*************************************************** NOTICE *************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, itallic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the orginal document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************** Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Petition of Fort Mojave ) Telecommunications, Inc., Gila ) River Telecommunications, Inc., ) San Carlos Telecommunications, ) Inc., and Tohono O'odham Utility ) Authority ) Docket No. _______ ) for Designation as ) Eligible Telecommunications ) Carriers Under the ) Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) To: The Commission Petition for Designation as Eligible Telecommunications Carriers FORT MOJAVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. GILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. SAN CARLOS TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. TOHONO O'ODHAM UTILITY AUTHORITY Stephen G. Kraskin Sylvia Lesse Marci E. Greenstein Kraskin & Lesse, LLP 2120 L Street, N.W., Suite 520 Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 296-8890 December 18, 1997 Petition for Designation as Eligible Telecommunications Carriers of Fort Mojave Telecommunications, Inc., Gila River Telecommunications, Inc., San Carlos Telecommunications, Inc. and Tohono O'odham Utility Authority (filed December 18, 1997) TABLE OF CONTENTS I. BACKGROUND 3 II. THE PUBLIC INTEREST WILL BE SERVED BY CONFIRMING TRIBAL DESIGNATION OF THE COMPANIES AS ETCS WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE INCUMBENT SERVICE AREAS 4 III. THE COMPANIES QUALIFY FOR ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER DESIGNATION 7 A. The Companies Meet ETC Requirements 7 B. Exceptional Circumstances Warrant the Grant of Extensions of Time for Limited Purposes 8 IV. CONCLUSION 10 Attachments Attachment A: NECA Study Area Designation Attachment B: Declarations and Resolutions of Fort Mojave Telecommunications, Inc. Gila River Telecommunications, Inc. San Carlos Telecommunications, Inc. Tohono O'odham Utility Authority Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Petition of Fort Mojave ) Telecommunications, Inc., Gila ) River Telecommunications, Inc., ) San Carlos Telecommunications, ) Inc., and Tohono O'odham Utility ) Authority ) Docket No. _______ ) for Designation as ) Eligible Telecommunications ) Carriers Under the ) Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) To: The Commission Petition for Designation as Eligible Telecommunications Carriers Fort Mojave Telecommunications, Inc., Gila River Telecommunications, Inc., San Carlos Telecommunications, Inc. and Tohono O'odham Utility Authority ("Companies" or "Petitioners"), pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Sections 54.201-207 of the Rules of the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC" or "Commission"), respectfully petition the FCC to confirm or designate each of the Companies as the Eligible Telecommunications Carrier ("ETC") within their respective incumbent LEC service area. Each of the four Petitioners is subject to the jurisdiction of the governing body of a distinct federally-recognized Indian tribe. These four governing bodies regulate the provision of telecommunications services within the respective tribal lands within the state of Arizona; the Arizona Corporation Commission does not assert jurisdiction over the Companies. Accordingly, each Petitioner is "a common carrier providing telephone exchange service and exchange access that is not subject to the jurisdiction of a State commission." Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6), therefore, Petitioners seek the Commission's designation as an ETC. Each of the Companies operates in a rural area and is eligible to receive cost recovery from interstate mechanisms established to foster universal service, and the customers that each serves are the beneficiaries of the existing universal service cost recovery mechanisms. If the existing interstate universal service cost recovery sources were disrupted or abruptly terminated, the Companies (and the subscribers they serve) would face unnecessary disorder and shortfalls in their respective recovery of universal service costs, contrary to both Section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the established Commission policies to promote universal service. As demonstrated herein, expeditious action in granting this Petition will allow the Companies to continue to receive uninterrupted interstate cost recovery support while assuring that the subscribers they serve continue to receive the benefits of quality telecommunications services at reasonable rates. In support thereof, the Companies show the following: I. BACKGROUND. The FCC has adopted a number of cost recovery policies and mechanisms designed to promote and maintain universal service. These policies were established, in part, to promote network infrastructure investment in areas such as those served by the Companies that are characterized generally by higher cost to serve rural areas. In light of these policies, cost recovery mechanisms were also established in an effort to moderate the amount of cost to be recovered through basic, recurring charges to users, thereby assisting efforts to maintain reasonable basic rate levels. As a result of these policies and cost recovery mechanisms, the Companies have been able to invest in modern telecommunications networks and to provide quality telecommunications services at reasonable prices to their customers. Without these interstate policies and mechanisms, the Companies serving rural, higher cost tribal areas either would not have been capable of providing the advanced services that their respective subscribers enjoy today or would have been forced to provide services at much higher basic rates, or both. In compliance with the 1996 Act, the FCC and the Federal-State Joint Board on universal service issues have been working to reformat these cost allocation and recovery mechanisms. Their efforts culminated in the FCC's May 8, 1997, decision on universal service which adopted many of the Joint Board recommendations. The Universal Service Order also prescribed a new set of universal service rules designed, in part, to yield approximately the same level of cost recovery for eligible LECs as that received today. Specifically, the existing high loop cost recovery support plan, interstate cost recovery of central office switching equipment owned by smaller LECs, and Long Term Support have now been restated in the FCC's rules. Consistent with the requirements of the 1996 Act, the FCC has transferred to the new reconstituted universal service fund the cost recovery previously reflected through these interstate mechanisms. Beginning January 1, 1998, Petitioners, which currently receive cost recovery from these mechanisms will be qualified to receive such universal service support only if they are designated by the FCC as an ETC. II. THE PUBLIC INTEREST WILL BE SERVED BY CONFIRMING TRIBAL DESIGNATION OF THE COMPANIES AS ETCS WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE INCUMBENT SERVICE AREAS. Petitioners request that the Commission designate each of the Companies as the ETC within its respective incumbent LEC service area. Such action is consistent with both the 1996 Act and the public interest. The Companies provide local exchange and exchange access services in predominantly rural areas of Arizona; these services are integral to the achievement of universally available telecommunications services in Arizona. The commitment of the Companies to the provision of reasonably priced services is well known. Moreover, within their respective incumbent LEC service areas, the Companies provide ubiquitous telecommunications services to all that request service, each serving as the "carrier of last resort" in its service area. Absent Commission action designating the Companies as ETCs, the continuation of uninterrupted interstate cost recovery support will end as of January 1, 1998. In the absence of expeditious action, the public policy goal of ensuring that the Companies' subscribers continue to receive the benefits of reasonable basic rates and quality telecommunications services will be placed in jeopardy. Accordingly, expeditious Commission action is required by the public interest in order to ensure that the current interstate universal service support and the resulting benefits from these cost recovery programs are maintained in the tribal territories. Congress amended Section 214(e) of the 1996 Act by adding subsection 214(e)(6) for the express purpose of providing a means by which carriers not subject to state commission jurisdiction, and, specifically, carriers subject to sovereign tribal authority, may obtain ETC designation: Under the current universal service provisions of the Communications Act, only common carriers designated by the States are eligible to receive Federal universal service support. Unfortunately this policy ignores the fact that some common carriers providing service today are not subject to the jurisdiction of a State commission; most notably, some carriers owned or controlled by native Americans. Thus, many of these common carriers may lose Federal support on January 1, 1998, unless Congress takes action. S. 1354 corrects this problem by permitting a common carrier that is not subject to State authority to be designated by the Federal Communications Commission as eligible to receive Federal universal service support. S. 1354 will apply to only a limited number of carriers, but to these carriers' customers, its impact will be significant. The legislative history of the amendment clearly demonstrates that the legislation was intended to address directly Petitioners' circumstances to enable their continued participation in the cost recovery mechanisms that foster affordable telecommunications service in high cost areas. The FCC recognizes the sovereign authority of tribal councils, and has exhibited "a proper respect both for tribal sovereignty itself and for the plenary authority of Congress." In the Matter of AB Fillins, Petition for Declaratory Ruling, Memorandum Opinion and Order at para. 18 (rel. Aug. 1, 1997)(citation omitted). Pursuant to their respective tribal constitutions, the tribal councils have authorized operation of the telecommunications carriers that are the subject of this petition, having granted to each Certificates of Convenience and Necessity to provide telecommunications services. Each Company affirms that it meets the requirements for ETC designation. III. THE COMPANIES QUALIFY FOR ELIGIBLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER DESIGNATION A. The Companies Meet ETC Requirements As demonstrated below, each Company satisfies the requirements (or qualifies for waiver or an extension of time pursuant to FCC rules) for ETC designation. Accordingly, the public interest would be promoted by grant of ETC status to each Petitioner. Under applicable federal rules, an ETC must offer the following services: 1) voice grade access to the public switched network; 2) access to free of charge "local usage" defined as an amount of minutes of use of exchange service; 3) dual tone multi-frequency signaling or its functional equivalent; 4) single-party service or its functional equivalent; 5) access to emergency services; 6) access to operator services; 7) access to interexchange service; 8) access to directory assistance; and 9) toll limitation services for qualifying low-income consumers. Qualified ETCs must offer these services either using their own facilities or a combination of their own facilities and the resale of services of another facilities based carrier. An ETC must also advertise the availability of, and the prevailing prices for, the list of universal services throughout the area in which it is designated as an ETC. Each Petitioner provides voice grade local exchange and interexchange access services utilizing its respective facilities-based network. Each Petitioner offers single-party touch-tone service, access to operator services and directory assistance, and access to local usage free of usage charges. In addition, the Companies currently utilize standard subscriber notification and public notice procedures, and will advertise the availability and cost of universal service elements. The Companies submit that the advertising requirement is therefore satisfied because the combination of customer notification, marketing and advertising are consistent with the advertising requirement. B. Exceptional Circumstances Warrant the Grant of Extensions of Time for Limited Purposes Each Company offers 911 or enhanced 911 ("E911") and toll limitation services, except as discussed below. With respect to these exceptions, the Commission has recognized that it is appropriate to grant LECs additional time to provide these supported services under certain circumstances. The requirement that ETCs offer access to 911 or E911 applies only "to the extent the local government in an eligible carrier's service area has implemented 911 or enhanced 911 systems." San Carlos does not provide "911" services because the area served by San Carlos currently has no Public Safety Answering Point ("PSAP"), although access to emergency services is available through seven-digit dialing. Under the rules, therefore, there is no current obligation of San Carlos to offer 911 service as a condition for ETC qualification. The Companies are not aware that any LEC in the nation is capable of providing both elements of toll limitation, as the FCC has defined this term. Although the majority of the Companies offer toll blocking, "toll control" would require the capability to record and rate every call of every long distance carrier instantaneously to ensure that the maximum specified toll charge is not exceeded. Most interexchange carriers no longer seek billing and collection services from the LECs, and the Companies are not aware of any LEC that can rate calls instantaneously for all interexchange carriers. Accordingly, the Companies seek an extension of time to accommodate this requirement, to the extent required. The limited extensions of time within which to accomplish necessary network upgrades for the limited instances described above are warranted under the circumstances. The Companies meet all other requirements for ETC designation. Accordingly, the Companies respectfully submit that grant of these limited requests serves the public interest by ensuring that resources are committed to the provision of universal service. IV. CONCLUSION. Having demonstrated that the Companies satisfy the conditions necessary for designation as ETCs, and having shown good cause why the public interest will be served, the Companies respectfully request that the Commission designate each Petitioner as the ETC in its respective incumbent LEC service area. Respectfully submitted, FORT MOJAVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. GILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. SAN CARLOS TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. TOHONO O'ODHAM UTILITY AUTHORITY By: ________________________________ Stephen G. Kraskin Sylvia Lesse Marci E. Greenstein Their Attorneys Kraskin & Lesse, LLP 2120 L Street, N.W., Suite 520 Washington, D.C. 20037 (202) 296-8890 December 18, 1997 ATTACHMENT A NECA STUDY AREA DESIGNATION FORT MOJAVE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. 452200 GILA RIVER TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. 452179 SAN CARLOS TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. 452169 TOHONO O'ODHAM UTILITY AUTHORITY 452173 ATTACHMENT B DECLARATIONS AND RESOLUTIONS