Re:	Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, Tariff F.C.C. No. 73.

I concur in the majority's decision to deny Southwestern Bell Telephone Company's Petition for Reconsideration of our earlier decision to reject the pricing flexibility sought by its tariff offering. I continue to believe that Southwestern Bell has failed to justify such an individual departure. I write separately, however, to continue to urge the Commission to consider the issue of pricing flexibility for dominant exchange carriers in the context of the Commission's pending Access Charge Reform proceeding. As I stated in the Commission's original denial, the issues raised by Southwestern Bell's tariff are only part of the larger issues relating to pricing flexibility of dominant LECs in general. I have serious reservations about the majority's initial conclusion that the public interest could be thwarted by allowing customer-specific tariffs. The accompanying economic theories relating to "limit pricing" and the incentives a LEC may have to lower prices to deter entry turn logic on its head; consumers benefit, and the public interest is served, when prices are lowered. Thus, I continue to await anxiously the opportunity to address more fully these issues and the circumstances under which dominant LECs should be accorded additional pricing flexibility.