[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 194 (Friday, October 6, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52363-52365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-24883]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52364]]
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 61
[CC Docket No. 94-1; FCC 95-394]
Price Cap Performance Review for Local Exchange Carriers;
Treatment of Video Dialtone Services Under Price Cap Regulation
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Further notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On October 20, 1994, the Commission adopted a Memorandum
Opinion and Order concluding that the basic video dialtone offerings of
local exchange carriers (LECs) would be subject to the existing price
cap rules. In the order, the Commission stated it would initiate a
rulemaking proceeding on whether to create a separate price cap basket
for LEC video dialtone service. On February 7, 1995 the Commission
issued a notice of proposed rulemaking in this docket seeking comment
on whether to establish a separate price cap basket for LEC video
dialtone service. In a companion order adopted today the Commission
established a separate price cap basket for video dialtone and required
LECs to segregate video dialtone costs and revenues from those for
telephony service for purposes of sharing and the low-end adjustment
once LEC provision of video dialtone exceeds a de minimis threshold. In
the Order, the Commission also declined to establish sharing and low
end-adjustments for the video dialtone basket for LECs exceeding the
threshold. The Order initiated this Further Notice to obtain comment on
the specific level for the de minimis threshold as well as on the
procedures for allocating costs to the video dialtone basket for
purposes of sharing and the low-end adjustment once a LEC has exceeded
the threshold.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before October 27, 1995. Reply
Comments must be submitted on or before November 17, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Claudia Pabo, Policy and Program Planning Division, Common Carrier
Bureau, (202) 418-1595, or Cheryl Lynn Schneider, Tariff Division,
Common Carrier Bureau, (202) 418-1530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Third
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopted September 14, 1995, and
released September 21, 1995. The full text of the Commission's decision
is available for public inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the FCC Public Reference Room (Room 230), 1919 M St., NW.,
Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International
Transcription Service, Suite 140, 2100 M Street, NW., Washington, DC
20037.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
We have determined that section 605(b) of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), does not apply to these
proposed rules because they do not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities, as defined by section 301(3)
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Carriers subject to price cap
regulation for local exchange access services affected by the rule
amendments adopted in this Order generally are large corporations or
affiliates of such corporations.
Summary of Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Having concluded that video dialtone costs and revenues should be
segregated from those for telephony service for purposes of sharing and
the low-end adjustment once LEC provision of video dialtone exceeds a
de minimis threshold, we seek comment on the following proposals and
invite parties to suggest alternate sources for the threshold data, and
different procedures for setting the threshold. We also invite
interested parties to suggest alternative methods for allocating costs
to the video dialtone basket once the LEC exceeded the threshold.
We propose basing the de minimis threshold on the data carriers are
currently required to submit under Responsible Accounting Officer (RAO)
Letter 25. In RAO Letter 25, the Accounting and Audits Division of the
Common Carrier Bureau required LECs to maintain subsidiary records by
USOA accounts for all wholly dedicated and shared investments, expense
and revenue related to providing video dialtone service. Using the RAO
Letter 25 data, the threshold could be set at the amount of dedicated
video dialtone investment that would reduce the LEC overall rate of
return by a specified amount, such 10 or 25 basis points, for example.
We also need to specify a method or factor to be used in Part 69
for allocating video dialtone costs to the video dialtone basket for
purposes of sharing and the low-end adjustment once the threshold has
been passed in the case of LECs that select an X-Factor with sharing
and a low end adjustment for telephony. We could allocate costs to the
video dialtone basket using the approach in the new services test
applied in the tariff review process for setting video dialtone rates.
Under this approach, if somewhat different cost allocation
methodologies are used for a single LEC due, for example, to
differences in technology for various video dialtone systems, we
propose to weight the application of the different cost allocation
methodologies in some manner. For example, use of the different cost
allocation methodologies could be weighted based on video dialtone
investment for the relevant systems. As an alternative to use of the
new services costs allocation methodology, we seek comment on whether
we should adopt a fixed cost allocation factor, such as a specified
percentage, and, if so, what level of allocator we should use. Parties
advocating the use of a fixed allocator should explain the basis for
their proposal and the public interest goals that would be advanced by
use of such an allocator. We also ask interested parties to address the
implications of allocating costs to the video dialtone basket on a
basis different than that used to set video dialtone rates.
Ordering Clauses
It is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 4, 201-205, 215, and
218 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154,
201-205, 215, 218, a third further notice of proposed rulemaking is
hereby adopted and that comment is sought on the issues contained
therein. Interested parties may file comments on or before October 27,
1995, and reply comments on or before November 17, 1995.
It is further ordered that to file formally in this proceeding,
parties must file an original and four copies of all comments, reply
comments, and supporting comments. If parties want each Commissioner to
receive a personal copy of their comments, parties must file an
original plus nine copies. Comments and reply comments should be sent
to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,
Washington, DC 20554. Parties should also file one copy of any
documents filed in this docket with the Commission's copy contractor,
International Transcription Service, Inc., Room 246, 1919 M Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20037. Parties should also send one copy of any
documents filed in this proceeding to Ms. Janice Myles, Policy and
Program Planning Division, Common Carrier Bureau, Room 544, 1919 M
Street NW., Washington, DC 20554. Comments and
[[Page 52365]]
reply comments will be available for public inspection during regular
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20554.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 61
Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-24883 Filed 10-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
