If telcos don’t like FCC’s proposed “connection-based” method of collecting contributions to universal service fund (USF), they could help FCC by suggesting alternative, FCC Comr. Abernathy told USTA members Thurs. Speaking at group’s Washington Leadership Conference, she said she was convinced current contribution system “isn’t sustainable” so something would have to replace it. Abernathy told group it probably would take “a good 2 years” for FCC to replace current collection system and agency would welcome ideas from carriers. Explaining recently opened wireline Internet access proceeding, she said FCC’s proposed definition of Internet access as information service could mean that “most provisions of Title 2 [of Telecom Act] would not apply to Internet access.” She said there also was universal service angle to that proceeding because USF contributions were assessed only on telecom services. Under assumption that DSL was telecom service, USF contributions now are assessed on DSL provision. Proposed new definition for wireline Internet access services as information service could be interpreted as excluding DSL from universal service base because it’s no longer telecom service, she said. And that could have “significant impact” on money available for universal service support for high-cost carriers, she said. Asked about time frame for broadband proceedings, she said desire was by end of year but that would be “rocket speed.” She said she thought some parts would be completed, perhaps with further notice of proposed rulemaking on remaining issues.

National Telecom Co-op Assn. (NTCA) told FCC it opposed proposal submitted by Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee, AT&T, E-commerce Telecom Users Group and WorldCom to revise way Universal Service Fund (USF) contributions are collected (CD Nov 20 p1). In Dec. 21 letter to FCC Chmn. Powell, NTCA said proposal’s goal seemed to be to relieve long distance companies “of their obligation to make equitable contributions” to USF. That is “in direct violation” of Sec. 254 of Telecom Act that requires all interstate carriers to contribute on equitable basis, NTCA said. “The proposal is couched as a plan to replace the current USF assessment mechanism with a flat-rated per-line charge,” wrote NTCA CEO Michael Brunner. “It is more than that,” he said: “If adopted, the class of carriers providing interexchange services such as those provided by AT&T and WorldCom would have no obligations to contribute to the mechanisms.”

Coalition of long distance companies and user groups proposed revising method of collecting Universal Service Fund contributions from carriers, approach that could please some in industry, dismay others. Proposal, outlined to news media Mon. and submitted to FCC in Nov. 7 ex parte letter, was put forward by AT&T, WorldCom, E-commerce Telecom Users Group (ETUG) and Ad Hoc Telecom Users Committee. It would replace revenue-based contribution scheme with flat-rate per- connection fee. Current system collects contributions from carriers for $5.5 billion USF based on percentage of carrier’s interstate revenues. Coalition members told group that current method was unfair to long distance companies that bore bigger share of it than other parts of industry.

FCC approved proposal Tues. to explore whether and how to reform way agency assesses carrier contributions to Universal Service Fund (USF) and how carriers can recover such costs from customers. Notice of proposed rulemaking unanimously approved by Commission solicits feedback on continuing to require carriers to contribute to USF based on percentage of collected revenue or whether agency should move toward flat-fee alternative, such as per-line charge. Companies that have recovered universal service contributions from customers haven’t historically been held by FCC to particular cost recovery method, with agency instead generally requiring contributors not to shift more than “equitable” amount of contributions to any customer or group of customers. FCC said changes under examination are response to industry trends, including new entrants such as RBOCs into long distance market because contributions now are based on historical, not current, interstate revenue.

Federal court decision last week on ILEC access charges has ramifications for other proceedings such as FCC’s attempts to overhaul access charge and universal service regimes for rural telcos, industry observers said Mon. Fifth U.S. Appeals Court, New Orleans, ruled May 3 that ILECs couldn’t recover their Universal Service Fund (USF) contributions through access charges levied on long distance companies. Court, which remanded FCC regulations for 2nd time on this issue, said such action constituted implicit subsidy, which is barred by Telecom Act. At issue are contributions that all carriers must make to USF. Long distance companies, for example, recover those contributions directly from their customers. FCC in 1997 ordered ILECs to recover their costs from long distance companies as part of access charges. Fifth Circuit remanded that rule in 1999 because of implicit subsidy problem. Commission rewrote rule and said ILECs no longer were required to recover costs from access charges but were permitted to do so if they wished. FCC said it interpreted court’s decision to mean it couldn’t require contributions through access charges but instead had to give ILECs choice of how they recovered contributions. In latest ruling, court said FCC interpretation was wrong. It said ILECs couldn’t recover universal service contributions from access charges, period: “The distinction the agency draws between ‘require’ and ‘permit’ is one without a difference.” Court said its original ruling “turned on the recovery method per se, not whether the Commission permitted or mandated it.” AT&T Vp Joel Lubin said he was cheered by strong language court used in defining access charge recovery as implicit subsidy. Lubin said court’s ruling could affect decision FCC is expected to make Thurs. on rural universal service. At very least, proposals under study by FCC, such as one proposed by Multi-Assn. Group, should be revised to eliminate implicit USF subsidies in access charges, he said. AT&T and several other carriers proposed such action to FCC last month, Lubin said, so court’s ruling was pleasant coincidence. Appeals Court ruling doesn’t have as much effect on large price-cap-regulated ILECs because FCC directed them last year to stop recovering USF contributions through access charges. Action was taken as part of Commission’s adoption of CALLS proposal. Lubin said court’s strong statements barring implicit subsidies in access charges applied to other industry practices as well. Among them, he said, is practice of pooling carrier common line (CCL) charges for rural carriers. Because National Exchange Carrier Assn. (NECA) pools those charges, by nature they are not cost-based, he said. Pooling access charges discourages competition, he said. Competitors such as Western Wireless can’t share in that subsidy because it’s “buried in the pool,” he said. Judge Emilio Garza wrote decision. Also on panel were Judges Eugene Davis and Donald Pogue. Pogue concurred because he disagreed with 1999 decision, saying it might have gone too far