FW: Fact Sheet on The FCC, Internet Service Providers, and Access Charges (http://w

[Patrick Sherman <psherman@bigfoot.com>]

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD2296.F7FE0320
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



(\X/)Patrick Sherman			psherman@bigfoot.com(\X/)
97 Vento VR6 / Tornado Red / 10K
"Zzzzzzzz"


THE FCC, INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND ACCESS CHARGES
This fact sheet offers informal guidance on an issue that has generated a 
great deal of public interest. For more specific details about the 
proceedings currently before the Commission, please visit our web site 
(http://www.fcc.gov/).


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

In December 1996, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requested 
public comment on issues relating to the charges that Internet Service 
Providers (ISPs) and similar companies pay to local telephone companies. On 
May 7, 1997, the FCC decided to leave the existing rate structure in place. 
In other words, the FCC decided not to allow local telephone companies to 
impose per-minute access charged on ISPs.

Please Note: There is no open comment period in this proceeding. If you 
have recently seen a message on the Internet stating that in response to a 
request from local telephone companies, the FCC is requesting comments to 
<isp@fcc.gov> by February 1998, be aware that this information is 
inaccurate.

The FCC issued an unrelated public notice, DA 98-2, on January 5, 1998 in 
connection with a report to Congress on universal service. Pursuant to the 
FCC's 1998 appropriations legislation, the Commission must submit a report 
by April 10, 1998 on several issues including the legal status of Internet 
services under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Comments in response to 
the public notice are due January 20, 1998, and reply comments are due 
February 2, 1998. Informal comments may be sent by email to 
<usreport@fcc.gov>.


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

Background Information


Each long distance telephone call you make includes per-minute fees that 
your long distance carrier pays to the originating and terminating local 
telephone companies over whose facilities that call also travelled. Those 
fees, which are designed to recover the costs to local telephone companies 
for use of their facilities, are referred to as "access charges."

As part of its Access Reform proceeding, CC Docket 96-262, the FCC in 
December 1996 sought comment on the treatment of ISPs and other "enhanced 
service providers" that also use local telephone companies' facilities. 
Since the access charge system was established in 1983, enhanced service 
providers have been classified as "end users" rather than "carriers" for 
purposes of the access charge rules, and therefore they do not pay the 
per-minute access charges that long-distance companies pay to local 
telephone companies.

In the Access Reform Order, FCC 97-158, adopted on May 7, 1997, the FCC 
concluded that the existing rate structure for ISPs should remain in place. 
In other words, the Commission reaffirmed that ISPs are not required to pay 
interstate access charges.

When it began the Access Reform proceeding, the Commission also issued a 
Notice of Inquiry, CC Docket 96-263, seeking comment more broadly on usage 
of the public switched telephone network by Internet and interstate 
information service providers. A Notice of Inquiry is a request for 
information that does not involve any specific proposed action. The 
Commission stated in the Access Reform order that it intended to use the 
Notice of Inquiry record to develop a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 
proposing actions to facilitate the efficient deployment of data networks.


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

Frequently Asked Questions on Internet Services and Access Charges



Q: Does the FCC regulate the rates charged by Internet Service Providers 
(ISPs)?



A: No. ISPs are considered "enhanced service providers" under FCC rules. 
The FCC does not regulate the rates that enhanced service providers charge 
to their subscribers.


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

Q: How does the FCC regulate the rates that local telephone companies 
charge to ISPs?



A: ISPs purchase local phone lines so that customers can call them. Under 
FCC rules, enhanced service providers ISPs are considered "end users" when 
they purchase services from local telephone companies. Thus, ISPs pay the 
same rates as any other business customer, and these rates are set 
separately in each state. By contrast, long-distance companies are 
considered "carriers," and they pay interstate access charges regulated by 
the FCC.


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



Q: How are access charges different from the rates ISPs pay now?



A: Today, ISPs typically purchase "business lines" from local phone 
companies. Business lines usually include a flat monthly charge, and a 
per-minute charge for making outgoing calls. Because ISPs receive calls 
from their subscribers rather than making outgoing calls, ISPs generally do 
not pay any per-minute charges for their lines, which is one reason many 
ISPs do not charge per-minute rates for Internet access. Access charges, by 
contrast, include per-minute fees for both outgoing and incoming calls. The 
rate levels of interstate access charges are also in many cases higher than 
the flat business line rates ISPs pay today.


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



Q: Have local phone companies requested authority from the FCC to charge 
per-minute rates to ISPs?



A: Since 1983, there has been an ongoing debate about whether enhanced 
service providers should be required to pay access charges, based on the 
contention that these companies use local networks in the same manner as 
long-distance carriers. In June 1996, four local telephone companies 
(Pacific Bell, Bell Atlantic, US West, and NYNEX) submitted studies to the 
FCC concerning the effects of Internet usage on these carriers' networks. 
The companies argued that the existing rate structure did not reflect the 
costs imposed on local telephone companies to support Internet access, and 
that Internet usage was causing congestion in part of the local network. In 
connection with these studies and other pleadings, several local phone 
companies have asked the FCC for authority to charge interstate access 
charges to ISPs, although they have not filed a formal petition for 
rulemaking.


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



Q: Is the FCC considering allowing local phone companies to impose access 
charges on ISPs?



A: The FCC requested public comment in December 1996 on whether ISPs should 
pay current access charges, and more generally on how Internet and 
interstate information services that use local telephone networks should be 
treated. The Commission concluded on May 7, 1997 that ISPs should not be 
subject to interstate access charges. There is currently no open comment 
period on this issue.


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



Q: Does the FCC currently have an ongoing proceeding on Internet and 
interstate information services?



A: The FCC issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) in December 1996, at the same 
time as it asked for comment on whether ISPs should be subject to access 
charges. The NOI asked generally about how to create incentives for 
companies to make the most efficient use of the telephone network for 
Internet and other information services. The comment period for the NOI is 
closed, but the FCC has stated that it plans to issue a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM) asking for comment on more specific proposals based on 
the responses to the NOI. The NPRM will consider actions other than 
imposition of per-minute access charges on ISPs.


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



Q: What is the difference between a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) and a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)?



A: A NOI is the earliest step in the FCC's process and typically asks 
questions in an effort to gather enough information to make informed 
proposals on a given topic. A NPRM is a request for comment on specific 
proposals made by the Commission. After the FCC reviews the comments filed 
in response to an NPRM, the FCC can issue a Report and Order adopting new 
rules.


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



Q: Are comments filed by other parties be available for review?



A: Yes. All formal comments are available for review in the FCC Reference 
Center in Washington DC, and copies may be purchased through International 
Transcription Services, which can be reached at 202-857-3800. In addition, 
copies of comments that were submitted on diskette are available for review 
at http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/comments.html.


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



Q: Is the FCC considering taxes for use of the Internet or online services? 



A: No. The debate involves charges levied by local phone companies, not 
government taxes.


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



Q: Is this the "FCC modem tax" that has been floating around the Internet 
in various forms for several years?



A: The "modem tax" referred to a proposal in 1987 to require enhanced 
service providers to pay interstate access charges, which at that time were 
significantly higher than they are today. The 1987 proposal was abandoned 
in 1988. The current Access Reform proceeding is entirely separate.


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

For more specific questions, see the Access Reform page on the on the FCC 
Web site at http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html.

Last Updated January 7, 1998

 
- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD2296.F7FE0320
Content-Type: text/html; name="ATT00000.html"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><TITLE>Fact Sheet on The FCC, Internet Service =
Providers, and Access Charges</TITLE><BASE=20
href=3Dhttp://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Factsheets/ispfact.html>=

<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.2106.6"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BASEFONT size=3D2><STRONG><FONT size=3D+2>THE FCC, =
INTERNET=20
SERVICE PROVIDERS, AND ACCESS CHARGES</FONT></STRONG>=20
<P><EM><FONT size=3D+2><STRONG>T</STRONG></FONT>his fact sheet offers =
informal=20
guidance on an issue that has generated a great deal of public interest. =
For=20
more specific details about the proceedings currently before the =
Commission,=20
please visit our web site (<A=20
href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/">http://www.fcc.gov/</A>).</EM>=20
<HR noShade SIZE=3D1>

<P><FONT size=3D+2><STRONG>I</STRONG></FONT>n December 1996, the Federal =

Communications Commission (FCC) requested public comment on issues =
relating to=20
the charges that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and similar companies =
pay to=20
local telephone companies. On May 7, 1997, the FCC decided to leave the =
existing=20
rate structure in place. In other words, the FCC decided =
<STRONG>not</STRONG> to=20
allow local telephone companies to impose per-minute access charged on =
ISPs.=20
<P><FONT color=3Dred><STRONG>Please Note:</STRONG> There is no open =
comment period=20
in this proceeding. If you have recently seen a message on the Internet =
stating=20
that in response to a request from local telephone companies, the FCC is =

requesting comments to &lt;isp@fcc.gov&gt; by February 1998, be aware =
that this=20
information is inaccurate.</FONT>=20
<P>The FCC issued an unrelated <A=20
href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Public_Notices/1998/da9=
80002.html">public=20
notice</A>, DA 98-2, on January 5, 1998 in connection with a report to =
Congress=20
on universal service. Pursuant to the FCC's 1998 appropriations =
legislation, the=20
Commission must submit a report by April 10, 1998 on several issues =
including=20
the legal status of Internet services under the Telecommunications Act =
of 1996.=20
Comments in response to the public notice are due January 20, 1998, and =
reply=20
comments are due February 2, 1998. Informal comments may be sent by =
email to <A=20
href=3D"mailto:usreport@fcc.gov">&lt;usreport@fcc.gov&gt;</A>.=20
<HR noShade SIZE=3D1>
<!-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ background =
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-->
<P><FONT size=3D+2><STRONG>Background Information</STRONG></FONT>=20
<P>
<P>Each long distance telephone call you make includes per-minute fees =
that your=20
long distance carrier pays to the originating and terminating local =
telephone=20
companies over whose facilities that call also travelled. Those fees, =
which are=20
designed to recover the costs to local telephone companies for use of =
their=20
facilities, are referred to as &quot;access charges.&quot;=20
<P>As part of its <A href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html">Access =
Reform</A>=20
proceeding, CC Docket 96-262, the FCC in December 1996 sought comment on =
the=20
treatment of ISPs and other &quot;enhanced service providers&quot; that =
also use=20
local telephone companies' facilities. Since the access charge system =
was=20
established in 1983, enhanced service providers have been classified as=20
&quot;end users&quot; rather than &quot;carriers&quot; for purposes of =
the=20
access charge rules, and therefore they do not pay the per-minute access =
charges=20
that long-distance companies pay to local telephone companies.=20
<P>In the <A href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/access/fcc97158.html">Access =
Reform=20
Order</A>, FCC 97-158, adopted on May 7, 1997, the FCC concluded that =
the=20
existing rate structure for ISPs should remain in place. In other words, =
the=20
Commission reaffirmed that ISPs are not required to pay interstate =
access=20
charges.=20
<P>When it began the Access Reform proceeding, the Commission also =
issued a=20
Notice of Inquiry, CC Docket 96-263, seeking comment more broadly on =
usage of=20
the public switched telephone network by Internet and interstate =
information=20
service providers. A Notice of Inquiry is a request for information that =
does=20
not involve any specific proposed action. The Commission stated in the =
Access=20
Reform order that it intended to use the Notice of Inquiry record to =
develop a=20
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing actions to facilitate the =

efficient deployment of data networks.=20
<HR noShade SIZE=3D1>
<!-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ faq +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-->
<P><STRONG><FONT size=3D+2>Frequently Asked Questions on Internet =
Services and=20
Access Charges</STRONG></FONT> <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Does the FCC=20
regulate the rates charged by Internet Service Providers (ISPs)? <BR wp =
=3D=20
br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> No. =
ISPs are=20
considered &quot;enhanced service providers&quot; under FCC rules. The =
FCC does=20
not regulate the rates that enhanced service providers charge to their=20
subscribers.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>

<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> How =
does the=20
FCC regulate the rates that local telephone companies charge to ISPs? =
<BR wp =3D=20
br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
ISPs purchase=20
local phone lines so that customers can call them. Under FCC rules, =
enhanced=20
service providers ISPs are considered &quot;end users&quot; when they =
purchase=20
services from local telephone companies. Thus, ISPs pay the same rates =
as any=20
other business customer, and these rates are set separately in each =
state. By=20
contrast, long-distance companies are considered &quot;carriers,&quot; =
and they=20
pay interstate access charges regulated by the FCC.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> How =
are access=20
charges different from the rates ISPs pay now? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D =
br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Today, ISPs=20
typically purchase &quot;business lines&quot; from local phone =
companies.=20
Business lines usually include a flat monthly charge, and a per-minute =
charge=20
for making outgoing calls. Because ISPs receive calls from their =
subscribers=20
rather than making outgoing calls, ISPs generally do not pay any =
per-minute=20
charges for their lines, which is one reason many ISPs do not charge =
per-minute=20
rates for Internet access. Access charges, by contrast, include =
per-minute fees=20
for both outgoing and incoming calls. The rate levels of interstate =
access=20
charges are also in many cases higher than the flat business line rates =
ISPs pay=20
today.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Have local=20
phone companies requested authority from the FCC to charge per-minute =
rates to=20
ISPs? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Since 1983,=20
there has been an ongoing debate about whether enhanced service =
providers should=20
be required to pay access charges, based on the contention that these =
companies=20
use local networks in the same manner as long-distance carriers. In June =
1996,=20
four local telephone companies (Pacific Bell, Bell Atlantic, US West, =
and NYNEX)=20
submitted studies to the FCC concerning the effects of Internet usage on =
these=20
carriers' networks. The companies argued that the existing rate =
structure did=20
not reflect the costs imposed on local telephone companies to support =
Internet=20
access, and that Internet usage was causing congestion in part of the =
local=20
network. In connection with these studies and other pleadings, several =
local=20
phone companies have asked the FCC for authority to charge interstate =
access=20
charges to ISPs, although they have not filed a formal petition for =
rulemaking.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> Is =
the FCC=20
considering allowing local phone companies to impose access charges on =
ISPs? <BR=20
wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> The =
FCC=20
requested public comment in December 1996 on whether ISPs should pay =
current=20
access charges, and more generally on how Internet and interstate =
information=20
services that use local telephone networks should be treated. The =
Commission=20
concluded on May 7, 1997 that ISPs should not be subject to interstate =
access=20
charges. There is currently no open comment period on this issue.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Does the FCC=20
currently have an ongoing proceeding on Internet and interstate =
information=20
services? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> The =
FCC issued=20
a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) in December 1996, at the same time as it asked =
for=20
comment on whether ISPs should be subject to access charges. The NOI =
asked=20
generally about how to create incentives for companies to make the most=20
efficient use of the telephone network for Internet and other =
information=20
services. The comment period for the NOI is closed, but the FCC has =
stated that=20
it plans to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) asking for =
comment on=20
more specific proposals based on the responses to the NOI. The NPRM will =

consider actions <U>other than</U> imposition of per-minute access =
charges on=20
ISPs.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
What is the=20
difference between a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) and a Notice of Proposed =
Rulemaking=20
(NPRM)? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> A =
NOI is the=20
earliest step in the FCC's process and typically asks questions in an =
effort to=20
gather enough information to make informed proposals on a given topic. A =
NPRM is=20
a request for comment on specific proposals made by the Commission. =
After the=20
FCC reviews the comments filed in response to an NPRM, the FCC can issue =
a=20
Report and Order adopting new rules.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> Are =
comments=20
filed by other parties be available for review? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =
=3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> =
Yes. All formal=20
comments are available for review in the FCC Reference Center in =
Washington DC,=20
and copies may be purchased through International Transcription =
Services, which=20
can be reached at 202-857-3800. In addition, copies of comments that =
were=20
submitted on diskette are available for review at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/comments.html">http://www.fcc.gov/ccb/comm=
ents.html</A>.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> Is =
the FCC=20
considering taxes for use of the Internet or online services? <BR wp =3D =
br1><BR=20
wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> No. =
The debate=20
involves charges levied by local phone companies, not government taxes.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>
<BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#800000 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>Q:</I></STRONG></FONT> Is =
this the=20
&quot;FCC modem tax&quot; that has been floating around the Internet in =
various=20
forms for several years? <BR wp =3D br1><BR wp =3D br2>
<P><FONT color=3D#008080 size=3D+2><STRONG><I>A:</I></STRONG></FONT> The =
&quot;modem=20
tax&quot; referred to a proposal in 1987 to require enhanced service =
providers=20
to pay interstate access charges, which at that time were significantly =
higher=20
than they are today. The 1987 proposal was abandoned in 1988. The =
current Access=20
Reform proceeding is entirely separate.
<HR align=3Dcenter noShade SIZE=3D1 width=3D50%>

<P><STRONG>For more specific questions, see the Access Reform page on =
the on the=20
FCC Web site at <A=20
href=3D"http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html">http://www.fcc.gov/isp.html</A>.</ST=
RONG>=20
<P><EM>Last Updated January 7, 1998</EM> </P></BASEFONT></BODY></HTML>

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BD2296.F7FE0320--