sought by Connecticut Light and Power (CL&P) and the Connecticut Internet Service Providers Association (CTISPA) (CD Oct 1 p13). Written objections to the draft decision are due Tuesday, with oral argument Oct. 14, PURA said.
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.
CTISPA is unlikely to challenge PURA’s draft, said Pullman Comley lawyer Brad Mondschein, CTISPA counsel. CTISPA had asked PURA to require Frontier to begin offering DSL service to ISP users separately from phone service -- known as offering a “dry loop” -- when ISPs buy wholesale DSL transport. PURA dismissed that request as “untimely” but said CTISPA could petition the regulator on the issue via a separate proceeding. CTISPA is “considering filing a separate petition with PURA post-merger,” Mondschein said.
CL&P is “reviewing” PURA’s draft decision, a spokesman said. CL&P had asked PURA to require AT&T to pay for $9.25 million in costs related to the cleanup of storm-damaged CL&P lines that CL&P believes AT&T owes before Frontier could close the deal. PURA previously said AT&T is responsible for the $9.25 million because it benefitted from the cleanup, but said in its draft decision that it didn’t think it had statutory authority to interpret the issue within the confines of its Frontier/AT&T review. PURA suggested CL&P seek relief in court or through another state agency. It’s unclear whether CL&P will challenge the draft decision, but it’s “certainly possible” given that the utility has been vehement about its demands throughout PURA’s review, said an industry lawyer who’s experienced in PURA proceedings and has followed the Frontier/AT&T review.
The draft decision appears to satisfy almost all other parties, with CL&P remaining the one “wild card,” the industry lawyer said. The overall language of the draft decision is “a pretty positive development” for Frontier/AT&T Connecticut, said Guggenheim Partners analyst Paul Gallant. PURA was “initially quite tough on the initial settlement,” he said. “That the commission is now proposing to approve the settlement, albeit with tougher additional conditions, certainly appears to be a positive step.”