[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 135 (Thursday, July 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43331-43333]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17666]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[CC Docket Nos. 96-98, 99-68; FCC 00-227]


Reciprocal Compensation; Inter-Carrier Compensation for ISP-Bound 
Traffic

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On March 24, 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the 
D.C. Circuit vacated certain provisions of the Commission's Reciprocal 
Compensation Ruling regarding ISP-bound traffic, and remanded the 
matter to the Commission. The Commission seeks comment on the issues 
identified by the court in its decision, including the jurisdictional 
nature of ISP-bound traffic, the scope of the reciprocal compensation 
requirement, and the relevance of the concepts of ``termination,'' 
``telephone exchange service,'' ``exchange access service,'' and 
``information access.'' The Commission also seeks comment on any ex 
parte presentations filed after the close of the reply period on April 
27, 1999, and on any new or innovative inter-carrier compensation 
arrangements for ISP-bound traffic that may have been considered or 
entered into during the pendency of this proceeding.

[[Page 43332]]


DATES: Comments are due on or before July 21, 2000, and reply comments 
are due on or before August 4, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments and reply comments to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Requests for filing instructions for e-
mail comments may be sent to [email protected]. Comments and reply comments 
filed by paper must be filed with the Commission's Secretary, Magalie 
Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., TW-A325, Washington, D.C. 20554. 
Copies filed with International Transcription Services (ITS), the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, must be sent to 1231 20th Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, and copies to the Chief, Competitive 
Pricing Division, must be sent to 445 12th Street, S.W., TW-A225, 
Washington, D.C. 20554. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for further 
information on filing requirements.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodney McDonald, Common Carrier 
Bureau, Competitive Pricing Division, (202) 418-1520.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission's Public Notice, Comment 
Sought on Remand of the Commission's Reciprocal Compensation 
Declaratory Ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 
Pleading Cycle Established, CC Docket Nos. 96-98, 99-68, FCC 00-227, 
was adopted June 22, 2000, and released June 23, 2000. The item in its 
entirety is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, 
D.C. 20554. Comments and reply comments will be available for public 
inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center. 
The complete text may also be obtained through the world wide web, at 
http:/www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common__Carrier/Public__Notices, or may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Services, Inc., 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 
20036.

Public Notice

    On February 26, 1999, the Commission released a Declaratory Ruling 
and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Reciprocal Compensation Ruling) to 
address the issue of inter-carrier compensation for the delivery of 
telecommunications traffic to an Internet service provider (ISP). (64 
FR 14203, 64 FR 14239, March 24, 1999). In the Reciprocal Compensation 
Ruling, the Commission determined that ISP-bound calls are not local 
calls subject to reciprocal compensation under our rules implementing 
section 251(b)(5) of the Act. 47 U.S.C. 251(b)(5). Using an ``end-to-
end'' analysis of these calls, the Commission concluded that ISP-bound 
calls do not terminate at the ISP's local server, but instead continue 
to one or more Internet websites that are often located in another 
state. It therefore found that ISP-bound calls are jurisdictionally 
mixed, largely interstate, and thus not subject to reciprocal 
compensation. The Commission also acknowledged that there was no 
federal rule establishing an inter-carrier compensation mechanism for 
such traffic or governing what amounts, if any, should be paid. In the 
absence of a federal rule regarding the appropriate inter-carrier 
compensation for ISP-bound traffic, the Commission held that parties 
were bound by their interconnection agreements as interpreted and 
enforced by state commissions. The Commission sought comment, 
therefore, on a federal inter-carrier compensation mechanism for ISP-
bound traffic.
    On March 24, 2000, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. 
Circuit vacated certain provisions of the Reciprocal Compensation 
Ruling, and remanded the matter to the Commission. Bell Atl. Tel. 
Companies v. F.C.C., 206 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2000). The court ruled that 
the Commission had not adequately justified the application of its 
jurisdictional analysis in determining whether a call to an ISP is 
subject to the reciprocal compensation requirement of section 
251(b)(5). The court noted that (1) the Commission failed to apply its 
definition of ``termination'' to its analysis; and (2) cases upon which 
the Commission relied in its end-to-end analysis can be distinguished 
on the theory that they involve continuous communications switched by 
interexchange carriers (IXCs), as opposed to ISPs, which are not 
telecommunications providers. The court also found that a remand was 
required because the Commission did not provide a satisfactory 
explanation as to how its conclusions regarding ISP-bound traffic 
accord with the statutory definitions of ``telephone exchange service'' 
and ``exchange access service.''
    The Commission seeks comment on the issues identified by the court 
in its decision. In particular, the Commission asks parties to comment 
on the jurisdictional nature of ISP-bound traffic, as well as the scope 
of the reciprocal compensation requirement of section 251(b)(5), and on 
the relevance of the concepts of ``termination,'' ``telephone exchange 
service,'' (47 U.S.C. 153(47)) ``exchange access service,'' (47 U.S.C. 
153(16)) and ``information access.'' (47 U.S.C. 251(g); 47 U.S.C. 
153(20)) In addition, the Commission seeks to update the record in the 
pending rulemaking proceeding by inviting parties to comment on any ex 
parte presentations filed after the close of the reply period on April 
27, 1999. Finally, the Commission seeks comment regarding any new or 
innovative inter-carrier compensation arrangements for ISP-bound 
traffic that parties may be considering or may have entered into, 
either voluntarily or at the direction of a state commission, during 
the pendency of this proceeding.
    This matter shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 47 CFR 
1.1200, 1.1206. Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded 
that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of 
the substance of the presentations and not merely a listing of the 
subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the 
views and arguments presented generally is required. 47 CFR 1.1206(b). 
Other rules pertaining to oral and written ex parte presentations in 
permit-but-disclose proceedings are set forth in section 1.1206(b) of 
the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
    Interested parties may file comments no later than July 21, 2000. 
Reply comments may be filed no later than August 4, 2000. Comments may 
be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) 
or by filing paper copies. (63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998) When filing 
comments, please reference CC Docket Nos. 96-98, 99-68.
    Comments filed through ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via 
the Internet to http://www.fcc.gov/e-file/ecfs.html. Generally, only 
one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. If multiple docket 
or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, 
however, commenters must transmit one electronic copy of the comments 
to each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In 
completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full 
name, Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or 
rulemaking number. Parties also may submit an electronic comment by 
Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, 
commenters should send an e-mail message to [email protected] and include 
``get form your e-mail address>'' in the body of the message. A sample 
form and directions will be sent in reply.

[[Page 43333]]

    An original and four copies of all comments and reply comments 
filed by paper must be filed with the Commission's Secretary, Magalie 
Roman Salas, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., TW--A325, Washington, D.C. 20554. In 
addition, one copy of each pleading must be filed with International 
Transcription Services (ITS), the Commission's duplicating contractor, 
at its office at 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, and 
one copy with the Chief, Competitive Pricing Division, 445 12th Street, 
S.W., TW--A225, Washington, D.C. 20554.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-17666 Filed 7-12-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P