Opinion ID: 421797
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Acceptance Order

Text: 26 Pursuant to the terms of their contract, the signatories sought the FCC's approval of the ENFIA Agreement and a tariff intended to reflect the agreement reached [therein] among the parties as to an acceptable compromise for the Interim Period. ENFIA Agreement p 6, reprinted in 43 Fed.Reg. at 59,131. In so doing, they expressed their belief that the interim agreement would serve the public interest, id. p 2, reprinted in 43 Fed.Reg. at 59,130, but the FCC properly recognized that its inquiry could not be limited to these parties' individual interests ... [and that the agency was] obligated to assess the public interest as it might be affected by the agreement. Acceptance Order, 71 F.C.C.2d at 441; see id. at 451. But the agreement of the carriers, the FCC believed, did allow it to avoid the rigor [of a full public interest determination] necessary to support FCC prescription of just and reasonable rates. Id. at 453; see 47 U.S.C. § 205(a) (1976). The public interest, the Commission stated, could not be assessed with mathematical precision on the basis of existing data, but would be served by avoiding protracted litigation and creating some degree of certainty in this uncharted field. Acceptance Order, 71 F.C.C.2d at 451. 27 In a decision it later characterized as an interim arrangement to carry out the mandate of the Execunet decisions and establish a workable modus vivendi among all parties [229 U.S.App.D.C. 212] until the many difficult, complex, and fundamental issues presented by the advent of competition had been resolved, Order After Investigation, 91 F.C.C.2d at 1083, the FCC approved and accepted the ENFIA Agreement. The Commission acknowledged that [t]he interim agreement is not represented as cost-based in toto. Acceptance Order, 71 F.C.C.2d at 453. But, confronted with a choice between approving the agreement or conducting protracted proceedings to determine the lawfulness of an alternative AT & T ENFIA tariff that included substantially higher charges, the FCC concluded that the latter course of action would waste Commission and carrier resources because any ENFIA tariff would be superseded either by access charges to be established in ... [Docket 78-72 ] or access charges established pursuant to legislation that was being actively considered in both houses of Congress. Extension Order, 90 F.C.C.2d at 10. The ENFIA Agreement, moreover, appeared to embody an acceptable compromise between the [local] business rate and a rate based upon unadjusted separations costs. Order After Investigation, 91 F.C.C.2d at 1083. These factors led the Commission to 28 approve the negotiation process and the agreement ... as being a reasonable means of avoiding complex and protracted litigation ..., as conducive to the ends of justice, and therefore, at least for the interim, as in the public interest.... [T]he settlement affords an expeditious and acceptable compromise of differences on matters relating to methodologies, rate levels and rate components which would otherwise necessitate substantial time, expense and effort to resolve through formal Commission processes (and likely appellate review). 29 Acceptance Order, 71 F.C.C.2d at 456 (emphasis added).