STATEMENT OF 
COMMISSIONER MIGNON L. CLYBURN
Re: Business Data Services in an Internet Protocol Environment, WC Docket No 16-143; 
Investigation of Certain Price Cap Local Exchange Carrier Business Data Services Tariff 
Pricing Plans, WC Docket No. 15-247; Special Access for Price Cap Local Exchange Carriers, 
WC Docket No 05-25; AT&T Corporation Petition for Rulemaking to Reform Regulations of 
Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier Rates for Interstate Special Access Services, RM-10593.
At the core of a successful community, is a vibrant and growing business sector.  Be it a large 
multinational corporation in need of dedicated high capacity circuits or a small local business seeking to 
run a handful of ATMs, they both have one thing in common: the need for dedicated wireline circuits for 
connectivity. These services also support public safety operations, schools and health care facilities all of 
which underscore the importance of reliable, robust services.  
Business circuits are also a necessary input for mobile broadband service as these networks are 
only wireless until they hit the cell tower at which point they become reliant on wireline backhaul.  A fast 
wireless network needs high capacity wireline connectivity when it reaches that tower. If such facilities 
are not in place, service could slow as soon as it reaches those backhaul facilities.  And if rates for 
backhaul connectivity are unreasonable, providers must either pay more or offer consumers slower
speeds.  Either way consumers and their communities are disadvantaged. This is why we need to ensure 
that special access, which the Chairman has renamed Business Data Services, are both available and 
reasonably priced.  
It should come as no surprise that our comprehensive data collection shows that where 
competitive pressures exist in the special access market, prices are reduced. But what is less clear, is the 
number of providers necessary for this to happen, and the appropriate geographic and product markets.  
These are all issues where I believe further stakeholder engagement is needed.  
While I wish we lived in a marketplace nirvana, where competitive options are omnipresent, the 
reality is this does not exist. In areas that are non-competitive, I believe it is appropriate to have a simple 
regulatory backstop to ensure that the rates, terms and conditions for services are just and reasonable.  
Agreeing on these principles is the easy part. Implementation is more challenging.  We need a
framework that minimizes regulation when market forces are sufficient to discipline prices but we must 
also have a simple and easy to administer regulatory backstop in places where competitive forces are 
lacking. 
Make no mistake, I greatly appreciate the significant work the Bureau has put into this item, as 
well as the Chairman’s willingness to accommodate my many, many edits.  At the same time, I must 
confess to being concerned about the complexity of some aspects of the Further Notice, and how feasible 
it will be for the agency as well as for the entities that provision the facilities and providers that purchase 
these services to administer.  We need to ensure that reforms are targeted and while being technology 
neutral is beneficial, reforms must take into account the nature of the market.  
The Chairman agreed to make the item more neutral by, for example, moving away from a 
tentative conclusion that 50 Mbps is the appropriate metric for presuming whether a market is competitive
or not, asking about the implications and feasibility of administering the reforms, and seeking comment 
about alternative frameworks so that we can develop a complete record which enables all parties to have 
the opportunity to make their best case.  I must thank him for that. I also appreciate his willingness to 
ensure parties have sufficient time to analyze the proposals and comment.  
2And while a robust record is always beneficial, I believe an ideal outcome is one in which the 
industry comes together and proposes a solution that ensures the policy goals are realized. I know this is 
possible because we have seen it take place in the legacy wireline space -- from CALLS and, more 
recently, to the 2011 reform of intercarrier compensation and universal service -- which resulted in win-
wins for the agency and stakeholders.
So, I support today’s item, not only because we have been working for years to arrive at this 
point, but because we are asking how to develop a new, modern framework to govern Business Data 
Services. From my perspective, all options are on the table and I hope that the ultimate result will be a
framework that is simple, targeted and easy to administer.  In addition, I am in support of common-sense 
fixes in the Tariff Investigation Order that will prevent unreasonable practices that may inhibit providers
from moving to IP services.  
I am grateful to the dedicated and hard-working team from the Wireline Competition Bureau.  
You have maintained your focus and sense of purpose as you collected and analyzed an incredible amount 
of data. You built a tremendous record in this complex and incredibly important proceeding and, for that 
and more, I thank you.