Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Ajit Varadaraj Pai and Jessica Rosenworcel were sworn in Monday as FCC Commissioners.

They replace former Commissioners Michael Copps and Meredith Atwell Baker, who is now Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at Comcast.

Rosenworcel worked at the FCC from 1999 to 2007, serving in the Common Carrier and Wireline Competition Bureaus. She later became Copps’ Senior Legal Advisor. She most recently worked under Senator Jay Rockefeller IV as Senior Communications Counsel for the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.

Pai also has extensive communications experience, from trial attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice Telecommunications Task Force to Deputy General Counsel for the FCC. Most recently, he was a Partner at nationwide law firm Jenner & Block.

Thursday, May 3, 2012

Local exchange carriers (LECs) will now be allowed to tariff a higher transitional default rate for originating intrastate toll VoIP traffic until June 30, 2014.

The USF/ICC Transformation Order originally required LECs to transition down the default rate for intrastate VoIP traffic to interstate levels.

Frontier and Windstream, along with the Rural Associations, petitioned against the new rule back in December 2011. One of the requests, was that the Commission clarify the Order does not apply to intrastate originating access rates for calls originating on the PSTN and terminating VoIP.

While the Commission rejected the group’s interpretation of the Order, it did modify the rules so that originating intrastate VoIP traffic could be assessed at the intrastate, rather than interstate level.

The FCC adopted the changes April 24. Read a copy of the Reconsideration Order here.

Monday, April 30, 2012

The FCC adopted a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Universal Service Fund (USF) Contribution Reform at its April 27 Open Meeting.

The Notice seeks comments on what services and service providers should contribute to the fund, how contributions should be assessed, how to reduce costs and promote transparency, and limitations on how providers recover their USF costs.

Carriers pay a percentage of their interstate and international revenue into the USF. The contribution factor, currently at 17.4 percent, has been steadily increasing for the last several quarters.

The FCC acknowledges that the USF contribution system, with its increasing costs and complex compliance rules, is an inefficient program that creates unfair advantages for some providers. The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) released a statement shortly after the Open Meeting saying, “roughly 44 percent of the contribution burden falls on wireless providers and their customers.”

As a result, many carriers are taking a closer look at how they report their revenue. Knowing how much of the traffic on your network is interstate and international is the best way to ensure you’re paying only what you should into the USF. And the best way to accurately calculate that number is through a detailed traffic study.

Contact Kim Russo at krusso@telecomdb.com to learn more.

Monday, April 30, 2012

The April 2012 NPA and NANP exhaust projections are now available, along with a 5YY NPA forecast.

Download NPA Exhaust Analysis

Download NANP Exhaust Analysis

Download 5YY NPA Exhaust Analysis

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

NANPA is now assigning the 566 NPA for Personal Communications Services (PCS).

The supply of 500, 533 and 544 NXXs have been exhausted as of April 17, 2012.

The Industry Numbering Committee (INC) designated the 566 NPA as the next PCS 5YY resource with Planning Letter 424.

For more information, go to www.nanpa.com.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

A perspective from Kim Russo, Co-President

I heard a comment in one of Tuesday’s seminars that was right on the money. The FCC in its ICC/USF Reform Order spends 60 pages saying, we’re not classifying VoIP as a telecom service, but we’re not saying it isn’t a telecom service either.

That’s just one example of why there’s so much dispute over how to implement last year’s reforms. But one thing is admittedly clear. In spite of all the quarrels and questions, reform is moving forward.

In continuing with my earlier post, here’s a recap from Tuesday.

Implementing ICC/USF Reform – The Next Steps in the States
Moderated by Joe Gillan of Gillan Associates, speakers included John Burke, Vermont Public Service Board and Telecommunications Committee Chair at NARUC; Sarah DeYoung, Executive Director of CALTEL; Roy Lathrop, Senior Director at NCTA and Pamela Hollick, VP of Regulatory at tw telecom.

This seminar looked at how states are implementing the ICC/USF Reform Order as well as the effects on CLECs, cable providers and state regulators.

From cable’s perspective, Roy Lathrop (NCTA) said it’s good the USF now has a budget. Companies are also pleased that the Connect America Fund (CAF) is limited to areas where there is no unsubsidized competitor offering service. Overall, cable providers like the reform but want states to be careful with implementation.

John Burke (NARUC) said he understands cable’s concerns. Burke believes cable companies will now be less secretive about where their systems are. For states, the big issue is intrastate access. Eliminating that revenue makes it more difficult for state programs to serve at-risk customers.

Pam Hollick (tw) pointed out that state statutes have provisions allowing providers to ask for supplemental USF funding if federal support wanes. The question is, are states required to provide that stop gap funding? A number of states are currently looking at how to reconcile that with the Reform Order.

Wrapping it Up
For me, this spring’s COMPTEL PLUS was an invigorating experience. More than 2,000 attendees talked about issues and solutions to move the industry forward. There’s been a sort of stalemate over the last few years as we watched the FCC craft its reform plans and then finally adopt the official Order. I think most of us are done digesting the pieces. Now, it’s time to plan and execute a profitable strategy for the future.

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

A perspective from Kim Russo, Co-President

COMPTEL CEO Jerry James didn’t mince words in his opening remarks Monday when he called Intercarrier Compensation reform “a disaster”. The FCC’s historic overhaul of the Universal Service Fund and Intercarrier Compensation system faces numerous reconsideration petitions, along with legal challenges, since its adoption last year.

Those working in the telecom industry are now trying to figure out what’s next. According to James, critical issues in this post-ICC reform era are IP to IP interconnection, special access, last mile access, Cyber security, privacy, spectrum and ILEC forbearance.

I’ve had a great time so far being able to discuss the current industry situation and share challenges and success stories with peers at the COMPTEL PLUS Spring 2012 Convention & Expo in San Francisco. On Monday, I also had the opportunity to attend two very informative seminars.

ICC Reform: What’s the Bottom Line Impact?    
A lot of people are looking for that answer, which is why this seminar was packed! The topic:  “bill and keep” and the internal cost and process changes involved.

The event was moderated by Carey Roesel, VP of Technologies Management Inc. (TMI), with speakers Michael Beach, Co-Founder of HighTide Partners; Paul Florack, VP of Product Management at Transaction Network Services, Inc. and attorney James Lister of Birch Horton Bittner and Cherot.

For starters, they all agree that the reform process will take several years, which means company leaders will need to manage the transition. The challenge in managing this transition is that some major provisions are still in dispute. According to Michael Beach, we’ll continue to see appeals, reconsiderations and NPRMs.

One of the key provisions in the reform is that switched access and reciprocal compensation goes to zero. This process will lead to winners and losers, and Beach outlined the following process to manage the change.

1. Understand impacts and timeliness, quantify them.
2. Determine tactical move, billing changes, tariffs.
3. Modify plan with changes.
4. Support customers.

IP Interconnection: What is the Optimal Regulatory Framework for the Industry?
This is a question that has yet to be answered at the federal level, although there is a pending FCC rulemaking process covering interconnection arrangements for the exchange of voice in IP format.

The seminar explored regulatory issues surrounding such interconnection, with insight coming from the CLEC, ILEC and cable and edge provider’s perspectives. Judging from comments made in this hour-long discussion, it’s possible to imagine how daunting a task this must be for the FCC to tackle.

Moderated by Thomas Jones of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, speakers included Joe Gillan of Gillan Associates; Hank Hultquist, VP of Federal Regulatory at AT&T and Richard S. Whitt, Director and Managing Counsel for Telecom and Media Policy at Google.

Hank Hultquist (AT&T) called the transition to IP networks “messy”. Not only is it complicated, it’s also wrapped up in regulation; and he proposes that the FCC identify and remove obstacles. One of the biggest challenges is that the Commission has not set a date for a full transition from TDM. The industry also needs to define what IP to IP interconnection means.

Richard Whitt (Google) agreed that the transition is fraught with too much regulation. He advocated for a process in which the industry reaches agreements organically, involving the FCC only when necessary. Whitt also pointed out that the Telecommunications Act requires carriers to interconnect in a good faith effort. He sees a future with possibly two Points of Interconnection in the country for big service providers, and medium and small companies would be asked to bring traffic to those points.

Coming from the CLEC perspective, Joe Gillan said the legal framework, which currently applies to the PSTN, should remain intact even with technology changes. He singled out AT&T, stating the carrier wants statutory protections to go away with technology changes when those statutes should stay in place. He accused larger networks of not treating smaller networks as equals. He suggested AT&T work with these smaller networks and state commissions to resolve their disagreements.

I couldn’t help but notice, as an observer, that the conversation soon became an argument pitting the “big guys” versus the “little guys”.

Gillan said section 251 of the Act was put there to even things out between small guys and big guys and needs to remain.

Hultquist countered that the applicable part of the Act is section 251e, which establishes FCC authority for numbering resources. He cited a need to share routing information for IP interconnection and believes the first thing we need is a date mandated by the FCC for companies who have IP end points to share routing information.

Gillan added that in the end, it will not be the FCC that decides these issues, but the courts.

The bottom line: there is no easy answer. When the FCC finally issues an NPRM on IP interconnection, it’s likely to receive much rancorous debate.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

New York had the most Central Office code assignments in 2011, according to statistics from NANPA’s latest newsletter.

Here are the top five recipients. The numbers reflect total codes assigned less codes returned.

1. New York 190
2. Texas 176
3. Florida 127
4. Illinois 123
5. Maryland 122

New York’s 718/347/929 area code complex also pulled in the most net assignments with 81 codes. Maryland came in second, with 62 assignments in 410/443 and 60 assignments in 301/240. Texas followed with 40 assignments for the 713/281/832 complex and 38 assignments for 214/469/972.

The rankings should come as no surprise, since these states are home to some of the nation’s most populous cities. It is interesting to note, however, that California did not make the list.

Friday, April 6, 2012

Look out for major updates in the next installment of Localizers. Tele-Tech researchers report that New York, South Carolina and Texas all had local changes affecting residential plans. Rate center changes in Oregon, Maryland, Missouri and Canada also impacted local files.

Regarding rates, AT&T continues to increase subscriber line charges, with changes occurring in California, Michigan, Missouri and former Bell South states Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee.

CenturyLink also raised subscriber line charges in Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee and Wisconsin.

Verizon increased subscriber line charges in Maryland and Pennsylvania.

Citizen/Frontier raised subscriber line charges in Illinois, Iowa, New Mexico, New York and Wisconsin.

Contact Customer Service if you have any questions, custserv@telecomdb.com or 800-433-6181.

Monday, March 26, 2012

NANPA has added the Raleigh Durham Airport rate center (RAL DUR AP) due to a correction. The change only affects the central office code of 919-840 and is effective June 23, 2012.