FCC Web Documents citing 3.28

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 07 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-87A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-00-87A5.txt
  • 1997 and 1998, Euro for 1999 Local Single Transit Double Transit 1997 1998 1999 1997 1998 1999 1997 1998 1999 Country Austria 7.61 1.80 1.82 7.61 1.80 1.82 8.41 2.37 2.40 Belgium 2.78 1.11 1.07 2.78 2.10 1.80 3.62 2.94 2.56 Denmark 0.98 0.98 0.93 1.82 1.82 1.67 2.22 2.22 1.91 Finland 1.81 1.42 1.43 1.81 1.42 1.43 4.20 2.81 3.28 France 0.71 0.70 0.61 1.73 1.71 1.50 2.55 2.52 2.23 Germany 1.00 0.99 1.01 1.71 1.69 1.72 2.61 2.58 2.63 Greece n/a 1.81 n/a n/a 1.81 n/a n/a 2.59 n/a Italy 1.54 1.51 1.00 2.52 2.47 1.60 n/a n/a 2.30 Ireland n/a 2.20 1.00 n/a 4.15 1.60 n/a 5.18 2.26 Luxembourg n/a 2.01 2.25 n/a 2.01 2.25 n/a 2.01 2.25
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-699A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-699A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-01-699A1.txt
  • DARS satellites from 62 dBW to 68.5 dBW; (2) to revise its downlink channelization plan by increasing the number of channels from five to six, including four carrier frequencies (two per satellite) of 1.84 MHz each and two frequencies for terrestrial repeaters of 2.53 MHz each; and (3) to increase the transmission rate of each of its satellite carriers to 3.28 Mbits/s. 6. The satellite EIRP is 62 dBW in XM's current authorization. The modification application requests a 6.5 dB EIRP increase to 68.5 dBW. This increase in radiated power will provide a stronger signal to the receivers on the earth's surface, which will improve reception and increase service availability. A stronger signal from the satellites may reduce the number of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3667A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3667A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3667A1.txt
  • largely passive investors. Any influence of these investors will be limited to their ownership interests in FIIB. Financing for the proposed merger will also be provided in part through a shares offering to FIIP Limited (``FIIP''), a Cayman Islands company limited by shares. FIIP is the corporate vehicle for participation in THC by FIIB and Crescent employees. THC will issue 3.28 percent of its non-voting common stock to FIIP. No employee of FIIB or Crescent will be allowed to hold an ownership interest in FIIP that, separately or combined with the employee's interest in FIIB, would be sufficient to constitute a 10 percent or greater ownership interest in Cypress post-close or confer the ability to control Cypress. After the financing arrangements
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-180A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-180A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-180A1.txt
  • DARS satellites from 62 dBW to 68.5 dBW; (2) to revise its downlink channelization plan by increasing the number of channels from five to six, including four carrier frequencies (two per satellite) of 1.84 MHz each and two frequencies for terrestrial repeaters of 2.53 MHz each; and (3) to increase the transmission rate of each of its satellite carriers to 3.28 Mbits/s. . . XM Radio also received Special Temporary Authority (STA) to operate in-band terrestrial repeaters for commercial service in certain markets to fill gaps in satellite coverage. See XM Radio, Inc., Order and Authorization, 16 FCC Rcd 16781 (Int'l Bur. 2001), as modified by 16 FCC Rcd 18484, pet. for recon. pending. . XM Radio Inc., Application for Minor
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3470A4.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3470A4.txt
  • 168 10.61 CW 93 5.87 MNT 74 4.67 IndependentandPublic"Networks" IND1 86 5.43 IND2 40 2.53 IND3 20 1.26 IND4 12 0.76 IND5 9 0.57 IND6 5 0.32 IND7 3 0.19 IND8 1 0.06 IND9 1 0.06 PBS1 181 11.43 PBS2 91 5.75 PBS3 40 2.53 PBS4 22 1.39 PBS5 6 0.38 PBS6 4 0.25 OtherBroadcastNetworks AZA 5 0.32 ION 52 3.28 TBN 37 2.34 TEL 22 1.39 TLF 19 1.20 UNI 37 2.34 Total 1,583100.00 Source:Authorcalculations.Note:IND1-IND9(PBS1-PBS6)are"virtualnetworks"consistingofthefirst,second, etc.Independent(Public)televisionstationofferedineachNielsenDMA.SeeSection4.1formoredetails.AZA =AztecaAmerica,ION=The"i"network,TBN=TrinityBroadcastingNetwork,TEL=Telemundo,TLF= Telefutura,andUNI=Univision 34 Table6: ProgramProductionbyProgrammingType 6:00p.m.-12:00a.m.EST(orequivalent),2weeks/year,2003-2006 AllBroadcast Cable Variable Networks NetworksNetworks NewsProgramming AnyNews 4.14 11.79 2.96 NetworkNews 0.51 2.63 0.18 LocalNews 3.63 9.16 2.78 PublicAffairsProgramming 1.98 3.40 1.76 MinorityProgramming NetworksTargetingBlackAudiences 3.39 0.00 3.91 TargetingLatinoAudiences OnNetworksTargetingLatinoAudiences 8.13 15.17 7.05 Spanish-LanguageProgramming 3.39 5.54 3.05 NetworksTargetingOtherDiverseAudiences 2.65
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3470A7.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3470A7.txt
  • and Weather (in seconds) Independent variables (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Local station ownership Cross-owned newspaper 46.9 (0.91) 77.2 (1.13) 50.5 (0.89) 91.6 (1.63) 78.8** (1.98) Cross-owned radio station -307.8** (2.56) -255.0** (2.16) -167.1* (1.89) -76.5 (1.20) Cross-owned radio and newspaper 124.2 (0.80) 190.1 (1.38) 143.4 (1.23) 23.0 (0.26) Parent company coverage of all television households (%) 17.3*** (3.70) 14.4*** (3.28) 3.4 (1.02) Network owned and operated -185.5* (1.70) -231.4* (1.94) -17.0 (0.18) Network affiliation (omitted category is CW\MyNetwork) ABC -16.3 (0.12) 324.1*** (3.35) CBS -74.3 (0.56) 331.6*** (3.47) FOX 333.0** (2.37) 106.6 (1.28) NBC -79.6 (0.60) 327.4*** (3.36) Other control variables Time and length of broadcast fixed effects No No No No Yes DMA and date fixed effects Yes Yes
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-2340A1.txt
  • following example shows the calculation of the permissible tolerance for a measured base impedance of 20 - j32 ohms: The tolerance for the resistance term is (2 + 0.04 x 20), or 2.80 ohms. Calculated base resistance must therefore be within +/- 2.80 ohms of 20 ohms. The tolerance for the reactance term is (2 + 0.04 x 32), or 3.28 ohms. Calculated base reactance must therefore be within +/- 3.28 ohms of -j32. Requirement to measure impedance of sampling line with sampling device connected The matrix of measurements described in Section 73.151(c)(2)(i) includes a requirement for impedance measurements of the sampling line at or near carrier frequency ``with the sampling device connected'' (emphasis added). Some applicants have failed to submit
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-148A1_Rcd.pdf
  • should it be a winning bidder for any Auction 93 construction permit, it will be able to build and operate facilities that will fully comply with the Commission's current technical and legal requirements. Participants in this auction should continue such research throughout the auction. For further details regarding due diligence, please refer to the Auction 93 Procedures Public Notice, section I.B.3.28 15.NewEntrant Bidding Credit Eligibility. An applicant seeking a new entrant bidding credit must have indicated on its short-form application that it is claiming eligibility for a credit, along with the percentage of the bidding credit it is claiming.29The bidding credit percentage indicated on the short-form application as of the January 12, 2012, filing deadline is the maximum level of bidding
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-104945A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-104945A1.txt
  • USTA Comments at 62-63; BellSouth Comments at 78; U S West Comments at 68-69; Citizens Utilities Comments at 33; GTE Comments at 38. 16230 Federal Communications Commission FCC 97-158 operator switches being allocated in Part 69 to Common Line, Transport, and Special Access, where there is no switch investment to maintain.354 USTA estimates COE Maintenance Misallocations at $101.8 million, or 3.28 percent of the TIC.355 According to USTA, a more cost-causative approach would be to separate the central office expenses based on the separation of the investment being maintained.356 104. To accomplish this modification, USTA proposes to modify sections 36.321 and 69.40 l(b).357 USTA states that COE switching expenses should be assigned to the Transport elements based on a relationship of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A1.txt
  • Allocating LEC Intrastate Toll ............................................ Table 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Common Line Support Payment Trueups by State or Jurisdiction ......... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Payment Trueups by Study Area .......................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A2.txt
  • Allocating LEC Intrastate Toll ............................................ Table 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Common Line Support Payment Trueups by State or Jurisdiction ......... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Payment Trueups by Study Area .......................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A4.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A4.txt
  • 1.75 1.75 6.50 10.00 10.00 6.50 13.50 13.49 Illinois 6.25 8.25 6.92 0.00 1.20 0.18 0.00 0.60 0.09 6.25 8.85 7.01 6.25 10.05 7.18 Indiana 7.28 8.25 7.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.28 8.25 7.52 7.28 8.25 7.52 Iowa 5.25 8.25 7.29 0.00 3.50 0.03 0.00 1.75 0.02 5.25 10.00 7.31 5.25 13.50 7.34 Kansas 5.25 8.25 7.25 3.28 3.50 3.50 1.64 1.75 1.75 6.89 10.00 9.00 10.17 13.50 12.50 Kentucky 7.09 8.25 8.11 0.00 3.50 2.44 0.00 1.75 1.22 7.09 10.00 9.33 7.09 13.50 11.77 Louisiana 8.25 8.25 8.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 Maine 8.20 8.25 8.21 3.48 3.50 3.50 1.74 1.75 1.75 9.94 10.00 9.96 13.42 13.50 13.46 Maryland
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-262986A5.txt
  • the table. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Only those study areas that are eligible for these payments, regardless of whether they receive any support, are included in the table. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism.42 Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has 40 These are the carriers that settle on a cost basis. Costs for the remaining ILECs, which settle on an average schedule basis, are attributed by NECA on the basis of those carriers' average number of loops per exchange. 41 The data submitted by NECA include payments that would have been made to non-rural carriers if the forward-looking high
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266857A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266857A1.txt
  • Truck transportation 228,467.4 587.8 0.26 0.09 485 Transit and ground passenger transportation 37,835.7 1,017.2 2.69 0.16 486 Pipeline transportation 32,978.7 2.2 0.01 0.00 487OS Other transportation and support activities 109,798.0 1,146.6 1.04 0.18 493 Warehousing and storage 42,501.1 126.3 0.30 0.02 511 Publishing industries (includes software) 171,317.8 260.1 0.15 0.04 512 Motion picture and sound recording industries 98,311.6 21,172.3 21.54 3.28 513 Broadcasting and telecommunications 560,329.8 137,507.6 24.54 21.31 514 Information and data processing services 122,745.5 1,969.2 1.60 0.31 521CI Federal Reserve banks, credit intermediation, and related 569,489.1 14,570.7 2.56 2.26 523 Securities, commodity contracts, and investments 285,947.7 925.6 0.32 0.14 524 Insurance carriers and related activities 542,418.4 6,439.3 1.19 1.00 525 Funds, trusts, and other financial vehicles 87,984.5 0.00 0.00
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A1.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A2.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-269251A5.txt
  • in Table 3.6 are a better indication of the actual HCLS payments. 3 - 11 payments. Table 3.23 has safety net additive support payments. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism.44 Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables contains the annual amounts for only those years for which a support mechanism was in place. The 1998 amounts in Tables 3.22, 3.26, and 3.29 are the actual payments after processing the final true-ups
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 3 Index of Tables and Charts Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A2.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 3 Index of Tables and Charts Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A4.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A4.txt
  • 7.49 6.96 13.50 8.05 Oregon 8.09 8.25 8.25 0.00 3.50 3.48 0.00 1.75 1.74 8.09 10.00 9.99 8.09 13.50 13.47 Pennsylvania 6.65 8.25 7.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.65 8.25 7.94 6.65 8.25 7.94 Puerto Rico 8.25 8.25 8.25 3.36 3.50 3.37 1.68 1.75 1.68 9.93 10.00 9.93 13.29 13.50 13.30 Rhode Island 8.15 8.19 8.15 0.00 3.50 3.28 0.00 1.75 1.64 8.15 9.94 9.79 8.15 13.44 13.07 South Carolina 7.41 8.25 8.23 0.00 3.50 3.49 0.00 1.75 1.74 7.41 10.00 9.97 7.41 13.50 13.46 South Dakota 6.50 8.25 8.21 0.00 3.50 0.30 0.00 1.75 0.15 6.50 10.00 8.36 6.50 13.50 8.66 Tennessee 6.84 8.25 8.11 0.00 3.50 3.10 0.00 1.75 1.55 6.84 10.00 9.66 6.84 13.50 12.75 Texas
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.txt
  • 2001 can be found in the 2006 Universal Service Monitoring Report. Table 3.22 has HCLS payments. Table 3.23 has safety net additive support payments. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism.47 Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables contains the annual amounts for only those years for which a support mechanism was in place. Table 3.27 has the final ICLS true-ups for 2002 through on an average schedule basis, are attributed by
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A1.pdf
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 3 Index of Tables and Charts Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A2.pdf
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 3 Index of Tables and Charts Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance -
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A3.pdf
  • 26 33 Illinois 1,139,239 3.82 196 275 369 465 Indiana 338,113 1.13 58 82 109 138 Iowa 229,603 0.77 39 55 74 94 Kansas 346,533 1.16 60 84 112 142 Kentucky 337,467 1.13 58 82 109 138 Louisiana 394,199 1.32 68 95 128 161 Maine 134,610 0.45 23 33 44 55 Maryland 590,557 1.98 102 143 191 241 Massachusetts 978,953 3.28 168 237 317 400 Michigan 992,598 3.33 171 240 321 405 Minnesota 675,623 2.27 116 163 219 276 Mississippi 161,058 0.54 28 39 52 66 Missouri 425,768 1.43 73 103 138 174 Montana 61,726 0.21 11 15 20 25 Nebraska 244,058 0.82 42 59 79 100 Nevada 245,553 0.82 42 59 79 100 New Hampshire 195,539 0.66 34 47 63
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-287688A5.pdf
  • 2003 can be found in the 2007 Universal Service Monitoring Report. Table 3.22 has HCLS payments. Table 3.23 has safety net additive support payments. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism. Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables contains the annual amounts for only those years for which a support mechanism was in place. Table 3.27 has the final ICLS true-ups for 2002 through 2006, and Table 3.29 has the final LSS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A1.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance - Payments - by State or Jurisdiction .......................................Table 2.8 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - by State ........................................................ Table 2.6 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - Tribal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A2.txt
  • 1.24 Information for Allocating Mobile Wireless Revenues .................................. Table 1.20 Information for Allocating Non-LEC Intrastate Toll ......................................Table 1.25 Information for Allocating SLC Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ....................Table 3.27 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ........................................................ Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance - Payments - by State or Jurisdiction .......................................Table 2.8 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - by State ........................................................ Table 2.6 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - Tribal
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A3.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A3.txt
  • Colorado 1,218,188 150,924 652,878 6.50 7.00 7.56 167 2.00 205 Connecticut 880,736 171,979 508,518 5.79 5.78 6.24 111 1.33 137 Delaware 237,950 21,995 126,129 6.44 6.43 6.43 30 0.36 37 Dist. of Columbia 154,772 22,791 442,035 3.85 3.85 3.85 29 0.34 35 Florida 5,009,421 499,865 2,205,385 6.50 6.75 7.39 627 7.50 770 Georgia 2,094,235 207,159 1,085,771 6.50 6.76 7.23 274 3.28 337 Guam NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Hawaii 314,388 31,904 192,982 6.50 7.00 8.14 46 0.55 57 Idaho 366,167 26,477 188,239 6.37 6.50 7.15 46 0.55 57 Illinois 3,002,161 322,834 1,949,267 4.81 4.81 5.20 313 3.75 385 Indiana 1,683,862 95,441 759,743 5.90 6.02 6.97 190 2.27 233 Iowa 734,841 34,057 346,190 5.40 5.18 6.35 76 0.91
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-295442A5.txt
  • 2004 can be found in the 2008 Universal Service Monitoring Report. Table 3.22 has HCLS payments. Table 3.23 has safety net additive support payments. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism. Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables contains the annual amounts for only those years for which a support mechanism was in place. Table 3.27 has the final ICLS true-ups for 2005 through 2007, and Table 3.29 has the final LSS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A1.txt
  • 3.36 ILEC Loops - by State or Jurisdiction .......................................................Table 3.20 ILEC Loops - by Study Area .................................................................Table 3.34 Information for Allocating Incumbent Local Exchange Revenues - by State .........Table 1.18 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints - 2009 .................................. Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ................... Table 3.27 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ..........................................................Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance - Annual Payments - by State or Jurisdiction .............................Table 2.8 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - by State or Jurisdiction ...................................Table 2.6 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A2.txt
  • 3.36 ILEC Loops - by State or Jurisdiction .......................................................Table 3.20 ILEC Loops - by Study Area .................................................................Table 3.34 Information for Allocating Incumbent Local Exchange Revenues - by State .........Table 1.18 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints - 2009 .................................. Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payments by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.12 Interstate Access Support Payments by Study Area ........................................... Table 3.28 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by State or Jurisdiction ...... Table 3.11 Interstate Common Line Support Trued-up Payments by Study Area ................... Table 3.27 Lifeline and Link Up Support Payments ..........................................................Chart 2.1 Lifeline Assistance - Annual Payments - by State or Jurisdiction .............................Table 2.8 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - by State or Jurisdiction ...................................Table 2.6 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A5.txt
  • 2005 can be found in the 2009 Universal Service Monitoring Report. Table 3.22 has HCLS payments. Table 3.23 has safety net additive support payments. Table 3.24 has safety valve support payments. Table 3.25 provides, by non-rural study area, the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism. Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has ICLS payments. Table 3.28 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables contains the annual amounts for only those years for which a support mechanism was in place. Table 3.27 has the final ICLS true-ups for 2006 through 2008, and Table 3.29 has the final LSS
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A6.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A6.txt
  • 44,556,331 25.62 15,291,538 8.79 Minnesota 858,350 26,666,083 31.07 22,834,501 26.60 3,831,582 4.46 Mississippi 548,420 33,077,853 60.31 25,995,129 47.40 7,082,724 12.91 Missouri 848,893 25,238,140 29.73 21,213,503 24.99 4,024,637 4.74 Montana 145,130 4,063,323 28.00 3,584,220 24.70 479,103 3.30 Nebraska 305,632 9,641,017 31.54 8,299,271 27.15 1,341,746 4.39 Nevada 126,938 8,795,303 69.29 5,174,356 40.76 3,620,947 28.53 New Hampshire 178,550 2,430,887 13.61 1,845,593 10.34 585,294 3.28 New Jersey 1,401,262 51,705,508 36.90 39,580,662 28.25 12,124,846 8.65 New Mexico 321,619 39,773,655 123.67 31,631,055 98.35 8,142,601 25.32 New York 3,249,352 307,274,342 94.56 200,761,871 61.79 106,512,470 32.78 North Carolina 1,403,541 65,129,022 46.40 54,132,786 38.57 10,996,237 7.83 North Dakota 107,263 4,153,024 38.72 3,874,458 36.12 278,566 2.60 Northern Mariana Is. 11,524 1,041,729 90.40 951,734 82.59 89,995 7.81 Ohio 1,923,105 84,775,921 44.08 64,248,301
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311775A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-311775A1.txt
  • 8.25 3.50 1.75 10.00 13.50 NA NA NA NA NA 8.25 3.50 1.75 10.00 13.50 Virginia 7.22 3.25 1.62 8.84 12.09 7.82 3.49 1.74 9.56 13.05 7.78 3.47 1.74 9.51 12.99 Washington 7.70 2.65 1.32 9.02 11.67 8.10 0.82 0.41 8.51 9.32 7.77 2.31 1.15 8.93 11.24 West Virginia 8.27 0.00 0.00 8.27 8.28 8.25 3.48 1.74 9.99 13.47 8.25 3.28 1.64 9.89 13.16 Wisconsin 7.39 2.42 1.21 8.60 11.02 7.00 2.65 1.33 8.33 10.98 7.14 2.57 1.28 8.42 10.99 Wyoming 8.25 3.50 1.75 10.00 13.50 8.25 3.50 1.75 10.00 13.50 8.25 3.50 1.75 10.00 13.50 Total $7.33 $3.08 $1.54 $8.87$11.95 $7.83 $3.19 $1.59 $9.42$12.61 $7.61 $3.14 $1.57 $9.18$12.32 Notes: This table reflects only non-Tribal support. All averages are weighted averages.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-208A2.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-208A2.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-208A2.txt
  • Orders in a Hold Status > 90 Days 0.60 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.77 0.00 0.83 0.00 Resale Special Services PR-2-01 Average Interval Completed - Total No Dispatch 2.04 1.41 2.02 1.72 1.81 2.51 24.78 1.67 4a,3n PR-2-02 Average Interval Completed - Total Dispatch 11.62 10.40 10.79 5.11 9.18 5.11 24.79 8.00 1b,2a,3a,4a PR-2-06 Average Interval Completed - DS0 3.00 3.07 3.28 1.55 3.04 2.95 6.82 4.00 4a,1x PR-2-07 Average Interval Completed - DS1 16.19 7.44 18.04 2.75 13.40 4.00 25.02 NA 1a,2a,3a PR-2-08 Average Interval Completed - DS3 31.80 NA 16.88 NA 20.33 NA 50.49 NA PR-4-01 % Missed Appointment - Verizon - Total 2.39 0.65 6.60 1.94 4.30 0.88 2.30 0.00 4b PR-4-01 % Missed Appointment - Verizon - DS0
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-330A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-330A1.txt
  • 0.00 0.16 0.19 0.00 0.25 12 Resale Business POTS field work 4.65 3.01 0.00 3.18 2.60 2.95 0.95 2.60 3.80 2.58 12 Resale Business POTS no field work 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.35 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.13 12 Resale Centrex field work 0.00 2.51 1.03 2.25 0.00 1.70 1.96 2.40 0.00 1.91 12 Resale Residential POTS field work 0.80 3.28 1.56 3.48 0.83 3.25 1.18 2.88 0.68 2.82 12 Resale Residential POTS no field work 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.03 12 UNE EELs DS1 - New 1.28 tbd 0.00 tbd 0.43 tbd 0.00 tbd 1.74 tbd 12 UNE Loop 2 wire Digital IDSL capable 3.59 3.73 4.35 5.46 4.05 3.35 2.94 2.93 2.26 3.66 12
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-331A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-331A1.txt
  • 0.29% 0.20% 0.36% 0.18% 0.07% 0.21% 0.23% 0.16% 0.15% Maintenance Average Duration A.3.3.1.1 Residence/Dispatch/TN (hours) 31.71 28.98 27.50 23.07 36.50 30.09 30.51 28.37 33.12 28.89 A.3.3.1.2 Residence/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 12.61 7.39 10.18 6.49 14.45 9.00 11.79 5.94 16.08 8.88 A.3.3.2.1 Business/Dispatch/TN (hours) 11.41 7.50 10.88 10.79 11.80 9.83 10.44 8.82 11.48 12.22 A.3.3.2.2 Business/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 4.34 4.34 4.13 4.36 4.41 2.18 3.28 1.36 3.07 2.67 A.3.3.3.1 Design (Specials)/Dispatch/TN (hours) 4.78 4.92 4.80 6.50 5.49 4.24 5.90 8.99 5.80 5.52 A.3.3.3.2 Design (Specials)/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 2.12 5.82 2.20 2.49 2.23 0.86 2.48 2.55 2.28 3.40 1,2 A.3.3.4.1 PBX/Dispatch/TN (hours) 6.52 1.88 6.75 0.00 7.29 5.69 9.18 14.95 11.84 4.73 1,3,4,5 A.3.3.4.2 PBX/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 3.93 0.00 2.96 4.33 3.47 2.61 4.39 0.00 5.32 5.95 2,3,5
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-12A1.txt
  • 0.36 0.36 Competitive group Average $43.25 $31.47 $27.43 Observations 235 235 235 Standard error 1.19 1.30 0.88 Wireline competition Average $43.00 $31.57 $26.76 Observations 115 115 115 Standard error 1.22 1.31 0.88 Wireline incumbent Average $44.40 $31.16 $26.66 Observations 65 65 65 Standard error 0.71 0.87 0.66 Wireline rival Average $36.79 $33.36 $27.17 Observations 50 50 50 Standard error 3.46 3.28 1.84 DBS competition *** Average $41.20 $32.41 $29.36 Observations 52 52 52 Standard error 1.28 1.19 0.84 Wireless competition *** Average $45.58 $29.73 $25.80 Observations 29 29 29 Standard error 0.86 1.26 0.74 Low penetration test Average $45.04 $34.90 $30.34 Observations 39 39 39 Standard error 2.42 2.15 1.99 July 1, 2002 ** Sample groups combined Average $41.30 $29.09 $26.03
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/2002/fcc02331.pdf
  • 0.29% 0.20% 0.36% 0.18% 0.07% 0.21% 0.23% 0.16% 0.15% Maintenance Average Duration A.3.3.1.1 Residence/Dispatch/TN (hours) 31.71 28.98 27.50 23.07 36.50 30.09 30.51 28.37 33.12 28.89 A.3.3.1.2 Residence/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 12.61 7.39 10.18 6.49 14.45 9.00 11.79 5.94 16.08 8.88 A.3.3.2.1 Business/Dispatch/TN (hours) 11.41 7.50 10.88 10.79 11.80 9.83 10.44 8.82 11.48 12.22 A.3.3.2.2 Business/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 4.34 4.34 4.13 4.36 4.41 2.18 3.28 1.36 3.07 2.67 A.3.3.3.1 Design (Specials)/Dispatch/TN (hours) 4.78 4.92 4.80 6.50 5.49 4.24 5.90 8.99 5.80 5.52 A.3.3.3.2 Design (Specials)/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 2.12 5.82 2.20 2.49 2.23 0.86 2.48 2.55 2.28 3.40 1,2 A.3.3.4.1 PBX/Dispatch/TN (hours) 6.52 1.88 6.75 0.00 7.29 5.69 9.18 14.95 11.84 4.73 1,3,4,5 A.3.3.4.2 PBX/Non-Dispatch/TN (hours) 3.93 0.00 2.96 4.33 3.47 2.61 4.39 0.00 5.32 5.95 2,3,5
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref02.pdf
  • WorldCom Sprint AT&T WorldCom Sprint 1980 $1.01 $1.41 $2.35 $3.15 $2.37 $2.30 $3.54 $2.58 $2.50 $3.74 $2.81 $2.70 $3.77 $3.22 $2.90 $3.97 $3.61 $3.20 $4.17 $3.82 $3.30 1981 1.13 1.63 2.77 3.67 3.07 2.67 4.07 3.39 2.90 4.36 3.62 3.13 4.39 3.66 3.36 4.60 3.84 3.71 4.80 4.00 3.83 1982 1.76 $1.53 $1.53 2.38 $1.54 $1.55 3.00 $1.94 $1.92 3.90 3.28 3.27 4.09 3.42 3.43 4.37 3.63 3.62 4.49 3.74 3.74 4.60 3.84 3.85 5.15 4.32 4.32 1983 1.76 1.54 1.54 2.38 2.10 2.09 3.00 2.70 2.69 3.90 3.28 3.29 4.09 3.42 3.43 4.37 3.63 3.62 4.49 3.74 3.74 4.60 3.84 3.83 5.15 4.32 4.32 1984 1.65 1.48 1.62 2.27 1.96 2.19 2.79 2.56 2.76 3.69 3.33 3.49 3.87 3.48 3.63
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref03.pdf
  • Day, Evening, and Night Call 90-Mile Call AT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprint 1980$1.01 $1.41 $2.35 $3.15 $2.37 $2.30 $3.54 $2.58 $2.50 $3.74 $2.81 $2.70 $3.77 $3.22 $2.90 $3.97 $3.61 $3.20 $4.17 $3.82 $3.30 19811.13 1.63 2.77 3.67 3.07 2.67 4.07 3.39 2.90 4.36 3.62 3.13 4.39 3.66 3.36 4.60 3.84 3.71 4.80 4.00 3.83 19821.76 $1.53 $1.53 2.38 $1.54 $1.55 3.00 $1.94 $1.92 3.90 3.28 3.27 4.09 3.42 3.43 4.37 3.63 3.62 4.49 3.74 3.74 4.60 3.84 3.85 5.15 4.32 4.32 19831.76 1.54 1.54 2.38 2.10 2.09 3.00 2.70 2.69 3.90 3.28 3.29 4.09 3.42 3.43 4.37 3.63 3.62 4.49 3.74 3.74 4.60 3.84 3.83 5.15 4.32 4.32 19841.65 1.48 1.62 2.27 1.96 2.19 2.79 2.56 2.76 3.69 3.33 3.49 3.87 3.48 3.63 4.06 3.72
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref98.pdf
  • 3.852.31 1.54 3.972.381.58 4.07 2.44 1.62 4.43 2.65 1.77 June 1, 1986 1.751.050.77 2.261.350.99 2.571.541.13 2.961.771.30 3.141.88 1.38 3.331.99 1.46 3.442.061.51 3.54 2.12 1.55 3.80 2.28 1.67 July 11, 1986 1.751.050.77 2.261.350.99 2.571.541.13 2.951.771.29 3.141.88 1.38 3.331.99 1.46 3.442.061.51 3.54 2.12 1.55 3.79 2.27 1.66 January 1, 1987 1.580.970.74 1.991.230.93 2.201.361.03 2.491.541.17 2.671.65 1.25 2.861.77 1.34 3.061.891.43 3.16 1.95 1.48 3.28 2.03 1.54 July 1, 1987 1.480.910.69 1.891.170.88 2.091.290.98 2.381.471.11 2.561.58 1.20 2.751.70 1.29 2.951.821.38 2.96 1.83 1.39 3.08 1.90 1.44 January 1, 1988 1.470.950.73 1.791.160.89 1.991.290.99 2.181.411.09 2.451.59 1.22 2.551.65 1.27 2.741.781.37 2.76 1.79 1.38 2.88 1.87 1.44 December 1, 1988 1.470.980.70 1.781.190.85 1.981.320.95 2.161.441.03 2.341.56 1.12 2.431.62 1.16 2.641.761.26 2.64 1.76 1.26 2.75 1.84 1.32 April 1, 1989 1.711.140.88
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref99.pdf
  • 3.852.31 1.54 3.972.381.58 4.07 2.44 1.62 4.43 2.65 1.77 June 1, 1986 1.751.050.77 2.261.350.99 2.571.541.13 2.961.771.30 3.141.88 1.38 3.331.99 1.46 3.442.061.51 3.54 2.12 1.55 3.80 2.28 1.67 July 11, 1986 1.751.050.77 2.261.350.99 2.571.541.13 2.951.771.29 3.141.88 1.38 3.331.99 1.46 3.442.061.51 3.54 2.12 1.55 3.79 2.27 1.66 January 1, 1987 1.580.970.74 1.991.230.93 2.201.361.03 2.491.541.17 2.671.65 1.25 2.861.77 1.34 3.061.891.43 3.16 1.95 1.48 3.28 2.03 1.54 July 1, 1987 1.480.910.69 1.891.170.88 2.091.290.98 2.381.471.11 2.561.58 1.20 2.751.70 1.29 2.951.821.38 2.96 1.83 1.39 3.08 1.90 1.44 January 1, 1988 1.470.950.73 1.791.160.89 1.991.290.99 2.181.411.09 2.451.59 1.22 2.551.65 1.27 2.741.781.37 2.76 1.79 1.38 2.88 1.87 1.44 December 1, 1988 1.470.980.70 1.781.190.85 1.981.320.95 2.161.441.03 2.341.56 1.12 2.431.62 1.16 2.641.761.26 2.64 1.76 1.26 2.75 1.84 1.32 April 1, 1989 1.711.140.88
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/strev-97.pdf
  • 65 158 0.91 12 165 CALIFORNIA 2,381 2,417 858 1,559 8.99 122 1,625 COLORADO 480 501 146 356 2.05 28 371 CONNECTICUT 371 375 103 272 1.57 21 284 DELAWARE 70 70 26 45 0.26 3 47 DIST. OF COLUMBIA 171 171 29 142 0.82 11 148 FLORIDA 1,569 1,595 532 1,063 6.13 83 1,108 GEORGIA 728 810 242 568 3.28 44 592 HAWAII 135 135 34 102 0.59 8 106 IDAHO 134 148 35 113 0.65 9 118 ILLINOIS 883 904 364 540 3.12 42 563 INDIANA 470 491 165 326 1.88 26 340 IOWA 206 249 76 173 1.00 14 180 KANSAS 202 239 75 164 0.95 13 171 KENTUCKY 282 324 93 231 1.33 18 241 LOUISIANA 308
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/strev-99.pdf
  • 3,908 0.28 6,685 0.47 -2,777 -0.20 Vermont 3,397 0 3,397 0.68 2,447 0.49 950 0.19 Virginia 2,911 1,458 4,369 0.08 25,982 0.45 -21,613 -0.38 Washington 23,499 0 23,499 0.52 19,436 0.43 4,063 0.09 West Virginia 17,540 0 17,540 1.44 4,898 0.40 12,642 1.04 Wisconsin 17,633 0 17,633 0.42 14,178 0.34 3,455 0.08 Wyoming 12,367 1,362 13,730 3.85 2,031 0.57 11,699 3.28 United States 761,690 38,098 799,788 0.36 866,590 0.39 -66,802 -0.03 Guam 1,319 0 1,319 1.42 262 0.28 1,057 1.14 N. Mariana Islands 2,457 0 2,457 8.21 97 0.33 2,359 7.88 Puerto Rico 0 51,970 51,970 3.35 5,027 0.32 46,943 3.02 Virgin Islands 16,947 0 16,947 21.01 505 0.63 16,442 20.38 Grand Total $782,413 $90,068 $872,481 $0.39 $872,481 $0.39 $0 $0.00
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trend100.pdf
  • 0.85 NOS Communications, Inc. 6,313,726 36,421,960 14,042,810 0.29 Omnipoint Communications, Inc. 841,242 6,660,776 11,218,399 0.23 Primus Telecommunications, Inc. 126,024,284 658,905,556 210,977,592 4.40 Progress International, L.L.C. (Progress) 7,574,145 49,989,356 12,497,339 0.26 Q Telecommunications International Corporation 6,768,474 38,161,516 9,479,177 0.20 Qwest Communications Corporation 78,246,000 499,162,000 236,446,000 4.93 Rapid Link USA, Inc. 10,035,500 111,550,000 21,337,780 0.44 RSL COM U.S.A., Inc. 112,743,948 737,224,307 157,366,511 3.28 Sprint 33,344,436 150,078,620 89,244,650 1.86 Star Telecommunications, Inc. 379,774,858 2,435,960,499 709,161,916 14.78 Startec Global Communications 6,225,423 388,148,923 153,268,132 3.19 Telco Holdings, Inc. 6,339,883 60,181,503 37,891,716 0.79 Telegroup, Inc. 44,963,602 899,272,038 281,022,512 5.86 Tel-Save, Inc. 38,882,542 255,768,649 35,672,057 0.74 UniDial, Incorporated 3,568,538 17,123,651 9,915,738 0.21 URSUS Telecom Corporation 15,907,254 111,514,724 54,241,946 1.13 US Wats, Inc. 8,439,774 25,319,322 10,127,729 0.21 US WEST
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trend200.pdf
  • 9.12 0.00 0.00 4.22 0.63 765 39 201 Global Crossing 4.35 6.05 8.34 0.00 0.00 1.47 0.24 648 81 263 Iowa Telecom 4.35 7.00 9.20 0.00 0.00 4.31 0.86 225 12 47 Qwest 4.35 6.39 8.33 0.00 0.00 2.78 2.78 10,371 1,767 4,748 SBC 4.35 5.14 5.65 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.11 31,160 7,093 19,038 Sprint 4.32 6.37 8.13 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.45 5,138 736 1,794 Verizon 4.35 6.40 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.55 0.55 35,491 6,458 16,905 All Price Caps 4.35 5.99 6.92 0.00 0.00 2.43 0.37 99,472 18,819 50,112 NECA 3.50 NA 5.97 NA NA NA NA 9,003 NA 2,062 All Price Caps and NECA $4.28 $5.99 $6.88 $0.00 $0.00 $2.30 $0.37 108,475 18,819 52,174 Source: Access tariff filings. NA -
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trend605.pdf
  • 1.75 1.75 6.50 10.00 10.00 6.50 13.50 13.49 Illinois 6.25 8.25 6.92 0.00 1.20 0.18 0.00 0.60 0.09 6.25 8.85 7.01 6.25 10.05 7.18 Indiana 7.28 8.25 7.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.28 8.25 7.52 7.28 8.25 7.52 Iowa 5.25 8.25 7.29 0.00 3.50 0.03 0.00 1.75 0.02 5.25 10.00 7.31 5.25 13.50 7.34 Kansas 5.25 8.25 7.25 3.28 3.50 3.50 1.64 1.75 1.75 6.89 10.00 9.00 10.17 13.50 12.50 Kentucky 7.09 8.25 8.11 0.00 3.50 2.44 0.00 1.75 1.22 7.09 10.00 9.33 7.09 13.50 11.77 Louisiana 8.25 8.25 8.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 8.25 Maine 8.20 8.25 8.21 3.48 3.50 3.50 1.74 1.75 1.75 9.94 10.00 9.96 13.42 13.50 13.46 Maryland
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/trend803.pdf
  • 318 778 1,403 2,262 3,665 1.21 Louisiana 1,085 2,358 3,443 480 351 831 1,565 2,709 4,274 1.42 Maine 378 691 1,069 204 114 318 582 805 1,387 0.46 Maryland 1,843 3,056 4,899 783 520 1,303 2,626 3,576 6,202 2.06 Massachusetts 2,091 3,696 5,787 1,002 578 1,580 3,093 4,274 7,367 2.44 Michigan 2,348 5,461 7,809 1,060 1,020 2,080 3,408 6,481 9,889 3.28 Minnesota 1,368 2,463 3,831 671 432 1,103 2,039 2,895 4,934 1.63 Mississippi 669 1,466 2,135 306 193 498 974 1,659 2,633 0.87 Missouri 1,545 3,094 4,639 787 642 1,429 2,332 3,736 6,067 2.01 Montana 277 408 685 131 87 218 408 495 903 0.30 Nebraska 474 963 1,436 243 187 429 716 1,149 1,866 0.62 Nevada 781 915 1,696 329
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-1.pdf
  • 318 779 1,403 2,262 3,665 1.21 Louisiana 1,084 2,358 3,442 481 351 832 1,565 2,709 4,274 1.42 Maine 378 691 1,069 204 114 319 582 805 1,387 0.46 Maryland 1,842 3,056 4,898 784 520 1,305 2,626 3,576 6,202 2.06 Massachusetts 2,089 3,696 5,786 1,004 578 1,582 3,093 4,274 7,367 2.44 Michigan 2,346 5,461 7,807 1,061 1,020 2,081 3,408 6,481 9,889 3.28 Minnesota 1,367 2,463 3,830 672 432 1,104 2,039 2,895 4,934 1.63 Mississippi 668 1,466 2,134 306 193 499 974 1,659 2,633 0.87 Missouri 1,543 3,094 4,638 788 642 1,430 2,332 3,736 6,067 2.01 Montana 277 408 685 131 87 218 408 495 903 0.30 Nebraska 473 963 1,436 243 187 430 716 1,149 1,865 0.62 Nevada 781 915 1,695 330
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-3.pdf
  • 54.309 3 - 11 that qualify for these payments are included in the table. Table 3.25 provides estimates, by non- rural study area, of the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism, along with the hold-harmless support for the years 2000 through 2003.41 Table 3.26 has LTS payments. Table 3.27 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.28 has ICLS payments. Table 3.29 has LSS payments. Table 3.30 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables (except 3.31) contains the annual amounts for 1998 through 2003. The 1998 amounts in Tables 3.23, 3.26, and 3.29 are the actual payments after processing the final true-ups for 1998.42 Table 3.29 has the final LSS true-ups
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-7.pdf
  • for 10-Minute calls 5-Mile Call 16-Mile Call 39-Mile Call 90-Mile Call 200-Mile Call 334-Mile Call 678-Mile Call 1418-Mile Call 2455-Mile Call AT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprintAT&TWorldComSprint 1980$1.01 $1.41 $2.35 $3.15 $2.37 $2.30$3.54 $2.58 $2.50$3.74 $2.81 $2.70$3.77 $3.22 $2.90$3.97 $3.61 $3.20$4.17 $3.82 $3.30 19811.13 1.63 2.77 3.67 3.07 2.674.07 3.39 2.904.36 3.62 3.134.39 3.66 3.364.60 3.84 3.714.80 4.00 3.83 19821.76$1.53 $1.532.38 $1.54 $1.553.00 $1.94 $1.923.90 3.28 3.274.09 3.42 3.434.37 3.63 3.624.49 3.74 3.744.60 3.84 3.855.15 4.32 4.32 19831.76 1.54 1.542.38 2.10 2.093.00 2.70 2.693.90 3.28 3.294.09 3.42 3.434.37 3.63 3.624.49 3.74 3.744.60 3.84 3.835.15 4.32 4.32 19841.65 1.48 1.622.27 1.96 2.192.79 2.56 2.763.69 3.33 3.493.87 3.48 3.634.06 3.72 3.804.18 3.84 3.984.29 3.96 4.064.83 4.47 4.67 19851.98 1.80 1.702.59 2.33 2.003.00 2.82 2.203.48 3.29 3.343.66 3.48 3.453.85
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr03-intro.pdf
  • Revenues ................................................. Table 1.21 Installation, Maintenance, and Customer Complaints ............................................ Table 9.1 Interstate Access Support Payment Projections by Jurisdiction ............................. Table 3.12 3 Index of Tables and Charts Interstate Access Support Payment Projections by Study Area ..............................Table 3.27 Interstate Common Line Support Payment Projections by Jurisdiction ................. Table 3.13 Interstate Common Line Support Payment Projections by Study Area .................. Table 3.28 Investment - Average Net ....................................................................................... Table 11.6 Investment - Gross .................................................................................................. Table 11.3 Investment - Other .................................................................................................. Table 11.13 Investment Reserves ............................................................................................... Table 11.4 Lifeline Assistance - Payments - by State ...........................................................Table 2.7 Lifeline Assistance - Payments - by Study Area ................................................ Table 2.8 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - by State ........................................................ Table 2.5 Lifeline Assistance - Subscribers - Tribal
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr04-3.pdf
  • qualify for these payments are included in the table. Table 3.24 provides estimates, by non- rural study area, of the high cost support using the forward-looking high-cost model support mechanism, along with the hold-harmless support for the years 2000 through 2004.42 Table 3.25 has LTS payments. Table 3.26 has ICLS payments. Table 3.27 has IAS payments for price-cap companies. Table 3.28 has LSS payments. Table 3.29 has the total support payments for all seven programs. Each of these tables (except 3.24) contains the annual amounts for 1998 through 2004. The 1998 amounts in Tables 3.22, 3.25, and 3.28 are the actual payments after processing the final true-ups for 1998.43 Table 3.26 has the final ICLS true-up for 2002.44 Table 3.28 has
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mr04-intro.pdf
  • Beneficiaries ................................................... Table 2.1 Link Up Assistance - Beneficiaries - by State ..................................................... Table 2.9 Link Up Assistance - Beneficiaries - Tribal and Non-Tribal - by State ..................Table 2.10 Link Up Assistance - Payments - by State .......................................................... Table 2.11 Local Switching Support Payment Projections by State or Jurisdiction .................Table 3.12 Local Switching Support Payment Projections by Study Area ...............................Table 3.28 Long-Term Support Payment Projections by State or Jurisdiction .........................Table 3.9 Long-Term Support Payment Projections by Study Area .......................................Table 3.25 Loops - by State or Jurisdiction .............................................................. Table 3.19 Loops - by Study Area ........................................................................ Table 3.33 Low-Income Average Benefits by State or Jurisdiction ................................. Table 2.12 Low-Income Program Dollars by Study Area .................................................Table 2.5 Low-Income Support Payments ....................................................................... Table 2.2
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs00-0.pdf
  • 9.12 0.00 0.00 4.22 0.63 765 39 201 Global Crossing 4.35 6.05 8.34 0.00 0.00 1.47 0.24 648 81 263 Iowa Telecom 4.35 7.00 9.20 0.00 0.00 4.31 0.86 225 12 47 Qwest 4.35 6.39 8.33 0.00 0.00 2.78 2.78 10,371 1,767 4,748 SBC 4.35 5.14 5.65 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.11 31,160 7,093 19,038 Sprint 4.32 6.37 8.13 0.00 0.00 3.28 0.45 5,138 736 1,794 Verizon 4.35 6.40 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.55 0.55 35,491 6,458 16,905 All Price Caps 4.35 5.99 6.92 0.00 0.00 2.43 0.37 99,472 18,819 50,112 NECA 3.50 N/A 5.97 N/A N/A N/A N/A 9,003 N/A 2,062 All Price Caps And NECA $4.28 $5.99 $6.88 $0.00 $0.00 $2.30 $0.37 108,475 18,819 52,174 Source: Access tariff filings. * This
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs01-0.pdf
  • Factors - Interstate DEM - Unweighted ...................................................Table 8.11 Factors - Interstate DEM - Weighted ......................................................Table 8.12 High-Cost Loop Fund - 1999 Data - by Jurisdiction..........................................Table 3.15 High-Cost Loop Fund - 1999 Data - by Study Area ...........................................Table 3.27 High-Cost Loop Fund - Percentage Changes - by Jurisdiction.......................... Table 3.16 High-Cost Loop Fund - Percentage Changes - by Study Area ............................Table 3.28 High-Cost Loop Payment Formulas ..................................................................Table 3.1 High-Cost Loop Payment History .........................................................................Table 3.2 High-Cost Loop Payment Projections - by Jurisdiction....................................... Table 3.8 High-Cost Loop Payment Projections - by Study Area .......................................Table 3.21 High-Cost Loop Payments - by Jurisdiction....................................................Table 3.20 High-Cost Loop Payments - by Study Area ....................................................Table 3.32 High-Cost Programs Fund Size Projections ................................................ Table 3.7 High-Cost Support Payment Projections -
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/Monitor/mrs02-0.pdf
  • ........................................................... Table 2.11 LinkUp Assistance - Payments - by Study Area ................................................. Table 2.12 Local Switching Support Mechanism ­ Net Dollar Flow by State ................... Table 3.16 Local Switching Support - Payment History .......................................................... Table 3.7 Local Switching Support - Payment Projections - by Jurisdiction ......................... Table 3.10 Local Switching Support - Payment Projections - by Study Area .......................... Table 3.28 Long-Term Support Mechanism ­ Net Dollar Flow by State .......................... Table 3.15 Long-Term Support - Payment History .................................................................. Table 3.6 Long-Term Support - Payment Projections - by Jurisdiction ................................. Table 3.9 Long-Term Support - Payment Projections - by Study Area .................................. Table 3.27 Loops - by Jurisdiction ....................................................................... Table 3.23 Loops - by Study Area ........................................................................ Table 3.35 Low-Income Program
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/95socc.pdf
  • DAY EVENING NIGHT/WEEKEND DEC 31 FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN 1980 1/ 1.19 2.37 0.36 0.71 1.49 2.97 0.45 0.89 1.25 2.50 0.38 0.75 1981 2/ 1.54 3.07 0.70 1.41 0.51 1.01 1.83 3.66 0.84 1.69 0.61 1.21 1.61 3.22 0.74 1.49 0.53 1.07 1982 3/ 1.64 3.28 0.73 1.46 0.57 1.14 1.87 3.74 0.85 1.69 0.66 1.31 1.71 3.42 0.77 1.54 0.60 1.20 1983 4/ 1.64 3.28 0.81 1.61 0.63 1.25 1.87 3.74 0.93 1.86 0.72 1.45 1.71 3.42 0.85 1.70 0.66 1.32 1984 5/ 1.68 3.33 1.04 2.05 0.68 1.34 1.97 3.84 1.23 2.40 0.82 1.60 1.75 3.48 1.10 2.19 0.72 1.44 1985 6/ 1.66 3.29
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/96socc.pdf
  • GEORGIA 785.0 10.85 774.1 124.8 649.3 307.9 216.2 123.4 647.5 1.785 GA HAWAII 140.6 0.29 140.3 12.2 128.1 61.5 52.2 14.5 128.1 HI IDAHO 162.1 1.63 160.5 30.8 129.7 56.8 56.5 16.4 129.7 ID ILLINOIS 1,128.7 (11.38) 1,140.1 185.6 954.4 390.5 406.8 155.8 953.1 1.379 IL INDIANA 657.0 (6.06) 663.1 213.8 449.3 205.8 177.2 65.8 448.8 0.472 IN IOWA 322.6 (3.28) 325.9 112.6 213.4 89.7 90.3 33.3 213.4 IA KANSAS 298.3 1.51 296.8 101.0 195.8 87.8 69.0 39.1 195.8 KS KENTUCKY 390.3 (0.29) 390.6 103.8 286.8 158.7 90.4 37.1 286.3 0.561 KY LOUISIANA 388.1 1.52 386.6 83.9 302.7 170.5 92.3 38.8 301.7 1.005 LA MAINE 156.0 3.52 152.5 35.1 117.4 42.9 58.5 16.0 117.4 ME MARYLAND 559.5 0.56 558.9 123.5 435.4
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/97socc.pdf
  • BOSTON, MA DAY EVENING NIGHT/WEEKEND DAY EVENING NIGHT/WEEKEND DAY EVENING NIGHT/WEEKEND FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN FIVE TEN 1.19 2.37 0.36 0.71 1.49 2.97 0.45 0.89 1.25 2.50 0.38 0.75 1.54 3.07 0.70 1.41 0.51 1.01 1.83 3.66 0.84 1.69 0.61 1.21 1.61 3.22 0.74 1.49 0.53 1.07 1.64 3.28 0.73 1.46 0.57 1.14 1.87 3.74 0.85 1.69 0.66 1.31 1.71 3.42 0.77 1.54 0.60 1.20 1.64 3.28 0.81 1.61 0.63 1.25 1.87 3.74 0.93 1.86 0.72 1.45 1.71 3.42 0.85 1.70 0.66 1.32 1.68 3.33 1.04 2.05 0.68 1.34 1.97 3.84 1.23 2.40 0.82 1.60 1.75 3.48 1.10 2.19 0.72 1.44 1.66 3.29 1.00 1.98 0.67 1.32 1.97 3.84
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/98SOCC.PDF
  • 0.43 0.23 (1.12) 21.3 MI MINNESOTA 80.3 59.3 21.0 13.5 7.5 (0.22) (0.33) 0.05 (0.50) 8.0 MN MISSISSIPPI 51.8 26.3 25.5 18.2 7.3 0.11 0.05 0.07 0.23 7.1 MS MISSOURI 315.6 259.5 56.1 38.9 17.2 0.39 (0.38) 0.28 0.30 16.9 MO MONTANA 4.8 8.2 (3.4) (2.8) (0.6) (1.29) (0.62) (0.44) (2.35) 1.8 MT NEBRASKA 127.7 48.2 79.5 60.9 18.6 5.53 3.28 4.73 13.53 5.1 NE NEVADA 145.0 95.5 49.4 39.2 10.2 0.06 (0.15) 0.04 (0.05) 10.3 NV NEW HAMPSHIRE 50.3 15.2 35.1 26.7 8.4 0.65 0.28 0.38 1.31 7.1 NH NEW JERSEY 366.6 226.5 140.1 61.7 78.4 11.85 5.30 7.21 24.36 54.1 NJ NEW MEXICO 46.5 31.4 15.1 10.9 4.2 (0.42) (0.13) (0.01) (0.56) 4.7 NM NEW YORK 740.8 335.2 405.6
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/SOCC/99socc.pdf
  • (0.3) (0.2) (0.1) (0.65) (0.31) (0.45) (1.40) 1.3TN Texas 187.7 108.7 79.0 56.5 22.5 2.69 0.56 0.89 4.14 18.4TX Utah 1,158.3 806.3 352.0 305.2 46.7 (2.23) 0.82 2.21 0.80 45.9UT Vermont 74.4 44.3 30.2 19.7 10.4 1.65 1.13 1.51 4.30 6.1VT Virginia 11.9 6.3 5.6 1.5 4.1 0.43 0.07 0.14 0.64 3.4VA Washington 400.1 246.6 153.5 99.8 53.7 7.71 5.01 3.28 16.00 37.7WA West Virginia 280.7 176.1 104.6 88.4 16.2 (0.12) (0.68) 0.40 (0.40) 16.6WV Wisconsin 45.1 19.2 25.9 16.2 9.7 1.86 0.44 0.51 2.81 6.9 WI Wyoming 109.3 81.9 27.3 15.5 11.9 0.58 (0.13) 0.19 0.64 11.2WY Puerto Rico 7.3 6.5 0.8 0.3 0.5 (0.70) (0.20) (0.19) (1.08) 1.6PR Unclassified See notes following Table 2.19. 134 STATISTICS OF COMMUNICATIONS COMMON
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/reports/dtvreprt.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/reports/dtvreprt.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/reports/dtvreprt.txt
  • in performance could be observed due to the differences between 8-VAB and COFDM in threshold carrier-to-noise (C/N) ratio needed for acquisition of service. It states that while there is a 4 dB difference in the theoretical C/N performance between of the two systems in favor of 8-VSB, the average daily calibration threshold difference between the 8-VSB and COFDM receivers was 3.28 dB and that in the field this difference shrank to 2 dB. Sinclair suggests that this may be due to the effect of real world impairments that add to the theoretical ``gaussian'' channel values. In its summary comments and conclusions, Sinclair states that the need for indoor reception was ignored during the design phase of 8-VSB and that portability and
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Public_Notices/2000/pnin0030.pdf
  • each of its DARS satellites to 68.5 dBW, (2) to revise its downlink channelization plan by increasing the number of channels from five to six, including four carrier frequencies (two per satellite) of 1.84 MHz each and two frequencies for terrestrial repeaters of 2.53 MHz each, and (3) to increase the transmission rate of each of its satellite carriers to 3.28 Mbit/s. S2118 SAT-MOD-20000131-00052 XM RADIO INC. Modification XM Radio Inc. has filed an application for modification of its authorization to construct, launch and operate two Digital Audio Radio Service (DARS) satellites. XM Radio seeks (1) to increase the maximum EIRP of each of its DARS satellites to 68.5 dBW, (2) to revise its downlink channelization plan by increasing the number
• http://www.fcc.gov/ftp/Bureaus/Mass_Media/Databases/documents_collection/57-1305.pdf
  • iflimitedtostandardnondirectionalandFMstations,operating withpowerof10kworless,wouldnotresultinanydegradationof ourtechnicalstandards. 3.Approximately:500commentsontheproposalwerereceivedfrom variousindividualsandoperators,broadcaststations,regionalassociations ofbroadcasters,tilenationalnetworks,andseveralnational laborunions.Allofthecommentssubmittedhavebeencarefully evaluatedandconsidered.However,inviewofthelargenumberof commentsfiledandtheduplicationofthecontentiousofthevarious parties,weshalllimitourdiscussionthereoftothecontentionsad- Amend.BroadcastRulesReRemoteControlOperations 455 vancedbytheprincipaladvocatesandopponentsoftheproposal. 4.Insupportoftheamendments,theNARTBurgesthattheCommission consideredanddisposedofallobjectionstoremotecontrol operationsinadoptingthepresentrules;thattheCommission'sconclusions areequallyapplicabletotheassociation'spresentproposal; andthattheonlyissuetobedecidediswhetherafurtherrelaxationof theruleswouldresultinadegradationoftheCommission'stechnical standards.NARTBclaimsthatthelimitationsinthepresentrules wereadoptedsolelybecauseofthelackoftechnicalproofthatequipment ofahigherpowercouldoperatewithoutadegradationofthe technicalstandardsandurgesthatthedatafurnishedwithitspetition demonstratesthatpresentremotecontroloperationsindicatea highdegreeofreliabilityandthatremotecontroloperationmaybe extendedtostationsutilizingdirectionalantennasystemsandhigh powerwiththeassurancethatequalreliabilitywillbeachieved.The associationallegesthattheoutagetimeof198stationsnowauthorized forremotecontroloperationsamountedtoonly0.04percentofatotal on-airfigureof630,790.5hours,lessthanone-thirdtheamountfor stationsoperatingwithoutremotecontrolpriorto1953;thatthis figureconfirmstheCommission'soriginalconclusionthatremotecontrol operationswouldnotresultinexcessoutagesanddemonstrates thattransmittingequipmentandremotecontrolequipmenthave reachedahighstateofdevelopment.Iturgesthatremoteoperation ofstations,utilizingdirectionalantennasystemsandoperatingwith powersupto50kw.,isfeasible;thatthisopinionisconfirmedbythe dataobtainedfromexperimentalremoteoperationofAmerican, British,andCanadianstationsandunattendedoperationofradio rangestations. 5.Theassociationrecognizesthepossibilitythatitsproposalsfor relaxingtherulesmightaffecttheCONELRADstationsnotnow authorizedforremotecontrol,andproposes,thatinordertoinsure thecontinuedeffectivenessofCONELRAD,anyfutureremotecontrol authorizationstoastandardbroadcaststation,beconditioned uponthestation'sbeingequippedtooperateinthesystemeitherby remoteswitchingofthetransmitteror,byusingaseparatetransmitter .Whiletheproposedrulewouldrequiretheinstallationof certainequipmentactualparticipationintheCONELRADsystem wouldremainonavoluntarybasis. 6.InoppositiontheAmericanCommunicationsAssociation(ACA), theInternationalBrotherhoodofElectricalWorkers(IBEW)and theNationalAssociationofBroadcastEmployersandTechnicians (NABET)arguethatthedatasubmittedwiththeNARTB petitiondoesnotsupporttheconclusionthat.thesuccessfulremote operationofstationsutilizingdirectionalantennasystemsandhigher powerisfeasible.ACAcontendsthattheunattendedoperationof CAAlowandmediumfrequencyradiowavestationsisnotevidence ofthereliabilityoftransmittingequipmentsincethestatisticsfurnished byNARTBindicatethatduringthe3-monthperiodin1955 theaverageoutageperstationpermonthwas3.28hours. IBEW contendsthattheCAAoperationsareinnowaycomparablewith broadcastoperationsnorhas,therebeenashowingofaclearandcon- 456 FederalCommunicationsCommissionReports vincingrecordofstability;thattherangestationsoperatewithless than400w.;thatfromJuly1954throughJune1955,theCAAoperated anaverageof309.6facilitiesforatotalof2,712,096hours,with atotalnumberofoutagehoursof9,420,anaverageof30.42hoursper station;thatfromJanuarythroughDecemberof195.5),32broadcast stations(19ofwhichhaveapowerof50kw.)operatedforatotalof 254,931.2hourswithonly25.4outagehours,anaverageofslightly morethan47minutesperstationandthatintheCAAoperationmore timewaslostduetotransmittertroublethanwaslostduetoremote controlfailure.NABETcontendsthatthereisnoevidenceofthe conditionsunderwhichsuchstationsoperate,thespecialreasonsfor unattendedoperation,andthespecialcompensationsmadetomaintain reliability.ACAarguesthatthecontentionofNARTB,thatthe unattendedoperationofstationsbytheBritishBroadcastingCorp. indicatethehighdegreeofreliabilityofbothbroadcasttransmitters andassociatedremotecontrolequipment,ismisleadinginthatmany ofthestationsweresemiattendedandthustherearesomeserious questionsastotheaccuracyofthefigures.NABETcontendsthat theBritishexperiencewithunattendedoperationdoesnotshowthe directrelevanceofthisexperiencetothetotallydissimilarAmerican operation;thatconditionsaredifferentinEnglandthanintheUnited States,inthatwhatissatisfactoryserviceinEngland,wherethe audienceissmall,wouldnotbeacceptabletothegreaturbanaudiences inthiscountryandthattheBritishusemultipleunittramsmittersto assurereliability.ItisallegedthatCONELRADhasbecomeineffective forthosestationscurrentlyonremotecontrolbecauseofthetime factor,thatstudiotechniciansarecompletelyoccupiedwithinnumerable programoperationsandtoexpectthemtoperformadditional full-timedutiesofkeepingtransmitterlogsandtomaintainthehigh standardsofbroadcasttransmitteroperationisunrealistic;thatthe reasonforregularreadingsontransmittersistoanticipateabnormalities inoperationandtotakeimmediateactiontocorrectsuch occurrences,andthattheinevitablelogicofremotecontrolisto dispensewiththesereadingscompletely. 7.Opponentscontendthattheissuesinthisproceedingarenot confinedtothepurelytechnicalquestionofwhetherafurtherrelaxing oftheruleswouldresultindegradationofthestandardsandthat unlessthepetitionisdismissedonthebasisofcommentsalone,the Commissionmustconductfullpublichearingstoobtainevidence ontheoperationofstationtransmittersfromallpersonsconcerned withtheirday-to-dayoperation,andtohavethebenefitofexperienced judgmentsofindependentengineerswhoarenotpartisananddependent ontheindustry'sgoodwilland,ifafterfullpublichearings, itappearsthattheremaybesubstancetotheindustries'demandfor rulesrelaxation,thentheCommissionmustconductinvestigations intoallphasesofthestatusofpresentequipment,includingdirect studiesandsurveysbyindependenttechnicalprofessionalpersonnel ofthehazardsofunattendedoperation,theexperienceofallstations presentlyauthorizedtooperatebyremotecontrol,andthenumber andcauseofoutages. Amend.BroadcastRidesReRenioteControlOp("'( o?i,N457 8.IBEWarguesthatexhibit1ofthepetitionpurportsmerelyto explainthecontentsandsignificanceofotherexhibitsandthuscannot beconsideredevidenceinsupportofthepetition;thatexhibit2purports
• http://www.fcc.gov/transaction/aol-tw/exparte/aol_response082800.pdf
  • Moreover, any entities that are inactive and/or hold no assets have been excluded. Each of the entities listed on Exhibit 3.27 principally operate in the United States, with the exception of Time Warner Entertainment Japan, Inc. Time Warner, TWE and their affiliates, of course, are engaged in significant business activities outside the United States in addition to their domestic activities. 3.28Please list each joint venture and/or contract considered or proposed since 1997 involving Time Warner and/or AOL and/or AT&T. Consistent with the direction of FCC Staff, the parties are providing all necessary information in its responses to Questions 3.31, 3.32, and 3.33 below regarding any contracts or joint ventures currently under discussion with AT&T, as well as in its responses to