FCC Web Documents citing 61.31

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 06 01

• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.pdf
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. § 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, ¶ 18. Complaint at 10-11, ¶ 16; Answer at 15, ¶ 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a ``dominant'' carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, ¶ 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.txt
  • They Apply after Section 272 Sunset Pursuant To 47 U.S.C. § 160 (filed Nov. 22, 2005) (Qwest Petition). On November 30, 2005, Qwest filed a corrected version of this petition. See Letter from Timothy M. Boucher, Senior Attorney, Qwest, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket No. 05-333 (filed Nov. 30, 2005). Qwest Petition at 1-2; 47 C.F.R. § 61.31 et. seq. 47 U.S.C. § 160(c). See, e.g., Petition of Ameritech Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of Section 275(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, CC Docket No. 98-65, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 6415 (Com. Car. Bur. 1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 155(c). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2307 Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2307
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.txt
  • the phrase ``on an integrated basis'' to refer to service provided through Verizon's Bell Operating Company (BOC) affiliates or through other Verizon affiliates that are not compliant with section 272 or the Commission's rules implementing that section. See 47 U.S.C. § 272. Verizon Petition at 1. Id. at 2; 47 U.S.C. § 203. Verizon Petition at 2; 47 C.F.R. § 61.31 et. seq. Verizon Petition at 3; Amendment of Section 64.702 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, CC Docket No. 85-229, Report and Order, 104 FCC 2d 958, 964, para. 4 (1986). Verizon Petition at 3; e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 63.12(b)(2), 63.19(b), 63.21(c), 63.71(c). Verizon Petition at 3; 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1901 - 64.1903. Verizon Petition at 2. 47 U.S.C. §
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.txt
  • Act and certain of the Commission's price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules with respect to in-region, interstate and international, long distance services provided through an entity that is not a rule 64.1903 separate affiliate. Specifically: (1) PRT is not required to, and is in fact barred from, filing tariffs for those services pursuant to section 203 and sections 61.31 through 61.38 and 61.43 of the Commission's rules; (2) PRT is not required to establish an ``interexchange basket'' pursuant to section 61.42(d)(4) of the Commission's rules, to the extent that rule would require the establishment of an interexchange basket for the services covered by this Order when those services are provided through an entity other than a rule 64.1903 separate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.txt
  • to implement the provisions of sections 201, 202, 203, and 204 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and ensure that rates are just, reasonable, and not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory. These rules govern the filing, form, content, public notice periods, and accompanying support materials for tariffs. Need: The Part 61, Subpart E rules apply to dominant carriers. Section 61.31 sets forth the scope of the Subpart E rules. Section 61.38(g) and (f) specify tariff filing procedures designed to allow consumers to determine with which tariffs supporting information is associated. Section 61.42(d)(4)(ii) allows carriers to remove certain tolls from their interexchange baskets under certain conditions. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205 and 403. Section Number and Title: 61.31
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.txt
  • a petition pursuant to section 10 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requesting that the Commission forbear from ``dominant carrier regulation and the Computer Inquiry tariffing requirement with respect to its packet-switched and optical transmission services'' for those services subject to the regulations. Specifically, CenturyLink seeks forbearance from 47 U.S.C. §§ 203, 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.54(a)(1), (e)(1), 61.31-61-59, 63.71, 63.03 and requirements from related Commission Orders. CenturyLink states that, because of recent mergers, its enterprise broadband services are subject to different regulations depending on which CenturyLink affiliate - Qwest, Embarq, or CenturyTel - previously provided (or didn't provide) those services. Interested parties may file comments on or oppositions to CenturyLink's Petition on or before April 5, 2012 and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.txt
  • Petition of CenturyLink for Forbearance Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §160(c) from Dominant Carrier and Certain Computer Inquiry Requirements on Enterprise Broadband Services, WC Docket No. 12-60, Protective Order, DA 12-454 (rel. Mar. 22, 2012) (Protective Order). 47 U.S.C. § 160. CenturyLink Petition at 1, 9-10. Specifically, CenturyLink seeks forbearance from 47 U.S.C. §§ 203, 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.54(a)(1), (e)(1), 61.31-61-59, 63.71, 63.03 and requirements from related Commission Orders. Pleading Cycle Established for Comments on CenturyLink Petition for Forbearance from Dominant Carrier and Certain Computer Inquiry Requirements on Enterprise Broadband Services, WC Docket 12-60, Public Notice, DA 12-346 (rel. March 6, 2012). COMPTEL Motion for Extension of Time, WC Docket No. 12-60 (filed Mar. 13, 2012) (COMPTEL Motion). NASUCA and NJDRC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.txt
  • 5.95 -2.39 8.54 13.16 250311 A OAKMAN TEL. CO., INC. 6.82 -2.18 9.20 30.49 250312 A OTELCO TELEPHONE LLC 13.47 -1.13 14.77 0.00 250314 C PEOPLES TEL. CO. 1.30 -0.98 2.30 -0.81 250315 C PINE BELT TEL. CO. 12.38 -1.61 14.22 23.57 250316 C RAGLAND TEL. CO. 2.59 -10.01 14.00 8.03 250317 C ROANOKE TEL. CO., INC. 12.60 -3.65 16.87 61.31 250318 C FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF THE SOUTH, LLC -9.77 -2.50 -7.46 -60.92 250322 A UNION SPRINGS TEL. CO. 2.47 -1.80 4.35 8.55 255181 C SOUTH CENTRAL BELL-AL 1.46 -3.64 5.29 0.00 259788 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (SOUTHERN) -4.28 -6.01 1.83 -18.34 259789 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (NORTHERN) -3.59 -4.50 0.96 -19.42 TOTAL ALASKA -1.36 -6.16 5.12 -6.43 610989
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.txt
  • 5.95 -2.39 8.54 13.16 250311 A OAKMAN TEL. CO., INC. 6.82 -2.18 9.20 30.49 250312 A OTELCO TELEPHONE LLC 13.47 -1.13 14.77 0.00 250314 C PEOPLES TEL. CO. 1.30 -0.98 2.30 -0.81 250315 C PINE BELT TEL. CO. 12.38 -1.61 14.22 23.57 250316 C RAGLAND TEL. CO. 2.59 -10.01 14.00 8.03 250317 C ROANOKE TEL. CO., INC. 12.60 -3.65 16.87 61.31 250318 C FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF THE SOUTH, LLC -9.77 -2.50 -7.46 -60.92 250322 A UNION SPRINGS TEL. CO. 2.47 -1.80 4.35 8.55 255181 C SOUTH CENTRAL BELL-AL 1.46 -3.64 5.29 0.00 259788 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (SOUTHERN) -4.28 -6.01 1.83 -18.34 259789 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (NORTHERN) -3.59 -4.50 0.96 -19.42 TOTAL ALASKA -1.36 -6.16 5.12 -6.43 610989
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.txt
  • notice for local exchange carriers), and 226(h)(1)(A) (``changes in [informational tariff] rates, terms, or conditions shall be filed no later than the first day on which the changed rates, terms, or conditions are in effect''); 47 C.F.R. § 61.23(c) (one day's notice for non-dominant carriers). See generally 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.13 et seq., 61.18, et seq., 61.28, et seq., and 61.31, et seq. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C §§ 204(a) (suspension and investigation of tariff publications) and 205(a) (action on unlawful tariff publications). See New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCC, 826 F.2d 1101, 1108 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (section 4(i) serves as the Communications Act's ``necessary and proper clause''); see also 47 U.S.C. § 303(r) (authority to prescribe rules and regulations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.txt
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.txt
  • particular method of doing so. Rather, ASI shall continue to purchase inputs in the same way as it currently does, whether that is through a statement of generally available terms, tariff or interconnection agreement, assuming this method is currently compliant with the Act and the Commission's implementing rules. 47 U.S.C. § 160(a)(1). DIRECTV Broadband Reply at 2. 47 C.F.R. § 61.31-61.59. 47 C.F.R. § 61.58(a)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.38. If the Commission determines that a tariff filing contains unjust, unreasonable, or unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory rates, terms, or conditions, it may reject the tariff, or investigate, and if it finds the tariff unlawful, order the carrier to refund any overcharges. 47 U.S.C. § 204. See Regulatory Treatment of LEC Provision of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.txt
  • provision of in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services on an integrated basis. Specific Relief The Order conditionally grants Qwest certain forbearance relief and otherwise denies Qwest's petition for forbearance. Tariff Filings. Qwest will not be required to, and is in fact barred from, filing tariffs for in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services pursuant to the tariffing requirements for dominant carriers in sections 61.31-.38 of our rules, and from annual price cap filing requirements in section 61.43 of our rules. The Commission further forbears from section 203 of the Act to the limited extent necessary to relieve Qwest of its section 61.31-.38 obligations with respect to in-region, interstate, interLATA services. The Commission does not forbear from the application of the other dominant carrier price
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.txt
  • (c), and (d) of the Act, which apply to ``entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers'' and any portion of section 272 of the Act that would require Qwest to provide in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services ``through a Section 272 affiliate or any other separate affiliate in order to be deemed non-dominant;'' (2) sections 61.28, 61.31-.38, 61.41-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600 of our rules, which set forth dominant carrier price cap and rate of return regulations and require dominant carriers to file tariffs on up to 15-days notice with cost support; (3) sections 63.03, 63.10, 63.18, 63.19, 63.21, 63.23, and 63.60-.90 of our rules, which apply to entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.txt
  • 22 (2002) (SBC Advanced Services Forbearance Order). 47 U.S.C. §§ 201-02. Specifically, we forbear from the following requirements with regard to ACS's provision of the specified existing broadband services within the Anchorage study area: (1) section 203 of the Act to the extent it requires ACS to file tariffs for these services as offered within that study area; and sections 61.31-61.38 of our rules to the extent they require ACS to file tariffs for these services as offered within that study area. See IXC Forbearance Order; Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace, Implementation of Section 254(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, CC Docket No. 96-61, Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 15014 (1997); Policy and Rules Concerning the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.txt
  • of the Act and certain of our price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules with respect to in-region, interstate and international, long distance services. Specifically: (1) AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest are not required to, and are in fact barred from, filing tariffs for in-region, interstate and international, long distance services pursuant to section 203 of the Act and sections 61.31-61.38 and 61.43 of our rules; (2) AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest are not required to establish an ``interexchange basket'' pursuant to section 61.42(d)(4) of our rules, to the extent that section 61.42(d)(4) would require the establishment of an interexchange basket for the services covered by this Order when those services are provided directly or through an affiliate that is neither a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.txt
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. § 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, ¶ 18. Complaint at 10-11, ¶ 16; Answer at 15, ¶ 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a ``dominant'' carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, ¶ 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.txt
  • channel by dividing the channel into distinctly allocable time segments. Specifically, we grant, with regard to the AT&T-specified services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214, (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as Computer Inquiry requirements. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corporation Application for Transfer of Control, WC Docket No.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.txt
  • channel by dividing the channel into distinctly allocable time segments. Specifically, we grant, with regard to the petitioner-specified services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214 (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as the tariffing obligations under the Computer Inquiry rules. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. See 47 U.S.C. §§ 203(b), 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.txt
  • at 1. Specifically, we grant, with regard to Qwest's existing packet-switched broadband services and its existing optical transmission services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214 (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-.59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as Computer Inquiry requirements. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. See 47 U.S.C. §§ 203(b), 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.38, 61.41, 61.58; Implementation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.txt
  • direct exchange of traffic, originating and transiting carriers could select a delivery point from among the terminating carrier's designated edges in the LATA, but would be required to use different trunk groups for each of the terminating carrier's terminating switching facilities in the LATA.'' Id. . See 47 U.S.C. § 160(a)(3). . See 47 U.S.C. § 203; 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-.59. See Letter from Heather Zachary, Counsel to AT&T, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 07-135, 05-337, 03-109, 04-36, GN Docket No. 09-51, CC Docket Nos. 01-92, 96-45 at 8 (filed Oct. 19, 2011) (suggesting that the Commission grant forbearance from tariffing requirements insofar as necessary to allow carriers to negotiate alternatives to a default rate). See
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.wp
  • E of this Part. (c) For all tariff filing requirements other than notice and cost support requirements, any carrier classified as dominant for the provision of particular international communications services on a particular route shall file tariffs for those services pursuant to the general rules for nondominant carriers set forth in Subpart C of this Part. 17. Insert before Section 61.31, "Subpart E - General Rules for Dominant Carriers". 18. Insert new Section 61.31. § 61.31 Scope. The rules in this subpart apply to all dominant carriers. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-164 18 19. Revise Section 61.32 by replacing the phrase "Chief, Tariff Review Branch" in Section 61.32(c) with the phrase "Chief, Tariff and Pricing Analysis Branch", and by revising Section
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.html
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2007/FCC-07-175A1.html
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, P: 18. Complaint at 10-11, P: 16; Answer at 15, P: 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a "dominant" carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. S: 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, P: 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://transition.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/waldfogel-a.pdf
  • -.034 -0.057 (5.37)** (5.16)** (3.17)** (3.86)** (2.72)* (3.17)** (5.41)** (2.15)* 2 0.153 0.122 .188 0.117 0.239 0.205 .112 0.201 (5.16)** (4.48)** (2.14)* (3.50)** (2.52)** (2.19)* (4.48)** (1.53) Regions No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Interacted Region (Zip) No No No Yes No No No Yes Constant 0.2122 0.2479 0.1128 0.2521 0.2525 0.3237 0.2054 0.3239 (112.52)** (51.48)** (4.72)** (48.12)** (61.31)** (26.34)** (16.41)** (25.19)** Observations 11763 11763 11763 11763 7397 7397 7397 7397 Note: All regressions population-weighted with robust standard errors. 34 Table 6: Preference Externalities by Race: MSA Fixed Effects Circulation Per Capita Five-Digit Zips Hybrid Zips (1) (2) Zip Black Fr. ( 0- 0) -0.120 -0.087 (15.28)** (4.72)** Zip Black Fr.* MSA White Pop ( 1- 1) -0.028 -0.059
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.wp
  • E of this Part. (c) For all tariff filing requirements other than notice and cost support requirements, any carrier classified as dominant for the provision of particular international communications services on a particular route shall file tariffs for those services pursuant to the general rules for nondominant carriers set forth in Subpart C of this Part. 17. Insert before Section 61.31, "Subpart E - General Rules for Dominant Carriers". 18. Insert new Section 61.31. § 61.31 Scope. The rules in this subpart apply to all dominant carriers. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-164 18 19. Revise Section 61.32 by replacing the phrase "Chief, Tariff Review Branch" in Section 61.32(c) with the phrase "Chief, Tariff and Pricing Analysis Branch", and by revising Section
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref02.pdf
  • 49.89 50.65 49.90 Texas Corpus Christi 48.31 46.83 48.68 50.40 48.63 48.45 48.67 49.61 53.69 46.86 46.62 45.94 Texas Dallas 58.83 59.15 58.91 61.81 60.39 60.33 60.26 58.70 60.73 61.87 60.77 60.02 Texas Fort Worth 53.14 50.57 53.03 54.86 53.14 53.17 53.01 51.55 53.39 55.35 56.12 55.36 Texas Houston 65.05 65.67 65.40 67.11 65.55 65.65 64.21 65.25 65.10 66.48 62.00 61.31 Texas San Antonio 52.73 50.18 52.65 54.09 52.76 52.61 52.38 51.94 52.16 49.81 49.90 49.22 Utah Logan 57.83 58.07 58.36 57.26 57.69 57.98 53.34 53.71 42.79 41.77 45.40 42.53 Virginia Richmond 114.51 114.79 114.50 118.60 119.18 119.18 115.76 115.79 NA119.02 120.09 120.09 Virginia Smithfield 61.16 60.76 60.87 60.87 60.87 60.87 60.87 58.50 58.50 62.12 62.12 92.49 Washington Everett 70.13 64.73
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.doc http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.html
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2007/FCC-07-175A1.html
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, P: 18. Complaint at 10-11, P: 16; Answer at 15, P: 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a "dominant" carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. S: 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, P: 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/waldfogel-a.pdf
  • -.034 -0.057 (5.37)** (5.16)** (3.17)** (3.86)** (2.72)* (3.17)** (5.41)** (2.15)* 2 0.153 0.122 .188 0.117 0.239 0.205 .112 0.201 (5.16)** (4.48)** (2.14)* (3.50)** (2.52)** (2.19)* (4.48)** (1.53) Regions No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Interacted Region (Zip) No No No Yes No No No Yes Constant 0.2122 0.2479 0.1128 0.2521 0.2525 0.3237 0.2054 0.3239 (112.52)** (51.48)** (4.72)** (48.12)** (61.31)** (26.34)** (16.41)** (25.19)** Observations 11763 11763 11763 11763 7397 7397 7397 7397 Note: All regressions population-weighted with robust standard errors. 34 Table 6: Preference Externalities by Race: MSA Fixed Effects Circulation Per Capita Five-Digit Zips Hybrid Zips (1) (2) Zip Black Fr. ( 0- 0) -0.120 -0.087 (15.28)** (4.72)** Zip Black Fr.* MSA White Pop ( 1- 1) -0.028 -0.059
• http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.doc http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.pdf
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. § 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, ¶ 18. Complaint at 10-11, ¶ 16; Answer at 15, ¶ 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a ``dominant'' carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, ¶ 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-06-2307A1.txt
  • They Apply after Section 272 Sunset Pursuant To 47 U.S.C. § 160 (filed Nov. 22, 2005) (Qwest Petition). On November 30, 2005, Qwest filed a corrected version of this petition. See Letter from Timothy M. Boucher, Senior Attorney, Qwest, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket No. 05-333 (filed Nov. 30, 2005). Qwest Petition at 1-2; 47 C.F.R. § 61.31 et. seq. 47 U.S.C. § 160(c). See, e.g., Petition of Ameritech Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of Section 275(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, CC Docket No. 98-65, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 6415 (Com. Car. Bur. 1999). See 47 U.S.C. § 155(c). (...continued from previous page) (continued....) Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2307 Federal Communications Commission DA 06-2307
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-620A1.txt
  • the phrase ``on an integrated basis'' to refer to service provided through Verizon's Bell Operating Company (BOC) affiliates or through other Verizon affiliates that are not compliant with section 272 or the Commission's rules implementing that section. See 47 U.S.C. § 272. Verizon Petition at 1. Id. at 2; 47 U.S.C. § 203. Verizon Petition at 2; 47 C.F.R. § 61.31 et. seq. Verizon Petition at 3; Amendment of Section 64.702 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, CC Docket No. 85-229, Report and Order, 104 FCC 2d 958, 964, para. 4 (1986). Verizon Petition at 3; e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 63.12(b)(2), 63.19(b), 63.21(c), 63.71(c). Verizon Petition at 3; 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1901 - 64.1903. Verizon Petition at 2. 47 U.S.C. §
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-2418A1.txt
  • Act and certain of the Commission's price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules with respect to in-region, interstate and international, long distance services provided through an entity that is not a rule 64.1903 separate affiliate. Specifically: (1) PRT is not required to, and is in fact barred from, filing tariffs for those services pursuant to section 203 and sections 61.31 through 61.38 and 61.43 of the Commission's rules; (2) PRT is not required to establish an ``interexchange basket'' pursuant to section 61.42(d)(4) of the Commission's rules, to the extent that rule would require the establishment of an interexchange basket for the services covered by this Order when those services are provided through an entity other than a rule 64.1903 separate
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-11-412A1.txt
  • to implement the provisions of sections 201, 202, 203, and 204 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and ensure that rates are just, reasonable, and not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory. These rules govern the filing, form, content, public notice periods, and accompanying support materials for tariffs. Need: The Part 61, Subpart E rules apply to dominant carriers. Section 61.31 sets forth the scope of the Subpart E rules. Section 61.38(g) and (f) specify tariff filing procedures designed to allow consumers to determine with which tariffs supporting information is associated. Section 61.42(d)(4)(ii) allows carriers to remove certain tolls from their interexchange baskets under certain conditions. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205 and 403. Section Number and Title: 61.31
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-346A1.txt
  • a petition pursuant to section 10 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, requesting that the Commission forbear from ``dominant carrier regulation and the Computer Inquiry tariffing requirement with respect to its packet-switched and optical transmission services'' for those services subject to the regulations. Specifically, CenturyLink seeks forbearance from 47 U.S.C. §§ 203, 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.54(a)(1), (e)(1), 61.31-61-59, 63.71, 63.03 and requirements from related Commission Orders. CenturyLink states that, because of recent mergers, its enterprise broadband services are subject to different regulations depending on which CenturyLink affiliate - Qwest, Embarq, or CenturyTel - previously provided (or didn't provide) those services. Interested parties may file comments on or oppositions to CenturyLink's Petition on or before April 5, 2012 and
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-12-451A1.txt
  • Petition of CenturyLink for Forbearance Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. §160(c) from Dominant Carrier and Certain Computer Inquiry Requirements on Enterprise Broadband Services, WC Docket No. 12-60, Protective Order, DA 12-454 (rel. Mar. 22, 2012) (Protective Order). 47 U.S.C. § 160. CenturyLink Petition at 1, 9-10. Specifically, CenturyLink seeks forbearance from 47 U.S.C. §§ 203, 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.54(a)(1), (e)(1), 61.31-61-59, 63.71, 63.03 and requirements from related Commission Orders. Pleading Cycle Established for Comments on CenturyLink Petition for Forbearance from Dominant Carrier and Certain Computer Inquiry Requirements on Enterprise Broadband Services, WC Docket 12-60, Public Notice, DA 12-346 (rel. March 6, 2012). COMPTEL Motion for Extension of Time, WC Docket No. 12-60 (filed Mar. 13, 2012) (COMPTEL Motion). NASUCA and NJDRC
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A1.txt
  • 5.95 -2.39 8.54 13.16 250311 A OAKMAN TEL. CO., INC. 6.82 -2.18 9.20 30.49 250312 A OTELCO TELEPHONE LLC 13.47 -1.13 14.77 0.00 250314 C PEOPLES TEL. CO. 1.30 -0.98 2.30 -0.81 250315 C PINE BELT TEL. CO. 12.38 -1.61 14.22 23.57 250316 C RAGLAND TEL. CO. 2.59 -10.01 14.00 8.03 250317 C ROANOKE TEL. CO., INC. 12.60 -3.65 16.87 61.31 250318 C FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF THE SOUTH, LLC -9.77 -2.50 -7.46 -60.92 250322 A UNION SPRINGS TEL. CO. 2.47 -1.80 4.35 8.55 255181 C SOUTH CENTRAL BELL-AL 1.46 -3.64 5.29 0.00 259788 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (SOUTHERN) -4.28 -6.01 1.83 -18.34 259789 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (NORTHERN) -3.59 -4.50 0.96 -19.42 TOTAL ALASKA -1.36 -6.16 5.12 -6.43 610989
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-279226A5.txt
  • 5.95 -2.39 8.54 13.16 250311 A OAKMAN TEL. CO., INC. 6.82 -2.18 9.20 30.49 250312 A OTELCO TELEPHONE LLC 13.47 -1.13 14.77 0.00 250314 C PEOPLES TEL. CO. 1.30 -0.98 2.30 -0.81 250315 C PINE BELT TEL. CO. 12.38 -1.61 14.22 23.57 250316 C RAGLAND TEL. CO. 2.59 -10.01 14.00 8.03 250317 C ROANOKE TEL. CO., INC. 12.60 -3.65 16.87 61.31 250318 C FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF THE SOUTH, LLC -9.77 -2.50 -7.46 -60.92 250322 A UNION SPRINGS TEL. CO. 2.47 -1.80 4.35 8.55 255181 C SOUTH CENTRAL BELL-AL 1.46 -3.64 5.29 0.00 259788 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (SOUTHERN) -4.28 -6.01 1.83 -18.34 259789 C CENTURYTEL OF ALABAMA, LLC (NORTHERN) -3.59 -4.50 0.96 -19.42 TOTAL ALASKA -1.36 -6.16 5.12 -6.43 610989
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-421A1.txt
  • notice for local exchange carriers), and 226(h)(1)(A) (``changes in [informational tariff] rates, terms, or conditions shall be filed no later than the first day on which the changed rates, terms, or conditions are in effect''); 47 C.F.R. § 61.23(c) (one day's notice for non-dominant carriers). See generally 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.13 et seq., 61.18, et seq., 61.28, et seq., and 61.31, et seq. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C §§ 204(a) (suspension and investigation of tariff publications) and 205(a) (action on unlawful tariff publications). See New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCC, 826 F.2d 1101, 1108 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (section 4(i) serves as the Communications Act's ``necessary and proper clause''); see also 47 U.S.C. § 303(r) (authority to prescribe rules and regulations
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-84A1.txt
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-340A1.txt
  • particular method of doing so. Rather, ASI shall continue to purchase inputs in the same way as it currently does, whether that is through a statement of generally available terms, tariff or interconnection agreement, assuming this method is currently compliant with the Act and the Commission's implementing rules. 47 U.S.C. § 160(a)(1). DIRECTV Broadband Reply at 2. 47 C.F.R. § 61.31-61.59. 47 C.F.R. § 61.58(a)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.38. If the Commission determines that a tariff filing contains unjust, unreasonable, or unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory rates, terms, or conditions, it may reject the tariff, or investigate, and if it finds the tariff unlawful, order the carrier to refund any overcharges. 47 U.S.C. § 204. See Regulatory Treatment of LEC Provision of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.txt
  • provision of in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services on an integrated basis. Specific Relief The Order conditionally grants Qwest certain forbearance relief and otherwise denies Qwest's petition for forbearance. Tariff Filings. Qwest will not be required to, and is in fact barred from, filing tariffs for in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services pursuant to the tariffing requirements for dominant carriers in sections 61.31-.38 of our rules, and from annual price cap filing requirements in section 61.43 of our rules. The Commission further forbears from section 203 of the Act to the limited extent necessary to relieve Qwest of its section 61.31-.38 obligations with respect to in-region, interstate, interLATA services. The Commission does not forbear from the application of the other dominant carrier price
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.txt
  • (c), and (d) of the Act, which apply to ``entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers'' and any portion of section 272 of the Act that would require Qwest to provide in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services ``through a Section 272 affiliate or any other separate affiliate in order to be deemed non-dominant;'' (2) sections 61.28, 61.31-.38, 61.41-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600 of our rules, which set forth dominant carrier price cap and rate of return regulations and require dominant carriers to file tariffs on up to 15-days notice with cost support; (3) sections 63.03, 63.10, 63.18, 63.19, 63.21, 63.23, and 63.60-.90 of our rules, which apply to entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-149A1.txt
  • 22 (2002) (SBC Advanced Services Forbearance Order). 47 U.S.C. §§ 201-02. Specifically, we forbear from the following requirements with regard to ACS's provision of the specified existing broadband services within the Anchorage study area: (1) section 203 of the Act to the extent it requires ACS to file tariffs for these services as offered within that study area; and sections 61.31-61.38 of our rules to the extent they require ACS to file tariffs for these services as offered within that study area. See IXC Forbearance Order; Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace, Implementation of Section 254(g) of the Communications Act of 1934, CC Docket No. 96-61, Order on Reconsideration, 12 FCC Rcd 15014 (1997); Policy and Rules Concerning the
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-159A1.txt
  • of the Act and certain of our price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules with respect to in-region, interstate and international, long distance services. Specifically: (1) AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest are not required to, and are in fact barred from, filing tariffs for in-region, interstate and international, long distance services pursuant to section 203 of the Act and sections 61.31-61.38 and 61.43 of our rules; (2) AT&T, Verizon, and Qwest are not required to establish an ``interexchange basket'' pursuant to section 61.42(d)(4) of our rules, to the extent that section 61.42(d)(4) would require the establishment of an interexchange basket for the services covered by this Order when those services are provided directly or through an affiliate that is neither a
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-175A1.txt
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. § 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, ¶ 18. Complaint at 10-11, ¶ 16; Answer at 15, ¶ 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a ``dominant'' carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. Joint Statement at 2, ¶ 6. 47 C.F.R. § 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, ¶ 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-180A1.txt
  • channel by dividing the channel into distinctly allocable time segments. Specifically, we grant, with regard to the AT&T-specified services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214, (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as Computer Inquiry requirements. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corporation Application for Transfer of Control, WC Docket No.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-184A1.txt
  • channel by dividing the channel into distinctly allocable time segments. Specifically, we grant, with regard to the petitioner-specified services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214 (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as the tariffing obligations under the Computer Inquiry rules. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. See 47 U.S.C. §§ 203(b), 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-168A1.txt
  • at 1. Specifically, we grant, with regard to Qwest's existing packet-switched broadband services and its existing optical transmission services, forbearance from the requirements contained in section 203 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 203, section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214 (as it relates to dominant carriers), and the following sections of the Commission's rules: 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-.59 (general rules for dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. § 63.71 (to the extent it provides discontinuance rules for domestic dominant carriers), 47 C.F.R. Part 69 (access charge and pricing flexibility rules), as well as Computer Inquiry requirements. See, e.g., 47 U.S.C. §§ 222, 225, 229, 251(a)(2), 254, 255. See 47 U.S.C. §§ 203(b), 204(a)(3); 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.38, 61.41, 61.58; Implementation
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-11-161A1.txt
  • direct exchange of traffic, originating and transiting carriers could select a delivery point from among the terminating carrier's designated edges in the LATA, but would be required to use different trunk groups for each of the terminating carrier's terminating switching facilities in the LATA.'' Id. . See 47 U.S.C. § 160(a)(3). . See 47 U.S.C. § 203; 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-.59. See Letter from Heather Zachary, Counsel to AT&T, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 07-135, 05-337, 03-109, 04-36, GN Docket No. 09-51, CC Docket Nos. 01-92, 96-45 at 8 (filed Oct. 19, 2011) (suggesting that the Commission grant forbearance from tariffing requirements insofar as necessary to allow carriers to negotiate alternatives to a default rate). See
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.wp
  • E of this Part. (c) For all tariff filing requirements other than notice and cost support requirements, any carrier classified as dominant for the provision of particular international communications services on a particular route shall file tariffs for those services pursuant to the general rules for nondominant carriers set forth in Subpart C of this Part. 17. Insert before Section 61.31, "Subpart E - General Rules for Dominant Carriers". 18. Insert new Section 61.31. § 61.31 Scope. The rules in this subpart apply to all dominant carriers. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-164 18 19. Revise Section 61.32 by replacing the phrase "Chief, Tariff Review Branch" in Section 61.32(c) with the phrase "Chief, Tariff and Pricing Analysis Branch", and by revising Section
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.html
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2007/FCC-07-175A1.html
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, P: 18. Complaint at 10-11, P: 16; Answer at 15, P: 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a "dominant" carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. S: 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, P: 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://transition.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/waldfogel-a.pdf
  • -.034 -0.057 (5.37)** (5.16)** (3.17)** (3.86)** (2.72)* (3.17)** (5.41)** (2.15)* 2 0.153 0.122 .188 0.117 0.239 0.205 .112 0.201 (5.16)** (4.48)** (2.14)* (3.50)** (2.52)** (2.19)* (4.48)** (1.53) Regions No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Interacted Region (Zip) No No No Yes No No No Yes Constant 0.2122 0.2479 0.1128 0.2521 0.2525 0.3237 0.2054 0.3239 (112.52)** (51.48)** (4.72)** (48.12)** (61.31)** (26.34)** (16.41)** (25.19)** Observations 11763 11763 11763 11763 7397 7397 7397 7397 Note: All regressions population-weighted with robust standard errors. 34 Table 6: Preference Externalities by Race: MSA Fixed Effects Circulation Per Capita Five-Digit Zips Hybrid Zips (1) (2) Zip Black Fr. ( 0- 0) -0.120 -0.087 (15.28)** (4.72)** Zip Black Fr.* MSA White Pop ( 1- 1) -0.028 -0.059
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/1998/fcc98164.wp
  • E of this Part. (c) For all tariff filing requirements other than notice and cost support requirements, any carrier classified as dominant for the provision of particular international communications services on a particular route shall file tariffs for those services pursuant to the general rules for nondominant carriers set forth in Subpart C of this Part. 17. Insert before Section 61.31, "Subpart E - General Rules for Dominant Carriers". 18. Insert new Section 61.31. § 61.31 Scope. The rules in this subpart apply to all dominant carriers. Federal Communications Commission FCC 98-164 18 19. Revise Section 61.32 by replacing the phrase "Chief, Tariff Review Branch" in Section 61.32(c) with the phrase "Chief, Tariff and Pricing Analysis Branch", and by revising Section
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/ref02.pdf
  • 49.89 50.65 49.90 Texas Corpus Christi 48.31 46.83 48.68 50.40 48.63 48.45 48.67 49.61 53.69 46.86 46.62 45.94 Texas Dallas 58.83 59.15 58.91 61.81 60.39 60.33 60.26 58.70 60.73 61.87 60.77 60.02 Texas Fort Worth 53.14 50.57 53.03 54.86 53.14 53.17 53.01 51.55 53.39 55.35 56.12 55.36 Texas Houston 65.05 65.67 65.40 67.11 65.55 65.65 64.21 65.25 65.10 66.48 62.00 61.31 Texas San Antonio 52.73 50.18 52.65 54.09 52.76 52.61 52.38 51.94 52.16 49.81 49.90 49.22 Utah Logan 57.83 58.07 58.36 57.26 57.69 57.98 53.34 53.71 42.79 41.77 45.40 42.53 Virginia Richmond 114.51 114.79 114.50 118.60 119.18 119.18 115.76 115.79 NA119.02 120.09 120.09 Virginia Smithfield 61.16 60.76 60.87 60.87 60.87 60.87 60.87 58.50 58.50 62.12 62.12 92.49 Washington Everett 70.13 64.73
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.doc http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01084.html
  • pre-blocking damages to Complainants, either in this order or in response to a supplemental complaint for damages. According to Complainants, Atlas' per-minute terminating access fee was $0.0663. See Tr. at 81. Total Telecommunications Services, Inc., and Atlas Telephone Company, Inc. v. AT&T Corp., AT&T Notice of Supplemental Authorities, File No. E-97-03 (filed May 26, 1999) at 8-10. 47 C.F.R. §§ 61.31-61.59. Id. at 10. Because we grant AT&T's claim in Count II that Total's relationship with Atlas violates section 201(b) of the Act, we need not and do not reach the issue raised in Count I of whether Total's relationship with Atlas also violates the Commission's dominant carrier regulations (47 C.F.R. Part 61) and section 212 of the Act, 47 U.S.C.
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2007/FCC-07-175A1.html
  • rules. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.38(b). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(i). 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2)(ii). Small Carrier Tariff Order, 2 FCC Rcd at 3813, P: 18. Complaint at 10-11, P: 16; Answer at 15, P: 16. In addition, as the independent incumbent LEC in its serving area, Farmers was a "dominant" carrier and therefore required to file tariffs. See 47 C.F.R. S: 61.31. The Commission has forborne from tariffing requirements for non-dominant carriers. See In the Matter of Policy and Rules Concerning the Interstate, Interexchange Marketplace Detariffing Order, Second Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 20730 (1996). Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. Joint Statement at 2, P: 6. 47 C.F.R. S: 61.39(b)(2). See Joint Statement at 3, P: 8. Complaint, Exhibit B,
• http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/roundtable_docs/waldfogel-a.pdf
  • -.034 -0.057 (5.37)** (5.16)** (3.17)** (3.86)** (2.72)* (3.17)** (5.41)** (2.15)* 2 0.153 0.122 .188 0.117 0.239 0.205 .112 0.201 (5.16)** (4.48)** (2.14)* (3.50)** (2.52)** (2.19)* (4.48)** (1.53) Regions No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Interacted Region (Zip) No No No Yes No No No Yes Constant 0.2122 0.2479 0.1128 0.2521 0.2525 0.3237 0.2054 0.3239 (112.52)** (51.48)** (4.72)** (48.12)** (61.31)** (26.34)** (16.41)** (25.19)** Observations 11763 11763 11763 11763 7397 7397 7397 7397 Note: All regressions population-weighted with robust standard errors. 34 Table 6: Preference Externalities by Race: MSA Fixed Effects Circulation Per Capita Five-Digit Zips Hybrid Zips (1) (2) Zip Black Fr. ( 0- 0) -0.120 -0.087 (15.28)** (4.72)** Zip Black Fr.* MSA White Pop ( 1- 1) -0.028 -0.059