[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 183 (Thursday, September 21, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48957-48959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23406]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CC Docket No. 91-35; FCC 95-374]
Operator Service Access and Payphone Compensation
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(``Notice'') seeking comment on tentative proposals for implementing a
per-call system of compensation for the largest operator services
providers
[[Page 48958]]
(``OSPs''), in lieu of the current flat-rate compensation system. Under
the Commission's current rules, certain OSPs pay competitive payphone
owners (``PPOs'') a flat-rate of $6 per payphone per month for
originating interstate access code calls. An ``access code'' is ``a
sequence of numbers that, when dialed, connects the caller to the OSP
associated with that sequence, as opposed to the OSP presubscribed to
the originating line.'' In particular, this Notice seeks comment on how
individual access calls could be tracked and the appropriate per-call
compensation amount.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 10, 1995; replies
must be received on or before October 31, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Comments and replies must be filed with the Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20554; one copy shall also be filed with the
Commission's contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc.
(ITS, Inc.) 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037 (202-
857-3800). The complete text of this Notice is available for inspection
and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center,
1919 M Street, NW., Room 239, Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Carowitz, 202-418-0960, Enforcement Division, Common Carrier
Bureau.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Synopsis of Notice
1. Ability of IXCs to Track Interstate Access Code Calls
The Commission believes that tracking 1-800 and 1OXXX access code
calls through the use of automatic number identification (ANI) and the
special billing treatment ``07'' code would provide OSPs with a means
of paying compensation to PPOs on a per-call basis. Because this
solution to the problem of tracking access code calls builds on an
OSP's existing capabilities, we believe that it would be relatively
easy and inexpensive to administer for those OSPs that receive a large
number of access code calls. The Commission notes that AT&T and Sprint
have already agreed to meet their compensation obligations through this
method.
According to data submitted by the American Public Communications
Council (``APCC''), the volume of 1-950 access code calls that cannot
be tracked directly does not appear to be so significant as to justify
rejection of a per-call compensation mechanism. The Commission
tentatively concludes that it would be reasonable to require OSPs that
utilize 1-950 access to rely upon a usage-based surrogate to determine
their per-call compensation obligations. The Commission also
tentatively finds that such a surrogate could be based on the ratio of
1-950 access code calls to the total access code calls received by
OSPs. The Commission tentatively concludes that the ratios set forth by
APCC in its petition are appropriate for calculating the compensation
obligations of those OSPs that utilize 1-950 access. The Commission
encourages parties, particularly MCI and LDDS, to comment on this
tentative conclusion and to submit data supporting alternative ratios.
The Commission also tentatively concludes that the relatively minor
percentage of competitive payphones in non-equal access areas, as
estimated by APCC, which do not transmit the ANI required to track
access phone calls, should be subject to status quo flat-rate
compensation. The Commission invites parties to comment on the accuracy
of APCC's estimates and to suggest alternative approaches for
compensating PPOs for access code calls originating from non-equal
access areas.
2. IXCs Required to Pay Per-Call Compensation
The Commission tentatively concludes that the largest OSPs should
be required to pay compensation to PPOs on a per-call basis. The
Commission notes that AT&T and Sprint have already begun paying per-
call compensation. In the absence of a showing to the contrary, the
Commission believes that the two other OSPs that currently have annual
toll revenues exceeding $1 billion dollars should be able to pay
compensation on a per-call basis without incurring significantly
different administrative costs that those associated with the current
per-phone mechanism. The Commission invites parties to comment on these
tentative conclusions. The Commission also tentatively concludes that
the flat-rate compensation obligations of the OSPs not meeting the
annual revenue threshold should not change as a result of the
implementation of per-call compensation for the largest OSPs. However,
the Commission believes that such OSPs should be given the opportunity
to pay compensation on a per-call basis, at their option. In addition,
the Commission proposes to continue to monitor call-tracking
capabilities within the industry for the purpose of moving in the
future to a per-call compensation mechanism for all OSPs that receive
access code calls.
3. Proposed Compensation Amount
The Commission established a range of reasonable compensation rates
in the Second Report and Order, 57 FR 21038-01 (1992). The proposed
rate of $.25 per call, identical to that negotiated by AT&T and APCC,
is clearly within that range. The Commission sees no reason to
reconsider at this juncture its conclusions about the reasonableness of
possible compensation rates, unless the participants in this docket
submit useful data that differ significantly from the information that
the Commission previously examined in this proceeding. The Commission
tentatively concludes that a per-call rate will lead to a more
efficient compensation mechanism through which both PPOs and OSPs
ultimately will benefit. In addition, consumers will benefit because
the per-call rate will encourage PPOs to place their payphones in
locations that are likely to generate the most calls. The parties are
invited to comment on these tentative conclusions.
4. Compensable Access Code Calls
The definition of ``acess code'' set for in the Communications Act
encompasses ``sequence[s] of numbers'' such as 1-800--COLLECT, 1-800-
OPERATOR, and others that connect a caller to an OSP which is not
presubscribed to the originating line. The Commission tentatively
concludes that OSPs must pay per-call compensation for 1-800 or 1-950
access code calls, whether or not the dialing sequences were in use at
the time the Commission adopted its previous orders in this docket. The
Commission notes that AT&T has already agreed to pay APCC per-call
compensation on the various 1-800 dialing sequences that allow callers
to reach its operator services.
5. Functioning of Per-Call Compensation Mechanism
In the Second Report and Order, the Commission prescribed the
existing direct-billing arrangement because it placed the burden of
implementing the compensation mechanism on those parties that receive
the benefits of access code calls--IXCs and PPOs. The Commission
tentatively concludes that this direct-billing arrangement should be
maintained with the simple addition of requiring each OSP to send back
to each PPO a statement indicating the number of access code calls that
it has received from each of that PPO's competitive payphones. As
before, the Commission continues to leave the
[[Page 48959]]
specific details of the billing arrangement for the parties to
determine. The Commission believes that this slight modification of the
status quo most efficiently implements payments of per-call
compensation by the largest OSPs.
6. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by Section 603 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. Section 601 et seq. (1981), the Commission has prepared a
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis of the expected impact on small
entities resulting from the policies and proposals set forth in the
Notice. The full analysis is contained within the Notice. The Secretary
shall send a copy of the Notice to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the Small Business Administration in accordance with Section 603(a) of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
7 Ex Parte Rules--Non-Restricted Proceeding
This is a non-restricted notice and comment rulemaking proceeding.
Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine
Agenda, provided they are disclosed as provided in Commission rules.
All interested may file comments on the per-call compensation
issues by October 10, 1995, and reply comments by October 31, 1995. All
relevant and timely comments will be considered by the Commission
before final action is taken in this proceeding. To file formally in
this proceeding, participants must file an original and four copies of
comments and reply comments. If participants want each Commissioner to
have a personal copy of their comments, an original plus nine copies
must be filed. Comments and reply comments should be sent to the Office
of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC
20554. The petition, comments, and reply comments will be available for
public inspection during regular business hours in the Dockets
Reference Room (Room 230) of the Federal Communications Commission,
1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20554. Copies of the petition and
any subsequently filed documents in this matter may be obtained from
ITS, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037, (202)
857-3800.
Ordering Clauses
It is Ordered, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i)-4(j), 201-205, 226, and
303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 226, and 303(r), that a Further Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is Issued.
It is further ordered That the Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau
is delegated authority to require the submission of additional
information, make further inquiries, and modify the dates and
procedures, if necessary, to provide for a fuller record and a more
efficient proceeding.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64
Communications common carriers, Operator service access, Payphone
compensation, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-23406 Filed 9-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
