The Other Merger Decisions Did Not Rely on Section 854 (c)

As TURN notes, the decisions granting §§ 854(b) and (c) exemptions relied almost exclusively on subsection (b). WorldCom never addresses this issue in response to TURN's submission except to state that "[TURN's] contention implicitly challenges each of the four prior decisions in which the Commission has done precisely what TURN contends is improper."¹⁷ I do not agree with this assessment. The § 854(c) factors simply were not separately considered in the previous decisions. TURN has raised those issues here.

Each of the factors the Commission relied on in granting exemptions in the four previous cases centered on whether the applicant was rate regulated. Because this Ruling determines that the issue of rate regulation is not alone determinative of WorldCom's Motion, those cases are less relevant here. There are independent reasons why the Commission should consider the factors in subsection (c) that do not depend on WorldCom's regulatory posture. The subsection (c) criteria - whether the merger will affect service quality, employees, state and local economies and the like - are relevant even if WorldCom is not subject to traditional rate regulation.