Local Competition Survey

This is a summary of the Bureau's Public Notice released May 8, 1998 (DA 98-839). The full text of this Public Notice is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, Washington, D.C. 20554. The complete text also may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th St., NW, Washington, DC 20036.

Summary of the Public Notice

The Commission requires timely and reliable information on the pace and extent of development of competition for local telecommunications services in different geographic markets to evaluate the effectiveness of decisions taken to implement the pro-competition provisions and to achieve the universal service goals of the Telecommunication Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. Section 151 et seq.). The Commission also requires such information to identify services and geographic markets where local competition has developed sufficiently to allow the Commission to exercise its regulatory forbearance authority (47 U.S.C. Section 160(a)). The Commission has previously concluded (Expanded Interconnection with Local Telephone Company Facilities, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 59 FR 38922 (August 1, 1994), CC Docket No. 91-141, 9 FCC Rcd 5154, 5177 (1994)) that an information collection program is necessary to monitor the state of local competition in diverse areas of the country so that the Commission might make its regulatory requirements more flexible as competition develops in particular areas. The Commission delegated authority to the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, to formulate the detailed elements of a reporting program, to decide which service providers must provide information, and to specify the format and timing of reports.

I. Background

3. Only a limited amount of information on the state of local competition can be derived from sources currently reported to the

Commission. These data are nationwide local service revenues reported by calendar year. Although these data are filed by all carriers, including new competitive local exchange carriers, the data are not available for analysis by Commission staff until several months after filing; consist only of nationwide aggregates; and are generally given confidential treatment. A summary of this information is published, a few months thereafter, in a form that maintains the confidentiality of revenues of individual companies. Additional data on the state of local competition in selected states, and in particular cities and regions within those states, have been submitted to the Commission in various proceedings, e.g., in the course of regional Bell company applications for authorization to provide in-region interLATA services. These data provide significant information related to local competition in the state for which, and at the time, an interLATA services petition is filed. Because they are submitted only by the petitioner, however, these data do not constitute a comprehensive survey of local competition in that state. Nor do they describe the extent of development of local competition across the country at any point in time.

II. Discussion

4. The Public Notice seeks comment on adopting a local competition survey similar to a survey completed--on a voluntary basis--by nine large incumbent local exchange carriers in March, 1998, and seeks comment on applying such a survey to all types of local exchange carriers, both incumbent carriers and competitive carriers. We propose to make any survey that we adopt mandatory for most carriers because we believe that an accurate and timely picture of the development of local competition and the achievement of universal service goals requires a limited set of information from substantially all local exchange carriers. 5. We also seek comment on whether there are authoritative data sources other than a periodic survey that could provide information necessary to evaluate the development of local competition and the achievement of universal service goals on a timely basis. We invite parties to identify publicly available alternative sources of any or all of the data discussed in the Public Notice. We ask parties proposing alternative data sources to identify those sources precisely and to explain in detail how those sources provide information that is accurate, sufficient, and timely to describe and understand the state of local competition in diverse areas of the country. 6. We invite comment on the definition of reporting areas and propose that the states should be the geographic reporting areas for local competition surveys. We also invite comment on whether the following items are both necessary and sufficient to describe and understand the state of local competition in diverse areas of the nation: number of local service lines sold directly to end users by the reporting carrier; number of local service lines sold to competing local carriers for resale; number of unbundled loops and unbundled switch ports for local access lines provided by the reporting carrier to an unaffiliated carrier; number of unaffiliated, competing local exchange carriers purchasing unbundled network elements and resold lines; number of wire centers where competitors have physical or virtual collocation arrangements, and number and type of customer lines served; switched minutes originated with end users, terminated with end users, and exchanged with other carriers; number of telephone numbers ported by interim or long-term portability methods; and names of competitive local exchange carriers active in the reporting area. 7. We seek comment on whether each incumbent local exchange carrier should file a local competition survey for each area in which it is an incumbent local exchange carrier. Because it is our objective to minimize reporting burdens, while collecting information sufficient to understand developing local exchange and exchange access competition in diverse areas of the country, we also seek comment on whether some subset of incumbent local exchange carriers should file local competition surveys, and, if so, on the appropriate basis for determining the composition of that subset of incumbent local exchange carriers. 8. To the extent that a competitor provides service to customers using its own loops and switches, these lines will not be included in any data collected by incumbents. Whether a competitive local exchange carrier serves customers over its own facilities, by means of unbundled network elements, or through resale, moreover, data provided directly by competitive local exchange carriers about their own customers would be extremely valuable as a cross-check to data provided by incumbent local exchange carriers, and should provide a much more specific snapshot of local competition. We therefore seek comment on whether carriers other than incumbent local exchange carriers should file local competition surveys if such carriers propose to provide--or are providing--local exchange or exchange access service as duly authorized competitive local exchange carriers. Consistent with this need for adequate information, we propose not to distinguish among local exchange carriers on the basis of the technology used to provide local exchange or exchange access service to the public. 9. We also seek comment on whether local exchange carriers other than incumbent local exchange carriers should report the same data, in the same form, that incumbent local exchange carriers report. Competitive local exchange carriers need not develop their business plans, conduct their operations, design their networks, or select geographic areas to serve in the same manner as incumbent local exchange carriers have done. Also, the 1996 Act places less extensive responsibilities on local exchange carriers other than incumbent local exchange carriers. 10. We propose that carriers file the survey quarterly, 30 days after the end of the calendar year quarter, through the first quarter of 2001, which will mark a date five years after the enactment of the 1996 Act. Prior to that date, we propose to undertake a review of the efficacy and burden imposed of this data collection to determine the need and form for any data collection efforts after that date.

III. Procedural Issues

11. Procedures for Filing. Interested parties may file comments in CC Docket No. 91-141 on or before June 7, 1998. Reply comments may be filed on or before June 22, 1998. All filings should refer to the pleadings as Local Competition Survey, CC Docket No. 91-141, CCB-IAD File No. 98-102. One original and four copies of all comments must be sent to Magalie Roman Salas, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, N.W., Suite 222, Washington, D.C. 20554. Three copies should also be sent to Ms. Terry Conway, Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, 2033 M Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20554. Copies of documents filed with the Commission may be obtained from the International Transcription Service (ITS), 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, (202) 857-3800. Documents are also available for review and copying at the Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., Monday, from 9:45 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and Tuesday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., (202) 418-0270.

12. This proceeding is a non-restricted proceeding. See 47 CFR 1.1200(a), 1.1206. Accordingly, ex parte presentations are permitted, provided that they are disclosed in conformance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 13. Paperwork Reduction Act. We note that this Public Notice contains either a proposed or modified information collection, and we invite the general public to take this opportunity to comment on those information collections, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's initial burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Federal Communications Commission. Peyton L. Wynns, Chief, Industry Analysis Division. [FR Doc. 98-14408 Filed 5-28-98; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P