[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 237 (Friday, December 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77028-77029]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31351]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[CC Docket No. 96-45; DA 00-2661]


The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission Petitions For Agreement 
To Redefine The Service Area Of Frontier Communications of Minnesota, 
Inc.

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Common Carrier Bureau provides notice 
that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission has filed a petition 
requesting the Commission's consent to its proposed alternative 
``service area'' definition for Frontier Communications of Minnesota, 
Inc.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard D. Smith, Attorney, Accounting 
Policy Division, Common Carrier Bureau, (202) 418-7400.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of a Commission's Public 
Notice in CC Docket No. 96-45 released on November 29, 2000. 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.
    The Common Carrier Bureau provides notice that the Minnesota Public

[[Page 77029]]

Utilities Commission (Minnesota PUC) has filed a petition, pursuant to 
Sec. 54.207 of the Commission's rules, requesting the Commission's 
consent to its proposed alternative ``service area'' definition for 
Frontier Communications of Minnesota, Inc. (Frontier). The Minnesota 
PUC proposes to adopt a definition of service area that differs from 
Frontier's ``study area'' for the purpose of determining universal 
service obligations and support mechanisms. Specifically, the Minnesota 
PUC proposes to classify each of the 45 individual exchanges served by 
Frontier as separate service areas. The Minnesota PUC contends that, 
without a redefinition of Frontier's service area, the Minnesota PUC 
will be unable to designate another carrier as an eligible 
telecommunications carrier (ETC) to serve any portion of Frontier's 
study area, even if such designation is in the public interest. The 
Minnesota PUC contends that it has taken into account the 
recommendations of the Federal-State Joint Board, as required by the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), and Commission rules.

Commission Rules

    For areas served by a rural telephone company, section 214(e)(5) of 
the Act provides that the company's service area will be its study area 
``unless and until the Commission and the States, after taking into 
account the recommendations of a Federal-State Joint Board instituted 
under section 410(c) of the Act, establish a different definition of 
service area for such company.'' Section 54.207 of the Commission's 
rules and the Universal Service Order, 62 FR 32862, June 17, 1997, set 
forth the procedures for consideration of petitions filed by state 
commissions seeking to designate service areas for rural telephone 
companies that are different from such companies' study areas. 
Specifically, Sec. 54.207(c)(1) provides that such a petition shall 
contain: (i) the definition proposed by the state commission; and (ii) 
the state commission's ruling or other official statement presenting 
the state commission's reason for adopting its proposed definition, 
including an analysis that takes into account the recommendations of 
any Federal-State Joint Board convened to provide recommendations with 
respect to the definition of a service area served by a rural telephone 
company.

The Petition

    On October 27, 1999, the Minnesota PUC issued an order granting 
preliminary approval to Minnesota Cellular Corporation, now known as 
Western Wireless Corporation (Western Wireless), for designation as an 
ETC under section 214(e) of the Act. In this order, the Minnesota PUC 
found that it was in the public interest to designate Western Wireless 
as an ETC in service areas served by rural telephone companies. At that 
time, the Minnesota PUC rejected the claim of Frontier that it was a 
rural telephone company.
    On February 10, 2000, the Minnesota PUC issued an order on 
reconsideration finding, among other things, that Frontier was a rural 
telephone company under the Act. As a rural telephone company, section 
214(e)(5) of the Act defines Frontier's service area as its study area, 
until and unless the Commission and the state establish a different 
definition. Accordingly, Frontier's study area would include all of 
Frontier's 45 existing exchanges in Minnesota. Pursuant to section 
214(e)(1) of the Commission's rules, a carrier designated as an ETC 
must offer and advertise the services supported by the federal 
universal service mechanism throughout the entire service area. Because 
Western Wireless is licensed to serve only 29 of the 45 exchanges 
comprising Frontier's Minnesota study area, the Minnesota PUC rescinded 
its preliminary designation of Western Wireless as an ETC in areas 
served by Frontier.
    On September 1, 2000, the Minnesota PUC issued an order concluding 
that Frontier's service area should be ``disaggregated on an exchange 
by exchange basis as this would allow CLECs [competitive local exchange 
carriers] which are designated a federal ETC to receive future federal 
high-cost funds, if any, for those exchanges in which they serve.'' The 
Minnesota PUC noted that Frontier's study area is comprised of 45 non-
contiguous exchanges located throughout Minnesota and concluded that 
Frontier's service area should be redefined into 45 separate service 
areas based on those individual exchanges. The Minnesota PUC reasoned 
that this redefinition would promote competition by allowing CLECs that 
are designated ETCs to receive federal high-cost funds to provide 
service in part or all of Frontier's current service area. The 
Minnesota PUC therefore authorized a petition to be filed with the 
Commission requesting consent to its proposed alternative service area 
definition for Frontier's Minnesota service territory.

Status

    Section 54.207(c)(3) of the Commission's rules provides that the 
Commission may initiate a proceeding to consider a petition to redefine 
the service area of a rural telephone company within ninety days of the 
release date of a Public Notice. If the Commission initiates a 
proceeding to consider the petition, the proposed definition shall not 
take effect until both the state commission and the Commission agree 
upon the definition of a rural service area, in accordance with section 
214(e)(5) of the Act. If the Commission does not act on the petition 
within 90 days of the release date of the Public Notice, the definition 
proposed by the state commission will be deemed approved by the 
Commission and shall take effect in accordance with state procedures. 
Under Sec. 54.207(e) of the Commission's rules, the Commission 
delegates its authority under Sec. 54.207(c) to the Chief of the Common 
Carrier Bureau.

Federal Communications Commission.
Katherine L. Schroder,
Chief, Accounting Policy Division.
[FR Doc. 00-31351 Filed 12-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P