Before the

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+
| In the Matter of                 | * | ASD File No. 01-43           |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Roseville Telephone Company      | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
| Extension of Time to File ARMIS  | * |                              |
| Reports and to Submit Cost       |   |                              |
| Allocation Manual Attestation    | * |                              |
| Report                           | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  |   |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | ) |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
|                                  | * |                              |
+----------------------------------+---+------------------------------+

**ORDER**

**Adopted: October 11, 2001 Released: October 15, 2001**

By the Chief, Accounting Safeguards Division:

1.  On December 8, 2000, we granted to Roseville Telephone Company
    (Roseville) [^1] a six-month extension of time, until October 1,
    2001, to file its initial Automated Reporting Management Information
    System (ARMIS) [^2] reports.[^3] On December 21, 2000, Roseville was
    granted an extension of time, until January 15, 2002, in which to
    file its cost allocation manual (CAM) initial attestation
    report.[^4] On September 13, 2001, Roseville requested additional
    extensions of time to file its initial ARMIS and CAM attestation
    reports.[^5] As discussed below, we grant further extensions of time
    for Roseville to file the ARMIS reports and the CAM attestation
    report.

2.  Roseville argues that a significant amount of time is needed to
    prepare the initial ARMIS reports and the CAM. Roseville asserts
    that, due to its limited resources, it should be granted an
    additional extension of time.[^6] Roseville also claims that it
    should not prepare the initial CAM attestation and ARMIS Reports
    before the Commission releases a Report and Order in CC Docket No.
    00-199 resolving the accounting and reporting requirements raised in
    that proceeding. Roseville contends that, if the Commission's
    proposals CC Docket No. 00-199 are adopted, it will soon have revise
    its system and train its staff based on a new Class B system of
    accounts, after learning the current system of accounts for the
    initial filing.[^7] Roseville further argues that, if the Commission
    adopts the proposal in CC Docket No. 00-199 to raise the indexed
    revenue threshold to \$200 million,[^8] it will no longer be
    required to comply with ARMIS reporting and CAM attestation
    requirements.[^9] Roseville contends that the Commission should
    grant it an extension of time until ninety days after the Commission
    releases a Report and Order in CC Docket No. 00-199 resolving the
    accounting and reporting issues raised in that proceeding.[^10]

3.  We have reviewed Roseville's request for an extension of time to
    file its initial ARMIS reports and obtain a CAM audit. We do not
    routinely grant extensions of time; however, we find merit in
    Roseville's argument. Roseville should receive an extension until
    after the Commission rules on the broader issues raised in CC Docket
    No. 00-199. We therefore conclude that an additional extension of
    three months, until January 1, 2002 for the ARMIS Reports and April
    15, 2002 for the CAM attestation report, is sufficient.

4.  Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to sections 0.91, 0.291, and
    1.46 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 1.46,
    that the Roseville Telephone Company request for additional
    extension of time is GRANTED and Roseville Telephone Company has an
    extension of time until January 1, 2002, to file its initial ARMIS
    Reports and until April 15, 2002 to file its initial rule 64.904 CAM
    attestation report.

    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

    Kenneth P. Moran

    Chief, Accounting Safeguards Division

[^1]: ^?^ Roseville is a mid-sized incumbent LEC, *i.e*., a carrier
    whose operating revenue equals or exceeds the indexed revenue
    threshold and whose revenue when aggregated with the revenues of any
    LEC that it controls, is controlled by, or with which it is under
    common control is less than \$7 billion. *See* 1998 Biennial
    Regulatory Review -- Review of Accounting and Cost Allocation
    Requirements, CC Docket No. 98-81, *Report and Order*, 14 FCC Rcd
    11396 (1999) (*Accounting Reductions Report and Order*).

[^2]: ^?^ ARMIS is an automated reporting system developed by the
    Commission for collecting financial, operating, service quality, and
    network infrastructure information from certain incumbent local
    exchange carriers (LECs). *See* Automated Reporting Requirements for
    Certain Class A and Tier 1 Telephone Companies (Parts 31, 43, 67,
    and 69 of the Commission's Rules), CC Docket No. 86-182, *Order*, 2
    FCC Rcd 5770 (1987), *modified on recon., Order on Reconsideration*,
    3 FCC Rcd 6375 (1988).

[^3]: ^?^ *See* Roseville Telephone Company Request for an Extension of
    Time to File ARMIS Reports, ASD File No. 00-43, *Order*, 15 FCC Rcd
    24093 (Com.Car.Bur. 2000).

[^4]: ^?^ *See* Roseville Telephone Company Request for an Extension of
    Time to Submit Cost Allocation Manual Attestation Report, ASD File
    No. 00-46, *Order*, 16 FCC Rcd 10069 (Com.Car.Bur. 2000).

[^5]: ^?^ *See* Roseville Telephone Company Request for an Extension of
    Time to File ARMIS Reports and CAM Attestation, filed September 13,
    2001 (Roseville Letter).

[^6]: ^?^ Roseville Letter at 2.

[^7]: ^?^ *Id.* at 3.

[^8]: ^?^ *See* \"Annual Adjustment of Revenue Threshold,\" *Public
    Notice*, DA 01-903 (rel. Apr. 11, 2001) (adjusting annual indexed
    revenue threshold to \$117 million). The classification of a company
    is determined at the start of the calendar year following the first
    time its annual operating revenue from regulated operations equals,
    exceeds, or falls below the indexed revenue threshold. 47 C.F.R. §
    32.11(e).

[^9]: ^?^ Roseville Letter at 3.

[^10]: ^?^ *Id.* at 5.