|  
              
                  
                 Teletruth Exclusive: 
                Former Bell Staffer Reveals Inventory 
                  Scandal Extends To the Birth of the Baby Bells: Two Decades 
                  of Deception. 
              
              NOTE: Teletruth has released excerpts from 
                Verizons network equipment Inventory records, showing massive 
                accounting errors. Teletruth has also filed a FOIA with the FCC 
                to open the Bells books for public scrutiny, as well as 
                SEC and IRS Complaints. To read these documents, go to: http://www.teletruth.org/auditupdate.html  
              
                ======================================= 
              
              In 1984, 
                AT&T, once the largest company in the world, was broken up. 
                Known as "Divestiture", this company was split up because of its 
                anti-competitive behavior, such as not letting other long distance 
                companies (MCI, etc.) use the networks to serve customers. At 
                the time, Ma Bell controlled almost all local and long distance 
                calling, and even supplied the customers phones and network 
                equipment. 
              To learn more about the history: http://www.teletruth.org/History/history.html 
              The 22 local phone monopolies were turned 
                into seven large companies known as "Regional Bell Operating Companies", 
                (RBOC) while the long distance portion remained AT&T. 
                These new companies included SBC, (which now owns Southwestern 
                Bell, Ameritech and Pac Bell,) Verizon, (which now owns NYNEX 
                and Bell Atlantic and GTE (not a Bell company),) Qwest, which 
                owns US West, and BellSouth. 
              In order to create these new concerns, the 
                inventory that was controlled by AT&T was now going to be 
                handled by seven separate companies. To help facilitate the change 
                over, these records would be put into a database, known as TIRKS, 
                which stands for Trunk Inventory Record Keeping System 
              Unfortunately, turning these old on-paper 
                records into the TIRKS database revealed a serious problem. According 
                to a former Bell staffer who was in charge of automating some 
                of these records for Bell Atlantic, approximately 30% of the equipment 
                that was on the books was missing. 
              Since the price of service is based on the 
                equipment in the network, then missing equipment meant lower prices. 
                Worst of all, if it could be shown that prices should have been 
                lower all along, this meant giving money back to the customers. 
              And the one thing every Bell staffer learned 
                from their very, very first day was that there were never 
                to be refunds  not if you wanted to keep your job. The staff 
                was forced to find work-arounds. These staffers were forced to 
                come up with creative accounting solutions, and so, in many records, 
                we find bogus entries --- hundreds of thousands of "Undetailed" 
                investment -- for hundreds of millions of dollars. According to 
                a FCC audit of NYNEX, over 48,000 entries of "Undetailed Investment" 
                added up to $359 million dollars or 5% of the total and an additional 
                56.000 entries of "Unallocated Other Costs" constituted $414 million 
                dollars. 
              Overall, the FCCs audits of the Bell 
                companies found $18.6 billion dollars of missing or unverifiable 
                networks equipment.To read a summary or of the original FCC audits 
                and other related materials see: http://www.newnetworks.com/fccauditsummary.htm 
              It turns out this is NOT a new problem because 
                the same books that were created in 1984 were the starting point 
                that were used to set your current residential and business phone 
                rates. 
              Here's an exclusive look at the underbelly 
                of the Bells accounting books. 
              TT: Tell me a little about your background 
                in telecommunications and with the Bell accounting books. 
              Mr. Smith: I was new to the Bell System 
                during Divestiture. I was in the Chesapeake & Potomac Headquarters 
                Group through 1986. C&P represented Maryland, Virginia, West 
                Virginia and DC. But during Divestiture, because it was all one 
                big network, and because we were all scrambling like mad to comply 
                with the Divestiture decree, all of us were helping out wherever 
                we could. 
              TT: And what were your responsibilities 
                related to the inventory/accounting books? 
              Mr. Smith:  At C&P I was in the 
                Cost and Economic Development Group. We were mostly responsible 
                for the Division of Revenue Traffic and Investment studies that 
                were used to allocate the cost associated with investment used 
                in common by many companies to the individual corporate books. 
                Wed come up with the relative usage for each company and 
                apply that to the total capital cost and the result would be the 
                investment used to calculate the rate base for each company. 
              Remember, they each had to get individual 
                rates approved by the state commissions. So this is how they got 
                the numbers they filed in those rate cases. 
              TT: Just to make this clear to the 
                readers, you examined the equipment in the network, the inventory, 
                and used formulas about how much traffic there was, and this was 
                used in the creation of phone rates. 
              Mr. Smith: Yes. Rates were set through 
                this process because after staff, the only real expense is the 
                equipment you have and how it's being used. Remember, C&P 
                was a utility and a monopoly and we were regulated for our profits 
                by the state commissions --- This is called a rate-case. 
              TT: So tell me about the inventory. 
              Mr. Smith: At the time of Divestiture, 
                we were required to split up a company which was attached like 
                an octopus to all of its long distance and local phone service 
                divisions. It was all one big happy family for almost 100 years 
                and now it had to be parceled out. 
              Up to then it was only an accounting issue. 
                If a call needed to be routed we didnt ask who owned the 
                equipment; we just sent it through. 
              However, starting in 1982, everything needed 
                to be separated, so we started looking at our inventory records 
                and literally splitting up the inventory. I remember counting 
                cars in the car pool and deciding which ones would go to which 
                state. 
              For network investment, people throughout 
                the System were using the information in the TIRKS inventory system 
                and splitting it up between companies. TIRKS was supposed to take 
                the place of the old manual paper inventory everywhere in the 
                Bell System. 
              New Jersey was behind in getting on TIRKS, 
                which had been no big deal before, but now it was the only way 
                to separate these assets in time, so everyone suddenly was worried 
                about why NJ couldnt move to TIRKS. 
              So I was asked to work with the NJ inventory 
                team to see what was wrong. And it was obvious. The problem was 
                that they couldnt find about 30% of the inventory they 
                had been listing manually, so they couldnt get it loaded 
                into the TIRKS system. 
              TT: Was this common and how do you 
                know this was happening throughout the Bell System? 
              Mr. Smith: Well, I was new to all of 
                this compared to the lifers who had been there for decades, so 
                I was surprised, to say the least. But they werent. They 
                had known there were problems and what they did was just make 
                things up. In your recent materials you talk about "Undetailed 
                investment" or "Unallocated Investment". These are all placeholders 
                for items that couldn't be found. Now, I assume that sometime, 
                somewhere some of this existed, but it certainly wasn't there 
                when we had to transfer the records. 
              So they werent acting like there was 
                anything strange at all about this, just they didnt know 
                how to keep anyone from finding out. When it was a manual inventory 
                they had all sorts of tricks to bury it. And they told war stories 
                about how it had been done before, and how it had gotten by the 
                auditors. But now that there was this computerized system, they 
                didnt know what to do. 
              TT" And the equipment was important 
                because
? 
              Mr. Smith: Well, if we admitted that 
                we had 30% less inventory than we had said, we would have had 
                to give a whopping refund. After all, the equipment was part of 
                the 'rate-base'. The commission had been basing rates on those 
                numbers for years. But we all knew that we couldnt give 
                a refund. If I wanted to keep my job, I couldn't go back to my 
                boss and say we can't find the equipment, we need to give millions 
                in refunds. That was not acceptable. We would all lose our jobs. 
              TT: Did the higher-ups know about this? 
              Mr. Smith: They were careful to maintain 
                plausible deniability throughout the chain of command. For example, 
                my boss knew there were problems that could trigger refunds - 
                and he made it clear that if I wanted to keep my job that this 
                must not be allowed to happen. However, he never wanted to know 
                any specifics of how we "fixed" the problem. It was understood 
                throughout the company since everyone in the management chain 
                knew that refunds were never an acceptable option. With this model, 
                nobody saw the whole picture, however, and it was easy to fool 
                the internal auditors, who weren't set up to take on a conspiracy 
                of this sort. It was a brilliant scheme, but obviously in a very 
                twisted way. 
              TT: So what did you do? 
              Mr. Smith: As I said, I was still green, 
                so I just wanted to see how to fix it. At one point, we decided 
                that we should create fake "repeater-huts" -- meaning extensions 
                of the network. But after doing the math --- how many repeater-huts 
                equals 30% of the missing equipment ---- it was obvious we would 
                be swimming in these things and it would be obvious that we had 
                thousands more of these things than anyone else. In the end, we 
                just made it fit with various items that didn't really exist anymore. 
              TT: Does this missing equipment come 
                into play with the current inventory? 
              Mr. Smith: The current inventory is 
                based on the same starting points, so it must have some relationship. 
                As you pointed out, when the FCC did its audit it found, what, 
                $19 billion in missing equipment from the Bell companies -- and 
                that was only 1/4 of the potential audits. Why do you think 
                there's so much "undetailed Investment". So that if anyone checked, 
                there'd still be a line entry, still account as inventory, until 
                someone actually checked. And no one has to date. 
              TT: And what do think about the missing 
                equipment impact on phone rates? 
              Mr. Smith: Well, everyone knew that 
                the rate-setting process was just a game, us against them. And 
                they made up their own numbers as well. So everyone knew that 
                none of the numbers were real, and it was just who could tell 
                the best story who would win. However, since our job was to not 
                give refunds, we were more motivated and we had the raw 
                data. 
              Don't you think prices would have dropped 
                if they ever really knew how much equipment was in the networks? 
                With the costs of the networks going down, including staff cuts 
                and aging technology, prices should continue to decline. Instead 
                they keep going up. 
              TT: Mr. Smith, first, I thought you'd 
                like to see this, which dovetails to your own "repeater huts". 
                According to the New York Public Service Commission's Audit of 
                New York Telephone, the company, from 1971-1980 went from having 
                9,500 "unallocated and undetailed" items, amounting to $16 million 
                to 34,300 items, accounting for $305 million dollars during the 
                1981-1990 timeframe, the years you were working at Bell. 
                 
                Mr. Smith: That certainly shows how the Bell staff was 
                able to add items to the accounting records without any detail. 
                A jump of approximately $290 million dollars and an additional 
                25,000 undetailed pieces of equipment in just one state during 
                the time of Divestiture clearly shows that the staffers had to 
                be creative in making this all fit, and they used the placeholders 
                of undetailed and unallocated costs as the simplest way. 
              TT: And I would like to call your 
                attention to the fact that in some of the FCC audits, such as 
                the audit of BellSouth, the FCC found 29% of the items were missing 
                or unverifiable.  
              "In the case of BellSouth, 29% of 
                the information required was missing or couldn't be found or had 
                serious errors."  
              Meanwhile, the Southwestern Bell Audit found 
                113,700 records containing $1.1 billion dollars in Undetailed 
                or Unallocated costs.  
              "We found 46,900 such line-items 
                representing $923.8 million in Undetailed Investment. Southwestern 
                Bell has not shown any specific physical plant or provided sufficient 
                or convincing cost support data relating to any of the line-items 
                for Undetailed Investment. We also found more than 66,800 line-items 
                representing $157.4 million in Unallocated Other Costs."  
              Mr. Smith: As I said, the Bell company 
                was originally one big family and so we all used the same methods 
                of record keeping.  
              TT: I would also like to call your 
                attention to this quote that demonstrates that the equipment in 
                the network in 1992 was the basis for the rates in New York even 
                today, because the current prices used 1992 as a starting point. 
               
                 
                  "New York Telephone also states that 
                    the findings have no relevance to rate setting under the current 
                    Alternate Regulation (PRP). Under the PRP, cost precision 
                    contained in the company's accounting records became less 
                    important when determining a reasonable level of customer 
                    rates. Therefore, the company claims that even if it was found 
                    that New York Telephone overvalued its plant, customers are 
                    not harmed because customer's rates were not based on accounting 
                    costs. However, the PRP forecast was the 1992 calendar year 
                    accounting records. To the extent that the 1992 costs were 
                    overstated, customer rates that were based on those costs 
                    are overstated." Source: NY PSC Audit of New York Tel.)
                
               
              Mr. Smith: You should remember that 
                the depreciation rates of most equipment was 30 years, meaning 
                that the company had this equipment on the books and active and 
                was writing it off over a 30 year period. The copper wiring in 
                the streets, for example, is still being used that was laid in 
                the 1920's. Therefore, since the prices of ALL services was based 
                on the equipment in the network, then equipment or missing equipment 
                for that matter, from the 1970's, 1980s and 1990's are all relevant 
                to today's pricing structure of rates. This material is starting 
                point for every states price regime, whether its under 
                rate-of return, which examined profits, or "Alternate 
                Regulations", sometimes called "Price caps" or Incentive regulation, 
                that examines the price of the service, but not the profits. The 
                New York Commission staff got it right. 
              TT: Why are you telling us this now? 
              Mr. Smith: To clear my conscience a 
                bit. I was just a kid and didn't really understand all of the 
                dynamics. My take on the equipment was we inherited bad books 
                and so we would just take the bad stuff off the books. I only 
                later thought about how much these companies really got away with, 
                And it makes me mad to think about what I was forced to do. Time 
                to "Tell The Truth" I guess. I only wished some of my colleagues 
                would step forward and tell their own tales. Believe me there's 
                a lot more to tell. 
              FIN: 
                 
                "Watergate was a gnat compared to the Bell System". 
              From suicide note, T.O. Gravitt, former president 
                of Southwestern Bell Texas, 1977. 
             |