FCC Web Documents citing 65.600

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 06 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.txt
  • 10 (1986) (Rate-of-Return Methodologies Order) (subsequent history omitted). 47 U.S.C. §§ 205, 208. See In the Matter of Implementation of Section 402(b)(1)(A) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC Docket No. 96-187, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2170, 2170, 2175-78, 2181-84, 2197, at paras. 8, 11, 12, 19-21, 23, 24, 51 (1997) (Streamlined Tariff Order). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.795, 65.600, 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring carriers to file rate-of-return reports by March 31). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring that ``final adjustments . . . be made by September 30 of the year following the [monitoring] period''). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. 47 U.S.C. § 201(b). National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., Tariff F.C.C. No. 5, Transmittal No.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.txt
  • Commission's rules. For further information, contact Alan Feldman of the Industry Analysis and Technology Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-0940. -FCC- See Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160(c), WC Docket No. 07-204 (filed September 13, 2007). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 43.21(a), 43.21(d)-(k), 65.1(b)(2), 65.600(a), 65.600(d). 47 C.F.R §§ 1.415, 1.419. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200, 1.1206. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 z { F v
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.txt
  • Basic Property Records or Continuing Property Records) 47 C.F.R. 32.23 (to the extent the rule requires a carrier to comply with Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 32.27 47 C.F.R. 32.2000 (e-f) 47 C.F.R. 43.21 (d-k) 47 C.F.R. 64.902 47 C.F.R. 64.903 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 64.904 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 65.600 47 C.F.R. 69.301-10 47 C.F.R. 69.401-15 47 U.S.C. 254(k) (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules). Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments on or before February 1, 2008 and reply comments on or before March 17, 2008. All filings should refer to WC Docket No. 07-273. Comments may be filed using:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.txt
  • the Joint Conference Report. The Commission also is considering a pending review of its accounting and ARMIS reporting procedures in Phase 3. The Commission extended the Joint Conference until March 1, 2007 to review accounting and reporting issues that remain outstanding. Comments USTelecom proposes eliminating the Part 43 reporting requirement associated with the rate of return filing requirements in Rule 65.600(d)(1) and (d)(2). USTelecom also proposes eliminating additional Part 43 reporting requirements that it claims no longer serve legitimate regulatory objectives. Specifically, USTelecom argues that data measured in the ARMIS 43-05, Service Quality Report, should be collected by the states, not the Commission, and that the Commission should rely on formal complaints filed with the Commission and state commissions to measure
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.txt
  • is extended to December 12, 2008. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Dana R. Shaffer Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau See 47 U.S.C. § 160(c). Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160, WC Docket No. 07-204 (filed Sept. 13, 2007) (Qwest Petition). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 43.21(a), 43.21(d)-(k), 65.1(b)(2), 65.600(a), 65.600(d). Pleading Cycle Established for Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160(c), WC Docket No. 07-204, Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 16900 (2007). Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Infrastructure and Operating Data Gathering; Petition of AT&T Inc. for Forbearance Under 47 U.S.C. § 160(c) From Enforcement
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.txt
  • Basic Property Records or Continuing Property Records) 47 C.F.R. 32.23 (to the extent the rule requires a carrier to comply with Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 32.27 47 C.F.R. 32.2000 (e-f) 47 C.F.R. 43.21 (d-k) 47 C.F.R. 64.902 47 C.F.R. 64.903 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 64.904 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 65.600 47 C.F.R. 69.301-10 47 C.F.R. 69.401-15 47 U.S.C. 254(k) (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules). The Commission released a Public Notice establishing a comment cycle for the petition on December 18, 2007. On September 6, 2008, the Commission addressed in part certain aspects of the Verizon Petition, including the grant of conditional forbearance from cost assignment obligations. Section 10(c)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266205A1.pdf
  • The Commission therefore concluded that it should permit exogenous treatment to "put[] the parties in the position they would have been in had the error not been made" and to "rectify the effects of the vacated RAO Letter 20." Id. at 7695. In response to AT&T's claim that the PCI increases were precluded by two rules - 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(d)(2), which bars rate base changes more than fifteen months after the calendar year to which the rate base calculations apply, and 47 C.F.R. § 61.45(d), which prohibits exogenous adjustments without a rulemaking, rule waiver, or declaratory ruling - the 8 Commission, assuming the rules applied, waived them. Id. at 7694. The Commission found that it would be "inequitable" to enforce
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266206A1.pdf
  • rates while still providing carriers an opportunity to respond to changing market conditions with mid-course rate revisions." Virgin Islands Tel. Corp. v. FCC, 989 F.2d 1231, 1237 (D.C. Cir. 1993) ("Vitelco"). Carriers therefore file both "interim monitoring reports" indicating any necessary adjustments during the monitoring period and "final monitoring reports" covering the duration of the enforcement period. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b). The Commission may base its enforcement only on the rate of return 6 for the complete monitoring period. See Vitelco, 989 F.2d at 1239-40. In ACS of Anchorage, we held that streamlined tariffs "deemed lawful" under § 204(a)(3) immunized rate of return carriers from damages liability, at least for those periods within the larger monitoring period during which the streamlined
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.txt
  • random audits of their Equal Employment Opportunity programs conducted pursuant to §73.2080 of this chapter. (c) Common Carrier Services, including: (1) Annual reports filed by carriers under §43.21 of this chapter; (2) Reports of proposed changes in depreciation rates filed by carriers under §43.43 of this chapter; (3) Rate-of-return reports filed by price-cap and rate-of-return incumbent local exchange carriers under §65.600 of this chapter; (4) All applications for common carrier authorizations acted upon by the Enforcement Bureau, and related files; (5) All formal and informal complaints against common carriers filed under §1.711 through §1.735 of this chapter, all documents filed in connection therewith, and all communications related thereto; (6) Annual employment reports filed by common carrier licensees or permittees pursuant to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.txt
  • i.e.,Verizon (19 operating companies); SBC Communications, Inc. (9 operating companies); BellSouth Corporation; and Qwest. Under the recent access reform measures we took in the CALLS Report and Order, price cap incumbent LECs retain the right to recover costs through low-end adjustments, above-cap filings, or other recovery mechanisms. See supra note 14. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.42(f). See 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. See Table 2.3 of Statistics of Communications Common Carriers at p. 20. The ARMIS 43-07 and 43-08 Reports are data sources for a number of Commission publications. On an annual basis, the Commission publishes the Statistics of Communications Common Carriers and Quality of Service Reports. The Commission also publishes on a biannual basis, Monitoring Reports on Universal Service. The Monitoring
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.txt
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.txt
  • (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, ¶¶ 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). See generally 47 C.F.R. § 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, ¶¶ 57-71. Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. § 208(b)(1)). See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th Cir.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.txt
  • effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. § 69.3(f). The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(d)(1). See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.txt
  • system will provide an early warning system if rate adjustments become necessary.''). See also Revision of Filing Requirements, CC Docket No. 96-23, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 16326, 16343, para. 38 (1996) (reducing the frequency of filing the FCC Form 492 Report from quarterly to annually ``without diminishing our ability to monitor rates of return''). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.795, 65.600, 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring carriers to file rate-of-return reports by March 31). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring that ``final adjustments . . . be made by September 30 of the year following the [monitoring] period''). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. Designation Order at 4, para. 7; NECA Rate of Return Reports, Form FCC 492s (Sept.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.txt
  • if the pre-1997 version of section 65.830 required the LECs to include accrued OPEBs in the rate base, other rules in effect at the time the tariffs were filed barred the LECs from making retroactive adjustments to the rate base for purposes of calculating their sharing obligations under the price cap rules. AT&T claims that the LECs' adjustments violate section 65.600(d)(2), which it contends proscribes rate base changes made more than 15 months after the end of the calendar year. AT&T also argues that the LECs' exogenous cost changes are barred by section 61.45(d), which limits exogenous cost changes to ``those cost changes that the Commission shall permit or require by rule, rule waiver, or declaratory ruling.'' According to AT&T, not
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.txt
  • forbears from section 203 of the Act to the limited extent necessary to relieve Qwest of its section 61.31-.38 obligations with respect to in-region, interstate, interLATA services. The Commission does not forbear from the application of the other dominant carrier price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules identified by Qwest (i.e., rules 61.41, 61.45, 61.46-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600) because the forbearance from sections 61.31-.38 of the rules obviates the need for Qwest to file tariffs for any in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services it chooses to provide on an integrated basis, and because the Commission treats, and will continue to treat, the costs and revenues associated with Qwest's provision of in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services as nonregulated for accounting
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.txt
  • which apply to ``entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers'' and any portion of section 272 of the Act that would require Qwest to provide in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services ``through a Section 272 affiliate or any other separate affiliate in order to be deemed non-dominant;'' (2) sections 61.28, 61.31-.38, 61.41-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600 of our rules, which set forth dominant carrier price cap and rate of return regulations and require dominant carriers to file tariffs on up to 15-days notice with cost support; (3) sections 63.03, 63.10, 63.18, 63.19, 63.21, 63.23, and 63.60-.90 of our rules, which apply to entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers; and (4)
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.html
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/FCC-02-186A1.html
  • 1129 (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). 77 See generally 47 C.F.R. 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). 78 For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, 57-71. 79 Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. 208(b)(1)). 80 See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-04-195A1.html
  • generally become effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. 69.3(f). 13 The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. 65.701. 14 47 C.F.R. 65.600(d)(1). 15 See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/2000/fcc00364.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/2000/fcc00364.txt
  • i.e.,Verizon (19 operating companies); SBC Communications, Inc. (9 operating companies); BellSouth Corporation; and Qwest. Under the recent access reform measures we took in the CALLS Report and Order, price cap incumbent LECs retain the right to recover costs through low-end adjustments, above-cap filings, or other recovery mechanisms. See supra note 14. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.42(f). See 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. See Table 2.3 of Statistics of Communications Common Carriers at p. 20. The ARMIS 43-07 and 43-08 Reports are data sources for a number of Commission publications. On an annual basis, the Commission publishes the Statistics of Communications Common Carriers and Quality of Service Reports. The Commission also publishes on a biannual basis, Monitoring Reports on Universal Service. The Monitoring
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.doc http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.html
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/FCC-02-186A1.html
  • 1129 (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). 77 See generally 47 C.F.R. 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). 78 For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, 57-71. 79 Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. 208(b)(1)). 80 See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-04-195A1.html
  • generally become effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. 69.3(f). 13 The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. 65.701. 14 47 C.F.R. 65.600(d)(1). 15 See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1059.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1059.html
  • return no greater than the Commission-prescribed maximum. See In re Amendment of Parts 65 and 69 of the Commission's Rules to Reform the Interstate Rate of Return Represcription and Enforcement Processes, 10 FCC Rcd 6788, 6791-94, p p 7-12, 6847-48, p 135 (1995). In addition, such carriers periodically submit monitoring reports showing their actual rates of return. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. These reports may lead carriers to file revised rates, see 47 C.F.R. § 69.3(b), or cause the Commission to start proceedings under 47 U.S.C. § 205 to prescribe new rates "to be thereafter followed." Three tariff filings by ACS are pertinent. In April 1996 it filed tariff rates for the two-year period from July 1, 1996 to June 30, 1998
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-04-3020A1.txt
  • 10 (1986) (Rate-of-Return Methodologies Order) (subsequent history omitted). 47 U.S.C. §§ 205, 208. See In the Matter of Implementation of Section 402(b)(1)(A) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC Docket No. 96-187, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 2170, 2170, 2175-78, 2181-84, 2197, at paras. 8, 11, 12, 19-21, 23, 24, 51 (1997) (Streamlined Tariff Order). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.795, 65.600, 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring carriers to file rate-of-return reports by March 31). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring that ``final adjustments . . . be made by September 30 of the year following the [monitoring] period''). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. 47 U.S.C. § 201(b). National Exchange Carrier Association, Inc., Tariff F.C.C. No. 5, Transmittal No.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-3949A1.txt
  • Commission's rules. For further information, contact Alan Feldman of the Industry Analysis and Technology Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-0940. -FCC- See Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160(c), WC Docket No. 07-204 (filed September 13, 2007). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 43.21(a), 43.21(d)-(k), 65.1(b)(2), 65.600(a), 65.600(d). 47 C.F.R §§ 1.415, 1.419. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.1200, 1.1206. See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). See 47 C.F.R. § 1.1206(b). PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 445 12th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 News Media Information 202 / 418-0500 Internet: http://www.fcc.gov TTY: 1-888-835-5322 z { F v
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-5034A1.txt
  • Basic Property Records or Continuing Property Records) 47 C.F.R. 32.23 (to the extent the rule requires a carrier to comply with Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 32.27 47 C.F.R. 32.2000 (e-f) 47 C.F.R. 43.21 (d-k) 47 C.F.R. 64.902 47 C.F.R. 64.903 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 64.904 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 65.600 47 C.F.R. 69.301-10 47 C.F.R. 69.401-15 47 U.S.C. 254(k) (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules). Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, interested parties may file comments on or before February 1, 2008 and reply comments on or before March 17, 2008. All filings should refer to WC Docket No. 07-273. Comments may be filed using:
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-07-656A1.txt
  • the Joint Conference Report. The Commission also is considering a pending review of its accounting and ARMIS reporting procedures in Phase 3. The Commission extended the Joint Conference until March 1, 2007 to review accounting and reporting issues that remain outstanding. Comments USTelecom proposes eliminating the Part 43 reporting requirement associated with the rate of return filing requirements in Rule 65.600(d)(1) and (d)(2). USTelecom also proposes eliminating additional Part 43 reporting requirements that it claims no longer serve legitimate regulatory objectives. Specifically, USTelecom argues that data measured in the ARMIS 43-05, Service Quality Report, should be collected by the states, not the Commission, and that the Commission should rely on formal complaints filed with the Commission and state commissions to measure
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2096A1.txt
  • is extended to December 12, 2008. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Dana R. Shaffer Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau See 47 U.S.C. § 160(c). Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160, WC Docket No. 07-204 (filed Sept. 13, 2007) (Qwest Petition). See 47 C.F.R. §§ 43.21(a), 43.21(d)-(k), 65.1(b)(2), 65.600(a), 65.600(d). Pleading Cycle Established for Petition of Qwest Corporation for Forbearance from Enforcement of the Commission's ARMIS and 492A Reporting Requirements Pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 160(c), WC Docket No. 07-204, Public Notice, 22 FCC Rcd 16900 (2007). Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Infrastructure and Operating Data Gathering; Petition of AT&T Inc. for Forbearance Under 47 U.S.C. § 160(c) From Enforcement
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-08-2611A1.txt
  • Basic Property Records or Continuing Property Records) 47 C.F.R. 32.23 (to the extent the rule requires a carrier to comply with Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 32.27 47 C.F.R. 32.2000 (e-f) 47 C.F.R. 43.21 (d-k) 47 C.F.R. 64.902 47 C.F.R. 64.903 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 64.904 (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules) 47 C.F.R. 65.600 47 C.F.R. 69.301-10 47 C.F.R. 69.401-15 47 U.S.C. 254(k) (only as related to Affiliate Transaction rules). The Commission released a Public Notice establishing a comment cycle for the petition on December 18, 2007. On September 6, 2008, the Commission addressed in part certain aspects of the Verizon Petition, including the grant of conditional forbearance from cost assignment obligations. Section 10(c)
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266205A1.pdf
  • The Commission therefore concluded that it should permit exogenous treatment to "put[] the parties in the position they would have been in had the error not been made" and to "rectify the effects of the vacated RAO Letter 20." Id. at 7695. In response to AT&T's claim that the PCI increases were precluded by two rules - 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(d)(2), which bars rate base changes more than fifteen months after the calendar year to which the rate base calculations apply, and 47 C.F.R. § 61.45(d), which prohibits exogenous adjustments without a rulemaking, rule waiver, or declaratory ruling - the 8 Commission, assuming the rules applied, waived them. Id. at 7694. The Commission found that it would be "inequitable" to enforce
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-266206A1.pdf
  • rates while still providing carriers an opportunity to respond to changing market conditions with mid-course rate revisions." Virgin Islands Tel. Corp. v. FCC, 989 F.2d 1231, 1237 (D.C. Cir. 1993) ("Vitelco"). Carriers therefore file both "interim monitoring reports" indicating any necessary adjustments during the monitoring period and "final monitoring reports" covering the duration of the enforcement period. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b). The Commission may base its enforcement only on the rate of return 6 for the complete monitoring period. See Vitelco, 989 F.2d at 1239-40. In ACS of Anchorage, we held that streamlined tariffs "deemed lawful" under § 204(a)(3) immunized rate of return carriers from damages liability, at least for those periods within the larger monitoring period during which the streamlined
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-289834A1.txt
  • random audits of their Equal Employment Opportunity programs conducted pursuant to §73.2080 of this chapter. (c) Common Carrier Services, including: (1) Annual reports filed by carriers under §43.21 of this chapter; (2) Reports of proposed changes in depreciation rates filed by carriers under §43.43 of this chapter; (3) Rate-of-return reports filed by price-cap and rate-of-return incumbent local exchange carriers under §65.600 of this chapter; (4) All applications for common carrier authorizations acted upon by the Enforcement Bureau, and related files; (5) All formal and informal complaints against common carriers filed under §1.711 through §1.735 of this chapter, all documents filed in connection therewith, and all communications related thereto; (6) Annual employment reports filed by common carrier licensees or permittees pursuant to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-00-364A1.txt
  • i.e.,Verizon (19 operating companies); SBC Communications, Inc. (9 operating companies); BellSouth Corporation; and Qwest. Under the recent access reform measures we took in the CALLS Report and Order, price cap incumbent LECs retain the right to recover costs through low-end adjustments, above-cap filings, or other recovery mechanisms. See supra note 14. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.42(f). See 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. See Table 2.3 of Statistics of Communications Common Carriers at p. 20. The ARMIS 43-07 and 43-08 Reports are data sources for a number of Commission publications. On an annual basis, the Commission publishes the Statistics of Communications Common Carriers and Quality of Service Reports. The Commission also publishes on a biannual basis, Monitoring Reports on Universal Service. The Monitoring
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-01-32A1.txt
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-186A1.txt
  • (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, ¶¶ 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). See generally 47 C.F.R. § 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, ¶¶ 57-71. Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. § 208(b)(1)). See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th Cir.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-195A1.txt
  • effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. § 69.3(f). The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(d)(1). See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-277A1.txt
  • system will provide an early warning system if rate adjustments become necessary.''). See also Revision of Filing Requirements, CC Docket No. 96-23, Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 16326, 16343, para. 38 (1996) (reducing the frequency of filing the FCC Form 492 Report from quarterly to annually ``without diminishing our ability to monitor rates of return''). 47 C.F.R. §§ 1.795, 65.600, 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.701. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring carriers to file rate-of-return reports by March 31). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600(b) (requiring that ``final adjustments . . . be made by September 30 of the year following the [monitoring] period''). 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. Designation Order at 4, para. 7; NECA Rate of Return Reports, Form FCC 492s (Sept.
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-74A1.txt
  • if the pre-1997 version of section 65.830 required the LECs to include accrued OPEBs in the rate base, other rules in effect at the time the tariffs were filed barred the LECs from making retroactive adjustments to the rate base for purposes of calculating their sharing obligations under the price cap rules. AT&T claims that the LECs' adjustments violate section 65.600(d)(2), which it contends proscribes rate base changes made more than 15 months after the end of the calendar year. AT&T also argues that the LECs' exogenous cost changes are barred by section 61.45(d), which limits exogenous cost changes to ``those cost changes that the Commission shall permit or require by rule, rule waiver, or declaratory ruling.'' According to AT&T, not
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-12A1.txt
  • forbears from section 203 of the Act to the limited extent necessary to relieve Qwest of its section 61.31-.38 obligations with respect to in-region, interstate, interLATA services. The Commission does not forbear from the application of the other dominant carrier price cap, rate of return, and tariffing rules identified by Qwest (i.e., rules 61.41, 61.45, 61.46-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600) because the forbearance from sections 61.31-.38 of the rules obviates the need for Qwest to file tariffs for any in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services it chooses to provide on an integrated basis, and because the Commission treats, and will continue to treat, the costs and revenues associated with Qwest's provision of in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services as nonregulated for accounting
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-13A1.txt
  • which apply to ``entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers'' and any portion of section 272 of the Act that would require Qwest to provide in-region, interstate, interLATA telecommunications services ``through a Section 272 affiliate or any other separate affiliate in order to be deemed non-dominant;'' (2) sections 61.28, 61.31-.38, 61.41-.49, 61.58-.59, 65.1(b)(1), 65.1(b)(3), and 65.600 of our rules, which set forth dominant carrier price cap and rate of return regulations and require dominant carriers to file tariffs on up to 15-days notice with cost support; (3) sections 63.03, 63.10, 63.18, 63.19, 63.21, 63.23, and 63.60-.90 of our rules, which apply to entry and discontinuance of services or transfers of control by dominant carriers; and (4)
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.doc http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.html
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/FCC-02-186A1.html
  • 1129 (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). 77 See generally 47 C.F.R. 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). 78 For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, 57-71. 79 Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. 208(b)(1)). 80 See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th
• http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-04-195A1.html
  • generally become effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. 69.3(f). 13 The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. 65.701. 14 47 C.F.R. 65.600(d)(1). 15 See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/2000/fcc00364.doc http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Notices/2000/fcc00364.txt
  • i.e.,Verizon (19 operating companies); SBC Communications, Inc. (9 operating companies); BellSouth Corporation; and Qwest. Under the recent access reform measures we took in the CALLS Report and Order, price cap incumbent LECs retain the right to recover costs through low-end adjustments, above-cap filings, or other recovery mechanisms. See supra note 14. See 47 C.F.R. § 61.42(f). See 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. See Table 2.3 of Statistics of Communications Common Carriers at p. 20. The ARMIS 43-07 and 43-08 Reports are data sources for a number of Commission publications. On an annual basis, the Commission publishes the Statistics of Communications Common Carriers and Quality of Service Reports. The Commission also publishes on a biannual basis, Monitoring Reports on Universal Service. The Monitoring
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.doc http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2001/fcc01032.html
  • ISP traffic as intrastate and counted intraoffice calls as two DEMs. . .''). Answer of Defendants Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc. and ACS of Anchorage, Inc., File No. EB-00-MD-016 (September 13, 2000) (``Answer''), at Exhibit 2. ATU, like other rate-of-return carriers, is required to file a preliminary monitoring report each year of the two-year monitoring period. See 47 C.F.R. §§ 65.600, 65.701. The final monitoring report, which includes any required adjustments to the preliminary reports, must be filed by September 30 of the year following the conclusion of the monitoring period. 46 C.F.R. § 65.600. Answer at Exhibit 2. Complaint at Exhibit 4. Id. at Description and Justification, Section 4 at 14. See ATU Reply Br. at 12, n.11 (``the 1997
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2002/FCC-02-186A1.html
  • 1129 (1996), cert. denied sub nom. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. v. FCC, 517 U.S. 1240 (1996); General Communication, Inc. v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc., et al., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 2834, 2860-61, 67-68 (2001), appeal pending, ACS of Anchorage, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 01-1059 (D.C. Cir., filed Feb. 7, 2001). 77 See generally 47 C.F.R. 65.600 (requiring local exchange carriers not subject to price cap regulation to file with the Commission an annual rate-of-return monitoring report). 78 For the same reasons, Beehive's laches defense also fails. Answer at 9-12, 57-71. 79 Beehive Supplemental Brief at 20-23 (citing 47 U.S.C. 208(b)(1)). 80 See, e.g., Contract Freighters, Inc. v. Dep't of Transportation, 260 F.3d 858, 860 n.3 (8th
• http://www.fcc.gov/eb/Orders/2004/FCC-04-195A1.html
  • generally become effective July 1. 47 C.F.R. 69.3(f). 13 The maximum allowable rate of return is equal to the prescribed rate of return plus the amount specified in sections 65.700(a) or (b), of our rules, 47 C.F.R. 65.700(a),(b), which is a margin that the carrier may earn from legal tariff rates before any refund obligation arises. See, e.g., 47 C.F.R. 65.600(b), 65.700-702; MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415. The two-year monitoring period for determining compliance with the maximum allowable rate of return begins on January 1 of odd-numbered years and ends on December 31 of even-numbered years. 47 C.F.R. 65.701. 14 47 C.F.R. 65.600(d)(1). 15 See, e.g., MCI v. FCC, 59 F.3d at 1415; Virgin Islands, 989 F.2d at 1238-39;
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1059.doc http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/2002/01-1059.html
  • return no greater than the Commission-prescribed maximum. See In re Amendment of Parts 65 and 69 of the Commission's Rules to Reform the Interstate Rate of Return Represcription and Enforcement Processes, 10 FCC Rcd 6788, 6791-94, p p 7-12, 6847-48, p 135 (1995). In addition, such carriers periodically submit monitoring reports showing their actual rates of return. 47 C.F.R. § 65.600. These reports may lead carriers to file revised rates, see 47 C.F.R. § 69.3(b), or cause the Commission to start proceedings under 47 U.S.C. § 205 to prescribe new rates "to be thereafter followed." Three tariff filings by ACS are pertinent. In April 1996 it filed tariff rates for the two-year period from July 1, 1996 to June 30, 1998