Source: http://www.fcc.gov/print/node/44663
Timestamp: 2015-03-02 05:01:08
Document Index: 80077750

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 208', '§ 64', '§ 1', '§ 276', '§ 64', '§ 64', '§ 64', '§ 64', '§ 201', '§ 64', '§ 64', '§ 64']

APCC v. CCI
Word Document [1]PDF Document [2]Text Document [3]	Released: January 11, 2013
FCC 13-5 Before the
File No. EB-09-MD-005
CCI Communications, LLC;
CCI Communications, Inc.;
Creative Communications, Inc.; and )
Link Systems, Inc., ))
This Order denies an Application for Review filed by CCI Communications, LLC (CCI),1
which requests modification or reversal of a Memorandum Opinion and Order issued by the Enforcement Bureau (Bureau) on June 29, 2010.2 The June 29 Order granted in part and denied in part a formal complaint3 that APCC Services, Inc. (APCC) filed against CCI and other defendants under Section 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act).4 The June 29 Order awarded APCC $1,868,451, plus interest, for per-call payphone compensation CCI owes as a “Completing Carrier” under Section 64.1300(a) and (b) of the Commission’s payphone compensation rules.5 As explained below, we affirm the Bureau’s June 29 Order6 and dismiss as moot CCI’s request to stay the effect of the June 29 Order.7
1 CCI Communications, LLC’s Application for Review and Request for Stay, File No. EB-09-MD-005 (filed July 28, 2010) (Application for Review) or (Application).
2 APCC Services, Inc. v. CCI Communications, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 8224 (Enf. Bur. 2010) (June 29 Order).
3 Formal Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-005 (filed Mar. 26, 2009) (Complaint).4 47 U.S.C. § 208. Although APCC had named several defendants in the Complaint, by the time of the June 29 Order, CCI remained the lone defendant. See Order Dismissing Defendant CCI Network Services, Inc., File No. EB-09-MD-005 (Aug. 13, 2009); Order Dismissing Certain Defendants, File No. EB-09-MD-005 (Apr. 29, 2010).
5 June 29 Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 8224, para. 1; see also 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300(a), (b).6 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.115.7 The Application for Review included a request that the Commission stay the effect of the June 29 Order. Application for Review at 10. CCI subsequently refiled that request in a separate document. CCI Communications, LLC’s Request for Stay, File No. EB-09-MD-005 (filed Aug. 13, 2010) (Request for Stay).
FCC 13-5 II.
Payphone Compensation Regime under Section 276
Section 276(b) of the Act directs the Commission to “establish a per-call compensation plan to ensure that all payphone service providers [(PSPs)] are fairly compensated for each and every completed intrastate and interstate call using their payphone.”8 Included among the calls subject to this mandate are “dial-around calls,” where the caller makes a coinless call using a carrier other than the payphone’s presubscribed long distance carrier (e.g., calls to toll-free numbers and calls using access codes to reach a service provider of choice).9 The Commission has established a default per-call compensation amount—currently set at $.494—to be paid to PSPs (in the absence of individual agreements) for each and every completed intrastate and interstate dial-around call.10
Multiple entities may collaborate in the transmission of a coinless payphone call, but the Commission’s rules place the responsibility for paying dial-around compensation on one: the “Completing Carrier,” defined as the “long distance carrier or switch-based long distance reseller that completes a coinless access code or subscriber toll-free payphone call.”11 To ensure that PSPs can identify and locate Completing Carriers that owe them dial-around compensation and to make certain that Completing Carriers accurately calculate the amount of any per-call compensation owed to PSPs, Commission rules impose a number of call tracking, third-party audit, certification, and reporting obligations on Completing Carriers.12 B.
The Formal Complaint Proceeding
The June 29 Order recites in detail the facts underlying the complaint proceeding.13 In brief, APCC serves as a clearinghouse for the billing and collection of dial-around compensation on behalf of certain PSPs (Represented PSPs).14 CCI provides interexchange telecommunications services and switch-based resale.15 CCI markets and sells prepaid phone cards to resellers.16
8 47 U.S.C. § 276(b)(1)(A). The Commission has interpreted the statutory term “completed call” to mean “a call that is answered by the called party.” Pay Telephone Reclassification and Compensation Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Report and Order, 18 FCC Rcd 19975, 19987, para. 25 (2003) (Tollgate Order). 9 See, e.g., Request to Update Default Compensation Rate for Dial-Around Calls from Payphones, Report and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 15636, 15638, para. 3 & n.9 (2004) (Rate Increase Order).
10 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300(b), (d); see, e.g., Rate Increase Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 15638, para. 3 & nn.10–11. The compensation obligations of Section 64.1300(b) do not apply to calls “to emergency numbers, calls by hearing disabled persons to a telecommunications relay service or local calls for which the caller has made the required coin deposit.” 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300(c).
11 47 C.F.R. § 64.1300(a).12 Implementation of the Pay Telephone Reclassification and Compensation Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Order on Reconsideration, 19 FCC Rcd 21457, 21459–60, paras. 4–5 (2004) (2004 Payphone Order); see 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1310, 64.1320.
13 June 29 Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 8225–27, paras. 3–9.14 Joint Statement, File No. EB-09-MD-005, at 2, para. 1 (filed June 22, 2009) (Joint Statement). As an agent of the Represented PSPs for the billing and collection of dial-around compensation, APCC has entered into an agency agreement with each of the Represented PSPs and, in addition, each Represented PSP has executed a Power of Attorney authorizing APCC to act on its behalf. See Complaint at 6. 15 Joint Statement at 2, paras. 4, 5.16 Declaration of Jeff Parson in Support of the Revised Answer of CCI Communications, LLC, File No. EB-09-MD-005 (filed May 21, 2009) (Parson Declaration).
FCC 13-5 5.
The Complaint alleged that CCI violated Sections 201(b) and 276(b) of the Act and Sections 64.1300, 64.1310, and 64.1320 of the Commission’s rules by failing to pay per-call compensation for dial-around calls made from the Represented PSPs’ payphones during the period beginning July 1, 2004, and ending September 30, 2008, and failed to comply with call tracking, third party audit, certification, and reporting requirements.17 The Complaint sought damages, based on “Intermediate Carrier” reports,18 for all dial-around calls reported as delivered to CCI from the Represented PSPs’ payphones during the relevant timeframe (i.e., all dial-around calls reported by Intermediate Carriers as delivered, regardless of their duration).19
With respect to the calls at issue in this proceeding, CCI acknowledged that, under the Commission’s payphone compensation rules, it is a Completing Carrier.20 Further, CCI stipulated that, using a 120-second timing proxy (i.e., counting as “completed” only those calls lasting 120 seconds or longer), it is the “liable Completing Carrier” for 1,287,026 of the 6,321,578 Intermediate Carrier reported calls that had been placed from the Represented PSPs’ payphones.21 CCI also admitted that, of the total stipulated calls it received from Intermediate Carriers, 1,991,771 were of 30 seconds duration or longer.22
CCI argued that the calls for which it owes compensation should be calculated using a 120-second timing proxy,23 because the international nature of most of its calls poses barriers that prevent the calls from connecting quickly and because the termination of some of its international calls using Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) technology results in a “high percentage of false answer supervision” calls.24 CCI claimed, therefore, that the use of a 30-second timing proxy would allow APCC to receive compensation for calls that were not completed. 8.
On February 4, 2010, APCC filed a Request for Resolution on the Pleadings, arguing that no material disputes remain, in either fact or law, and urging the Commission to rule on its Complaint 17 See, e.g., Complaint at 3, para. 5; 9, paras. 22–23; 10, paras. 28–29; see also 47 U.S.C. §§ 201(b), 276(b); 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1300, 64.1310, 64.1320.
18 An “Intermediate Carrier” is “a facilities-based long-distance carrier that switches payphone calls to other facilities-based long-distance carriers.” 47 C.F.R. § 64.1310(b). Under the Commission’s rules, PSPs are entitled to receive quarterly reports from both Completing Carriers (as noted above) and Intermediate Carriers. 47 C.F.R. § 64.1310(c). The Intermediate Carrier report, which must show all dial-around payphone calls delivered to a Completing Carrier’s platform, together with the Completing Carrier report, provide PSPs with verifiable information about compensable calls. 2004 Payphone Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 21472, para. 25. 19 Although the Complaint also sought damages for calls carried by CCI for which the 8YY (toll-free) numbers were translated into local POTS numbers before the calls were routed to CCI’s network (POTS-Translated Calls), see Complaint at 3–4, para 7; 60, para. 231, APCC subsequently abandoned its claim to compensation for these calls. See Request for Resolution on the Pleadings, File No. EB-09-MD-005, at 2, 6 (filed Feb. 4, 2010) (Request for Resolution).
20 Joint Statement at 2, para. 6.21 Id. at 3-4, paras. 11–20. 22 CCI Communications, LLC’s Responses to Complainant’s (1) Initial Interrogatories and Requests for Production and (2) Second Set of Interrogatories, File No. EB-09-MD-005, at 10 (filed Jan. 19, 2010) (CCI’s Interrogatory Responses). In addition to providing the number of calls that would be deemed “completed” using a 30-second timing proxy (i.e., counting as “completed” only those calls lasting 30 seconds or longer), CCI noted that it already had paid compensation to APCC for 374,384 of those calls. Id.
23 CCI Communications, LLC’s Revised Answer to Formal Complaint, File No. EB-09-MD-005, at 32–34 (filed May 21, 2009) (Answer).
24 Answer at 33; Parson Declaration at 6. Answer supervision refers generally to the signal that is emitted when a call is answered by its recipient so that billing for the call may commence. See generally Hi-Rim Communications, Inc. v. MCI Telecommunications Corp., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 1982, 1985, para. 6 n.34 (Com. Car. Bur. 1997).
FCC 13-5 based on the parties’ pleadings.25 APCC explained that it had abandoned all claims against CCI except for its claim to compensation for those calls as to which CCI had stipulated liability,26 plus interest.27 According to APCC, the only remaining issue for decision was the number of “completed calls,” which it urged the Commission to determine by applying the reasoning of APCC v. Radiant (Radiant).28 CCI did not file an opposition or other response to the Request for Resolution.
The June 29 Order
In the June 29 Order, the Bureau granted APCC’s Request for Resolution,29 and granted in part, and denied in part, APCC’s Complaint.30 The Bureau ordered CCI to pay APCC unpaid dial-around compensation for completed payphone calls in the amount of $1,868,451, plus interest,31 noting that CCI had admitted to being a Completing Carrier, had stipulated to liability for the 6,321,578 calls it had received from Intermediate Carriers (to the extent those calls were completed), and had provided the number of such calls that were of 30 seconds