|
 |
Chronology of Prepaid Regulations
By Edward A. Maldonado, Esq. |
AT&T: October 18, 2002.
AT&T files a Petition to the FCC for a declaratory ruling that its “phone-to-phone” Internet protocol (IP) telephony services are exempt from the access charges applicable to circuit-switched inter-exchange calls. WC Docket 02-361 opened (AT&T October 2002 Petition).
AT&T: May 15th 2003.
AT&T files a Petition to the FCC for a declaratory ruling that intrastate access charges did not apply to calls made using its “enhanced” prepaid calling cards when the calling card platform is located outside the state in which either the calling or the called party is local. WC Docket 03-133 opened (AT&T May 2003 Petition).
FCC: April 21, 2004.
The FCC issues “In the Matter of Petition for Declaratory Ruling that AT&T’s Phone-to-Phone IP Telephony Services are Exempt from Access Charges, Order” 19 FCC Rcd. 7457 (IP-in-the-Middle Order) wherein the FCC finds that “an inter-exchange service that: (1) uses ordinary customer premises equipment (CPE) with no enhanced functionality; (2) originates and terminates on the public switched telephone network (PSTN); and (3) undergoes no net protocol conversion and provides no enhanced functionality to end users due to the provider’s use of IP technology” is a telecommunications service. The FCC Ruling in the IP-in-the-Middle Order is strictly limited to calls that meet the criteria of (1), (2) and (3) and are placed using 1+ dialing.
AT&T: November 22, 2004.
AT&T submits an e- parte letter requesting a declaratory ruling on two additional types of “enhanced” prepaid calling card offerings in connection with the May 2003 Petition: (1) a card that offers the caller a menu of options to access non-call-related information, and (2) a card that utilizes Internet Protocol (IP) technology, accessed by 8YY dialing, to transport a portion of the calling card call.
AT&T: November 2004.
In its 499-Q filing, AT&T stated that it had developed a new prepaid calling card that uses IP technology to transport part or all of the call. AT&T requested a ruling that this service was not a telecommunications service because it did not use 1+ dialing and therefore was not like the service addressed in the IP-in-the-Middle Order. In the Calling Card Order and NPRM, the Commission did not decide the appropriate classification of this new calling card variant, but instead requested comment on how such an offering should be classified.
FCC: February 16, 2005.
The Commission denies AT&T’s original May 2003 Petition under WC Docket No 03-133. The Commission also required AT&T to file revised Forms 499-A to properly report its prepaid calling card revenue so that the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) could accurately calculate AT&T’s USF obligation and bill AT&T for the time period during which it offered its prepaid calling cards and did not contribute to the fund. The Commission also finds that the AT&T “Enhanced” Prepaid Calling Card is a telecommunications service for regulatory purposes and that retroactive USF is applicable and subject to fines.
FCC: February 16, 2005.
The Commission proposes rulemaking on WC Docket No 03-133 (May 2003 Petition by AT&T for “Enhanced” Prepaid Calling Cards); and issues new Docket on Rulemaking under the Regulation of Prepaid Calling Cards WC Docket No 05-68. The Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, found at 20 FCC Rcd 4826 (2005) (Calling Card Order and NPRM).
AT&T: March 28, 2005.
AT&T files an Appeal with the United States Court of Appeals D.C. District, Case # 05-1096, AT&T v. FCC, on Petition for Review of Order by the Federal Communications Commission.
 |
|
| |
|
|
