[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 137 (Thursday, July 17, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38244-38245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-18882]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Chapter I
[CC Docket No. 97-146, FCC 97-219]
Complete Detariffing for Competitive Access Providers and
Competitive Local Exchange Carriers
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes adopting a
policy of complete detariffing for all non-ILEC providers of interstate
exchange access services because of the public interest benefits from
complete detariffing, including eliminating the abuse of the filed rate
doctrine, reducing administrative burdens on the Commission, and
hindering price coordination afforded by tariffing.
DATES: Comments are due on or before August 18, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Room 222,
Washington, D.C. 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Bailey, (202) 418-1520.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's NPRM
in CC Docket No. 97-146 adopted and released on June 19, 1997. The full
text of this NPRM is available for inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street,
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037. The complete text may also be obtained
through the World Wide Web at http://www.fcc.gov or may be purchased
from the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription
Services, Inc. (202) 857-3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140,
Washington, D.C. 20037.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603, the
Commission has prepared the following Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) of the expected significant economic impact on small
entities by the policies and rules proposed in the NPRM to establish
complete detariffing of non-ILEC providers of interstate exchange
access services. Written public comments are requested on the IRFA.
Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed
on or before August 18, 1997.
Need for and Objectives of the Proposed Rule: The Commission, in
compliance with Section 10(a) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,
proposes to adopt complete detariffing for non-ILEC providers of
interstate exchange access services. Section 10 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act), requires the Commission
to forbear from tariff filing requirement if statutory criteria are
met. We anticipate that the proposed rule will: reduce transaction
costs and administrative burdens for providers, permit providers to
make rapid responses to market conditions, and facilitate entry by new
providers.
Legal Basis: As stated above, Section 10 of the Communications Act
requires the Commission to forbear from applying a regulation if
statutory criteria are met. The Commission has previously determined
that complete detariffing is more consistent with the public interest
than permissive detariffing in the context of interexchange services.
The Commission seeks comment regarding whether this is also true with
respect to interstate exchange access services.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which
the Proposed Rule Will Apply: Under the RFA, small entities may include
small organizations, small businesses, and small governmental
jurisdictions. The RFA generally defines the term ``small business'' as
having the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under
the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632. A small business concern is one
that: (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in
its field of operation; and (3) meets any additional criteria
established by the SBA. SBA has defined a small business for Standard
Industrial Classification (SIC) category 4813 (Telephone
Communications, Except Radiotelephone) to be small entities when they
have no more than 1500 employees.
Total Number of Telephone Companies Affected: The proposals in the
NPRM would have an impact on a substantial number of small telephone
companies identified by SBA. The United States Bureau of the Census
(``the Census Bureau'') reports that, at the end of 1992, there were
3,497 firms engaged in providing telephone service, as defined therein,
for at least one year. This number contains a variety of different
category of carriers, including local exchange carriers, interexchange
carriers, competitive access providers, cellular carriers, mobile
service carriers, operator service providers, pay telephone operators,
PCS providers, covered SMR providers, and resellers. It seems certain
that some of those 3,497 telephone service firms may not qualify as
small entities or small incumbent LECs because they are not
independently owned and operated.
Local Exchange Carriers: Neither this agency nor SBA has developed
a definition of small providers of local exchange service (LECs). The
closest applicable definition under SBA rules is for telephone
communications companies other than radiotelephone (wireless)
companies. The most reliable source of information regarding the number
of LECs nationwide of which we are aware appears to be the data that we
collect annually in connection with Telecommunications Relay Service
(TRS). According to our most recent data, 1,347 companies reported that
they were engaged in the provision of local exchange service. Although
it seems certain that some of these carriers are not independently
owned and operated, or have more than 1500 employees, we are unable at
this time to estimate with greater precision the number of LECs that
would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's definition. We
conclude that there are fewer than 1,347 small incumbent LECs that may
be affected by the proposals in this Report and Order.
Competitive Access Providers: Neither the Commission nor SBA has
developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to
providers of competitive access services (CAPs). The closest applicable
definition under SBA rules is for telephone communications companies
other than radiotelephone (wireless) companies. The most reliable
source of information regarding the number of CAPs nationwide of which
we are aware appears to be the data that
[[Page 38245]]
we collect annually in connection with the TRS. According to our most
recent data, 30 companies reported that they were engaged in the
provision of competitive access services. Although it seems certain
that some of these carriers are not independently owned and operated,
or have more than 1,500 employees, we are unable at this time to
estimate with greater precision the number of CAPs that would qualify
as small business concerns under SBA's definition. Consequently, we
estimate that there are fewer than 30 small entity CAPs.
Small Businesses (Workplaces): Workplaces encompass establishments
for profit and nonprofit, plus local, state and federal governmental
entities. SBA guidelines to the SBREFA state that about 99.7 percent of
all firms are small and have fewer than 500 employees and less than $25
million in sales or assets. There are approximately 6.3 million
establishments in the SBA database.
Interexchange Carriers: Neither the Commission nor SBA has
developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to
providers of interexchange services (IXCs). The closest applicable
definition under SBA rules is for telephone communications companies
other than radiotelephone (wireless) companies. The most reliable
source of information regarding the number of IXCs nationwide of which
we are aware appears to be the data that we collect annually in
connection with TRS. According to our most recent data, 97 companies
reported that they were engaged in the provision of interexchange
services. Although it seems certain that some of these carriers are not
independently owned and operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, we
are unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number
of IXCs that would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's
definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 97
small entity IXCs that may be affected by the decisions and rules
proposed in the NPRM.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other
Compliance Requirements: The rule which the Commission proposes would
reduce substantially reporting and recordkeeping because non-ILEC
providers of interstate exchange access services would no longer file
tariffs with the Commission.
Steps Taken to Minimize Any Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered: The Commission has
considered, as alternatives, requiring either mandatory tariffing or
permissive detariffing. Each of these options, however, would maintain
an economic burden on a substantial number of small entities. We
believe that this burden would be detrimental to small carriers because
they would need to expend resources to file tariffs, and we have
tentatively concluded that such filings are no longer in the public
interest.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules: The Commission is proposing to adopt complete
detariffing for the provision of exchange access services by non-ILECs.
We are aware of no rules that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with
the proposed rules. We seek comment on this conclusion.
Paperwork Reduction Act
Complete detariffing for non-ILEC providers of interstate access
would eliminate requirements that these carriers file tariffs.
Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The Commission tentatively concludes that complete detariffing for
non-ILECs would provide the benefits identified in its June 19, 1997
Memorandum Opinion and Order adopting permissive detariffing: reduction
of transaction costs for providers; reduction of administrative burdens
for service providers; permitting rapid response to market conditions
through elimination of costs on carriers that attempt to make new
offerings; and, facilitating entry by new providers. The Commission
also tentatively concludes that complete detariffing for those carriers
could offer additional public interest benefits beyond those of
permissive detariffing. Complete detariffing could preclude carriers
from attempting to use the filed rate doctrine to nullify contractual
arrangements, and remove uncertainty about the application of the
doctrine to tariffed arrangements that are filed on a permissive basis.
Complete detariffing could also eliminate any threat of price
coordination through tariffing. Complete detariffing could also reduce
the administrative burden on the Commission of maintaining the tariff
filing program. Although permissive detariffing would cause some
reduction in the resources expended for tariff filing, complete
detariffing would eliminate administration of all but ILECs' tariffs.
The Commission seeks comment on these tentative conclusions and any
other potential benefits to be derived from a policy of complete
detariffing. The Commission also solicits comment on whether we should
require any non-ILEC providers of interstate exchange access services
subject to any degree of tariff forbearance to make rates available to
the Commission and to interested persons upon request.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-18882 Filed 7-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
