Only audio bridging service providers supported two petitions to reconsider and clarify a June order that would force Intercall and other audio bridging companies to pay into universal service (CD Aug 12 p10). Unsurprisingly, Intercall backed the petitions, urging the FCC to declare audio conferencing an information service. Multi-Point Communications, another audio-conferencing provider, termed the FCC order “procedurally defective,” because it didn’t give “appropriate notice and comment to the teleconferencing industry.” The FCC provided 11 days to comment, and Multi- Point “was given only last-minute notice that it must adopt and implement procedures to fulfill its new [USF] obligations,” it said. Meanwhile, Verizon demanded that the petition be rejected outright. “There are no grounds for reconsideration,” the carrier said. The petitioners didn’t participate in the initial proceeding, they raise no new questions of law or fact and their arguments lack merit, it said. Others asked the FCC to clarify that the Intercall order changed no rules. Cisco said it believes the Intercall order confirmed existing FCC rules, but could be misread as rewriting them. It urged the FCC to make clear that the former -- and not the latter -- is true. The FCC “should confirm that this decision applied existing precedent, and did not adopt a new test for what constitutes an integrated information service,” said the VON Coalition. Also, the FCC should clarify the decision’s scope and say that it doesn’t cover information services including a functionally integrated voice communications function, the Coalition said.
A carrier contesting an FCC order on payphone compensation faced tough questioning from judges in oral argument Tuesday at U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Judges David Sentelle, Brett Kavanaugh and Janice Brown heard the case, NetworkIP v. FCC (06-1364). Kavanaugh and Sentelle at times seemed skeptical of NetworkIP’s position. Brown was mum throughout the argument.
Qwest’s and Verizon’s forbearance petitions on reporting requirements remain active, though the FCC granted the carriers some relief in Saturday’s order on a similar AT&T petition (CD Sept 9 p1). AT&T, Verizon, Qwest, Embarq and Frontier filed petitions seeking forbearance from Automated Reporting Management Information System requirements. A footnote in the AT&T order said, “To the extent that the [other] petitions seek other regulatory relief, those requests remain pending.” The Embarq and Frontier petitions sought less relief than AT&T and so are considered taken care of, but Qwest and Verizon asked for more relief than AT&T. The carriers can withdraw their petitions if they're satisfied with the relief won Saturday. A Qwest spokesman, who told us Monday that the carrier believed its petition had been handled, said Tuesday that the petition is still under review at the FCC. “We continue to ask the relief that it is seeking,” he said. Verizon is “reviewing what is still outstanding in our petition and will make a determination,” a spokesman said. Meanwhile, Frontier plans to ask the FCC to kill cost-assignment rules for all price-cap regulated carriers, it said in a statement sent late Monday. Saturday, the FCC gave Qwest and Verizon relief from the rules, which require carriers to keep records that separate interstate and intrastate costs, among other requirements. AT&T got relief in April. Frontier said it was pleased that the FCC had dealt with its petition for forbearance from ARMIS requirements in the order Saturday. The carrier agrees with the position taken in the attached noticed of proposed rulemaking, it said -- “in the event the FCC determines that collection of certain of that information is warranted, the reporting obligation should be on an industry-wide basis.”
The FCC is catching flak for a last-minute decision to give accounting rules relief to Verizon and Qwest in an order granting an AT&T forbearance petition. AT&T sought relief from Automated Reporting Management Information System rules. Saturday, commissioners unanimously decided that, within two years, AT&T and other price-cap carriers should stop filing four ARMIS reports on service quality, customer satisfaction, infrastructure and operating data. But the agency split by party on a controversial Friday afternoon edit that extended to Qwest and Verizon cost-assignment rules relief won by AT&T in April.
Level 3 is pleased AT&T and Verizon are proposing a per- system regulatory fee for submarine cable systems, but questions remain, Bill Hunt, Level 3 Public Policy vice president, said Thursday in an interview. The plan, filed earlier this week (CD Sept 4 p10), partly follows a proposal by Level 3 and other private submarine cable operators that the Bells had opposed, Hunt said. A per-system fee is “the way we need to go,” he said. But Hunt called unclear one part of the proposal stipulating that smaller cables would pay lower per-system fees than others. The proposal might shift too much burden to large cable providers, and exempt some providers from paying anything at all, he said: “Where do you draw the line?” The submarine cable operators, AT&T and Verizon were in contact prior to the carriers’ proposal, and the submarine cable operators are trying to schedule another meeting, he said. The FCC has promised to act by October on the submarine cable fee issue.
A draft order on intercarrier compensation reform could appear this month, telecom industry officials told us Thursday. Martin is expected to circulate it in three to four weeks, one official said. That timeframe “isn’t inconsistent with what I've heard,” said Curt Stamp, president of the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance. The Wireline Bureau is “feverishly working” on the draft, which is a comprehensive reform package, Stamp said. The FCC doesn’t comment on procedural issues, said an agency spokeswoman. But Martin has said he'd like to overhaul intercarrier compensation by Nov. 5, she said. According to court mandate, the FCC at least must explain by that date the statutory basis for its ISP-bound traffic compensation rules (CD Aug 26 p2).
FCC commissioners seem set to vote 3-2 to grant AT&T forbearance from reporting requirements, though decisions aren’t final, agency officials said Tuesday. And they'll likely extend by 90 days the deadline on a more expansive ARMIS forbearance petition filed by Qwest, we're told. The AT&T draft order, now circulating, would grant AT&T most of the Automated Reporting Management Information System deregulation it seeks and extend that to other price-cap carriers (CD Aug 27 p7). With votes due Saturday, CompTel and Sprint are sounding alarms on the FCC’s apparent intention to give ARMIS relief to multiple carriers.
All but rural carriers rejected an Embarq plan for an interim revamp to intercarrier compensation (CD Aug 4 p7). In comments to the FCC Tuesday, the Embarq plan got slightly better reviews than an AT&T proposal did last week (CD Aug 25 p4). But most commenters said they would rather the FCC pursue permanent, comprehensive reform, promised by Chairman Kevin Martin for Nov. 5.
Democratic FCC commissioners condemned the agency’s handling of an OrbitCom forbearance petition late Wednesday, in statements on a succinct order denying the petition. As expected, the FCC said the competitive local exchange carrier’s petition was facially deficient. The agency controversially kept the petition from public view for nearly a year after OrbitCom filed it (CD Aug 22 p6).
The FCC shouldn’t allow relay providers to forward 911 calls to other providers, Sorenson and other Internet relay providers said in reply comments. Earlier this month, in initial comments on a rulemaking about the FCC 10-digit numbering plan for Internet relay, the National Emergency Number Association said the FCC should require relay providers to forward 911 calls to other providers if they don’t answer in a set period (CD Aug 12 p6). In a reply, AT&T opposed imposing slamming and other new customer privacy rules on relay providers.