Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · REGISTER · 2001-03-23 · Federal Communications Commission · Proposed Rules

Proposed Rules. Final rule; petition for reconsideration

465 words·~2 min read·/register/2001/03/23/01-7230

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-S FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 54 [CC Docket No. 96-45; FCC 01-85] Petition for Reconsideration Filed by AT&T AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule; petition for reconsideration. SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission denies AT&T's Petition for Reconsideration to adopt a proposal to base contributions on current revenues. The Commission concludes that under this proposal, the contribution factor is set using prior-year revenues, but carriers contribute based on application of this contribution factor to their current revenues.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Smith, Attorney, Common Carrier Bureau, Accounting Policy Division,
(202)418-7400. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order on Reconsideration in CC Docket No. 96-45 released on March 14, 2001. The full text of this document is available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 Twelfth Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 1. The Commission denies AT&T's Petition for Reconsideration at this time to adopt a proposal to base contributions on current revenues. The Commission concludes that under this proposal, the contribution factor is set using prior-year revenues, but carriers contribute based on application of this contribution factor to their current revenues. This proposal would increase reporting burdens on carriers by requiring carriers to file revenue information 13 times per year within very short timeframes. We agree with the majority of commenters that this proposal would be unduly burdensome on carriers, particularly smaller carriers. We also have concerns that the adoption of this proposal might affect the sufficiency of the universal service fund and require the collection of a reserve fund to protect against a fund shortfall. For these reasons, we decline to adopt this proposal at this time and deny AT&T's petition. 2. The Commission will send a copy of this Order in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Order to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of the Order and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the **Federal Register** . *See* 5 U.S.C. 604(b). I. Ordering Clauses 3. Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 4(i), 4(j), 254, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, this Order on Reconsideration is adopted. 4. The Petition for Reconsideration filed on March 1, 2000 by AT&T is denied. 5. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center shall send a copy of this Order on Reconsideration to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. List of Subjects 47 CFR Part 54 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications, Telephone. Federal Communications Commission. Magalie Roman Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. 01-7230 Filed 3-22-01; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 2
1 reference not yet in our index
  • 47 CFR 54
Citation graph
cites case law
Proposed Rules
Final rule; petition for reconsideration
Cite47 CFR 54
Cites 3Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.