[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 208 (Thursday, October 28, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58060-58063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-28204]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Public Information Collections Approved by Office of Management
and Budget
October 22, 1999.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has received Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the following public
information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a
person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless
it displays a currently valid control number. For further information
contact Shoko B. Hair, Federal Communications Commission, (202) 418-
1379.
Federal Communications Commission
OMB Control No.: 3060-0526.
Expiration Date: 10/31/2002.
Title: Density Pricing Zone Plans, Expanded Interconnection with
Local Telephone Company Facilities--CC Docket No. 91-141.
Form No.: N/A.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Estimated Annual Burden: 13 respondents; 48 hours per response
(avg.); 624 total annual burden hours for all collections.
Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Description: Pursuant to Section 203 of the Communications Act,
LECs are required to tariff communications service offerings with the
Commission. Sections 201 and 202 of the Act require that all tariffed
charges, practices, classifications, and regulations be just and
reasonable and not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory. The
Commission concluded that it will allow LECs additional special access
pricing flexibility for services subject to competition in any study
area in which expanded interconnection offerings are operational. If
they choose, LECs may file density pricing plans establishing systems
of pricing zones. Rates for special access services subject to
competition will be averaged within zones, but will be allowed to
diverge between zones over time subject to a price cap mechanism. LECs
will be permitted to lower the weighted average rate level in any zone
by as much as 10 percent annually relative to the price cap index for
the special access basket, or to raise the weighted average rate level
in any zone by up to five percent annually relative to the price cap
index for the special access basket, without triggering any of the
additional cost justification or advance notice requirements contained
in the price cap rules. Material supporting each LEC's density pricing
plan is necessary to ensure that these plans generally reflect cost
differences and foster fair competition. Absent the review of such
information by the Commission, the LECs would have strong incentives to
attempt to use this additional pricing flexibility in an
anticompetitive manner. In the Switched Transport Expanded
Interconnection Order, the Commission created a density zone pricing
plan that allows some degree of deaveraging for switched transport
services. The Commission concluded that relaxing the pricing rules in
this manner would enable price cap LECs to respond to increased
competition in the interstate switched transport market. For purposes
of deaveraging services in the trunking basket, the Commission in the
Fifth Report and Order issued in CC Docket No. 96-262, released August
27, 1999, eliminates the limitations inherent in its current density
zone pricing plan and allow price cap LECs to define the scope and
number of zones within a study area, provided that each zone, except
the highest-cost zone, accounts for at least fifteen percent of the
incumbent LEC's trunking basket revenues in the study area. In
addition, the Commission eliminates the requirement that LECs file zone
pricing plans prior to filing their tariffs. The density pricing plan
information is used by the FCC staff to ensure that the tariff rates to
be paid for special access services are just, reasonable, and
nondiscriminatory, as Sections 201 and 202 of the Communications Act
require. The filing of density pricing plans is necessary to allow
review of the number of zones and how offices were assigned to the
different zones. The information is used to determine if the carriers
have complied with our order on zone density. Without this information,
the FCC would be unable to determine whether the rates for these
services are just, reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and otherwise in
accordance with the law. The density pricing plans are to be filed
whenever a LEC voluntarily elects to implement additional special
access pricing flexibility. Obligation to comply: Required to obtain or
retain benefits.
[[Page 58061]]
OMB Control No.: 3060-0760.
Expiration Date: 10/31/2002.
Title: Access Charge Reform--CC Docket No. 96-262, First Report and
Order, Second Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and
Order, Third Report and Order, and Fifth Report and Order.
Form No.: N/A.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Estimated Annual Burden: 14 respondents; 4165 hours per response
(avg.); 58,319 total annual burden hours for all collections.
Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $8,000.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Description: In the Fifth Report and Order (Order), CC Docket No.
96-262, Access Charge Reform, released August 27, 1999, the Commission
is modifying the rules that govern the provision of interstate access
services by those price cap LECs subject to price regulation to advance
the pro-competitive, de-regulatory national policies embodied in the
Telecommunications Act of 1996. The pricing flexibility framework
adopted in the Order is designed to grant greater flexibility to price
cap LECs as competition develops, while ensuring that: (1) Price cap
LECs do not use pricing flexibility to deter efficient entry or engage
in exclusionary pricing behavior; and (2) price cap LECs do not
increase rates to unreasonable levels for customers that lack
competitive alternatives.
a. Showings under the Market-Based Approach: In the Fifth Report
and Order, the Commission provides detailed rules for implementing the
market-based approach, pursuant to which price cap LECs would receive
pricing flexibility in the provision of interstate access services as
competition for those services develops. The Order grants immediate
pricing flexibility to price cap LECs in the form of streamlined
introduction of new services, geographic deaveraging of rates for
services in the trunking basket, and removal of certain interstate
interexchange services from price cap regulation. The Order also
provides for additional pricing flexibility, to be granted in two
phases, that is contingent upon competitive showings. To obtain Phase I
relief, price cap LECs must demonstrate that competitors have made
irreversible, sunk investments in the facilities needed to provide the
services at issue. For instance, for dedicated transport and special
access services, price cap LECs must demonstrate that unaffiliated
competitors have collocated in at least 15 percent of the LEC's wire
centers within an MSA or collocated in wire centers accounting for 30
percent of the LEC's revenues from these services within an MSA. Higher
thresholds apply, however, for channel terminations between a LEC end
office and an end user customer. In that case, the LEC must demonstrate
that unaffiliated competitors have collocated in 50 percent of the
price cap LEC's wire centers within an MSA or collocated in wire
centers accounting for 65 percent of the price cap LEC's revenues from
this service within an MSA. For traffic-sensitive, common line, and the
traffic-sensitive components of tandem-switched transport services, a
LEC must show that competitors offer service over their own facilities
to 15 percent of the price cap LEC's customer locations within an MSA.
Phase I relief permits price cap LECs to offer, on one day's notice,
volume and term discounts and contract tariffs for these services, so
long as the services provided pursuant to contract are removed from
price caps. To obtain Phase II relief, price cap LECs must demonstrate
that competitors have established a significant market presence (i.e.,
that competition for a particular service within the MSA is sufficient
to preclude the incumbent from exploiting any individual market power
over a sustained period) for provision of the services at issue. Phase
II relief for dedicated transport and special access services is
warranted when a price cap LEC demonstrates that unaffiliated
competitors have collocated in at least 50 percent of the LEC's wire
centers within an MSA or collocated in wire centers accounting for 65
percent of the LEC's revenues from these services within an MSA. Again
a higher threshold applies to channel terminations between a LEC end
office and an end user customer. In that case, a price cap LEC must
show that unaffiliated competitors have collocated in 65 percent of the
LEC's wire centers within an MSA or collocated in wire centers
accounting for 85 percent of the LEC's revenues from this service
within an MSA. Phase II relief permits price cap LECs to file tariffs
for these services on one day's notice, free from both our Part 61 rate
level and our Part 69 rate structure rules. See also 47 CFR Sections
1.774, 69.707, 69.709, 69.711, 69.713, 69.725, 69.727, 69.729. (No. of
respondents: 13; hours per response: 2117; total annual burden: 27,520
hours).
b. Cost Study of Interstate Access Service That Remain Subject to
Price Cap Regulation: The 1996 Act has created an unprecedented
opportunity for competition to develop in local telephone markets. The
Commission recognizes, however, that competition is unlikely to develop
at the same rate in different locations, and that some services will be
subject to increasing competition more rapidly than others. The
Commission also recognizes, however, that there will be areas and
services for which competition may not develop. The Commission will
adopt a prescriptive ``backdrop'' to our market-based approach that
will serve to ensure that all interstate access customers receive the
benefits of more efficient prices, even in those places and for those
services where competition does not develop quickly. To implement our
backstop to market-based access charge reform, we require each
incumbent price cap LEC to file a cost study no later than February 8,
2001, demonstrating the cost of providing those interstate access
services that remain subject to price cap regulation because they do
not face substantial competition. (No. of respondents: 13; hours per
response: 8; total annual burden 104 hours).
c. Tariff Filings: In the First Report and Order, the Commission
requires the filing of various tariffs, with modifications. For
example, the FCC directs incumbent LECs to establish separate rate
elements for the multiplexing equipment on each side of the tandem
switch. LECs must establish a flat-rated charge for the multiplexers on
the SWC side of the tandem, imposed pro-rata on the purchasers of the
dedicated trunks on the SWC side of the tandem. Multiplexing equipment
on the EO-to-tandem transport on a per-minute of use basis. These
multiplexer rate elements must be included in the LEC access tariff
filings to be effective January 1, 1998. In the Second Order on
Reconsideration, the FCC clarifies that the TIC exemption for access
customers using competitive transport providers only applies to that
portion of the residual per-minute TIC that is related to transport
facilities, and directs incumbent local exchange carriers to include,
in their access tariff filing, the amount of per-minute transport
interconnection charge (TIC) they anticipate will be allocated to
facilities-based rate elements in the future. (No. of respondents: 13;
hours per response 35 hours; total annual burden: 455 hours).
d. Third-Party Disclosure: In the Second Order on Reconsideration,
the Commission requires LEC to provide IXCs with customer-specific
information about how many and what type of presubscribed interexchange
carrier charges (PICCs) they are assessing for each of the IXC's
presubscribed customers. One of the primary goals of
[[Page 58062]]
our First Report and Order was to develop a cost-recovery mechanism
that permits carriers to recover their costs in a manner that reflects
the way in which those costs are incurred. Without access to
information that indicates whether the LEC is assessing a primary or
non-primary residential PICC, or about how many local business lines
are presubscribed to a particular IXC, the IXC will be unable to
develop rates that accurately reflect the underlying costs. (No. of
respondents: 14; hours per response: 35 hours; total annual burden 455
hours).
e. Contract-based Tariff Filings: Price cap LECs who have made a
Phase I showing may now offer contract-based tariffs. Contract-based
tariffs enable price cap LECs to tailor services to their customers'
individual needs, but also prevent targeting by requiring that price
cap LECs make contract tariffs available to all similarly situated
customers. See 47 CFR Sections 61.55 and 69.727. (No. of respondents:
13; hours per response: 3 hours; total annual burden: 780 hours).
In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued in CC Docket
No. 96-262, released August 27, 1999, the Commission seeks comment on
whether to permit incumbent LECs to deaverage common line and traffic
sensitive access elements without a competitive showing. To the extent
that parties advocate conditioning deaveraging upon satisfaction of a
competitive showing, the Commission seeks comment on the appropriate
showing and the procedure by which evidence be presented and evaluated.
f. Proposed Deaveraging of Common Line and Traffic Sensitive Access
Elements: Deaveraging common line and traffic sensitive access elements
would require at least one additional tariff filing and may require an
additional competitive showing. (No. of respondents: 13; hours per
response: 109 hours; total annual burden: 1420 hours).
g. Proposed Common line and Traffic Sensitive Phase II Showings:
Incumbent LECs seeking pricing flexibility for switched services may be
required to file a petition demonstrating that it has met the triggers,
and make an initial tariff filing. (No. of respondents: 13; hours per
response: 1984 hours; total annual burden: 25,800).
The Commission's authority to collect this information is provided
under 47 U.S.C 201-205 and 303(r). The information to be collected
would be submitted to the FCC by incumbent LECs for use in determining
whether the incumbent LECs should receive the regulatory relief
proposed in the Orders. The information collected under the Second
Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and Order would be
submitted by the LECs to the interexchange carriers (IXCs) for use in
developing the most cost-efficient rates and rate structures.
Obligation to comply: Mandatory.
OMB Control No.: 3060-0770.
Expiration Date: 10/31/2002.
Title: Price Cap Performance Review for Local Exchange Carriers--CC
Docket No. 94-1 (New Services).
Form No.: N/A.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Estimated Annual Burden: 13 respondents; 10 hours per response
(avg.); 130 total annual burden hours for all collections.
Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
Frequency of Response: On occasion.
Description: In the Fifth Report and Order, issued in CC Docket
Nos. 96-262 and 94-1, released August 27, 1999, the Commission permits
price cap LECs to introduce new services on a streamlined basis,
without prior approval. The Commission modified the rules to eliminate
the public interest showing required by Section 69.4(g) and to
eliminate the new services test (except in the case of loop-based new
services) required under Sections 61.49(f) and (g). These modifications
will eliminate the delays that now exist for the introduction of new
services as well as encourage efficient investment and innovation. The
Commission's authority to collect this information is provided under 47
U.S.C. Section 203. The information collected would be submitted to the
Commission by an incumbent LEC for use in determining whether it is in
the public interest for the incumbent LEC to offer a proposed new
switched access service. Obligation to comply: Required to obtain or
retain benefits.
OMB Control No.: 3060-0907.
Expiration Date: 04/30/2002.
Title: Universal Service Amendment Worksheets.
Form No.: FCC Form 457(M) and FCC Form 499-S(M).
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Estimated Annual Burden: 100 respondents; 2 hours per response
(avg.); 200 total annual burden hours for all collections.
Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
Frequency of Response: One-time requirement.
Description: On May 8, 1997, the Commission issued the Universal
Service Order, implementing the universal service provisions in Section
254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended and setting forth a
plan to fulfill the universal service goals established by Congress. In
the Universal Service Order, the Commission announced its plan for
establishing a system of universal service support for rural, insular,
and high cost areas that will replace the existing high-cost support
mechanisms and implicit federal subsidies with explicit, competitively-
neutral federal universal service support mechanisms. Pursuant to the
Act, the Commission also adopted rules to ensure that quality services
are available to low-income consumers at affordable rates. In addition,
the Commission adopted rules creating new support mechanisms to promote
universal service for eligible schools and libraries, and rural health
care providers, as mandated by Congress in the Act. Finally, the
Commission modified its existing funding methods, so that funding for
the support mechanisms is not generated exclusively through charges on
long distance carriers. Instead, as the statute requires, the new
universal service rules require equitable and nondiscriminatory
contributions from all telecommunications carriers that provide
interstate telecommunications services, as well as other providers of
interstate telecommunications to the extent that the Commission
determines that their contributions would serve the public interest. On
July 30, 1999, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision affirming in part,
remanding in part, and reversing in part the Commission's May 8, 1997
Universal Service Order. Several of the court's rulings in that
decision affect the assessment and recovery of universal service
contributions. In light of the court's ruling, the Commission amends
sections 54.706 and 54.709 of its rules in the Universal Service Remand
Order, released October 8, 1999, to provide for a single contribution
base for purposes of funding all of the universal service support
mechanisms. Specifically, in response to the court's determination that
the Commission lacks jurisdiction to assess providers' intrastate
revenues, we have eliminated intrastate revenues from the contribution
base. Consistent with the court's ruling, we also reconsider the basis
for assessing the international revenues of interstate providers. The
Commission is requiring each contributor that qualifies for the
international revenues exception adopted in the Universal Service
[[Page 58063]]
Remand Order to file an amendment to its March 1999 and September 1999
worksheets, identifying the amount and percentages of the contributor's
interstate and international revenues. This information is to be filed
on FCC Form 457(M) and/or FCC Form 499-S(M). Amendment to March 1999
Universal Service Worksheet, FCC Form 457(M) and Amendment to September
1999 Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet, FCC Form 499-S(M) simply
require contributors to identify the amounts and percentages of their
interstate and international revenues and will only apply to the
revenue data provided on the March 1999 and September 1999 Worksheet.
Contributors that qualify for the international revenues exception must
file the amendment forms with USAC by December 1, 1999. Copies of the
forms may be downloaded from the Commission's forms Web page,
www.fcc.gov/formpage.html. The form is also available through the FCC
Fax-on-Demand system. Copies may be order via fax 24 hours a day by
calling 202-418-0177 from the handset of any fax machine. The document
retrieval number for the FCC Form 475(M) is 0004571; the document
retrieval number for the FCC Form 499-S(M) is 0004993. The files
contain both the instructions and the forms. Follow the system voice
prompts and enter the document retrieval number when requested. Due to
the limited number of phone lines into the forms Fax-on-Demand system,
callers may wish to call during non-business hours. If you have
difficulty with the transmission of your fax contact Patricia Quartey
at 202-418-0212. Finally, copies may be obtained from the USAC at (973)
560-4400. Obligation to comply: Mandatory. Public reporting burden for
the collections of information is as noted above. Send comments
regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of the collections of
information, including suggestions for reducing the burden to
Performance Evaluation and Records Management, Washington, DC 20554.
Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 99-28204 Filed 10-27-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P