[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 164 (Tuesday, August 25, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45208-45213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22601]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 32 and 64
[CC Docket No. 98-81; FCC 98-108]
1998 Biennial Regulatory Review--Review of Accounting and Cost
Allocation Requirements; United States Telephone Association Petition
for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, (NPRM), the Commission
proposes as part of the biennial review to modify its accounting and
cost allocation rules. The Commission proposes to raise the threshold
significantly for required Class A accounting thus allowing mid-sized
carriers currently required to use Class A accounts to use the more
streamlined Class B accounts. In addition, the Commission proposes to
establish less burdensome cost allocation manual (``CAM'') procedures
for the mid-sized incumbent local exchange carriers (``LECs'') and to
reduce the frequency with which independent audits of the cost
allocations based upon the CAMs are required. Finally, the Commission
propose several changes to the Uniform System of Accounts (``USOA'') to
reduce accounting requirements and to eliminate or consolidate
accounts.
DATES: Written comments by the public on the proposed information
collections
[[Page 45209]]
are due July 17, 1998 and reply comments on or before September 4,
1998.
ADDRESSES: Office of the Secretary, Room 222, Federal Communications
Commission, 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to
filing comments with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the
information collections contained herein should be submitted to Judy
Boley, Federal Communications Commission, Room 234, 1919 M Street,
N.W., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to jboley@fcc.gov, and
to Timothy Fain, OMB Desk Officer, 10236 NEOB, 725--17th Street, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20503 or via the Internet to fain__t@al.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Warren Firschein, Accounting
Safeguards Division, Common Carrier Bureau, (202) 418-1844. For
additional information concerning the information collections contained
in this NPRM contact Judy Boley at 202-418-0214, or via the Internet at
jboley@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), CC Docket No. 98-81, adopted on June 2,
1998, and released on June 17, 1998. The full text of the NPRM is
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in
the FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street NW, Washington, DC.
The complete text may also be purchased from the Commission's copy
contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th
Street, Washington, DC 20036, telephone (202) 857-3800.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This NPRM contains either a proposed information collection. The
Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collections contained in
this NPRM, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public
Law 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same time as
other comments on this NPRM; OMB notification of action is due October
26, 1998. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions
of the Commission, including whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden
estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on the respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
OMB Approval Number: None.
Title: 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review--Review of Accounting and
Cost Allocation Requirements, CC Docket No. 98-81.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Business or other for profit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. of Estimated time Total annual
Title respondents per response burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uniform Systems of Accounts.............................. 239 12,672.6 2,398,268
Cost Allocation Manual................................... 18 600 10,800
Auditor's Attestation.................................... 19 342.1 6,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Burden: 2,415,568.
Estimated costs per respondent: $1,200,000.
Needs and Uses: This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes to
modify the Commission's accounting and cost allocation rules as part of
the biennial review process. Specifically, the Commission proposes (1)
to raise the threshold significantly for required Class A accounting,
thus allowing mid-sized carriers currently required to use Class A
accounts to use the more streamlined Class B accounts; (2) to establish
less burdensome cost allocation manual (``CAM'') procedures for the
mid-sized incumbent local exchange carriers (``LECs'') and to reduce
the frequency with which independent audits of the cost allocations
based upon the CAMs are required; and (3) to make certain changes to
our Uniform System of Accounts (``USOA'') to reduce accounting
requirements and to eliminate or consolidate accounts. If the proposals
are adopted as proposed, we anticipate a reduction of over 500,000
burden hours. The proposed information collection requirements will
provide the necessary information to enable this Commission to fulfill
its regulatory responsibilities.
Summary of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
1. Section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
requires the Commission, in every even-numbered year beginning in 1998,
to review its regulations applicable to providers of telecommunications
services to determine whether the regulations are no longer in the
public interest due to meaningful economic competition between
providers of such service and whether such regulations should be
repealed or modified. Section 11 further instructs the Commission to
``repeal or modify any regulation it determines to be no longer
necessary in the public interest.''
Streamlining Accounting Requirements for Mid-Sized Incumbent LECs
2. Section 32.11 of the Commission's rules establishes two classes
of incumbent local exchange carriers for accounting purposes: Class A
and Class B. Carriers with annual operating revenues above a designated
indexed revenue threshold, currently $112 million, are classified as
Class A; those with annual operating revenues below the threshold are
considered Class B. The classification of a carrier is determined by
its lowest annual operating revenues for the five immediately preceding
years. Class A carriers must record their transactions in 261 accounts
while Class B carriers maintain only 109 accounts. Our accounting
system is designed to enable management and policymakers to assess the
results of operational and financial events. The financial data
contained in the accounts, together with the detailed information
contained in the other subsidiary records required by the Commission,
provide the information necessary to support jurisdictional
separations, cost of service, and management reporting requirements.
The basic account structure has been designed to remain stable as
reporting requirements change.
3. We propose to streamline accounting requirements for certain
mid-sized incumbent LECs based on the aggregate revenues of the
incumbent LEC and any LEC that it controls, is controlled by, or with
which it is under common control. If the aggregate revenues of these
affiliated incumbent LECs are less than $7 billion, then each LEC
within that group would be eligible
[[Page 45210]]
for Class B accounting, even if the annual operating revenue of any
individual LEC exceeds $112 million. Among incumbent LECs, this
revision would limit Class A accounting to the Bell Operating Companies
and the GTE Operating Companies. All other incumbent LECs could use the
Class B system of accounts. The $7 billion threshold will provide the
Commission with Class A accounting data for nearly 90% of the industry
for local exchange telecommunications, as measured by annual operating
revenues.
4. We have maintained Class A and Class B accounting requirements
since we revised the USOA more than ten years ago. Through our auditing
functions and ongoing review of company financial information, we have
had sufficient experience with carriers of different size to conclude
tentatively that we can maintain the necessary degree of oversight and
monitoring while imposing less administratively burdensome accounting
requirements on the mid-sized carriers. We have reached this conclusion
because we have generally found that mid-sized carriers typically
conduct a lower volume of transactions involving competitive products
and services than the large incumbent LECs, thus providing easier
monitoring and oversight because there are fewer opportunities for
these mid-sized carriers to subsidize competitive services with the
revenues earned from the provision of noncompetitive services. We
therefore tentatively conclude that mid-sized carriers may opt to use
Class B accounting. We seek comment on these tentative conclusions and
also specifically ask commenters to address any possible effects on
jurisdictional separations that could result from adopting these
tentative conclusions.
5. For the largest incumbent LECs, however, our review of these
rules indicates that we should maintain the level of detail required by
Class A accounting. We believe that the more detailed Class A
accounting is required to monitor the large incumbent LECs as
competition begins to develop in local telephony markets. The more
detailed accounting requirements are also necessary for the Commission
to uphold our statutory obligations under sections 254(k), 260, 271,
272, 273, 274, 275, and 276 of the Act. Class A accounting is necessary
to ensure that the largest incumbent LECs are in compliance with these
provisions, such as section 254(k)'s mandate that ``a
telecommunications carrier may not use services that are not
competitive to subsidize services that are subject to competition.''
The level of detail of the Class A accounting rules allows us to
identify potential cost misallocations beyond those revealed by the
Class B system of accounts. Although we are cognizant of the necessity
of balancing our continuing need for information against our desire not
to impose unreasonable or unnecessary reporting requirements, we have
found that Class A accounting provides the level of detail needed to
ensure that a carriers' emerging competitive activities are not
subsidized by its noncompetitive activities. In allocating costs
between regulated and nonregulated activities, use of Class A accounts
also provides more refined cost allocations without imposing an undue
burden on the largest incumbent LECs. Moreover, we have long recognized
that, for managerial decision-making and other purposes, incumbent LECs
maintain their financial records in significantly more detail than that
required for Class A carriers in our Part 32 rules. Because incumbent
LECs disaggregate their financial records into much greater detail than
our Class A requirements, we tentatively conclude that the burden on
the largest incumbent LECs resulting from Class A accounting and
reporting requirements does not outweigh our needs for collecting
financial information. We therefore intend to maintain the Class A
accounting requirements for the largest incumbent LECs. We seek comment
on this tentative conclusion and ask for comment whether, instead, we
should relax Class A requirements for the largest incumbent LECs.
6. We note that our pole attachment formulas are based on Class A
accounting detail. If the Commission adopts Class B accounts for mid-
sized incumbent LECs as proposed herein, the ARMIS reports of the mid-
sized incumbent LECs would no longer provide the details needed to
calculate pole attachment fees using the pole attachment formulas. The
details provided in eight Class A accounts are needed to provide data
for the pole attachment formulas: six accounts associated with cable
and wire facilities investment and expenses, and two accounts
associated with network operations expenses. We seek comment on whether
mid-sized incumbent LECs should be required to maintain subsidiary
record categories to provide the data now provided in the eight Class A
accounts and to report in ARMIS the information in the noted accounts
as well as other information required by the pole attachment formulas.
7. We note that, while the same indexed revenue threshold is
applied for Part 32 carrier classification purposes and Part 64 cost
allocation purposes, the threshold is applied differently. For part 32
purposes, the accounting classification for a carrier is determined by
its lowest annual operating revenues for the five immediately preceding
years. For part 64 cost allocation purposes, carriers must file CAMs
and obtain independent audits of their cost allocations based upon
those CAMs after carriers exceed the indexed revenue threshold. This
dichotomy provides unnecessary complexity to our rules. Accordingly, in
light of our tentative conclusions to relax accounting requirements for
certain mid-sized incumbent LECs, we see no reason to maintain the
difference between the application of the indexed revenue threshold for
part 32 and part 64 purposes. We have tentatively concluded that mid-
sized LECs should continue to follow our Class B accounting rules until
their annual revenues exceed $7 billion, thus, crossing the $112
million threshold will no longer have an effect on a carrier's cost
allocation process. Because we see no reason to maintain the difference
between exceeding the indexed revenue threshold for part 32 accounting
or part 64 cost allocation purposes, we tentatively conclude that
carriers should be classified as Class A at the start of the calendar
year following the first time their annual operating revenues exceed
the indexed revenue threshold. We seek comment on this tentative
conclusion.
8. Section 64.903 of the Commission's rules requires incumbent LECs
with $112 million or more in annual operating revenues to file CAMs
setting forth the cost allocation procedures that they use to separate
costs between regulated and nonregulated services. These CAMs include
the following: (a) A description of each of the company's nonregulated
activities; (b) a list of the activities that the company accords
incidental accounting treatment; (c) a chart showing all of its
corporate affiliates; (d) a statement identifying affiliates that
engage in or will engage in transactions with the carrier entity and
describing the nature, terms, and frequency of such transactions; (e)
for each USOA account and subaccount, detailed specifications of the
cost categories to which amounts in the account or subaccount will be
assigned and of the basis on which each cost category will be
apportioned; and (f) a description of the carrier's time reporting
procedures. We tentatively conclude that we should reduce the
administrative burden on mid-sized incumbent LECs by eliminating or
[[Page 45211]]
modifying some of the information required in their CAMs, because our
experience has taught us that we can maintain the necessary degree of
oversight and monitoring while imposing less administratively
burdensome requirements on mid-sized incumbent LECs, which tend to have
lower transactional volumes than the largest incumbent LECs.
9. We tentatively conclude that mid-sized incumbent LECs may
maintain their accounts at the Class B level. Consistent with our
proposed change in the level of accounting detail required, we
tentatively conclude that mid-sized incumbent LECs should be permitted
to submit their CAMs based upon the Class B system of accounts. We seek
comment on these tentative conclusions. In the CAM section that
describes nonregulated activities, carriers must include a matrix that
shows each nonregulated product or service and the accounts associated
with each product or service. In the CAM section describing cost
allocation procedures, carriers are required to provide detail cost
pools and allocation methods by account. By allowing mid-sized
incumbent LECs to submit their CAMs based upon the Class B system of
accounts, we intend to reduce the reporting burden of the nonregulated
activity matrix and the cost apportionment section of the CAM. We seek
comment on this approach.
10. Section 64.904 of the Commission's rules requires that an
independent audit of reported cost allocation data must be performed
annually for all carriers that are required to file cost allocation
manuals. This rule requires that the audit shall provide a positive
opinion that the reported data is presented fairly in all material
respects and the audit shall be conducted in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards, except as otherwise directed by the Chief,
Common Carrier Bureau. We propose to reduce the audit requirements for
the mid-sized incumbent LECs. We tentatively conclude that mid-sized
incumbent LECs be required to obtain an audit every two years instead
of annually. We also propose that the required audit be an attest
audit, which has significantly less stringent standards of testing,
reporting and expression of opinion than the audits currently required.
As stated before, our experience with carriers of different size leads
us to conclude tentatively that we can maintain the necessary degree of
oversight and monitoring while imposing less administratively
burdensome requirements on mid-sized incumbent LECs. We tentatively
conclude that the relaxation of the audit requirements as proposed
above should significantly reduce the cost of the audit requirement for
mid-sized incumbent LECs. We seek comment on these tentative
conclusions.
11. For the largest incumbent LECs, however, our review of these
rules indicates that we should maintain the annual audit requirements
as presently provided for in Sec. 64.904 of our rules. Because the
largest incumbent LECs tend to conduct a much greater transactional
volume of competitive services than the smaller and mid-sized carriers,
there is a greater risk of harm to consumers and competitors from
cross-subsidization among these carriers. As stated above, Class A
accounting is necessary to properly monitor the largest incumbent LECs
because these carriers tend to offer a large volume of competitive
products and services, thereby creating numerous opportunities for
these largest carriers to subsidize competitive services with the
revenues earned from the provision of noncompetitive services.
Accordingly, we believe that these audits are required to monitor the
large incumbent LECs as competition begins to develop in local
telephony markets and are necessary for the Commission to uphold our
statutory obligations under sections 254(k), 260, 271, 272, 273, 274,
275, and 276 of the Act. We therefore intend to maintain the
independent CAM audit requirements for the largest incumbent LECs.
Accounting Changes
12. We have conducted a review of our USOA accounts and tentatively
conclude that a number of accounts or filing requirements may be
reduced or eliminated. A description of these changes and a discussion
of our rationale for our tentative conclusions are set forth below.
These modifications will apply to all carriers subject to Part 32 and
not just the mid-sized incumbent LECs. We invite comment on these
proposals, and on whether, as an alternative, we could have less
frequent audits for them as well.
13. Consolidation of Accounts 2114, 2115, and 2116. The United
States Telephone Association (``USTA'') has recommended that we
consolidate Account 2114, Special purpose vehicles, Account 2115,
Garage work equipment, and Account 2116, Other work equipment, into a
single new account. We tentatively conclude that the assets recorded in
these accounts are similar in nature and have similar prescribed
depreciation rates. In addition, these accounts are treated identically
under the jurisdictional separations rules set forth in Part 36 of our
rules. We tentatively conclude that the consolidation of these accounts
into a single account entitled Account 2114, Tools and other work
equipment, would reduce the carriers' accounting and reporting burdens
and would not affect the amounts separated between the interstate and
intrastate jurisdictions. We seek comment on these tentative
conclusions.
14. Consolidation of Accounts 6114, 6115, and 6116. We also propose
to consolidate Account 6114, Special purpose vehicles expense, Account
6115, Garage work equipment expense, and Account 6116, Other work
equipment expense, into a single new account entitled Account 6114,
Tools and other work equipment expense. The expenses recorded in these
accounts are related to the assets recorded in Accounts 2114, 2115, and
2116 and should also be combined into a single account. In addition,
these accounts are treated identically under the jurisdictional
separations rules set forth in Part 36 of our rules. We tentatively
conclude that the consolidation of these accounts into a single account
would reduce the carriers' accounting and reporting burdens and would
not affect the amounts separated between the interstate and intrastate
jurisdictions. We seek comment on these tentative conclusions.
15. Accounting for Nonregulated Revenues. On September 16, 1997,
USTA filed a petition for rulemaking requesting that the Commission
amend sections 32.23(c) and 32.5280 of its rules to allow carriers to
record revenues from all nonregulated activities in account 5280,
Nonregulated operating revenues. Such an amendment would modify the
current rule that instructs carriers to record revenue from
nonregulated activities in account 5280 only if there is no other
operating revenue account to which the revenue relates. USTA argues
that the use of specific regulated accounts for nonregulated activities
places carriers at a competitive disadvantage because competitors could
determine product-specific revenue amounts related to incumbent LECs'
nonregulated products and services. The petition also proposed
elimination of account 5010, Public telephone revenue. Incumbent LECs
record message revenue derived from public and semi-public telephone
services provided within their basic service areas in account 5010.
USTA argues that account 5010 is no longer needed as a result of the
deregulation of payphone services as well as the changes it proposed
with respect to account 5280. We tentatively conclude that the
Commission's interest in ensuring that such costs and revenues
[[Page 45212]]
are segregated from the carriers' regulated revenues and expenses would
continue to be served by allowing carriers to combine all nonregulated
activities into one account. Thus, we tentatively conclude that account
5010 should be eliminated and that the language in sections 32.23(c)
and 32.5280 should be revised consistent with USTA's petition. We seek
comment on these tentative conclusions.
16. Revision to Section 32.16, Changes in Accounting Standards.
Section 32.16 of the Commission's rules requires carriers to revise
their records and accounts to reflect new accounting standards
prescribed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (``FASB''). This
section provides that Commission approval of a change in accounting
standards shall automatically take effect 90 days after a carrier
notifies the Commission of its intention to follow a new standard. In
the notification to the Commission, carriers are required to provide a
revenue requirement study that analyzes the effects of the accounting
change for the current year and a projection for three years into the
future. In recent years, as carriers have adopted new FASB standards,
we have found that the forecast data is not necessary to determine
whether to approve the proposed modification. We therefore tentatively
conclude that carriers should be required to provide only current year
revenue requirement studies and that the requirement that carriers
provide projected revenue requirement data should be eliminated. We
seek comment on these tentative conclusions.
17. Revision to Section 32.2000(b), Telecommunications Plant
Acquired. Section 32.2000(b)(4), requires carriers to submit for
Commission approval the journal entries made to record acquisitions
from other entities of telecommunications plant that cost more than $1
million for Class A carriers and $250,000 for Class B carriers. It
requires that the text for these entries shall include a complete
description of the property acquired and the basis upon which the
entries were determined. This requirement was established to ensure
that plant acquired from other carriers is recorded at original cost as
required in section 32.2000(b) and so does not inflate the rate base or
allow recovery of depreciation expense already recovered by the
previous owner of the plant. The requirement to record plant acquired
from other entities at original cost is well established, and we
tentatively conclude that other accounting safeguards such as ARMIS
reporting and our audit program, together with our ability to obtain
additional information as necessary, are sufficient to assure that
carriers will comply with this accounting requirement. We tentatively
conclude, therefore, that it is no longer necessary to require the
routine filing of these journal entries to ensure that carriers comply
with the accounting requirements of section 32.2000(b). Accordingly, we
propose to eliminate this filing requirement. We seek comment on this
proposal.
18. Finally, we seek proposals for other accounts or filing
requirements that could be reduced or eliminated.
Procedural Matters
19. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. The Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis be prepared for notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings,
unless the agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if promulgated,
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.'' The RFA generally defines ``small entity'' as having the
same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,''
and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small
business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern''
under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which:
(1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its
field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria
established by the Small Business Administration (SBA).
20. This NPRM proposes to raise the threshold significantly for
required Class A accounting thus allowing mid-sized carriers currently
required to use Class A accounts to use the more streamlined Class B
accounts, proposes to establish less burdensome CAM procedures for the
mid-sized incumbent LECs and to reduce the frequency with which
independent audits of the cost allocations based upon the CAMs are
required, and proposes several changes to our USOA to reduce accounting
requirements and to eliminate or consolidate accounts. Neither the
Commission nor SBA has developed a definition of ``small entity''
specifically applicable to LECs. The closest definition under SBA rules
is that for establishments providing ``Telephone Communications, Except
Radiotelephone,'' which is Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)
code 4813. Under this definition, a small entity is one employing no
more than 1,500 persons.
21. We certify that the proposals in this NPRM, if adopted, will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Pursuant to long-standing rules, incumbent LECs with annual
operating revenues exceeding the indexed revenue threshold must report
financial and operating data to the Commission. This NPRM proposes to
reduce certain of these reporting requirements among mid-sized
incumbent LECs. These changes should be easy and inexpensive for mid-
sized incumbent LECs to implement and will not require costly or
burdensome procedures. We therefore expect that the potential impact of
the proposal rules, if such are adopted, is beneficial and does not
amount to a possible significant economic impact on affected entities.
If commenters believe that the proposals discussed in the NPRM require
additional RFA analysis, they should include a discussion of these
issues in their comments.
22. The Commission's Office of Public Affairs, Reference Operations
Division, will send a copy of this Notice, including this initial
certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration.
23. Comment Filing Procedures. Pursuant to applicable procedures
set forth in Sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments no later than July
17, 1998, and reply comments on or before September 4, 1998. To file
formally in this proceeding, you must file an original and four copies
of all comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want
each Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must
file an original and nine copies. Comments and reply comments should be
sent to the Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission,
1919 M Street, N.W. Room 222, Washington, D.C. 20554, with a copy to
Warren Firschein, Accounting Safeguards Division, Common Carrier
Bureau, FCC, 2000 L Street, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20554. Parties
should also file one copy of any documents filed in this docket with
the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services
(ITS), at its office at 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.
Comments and reply comments will be made available for public
inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center,
1919 M Street, N.W., Room 239, Washington, D.C. 20554.
24. Comments and reply comments must include a short and concise
summary of the substantive arguments raised in the pleading. Comments
and reply comments must also comply with
[[Page 45213]]
section 1.49 and all other applicable sections of the Commission's
rules. We also direct all interested parties to include the name of the
filing party and the date of the filing on each page of their comments
and reply comments. All parties are encouraged to utilize a table of
contents, regardless of the length of their submission.
25. Parties are also strongly encouraged to submit comments and
reply comments on diskette. Such diskette submissions would be in
addition to, and not a substitute for, the formal filing requirements
addressed above. Interested parties submitting diskettes should submit
them to Warren Firschein, Accounting Safeguards Division, Common
Carrier Bureau, 2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20554.
Such a submission should be on a 3.5 inch diskette formatted in an IBM
compatible format using Wordperfect 5.1 for Windows software. The
diskette should be submitted in ``read only'' mode. The diskette should
be clearly labeled with the party's name, proceeding, Docket No., type
of pleading (comment or reply comments), date of submission, and
filename with the ``*.wp extension. The diskette should be accompanied
by a cover letter.
26. This proceeding will be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding subject to the ``permit-but-disclose'' requirements under
Section 1.1206(b) of the rules, 47 CFR 1.1206(b)(2), as revised.
Additional rules pertaining to oral and written presentations are set
forth in Section 1.1206(b).
Ordering Clauses
27. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 2, 4,
and 11 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
152, 154, and 161 that notice is hereby given of proposed amendments to
part 32 and 64 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR parts 32 and 64, as
described in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
28. It is further ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 4, and 220
of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, and
220, and Sec. 1.401 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.401, the
Petition for Rulemaking of the United States Telephone Association is
granted to the extent indicated herein.
29. It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of Public
Affairs, Reference Operations Division, shall send a copy of this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects
Part 32
Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Telephone, Uniform System of Accounts.
Part 64
Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-22601 Filed 8-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6701-12-P
