Adam Bender

Level 3 is pleased AT&T and Verizon are proposing a per- system regulatory fee for submarine cable systems, but questions remain, Bill Hunt, Level 3 Public Policy vice president, said Thursday in an interview. The plan, filed earlier this week (CD Sept 4 p10), partly follows a proposal by Level 3 and other private submarine cable operators that the Bells had opposed, Hunt said. A per-system fee is “the way we need to go,” he said. But Hunt called unclear one part of the proposal stipulating that smaller cables would pay lower per-system fees than others. The proposal might shift too much burden to large cable providers, and exempt some providers from paying anything at all, he said: “Where do you draw the line?” The submarine cable operators, AT&T and Verizon were in contact prior to the carriers’ proposal, and the submarine cable operators are trying to schedule another meeting, he said. The FCC has promised to act by October on the submarine cable fee issue.

A draft order on intercarrier compensation reform could appear this month, telecom industry officials told us Thursday. Martin is expected to circulate it in three to four weeks, one official said. That timeframe “isn’t inconsistent with what I've heard,” said Curt Stamp, president of the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance. The Wireline Bureau is “feverishly working” on the draft, which is a comprehensive reform package, Stamp said. The FCC doesn’t comment on procedural issues, said an agency spokeswoman. But Martin has said he'd like to overhaul intercarrier compensation by Nov. 5, she said. According to court mandate, the FCC at least must explain by that date the statutory basis for its ISP-bound traffic compensation rules (CD Aug 26 p2).

FCC commissioners seem set to vote 3-2 to grant AT&T forbearance from reporting requirements, though decisions aren’t final, agency officials said Tuesday. And they'll likely extend by 90 days the deadline on a more expansive ARMIS forbearance petition filed by Qwest, we're told. The AT&T draft order, now circulating, would grant AT&T most of the Automated Reporting Management Information System deregulation it seeks and extend that to other price-cap carriers (CD Aug 27 p7). With votes due Saturday, CompTel and Sprint are sounding alarms on the FCC’s apparent intention to give ARMIS relief to multiple carriers.

All but rural carriers rejected an Embarq plan for an interim revamp to intercarrier compensation (CD Aug 4 p7). In comments to the FCC Tuesday, the Embarq plan got slightly better reviews than an AT&T proposal did last week (CD Aug 25 p4). But most commenters said they would rather the FCC pursue permanent, comprehensive reform, promised by Chairman Kevin Martin for Nov. 5.

Democratic FCC commissioners condemned the agency’s handling of an OrbitCom forbearance petition late Wednesday, in statements on a succinct order denying the petition. As expected, the FCC said the competitive local exchange carrier’s petition was facially deficient. The agency controversially kept the petition from public view for nearly a year after OrbitCom filed it (CD Aug 22 p6).

An FCC grant of forbearance to AT&T related to reporting requirements (CD Aug 26 p1) wouldn’t necessarily moot similar petitions for forbearance by Verizon, Qwest, Embarq, Frontier, Windstream and Citizens, Curt Stamp, president of the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance, said in an interview. The draft would grant AT&T most of the relief it seeks and extend that relief to the other price-cap carriers, an FCC official told us Monday (CD Aug 26 p1). The carriers seek relief from Automated Reporting Management Information System rules, but their petitions vary in terms of specific ARMIS rules contested, Stamp said. Qwest, Embarq, Windstream and Citizens Communications, parent to Frontier and Citizens, are ITTA members. It’s likely the AT&T order would moot the Embarq, Frontier and Citizens petitions, an industry source said, but it’s unclear what Verizon and Qwest would do because the Bells want more ARMIS relief than AT&T. “The Verizon petition, and the ARMIS forbearance petitions filed by other companies did request some relief that AT&T didn’t ask for,” said a Verizon spokeswoman, declining to say more. The Qwest petition largely overlaps AT&T’s, but with differences, another industry source said. Depending on the AT&T ARMIS order’s language, Qwest may or may not drop its petition, the source said. The same reporting requirements should apply to all providers, said Jeb Benedict, Embarq federal regulatory affairs director. Embarq believes many of the ARMIS rules are “outdated and redundant,” he added.

The FCC shouldn’t allow relay providers to forward 911 calls to other providers, Sorenson and other Internet relay providers said in reply comments. Earlier this month, in initial comments on a rulemaking about the FCC 10-digit numbering plan for Internet relay, the National Emergency Number Association said the FCC should require relay providers to forward 911 calls to other providers if they don’t answer in a set period (CD Aug 12 p6). In a reply, AT&T opposed imposing slamming and other new customer privacy rules on relay providers.

AT&T and other price-cap carriers will escape Automated Reporting Management Information System (ARMIS) requirements if commissioners vote to approve a draft order now circulating on the eighth floor, an FCC official said Monday. The draft grants AT&T’s forbearance petition, due for a vote Sept. 6, and extends that relief to Verizon, Qwest, Embarq, Frontier, Citizens and Windstream, we're told. An FCC spokeswoman declined comment because the proceeding is ongoing.

With slightly more than two months left to act on intercarrier compensation reform, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin hasn’t divulged his plan to colleagues, three FCC officials said Monday. Eighth floor offices are meeting with industry, but probably won’t talk to one another until Martin gives more instruction, they said. There’s no indication of what Martin’s plan will look like, only that it will be coming, an agency official said.

A group of wireless carriers withdrew their petition to have the FCC reconsider its interim cap on the Universal Service Fund high-cost program, according to a Friday ex parte. The Rural Cellular Association and a group of small wireless competitive eligible telecom carriers challenged the cap earlier this month (CD Aug 6 p10). The ex parte didn’t explain the withdrawal, but a source with knowledge of the matter told us the group didn’t want to “waste a lot of time” at the FCC, planning instead to take their challenge to court next week. The carriers filed at the FCC first because they expected others to file reconsideration petitions, the source said. If the carriers immediately went to court and others filed challenges at the FCC, the court probably would hold the case in abeyance pending the FCC proceedings. Since no one else has filed reconsideration petitions, the RCA group can go to court, the source said.