Special Access for Price Cap Local Exchange Carriers; AT&T Corporation Petition for Rulemaking To Reform Regulation of Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier Rates for Interstate Special Access Services, 67053-67075 [2013-26478]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 217 (Friday, November 8, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67053-67075]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26478]



[[Page 67053]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 69

[WC Docket No. 05-25; RM-10593; DA 13-1909]


Special Access for Price Cap Local Exchange Carriers; AT&T 
Corporation Petition for Rulemaking To Reform Regulation of Incumbent 
Local Exchange Carrier Rates for Interstate Special Access Services

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule; clarification and modification.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this Report and Order, pursuant to authority delegated by 
the Commission in the Special Access Data Collection Order the Bureau 
clarifies the scope of the collection to reduce burden where doing so 
is consistent with our delegated authority and will not impact the 
Commission's ability to analyze the data; provides instructions and 
record format specifications for submitting information; and modifies 
and amends questions and definitions contained in the collection.

DATES: Effective December 9, 2013. The information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements contained in the Special Access Data 
Collection Order, 78 FR 2571, January 11, 2013, as implemented by this 
Report and Order, are not effective until the Office of Management and 
Budget approves them and the Commission has published a notice in the 
Federal Register announcing the effective date of the information 
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Layton, Wireline Competition 
Bureau, Pricing Policy Division, at (202) 418-1520 or (202) 418-0484 
(TTY), or via email at William.Layton@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order in WC Docket No. 05-25, RM-10593, FCC 13-1909, released on 
September 18, 2013. This summary is based on the public redacted 
version of the document, the full text of which is available 
electronically via the Electronic Comment Filing System at https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/ or may be downloaded at https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0918/DA-13-1909A1.pdf. The full text of this document is also available for public 
inspection during regular business hours in the Commission's Reference 
Center, 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The 
complete text may be purchased from Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 
12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. To request 
alternate formats for persons with disabilities (e.g. Braille, large 
print, electronic files, audio format, etc.) or reasonable 
accommodations for filing comments (e.g. accessible format documents, 
sign language interpreters, CARTS, etc.), send an email to 
fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission's Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice) or (202) 418-0432 (TTY).

Introduction

    On December 11, 2012, the Commission adopted the Special Access 
Data Collection Order, requiring providers and purchasers of special 
access and certain entities providing ``best efforts'' service to 
submit data, information and documents for a comprehensive evaluation 
of competition in the special access market. In this Report and Order, 
we move forward in our efforts to review and ensure that our special 
access rules work to promote access, competition and investment by 
finalizing the comprehensive data collection. Specifically, pursuant to 
authority delegated by the Commission, we (1) clarify the scope of the 
collection to reduce burden where doing so is consistent with our 
delegated authority and will not impact the Commission's ability to 
analyze the data; (2) provide instructions and record format 
specifications for submitting information; and (3) modify and amend 
questions and definitions contained in the collection. We will 
subsequently issue a public notice announcing the deadline for 
submissions once approval for the collection is obtained as required by 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) from the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB).

Background

    On August 15, 2012, the Commission suspended, on an interim basis, 
its rules allowing the grant of pricing flexibility for special access 
services in areas subject to price cap regulation. The Commission took 
this step based on ``significant evidence that these rules, adopted in 
1999, are not working as predicted, and widespread agreement across 
industry sectors that these rules fail to accurately reflect 
competition in today's special access markets.'' To identify a 
replacement framework, the Commission detailed a plan to collect data 
and information for a robust market analysis to gauge actual and 
potential competition for special access services. There was ample 
support in the record for ``collecting additional data to inform our 
future actions.''
    On December 18, 2012, the Commission released the Special Access 
Data Collection Order, outlining the data collection. Services covered 
by the collection include traditional special access service (including 
DS1s and DS3s), Packet-Based Dedicated Service (PBDS) such as Ethernet, 
and Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service to ensure a 
``clear picture of all competition in the marketplace.'' Those required 
to respond to the data collection include Providers and Purchasers of 
special access services and certain entities providing Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Service. The geographic and temporal 
scope includes data on a nationwide basis for areas where the Incumbent 
Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC) is subject to price cap regulation (i.e., 
price cap areas) with the majority of the data from calendar years 2010 
and 2012.
    The general categories of data and information identified by the 
Commission for collection are: Market structure, pricing, demand, terms 
and conditions, and competition and pricing decisions. Under each 
category, most of which would be collected from Providers, the 
Commission highlighted the types of data and information covered. For 
example, market structure included, among other things, data 
exclusively from Providers on facilities used to provide Dedicated 
Service, non-price factors affecting deployment, collocations, and 
network maps. The pricing information included data exclusively from 
Providers on the ``quantities sold and prices charged for special 
access services, by circuit element'' and required ILECs to ``list the 
form of price regulation that applies . . . on a wire-center-by-wire-
center basis.'' The demand data included not only information on the 
bandwidth of special access sold and revenues earned by Providers but 
also on the expenditures made by Purchasers. The terms and conditions 
section called for information and data from both Providers and 
Purchasers, seeking details on topics such as the discounts and 
benefits associated with Tariff plans and the business rationale for 
those plans. The Commission also sought information on Requests for 
Proposals and advertised and marketed services to help evaluate 
competition and pricing decisions for special access services. Lastly, 
the Commission described the coverage area and price information it 
sought to collect from entities providing Best Efforts Business 
Broadband Internet Access Service. The

[[Page 67054]]

Commission provided an ``initial version'' of the questions and 
definitions for the collection as an appendix to the order.
    The Commission plans to use the data collected for a one-time, 
multi-faceted market analysis. The analysis will evaluate ``how the 
intensity of competition (or lack thereof), whether actual or 
potential, affects prices, controlling for all other factors that 
affect prices.'' The analysis will include ``econometrically sound 
panel regressions . . . of the prices for special access on 
characteristics such as (1) the number of facilities-based competitors 
(both actual and potential); (2) the availability of, pricing of, and 
demand for best efforts business broadband Internet access services; 
(3) the characteristics of the purchased service; and (4) other factors 
that influence the pricing decisions of special access providers, 
including cost determinants (e.g., density of sales) and factors that 
deliver economies of scale and scope (e.g., level of sales).'' The 
Commission also plans to assess the reasonableness of terms and 
conditions offered by ILECs for special access service. Once the data 
are obtained and analyzed, the Commission will evaluate whether it is 
appropriate to make changes to its existing pricing flexibility rules 
to better target regulatory relief in competitive areas and evaluate 
whether remedies are appropriate to address any potentially 
unreasonable terms and conditions.
    The Commission delegated authority to the Wireline Competition 
Bureau (Bureau) to implement the data collection. The Commission's 
delegation gives the Bureau authority to: ``(a) Draft instructions to 
the data collection and modify the data collection based on public 
feedback; (b) amend the data collection based on feedback received 
through the PRA process; (c) make corrections to the data collection to 
ensure it reflects the Commission's needs as expressed in [the Special 
Access Data Collection Order]; . . . (d) issue Bureau-level orders and 
Public Notices specifying the production of specific types of data, 
specifying a collection mechanism (including necessary forms or 
formats), and set[] deadlines for response to ensure that data 
collections are complied with in a timely manner; and (e) take other 
such actions as are necessary to implement [the Special Access Data 
Collection Order] . . . consistent with the terms of [the Special 
Access Data Collection Order].''
    After the release of the Special Access Data Collection Order, we 
received several requests for clarifications and changes to the initial 
version of the data collection definitions and questions; received 
comments through the PRA process; and met with several potential 
respondents to discuss the data collection. We also reviewed the 
collection for improvements to achieve the robust analysis proposed in 
the Special Access Data Collection FNPRM. In this Report and Order, 
consistent with our delegated authority, we clarify the scope of the 
collection; provide instructions on how to respond to the data 
collection questions; and provide a list of all modifications and 
amendments to the data collection questions and definitions based on 
the feedback received and our further internal review.

Discussion

Clarifying the Scope of the Data Collection

    As established by the Special Access Data Collection Order, 
Providers and Purchasers of special access services are required to 
respond to the data collection if they are subject to the Commission's 
jurisdiction under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. In 
addition, the Commission required entities providing Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services to respond unless they have 
fewer than 15,000 customers and fewer than 1,500 business broadband 
customers. The Commission limited the geographic scope of the 
collection to services provided and purchased in price cap territories.
    We have received several questions about the scope of the data 
collection. Parties have asked: (1) Who is required to file; (2) 
whether entities in rate-of-return areas must respond; and (3) how the 
reference to FCC Form 477 (Form 477) filers reporting broadband 
connections in Section II.G of the data collection affects the pool of 
respondents. We address these questions below.
Purchasers Subject to the Commission's Jurisdiction
    The Special Access Data Collection Order stated that Purchasers of 
Dedicated Service must supply certain information as part of the data 
collection. A Purchaser is a Competitive Provider or an End User, which 
is defined as a ``business, institutional, or government entity that 
purchases a communications service for its own purposes and does not 
resell such service.'' In the collection, Purchasers are generally 
required to report their expenditures for Dedicated Service under 
Tariff and non-Tariff plans and provide details on the terms and 
conditions associated with those plans. This information is useful in 
evaluating allegations of harmful, anticompetitive conduct and cross-
checking the information reported by Providers.
    The term Purchasers is broadly defined in the Special Access Data 
Collection Order to include ``any entity subject to the Commission's 
jurisdiction . . . that purchases special access services.'' Read 
literally, that term encompasses a very broad range of entities that 
are consumers of Dedicated Services and, in that regard, are no 
different from consumers of Dedicated Services that are not subject to 
our jurisdiction. For example, a package delivery service that 
purchases a DS-1 to operate its business would be required to comply 
with the collection if it holds a private radio license for 
communications with its drivers (and is therefore ``subject to the 
Commission's jurisdiction''). But if instead of holding its own 
wireless license the same company purchases a commercial mobile radio 
service (CMRS) for those communications, and does not otherwise engage 
in an activity that would cause it to fall within the Commission's 
jurisdiction, it would not be required to comply with the data 
collection. There are potentially hundreds of thousands of license and 
authorization holders, information service providers, or others that 
are ``subject to the Commission's jurisdiction'' but otherwise are 
simply consumers of Dedicated Services and are unfamiliar with, and 
perhaps completely unaware of, the Commission's requirements and 
proceedings involving the regulation of ILECs in price cap areas.
    For several reasons, we do not believe the Commission intended to 
capture these consumers. First, including literally all entities 
subject to the Commission's jurisdiction would result in the non-
uniform treatment of certain consumer categories; responses from 
manufacturers, banks, or package delivery service providers that 
purchase Dedicated Service would turn on whether an entity in that 
category just happened to engage in an unrelated activity that subjects 
it to the Commission's jurisdiction. Second, in describing the entities 
required to submit data in its Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(FRFA), the Commission noted that Providers and Purchasers required to 
respond may include ``price cap regulated incumbent LECs, competitive 
LECs, interexchange carriers, cable operators, and companies that 
provide fixed wireless communications services'' in addition to some 
entities providing ``best efforts''

[[Page 67055]]

services. We believe this statement largely describes the categories of 
entities from which responses were anticipated by the Commission; this 
is also consistent with the Commission's estimated respondent pool of 
about 6,500--far fewer than the potentially hundreds of thousands of 
entities if the definition of Purchasers were interpreted more broadly. 
Third, defining Purchasers more broadly will not contribute 
substantially to the economic analysis. As proposed in the Special 
Access Data Collection FNPRM, the analysis of the collected data will 
rely more heavily on the data obtained from Providers, e.g., Locations 
served and prices charged at the circuit-level, than the limited 
information on terms and conditions obtained from Purchasers. Although 
the data obtained from Purchasers will help to identify harmful, 
anticompetitive conduct in the sale of Dedicated Service, it need not, 
and indeed cannot, be comprehensive to serve this purpose. Finally, 
these consumers of Dedicated Service are unlikely to respond with any 
additional information on terms and conditions that we would not 
otherwise obtain from a smaller respondent pool and so the benefit of 
having a broader array of Purchasers respond is outweighed by the 
burden. Clarifying the scope of Purchaser respondents is therefore 
appropriate.
    Consistent with the Commission's overall intent, we clarify that 
the definition of Purchasers excludes from the collection entities that 
are subject to the Commission's jurisdiction only because they fall 
within one or more of the categories listed below. These exclusions do 
not apply to entities that hold licenses, authorizations or 
registrations under any other Part of the Commission's rules not listed 
below, or that provide a Dedicated Service or a Best Efforts Business 
Broadband Internet Access Service in a price cap area.
     End Users that provide an information service;
     Equipment authorization holders regulated under Parts 2 
and 15 of the Commission's rules;
     Accounting authorization holders in the maritime and 
maritime mobile-satellite radio services regulated under Part 3 of the 
Commission's rules;
     Experimental radio authorization holders regulated under 
Part 5 of the Commission's rules;
     Commercial radio operators regulated under Part 13 of the 
Commission's rules;
     Antenna structure registration holders regulated under 
Part 17 of the Commission's rules;
     Television and radio broadcasters regulated under Part 73 
of the Commission's rules;
     Holders of authorizations issued pursuant to Part 74 of 
the Commission's rules such as experimental radio, auxiliary, special 
broadcast and other program distribution service authorizations;
     Maritime service authorization holders regulated under 
Part 80 of the Commission's rules;
     Aviation service authorization holders regulated under 
Part 87 of the Commission's rules;
     Private land mobile radio service authorization holders 
regulated under Part 90 of the Commission's rules except for holders of 
authorizations under Part 90 for the provision of point-to-point fixed 
microwave services and authorizations in the Wireless Broadband 
Services frequency band, 3650-3700 MHz;
     Personal radio service authorization holders regulated 
under Part 95 of the Commission's rules; and
     Amateur radio service authorization holders regulated 
under Part 97 of the Commission's rules.
    These exclusions only apply to the categorically excluded entity 
and do not extend to other entities within the same corporate structure 
or entities that are otherwise affiliated with the excluded entity. For 
example, if an entity holding a television broadcast authorization is 
affiliated with a cable company that provides Dedicated Service, the 
affiliated cable company must still respond to the data collection even 
though the television broadcasting entity is not required to respond. 
In addition, for clarity, we point out that these categorical 
exclusions do not include common carriers (wired or wireless), mobile 
wireless service providers, cable system operators even if they only 
provide video program services, international service providers, 
satellite service providers, or entities that hold authorizations 
issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the provision 
of fixed point-to-point microwave services.
Price Cap Areas
    The Commission is seeking data and information on the provision and 
purchase of services in price cap areas ``[b]ecause the focus of this 
proceeding is on the regulation of special access services in price-cap 
territories.'' While certain language in the Special Access Data 
Collection Order has led to confusion on whether carriers in rate-of-
return areas must respond, we clarify that entities providing or 
purchasing Dedicated Service only in areas where the ILEC is subject to 
interstate rate-of-return regulation are not required to provide data 
and information in response to the data collection. Likewise, we 
clarify that an entity providing Best Efforts Business Broadband 
Internet Access Service only in areas where the ILEC is subject to 
interstate rate-of-return regulation is not required to submit data in 
response. A map depicting the study areas where the ILECs are subject 
to price cap and rate-of-return regulation is available on the 
Commission's Web site; the map will assist entities in determining 
whether or not they are providing or purchasing services in price cap 
areas. In addition, we recognize that over the years some ILECs have 
converted to price cap regulation and further clarify that the data 
collection covers Dedicated Service provided or purchased and Best 
Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service provided if the ILEC 
was subject to price cap regulation in the area at any point during the 
relevant reporting periods, 2010 or 2012.
FCC Form 477 Filers Reporting Broadband Connections
    In delegating authority to the Bureau, the Commission noted that 
``[t]he delegation includes the authority to require entities subject 
to the Commission's jurisdiction to certify whether or not they are 
special access providers, entities that provide best efforts business 
services, or purchasers for the purposes of this data collection.'' In 
Section II.G of the initial version of the data collection attached to 
the Special Access Data Collection Order, the Commission stated that 
``[i]f you must respond to this data collection because you filed the 
FCC Form 477 in 2012 to report the provision of `broadband connections 
to end user locations' but are not covered by the scope of the 
collection ``then indicate as such . . . and complete the certification 
accompanying this data collection.''
    Smith Bagley et al. in their joint comments to the Commission as 
part of the PRA process highlighted the reference to the Form 477 in 
Section II.G and requested a clarification as to which entities must 
submit data and which entities must only certify that they are not 
required to submit data and information in response to the collection. 
We therefore clarify that all entities required to submit the Form 477 
because they provide broadband connections to end user locations in 
price cap areas must--at a minimum--submit a certification in this 
special access data collection. Specifically, entities required to 
report broadband connections to end user locations on the

[[Page 67056]]

Form 477 must certify whether they are a Provider, Purchaser, a covered 
entity providing Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access 
Service, or none of the above as part of this data collection. If the 
Form 477 filer is also a Provider, Purchaser, or a covered entity 
providing Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service as 
defined in this collection, then it must also respond to all the 
relevant questions for that category of entity. If the Form 477 filer 
does not fall within any of those categories, e.g., an entity only 
providing Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service in 
interstate rate-of-return areas and not purchasing Dedicated Service, 
then the Form 477 filer need not submit any information or data beyond 
its certification.
    The intent of this certification is to ensure the subsequent market 
analysis of the collected data comprehensively includes all Providers 
with Connections to Locations that are owned, leased under an 
Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU) agreement, or in the case of 
Competitive Providers, obtained as an Unbundled Network Element (UNE) 
to provide a Dedicated Service, and covered entities providing Best 
Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service. We estimate that 
most, if not all, of these Providers and covered entities providing 
``best efforts'' services are required to file the Form 477 based on 
that form's reporting criteria. Therefore, we can use the list of Form 
477 filers as a point of reference to ensure that appropriate Providers 
respond to the collection. For example, if an entity filed the Form 477 
but did not respond to the collection, there is a strong likelihood it 
has data and information relevant to the collection. Moreover, to the 
extent Form 477 filers not covered by the scope of the collection have 
to certify as such, this burden is minimal. Thus, the Form 477 
certification requirement furthers the Commission's goal of conducting 
a comprehensive data collection in a minimally burdensome way.

Instructions--Data Specifications

    Attached to this Report and Order is a comprehensive set of 
instructions with format specifications for responding to the data 
collection. These instructions address many requests for clarification 
received from parties since the release of the Special Access Data 
Collection Order. The more significant clarifications contained in the 
instructions are discussed below.
1. Locations With Connections
    Providers are required to report Locations with Connections to help 
the Commission identify: (1) Facilities that can, or could, be used to 
provide a Dedicated Service; and (2) the demand for Dedicated Service. 
Regardless of what market analysis we adopt, this information is 
critical in determining how and where competition for special access 
services exists or is likely to develop.
    A Connection is defined as a communication path between a Location 
and a Provider's network that provides a Dedicated Service or is 
``capable'' of providing a Dedicated Service. By design, only 
Connections to non-residential Locations are reported. Special access 
services are used by businesses, schools, libraries, and other 
institutions of state and local government. Including facilities and 
services provided to residences will not help, and may distort, our 
analysis of the special access market. Therefore, Providers do not 
report Connections to residential locations.
    We have received several questions about the meaning of ``capable'' 
within the definition of Connection for purposes of the data 
collection. In response, we provide the following guidance on what 
Locations with Connections to report, which varies depending on the 
Provider type.
Guidance on Capable Connections for Competitive Providers
    Non-Cable Competitive Providers. Competitive Providers other than 
cable system operators must report all Locations with idle and in-
service Connections that they own or lease as an IRU, regardless of the 
type of service provided over the Connection. This subcategory of 
Competitive Providers must report all of their Connections because 
these entities typically target their service offerings to businesses 
and other higher-capacity users where sufficient demand exists to 
justify the investment. They do not typically deploy their facilities 
(or lease IRUs) to blanket an entire area and instead deploy (or lease 
IRUs) to particular Locations within a local geographic area. That is, 
they are likely to only have built such Connections to a particular 
Location based on strong expectations of sufficient demand. Both the 
information about the facilities and the demand leading to the 
deployment of those facilities are relevant to our analysis.
    In addition, Competitive Providers must report Locations with 
Connections obtained as a UNE to provide a Dedicated Service. This 
includes those UNEs obtained to provide a service that incorporates a 
Dedicated Service within the offering as part of a managed solution or 
bundle of services sold to the customer. Examples of services 
incorporating a Dedicated Service could include: The Converged Business 
Network solution offered by Level 3 Communications, Inc. (Level 3); the 
High-Speed Dedicated Internet Access service from XO Communications, 
LLC (XO); or the business Ethernet solution offered by TW Telecom. This 
information will further help us identify the demand for special access 
service.
    Competitive Providers Who Are Cable System Operators. Outside their 
Franchise Areas (FAs), cable operators must follow the same reporting 
guidance on all Locations with Connections, for the same reasons, as 
the non-cable Competitive Providers described above. However, we 
require cable system operators to report Locations in their FAs with 
Connections they own or lease as an IRU differently.
    Cable system operators within their FAs report Locations based on 
the type of Connection. They must report those Locations with 
Connections owned or leased as an IRU that are connected to a Node 
(i.e., headend) that has been upgraded or was built to provide Metro 
Ethernet (or its equivalent) service. They must report Locations with 
these Connections regardless of the service provided over the 
Connection or whether the Connection is idle or in-service. 
Historically, cable companies deployed facilities widely in their FAs 
to serve primarily residential customers and other community needs, and 
have more recently expanded their service offerings to customers that 
are likely to buy Dedicated Service. We are therefore particularly 
interested in Connections that have been upgraded to business class 
Metro Ethernet (or its equivalent)--whether or not those Connections 
are in service and regardless of the type of service provided--because 
it is reasonable to assume that such upgrades were made based on strong 
expectations as to the likelihood of sufficient demand for Dedicated 
Service and are sources of potential competition.
    For Locations with facilities that are not linked to a Node capable 
of providing Metro Ethernet (or its equivalent), cable system operators 
must report in-service Connections that were used during the relevant 
reporting period to provide a Dedicated Service or a service that 
incorporates a Dedicated Service within the offering as part of a 
managed solution or bundle of services sold to the customer. Cable 
system operators do not report Locations with facilities used to 
provide a service that is substantially similar to the services 
provided to residential customers, e.g., one or two line telephone 
service or

[[Page 67057]]

best-efforts Internet access and subscription television services. We 
exclude these facilities because they were most likely built to provide 
residential-type services instead of high-capacity services to non-
residential customers based on the historical deployment of cable 
systems; their inclusion could thus skew our assessment of demand for 
special access service. We can still account for the potential 
competition from these facilities by referencing data provided 
elsewhere in the collection, e.g., we can refer to the fiber maps filed 
by cable system operators, the location of Nodes upgraded to provide 
Metro Ethernet (or its equivalent), and the information provided 
showing those census blocks within the FAs where the cable system 
operator reports making broadband service available with a bandwidth 
rate of at least 1.5 Mbps in both directions (upstream/downstream). 
Accordingly, this clarification will aid the Commission by focusing the 
collection on Locations with Connections relevant to our inquiry, thus 
aiding the analysis, and has the benefit of reducing the reporting 
burden for cable system operators.
Guidance on Capable Connections for ILECs
    In addition to the guidance provided to Competitive Providers on 
the meaning of ``capable'' for the reporting of Locations with 
Connections, we provide ILECs with this additional clarification. ILECs 
are not required to report copper loops that were unable to provide a 
bandwidth connection of at least 1.5 Mbps in both directions (upstream/
downstream) ``as provisioned'' during the relevant reporting periods, 
e.g., bare copper loops not upgraded with the necessary equipment. 
These copper loops are not considered Connections capable of providing 
a Dedicated Service for the purposes of this data collection. This 
clarification addresses a concern raised by Verizon on their inability 
``to distinguish between UNEs that CLECs use to serve mass-market 
locations and those that they use to serve business locations.''
    We are collecting data to analyze the special access market to help 
inform our analysis of the appropriate regulatory treatment of special 
access services. Special access services subject to dominant carrier 
regulation largely consist of DS1s and DS3s, which have a symmetrical 
bandwidth of about 1.5 Mbps and 44 Mbps, respectively. Therefore, for 
the collection, we do not intend to collect data from ILECs on copper 
loops that ``as provisioned'' are unable to provide a bandwidth of at 
least 1.5 Mbps in both directions.
    This exclusion will significantly decrease the reporting burden for 
ILECs while not adversely affecting our analysis. Information on each 
and every copper loop an ILEC has with a bandwidth of less than 1.5 
Mbps in both directions is unnecessary for the Commission to assess 
potential competition. We can instead assume that the ILEC has deployed 
facilities of some kind throughout its study area and has at least one 
transmission link, albeit a bare copper loop, to every Location within 
its study area even when the ILEC does not report having a Location 
with a Connection. We do recognize, however, that copper loops can be 
modified to provide higher capacity services and will continue to 
collect information from Competitive Providers on the loops they obtain 
as UNEs and later modify to provide a bandwidth connection of at least 
1.5 Mbps in both directions.
    In addition to excluding certain copper loops, ILECs are prohibited 
from reporting facilities to Locations used to provide services 
substantially similar to the services provided to residential 
customers, e.g., one or two line telephone service or best-efforts 
Internet access and subscription television services such as AT&T's U-
verse or Verizon's FiOS service (even if the facility is technically 
capable of providing a Dedicated Service). This exclusion is again 
aimed at limiting the data reported to only Locations where the End 
Users are demanding services relevant to our inquiry (i.e., buying 
Dedicated Services). In these areas, as with the exclusion for certain 
copper loops, we can assume that the ILEC has a capable facility 
connecting every Location in its study area even when it did not 
provide a Dedicated Service to the Location during the relevant 
reporting period.
Location Data
    Several parties are concerned about the Location information sought 
in the data collection, namely the requirement that the Provider (1) 
indicate whether the connected Location is a building, cell site, or 
other man-made structure, i.e., reporting the location type and (2) 
report the geocode (latitude and longitude) for each Location. On 
location type, Comcast and Cox said ``that they do not necessarily know 
or record the type of structure . . . and that recreating such data 
(e.g., through site visits or requests to the customer) could be quite 
a burdensome exercise.'' In addition, Alaska Communications Systems 
(ACS), Cincinnati Bell Inc. (Cincinnati Bell), and members of the 
American Cable Association (ACA) reported difficulty with determining 
not only the location type but also the geocode.
    In response, we clarify in the instructions that if the filer does 
not know the location type, it can report the type as ``unknown.'' 
While we intend to use the location type to further understand the 
demand segments for Dedicated Services, we can utilize information 
reported elsewhere in the collection for this purpose. Therefore, while 
this clarification will significantly reduce the reporting burden on 
Providers, it will not adversely affect the Commission's analysis. As 
for the location geocode, we understand that Providers are more likely 
to have coordinate information for connected cell sites than for 
connected buildings. Providers do typically have, however, at least the 
street address for a connected building. We therefore clarify in the 
instructions that Providers can report a location geocode derived from 
a postal address through use of a geocoding platform. This 
clarification will significantly reduce the reporting burden by 
eliminating the need for site visits to obtain coordinate information.
Mapping Requirements
    The Special Access Data Collection Order required Competitive 
Providers to file maps showing: (1) The fiber routes constituting their 
network and connecting their networks to Locations; and (2) the Nodes 
used to interconnect with other providers and the year each Node went 
live. The maps showing fiber routes help the Commission identify where 
Competitive Providers can or potentially could provide Dedicated 
Service. The location of the interconnection Nodes helps the Commission 
understand the ``non-price factors that may impact where special access 
providers build facilities or expand their network via UNEs.''
    Several parties raised concerns about the burden of producing maps 
and verifying interconnection Nodes. Cable companies, for example, 
stated they do not keep maps at this level of detail in the normal 
course of business and would have to conduct site visits and create 
them at considerable expense. NTCA also expressed concern explaining 
that while its members generally have maps showing ``middle-mile'' 
facilities, they do not keep maps with ``last mile'' facilities.
    NCTA and ACA alternatively propose that the Commission: (1) Allow 
companies to simply submit whatever network maps they have or ``a list 
or `airline' map showing the network

[[Page 67058]]

footprint (headend locations and customer locations served by those 
headends)'' and (2) eliminate the Node identification requirements. 
USTelecom opposes this proposal, arguing this alternative will not 
provide the Commission with the necessary detail ``to determine how 
both actual and potential competition provide competitive discipline in 
the high-capacity marketplace.'' As discussed below, although we do not 
eliminate the obligations as proposed by NCTA and ACA, we do make 
certain clarifications to reduce the burdens while ensuring the 
Commission has sufficient data for its analysis.
    Fiber Maps. The Commission required Competitive Providers to submit 
maps showing their fiber routes, including fiber Connections to 
Locations, for an analysis of potential competition. While we 
understand the burdens of providing these comprehensive maps, the 
Commission has found that competition for Dedicated Service ``appears 
to occur at a very granular level--perhaps as low as the building/
tower.'' The Commission therefore needs to collect information at an 
equally granular level, i.e., the level of the connected Location.
    The mapping obligation is already limited by focusing solely on 
fiber routes and not requiring the mapping of other transmission 
mediums. Relative to copper or coaxial cable, a Competitive Provider 
can easily add additional Dedicated Services or other managed services 
to a fiber line. The presence of fiber down a street is thus a good 
indicator of a Competitive Provider's ability to serve nearby 
Locations. To further reduce the burdens, we clarify in the 
instructions that the scale used for shapefile mapping data is 
1:24,000, which is the standard used by the U.S. Geological Survey 
National Map and the same scale used by the Bureau for the study area 
boundary (SAB) map collection. This standard will give the Commission 
sufficient data on the streets and paths traversed by fiber while 
eliminating the need to report the exact location of fiber on the 
street. We expect that Competitive Providers would know the streets and 
routes where their fiber runs without having to conduct site surveys so 
this clarification should significantly reduce the reporting burden for 
Competitive Providers while still giving the Commission data on fiber 
routes to a sufficient level of accuracy for its analysis.
    We reject the alternative proposed by NCTA and ACA of requiring 
``whatever network maps'' a Competitive Provider has or ``a list or 
`airline' map showing a network footprint'' for two reasons. First, 
this approach will produce non-uniform and less granular data and will 
thus affect the Commission's analysis. Maps would vary by respondent 
with some simply showing the boundaries of their network coverage and 
others providing details on some fiber routes but unlikely to the level 
of the connected Location. Even a ``list or `airline' map showing the 
network footprint'' would not necessarily give the Commission the fiber 
routes to Locations, at least not to a sufficient level of accuracy. 
Second, the variability of the maps would substantially increase the 
burden on Commission staff. For example, the Commission would have to 
create a base map from the non-uniform data and offset gaps with 
information collected elsewhere or through third-party data sets. Even 
if the Commission could somehow fill any data gaps, the result would 
not be as detailed, uniform, or accurate as with having Competitive 
Providers submit maps showing their fiber facilities to each Location. 
It would also divert Commission resources from analyzing the data to 
create data necessary to begin the analysis.
    Nodes. NCTA and ACA have also asked the Commission to eliminate the 
requirement to include Nodes used for interconnecting. One NCTA member 
said it ``cannot reasonably identify every node on the network used to 
interconnect . . . and the year that each node `went live,''' asserting 
that it ``would have to walk portions of the route to check for all 
splice points and/or interview local personnel'' to determine the 
location of interconnecting Nodes. An ACA member stated it would have 
to review many end user agreements to determine this information, while 
another member stated that reporting the ``live'' date for each 
interconnecting Node is ``the most difficult and time-consuming aspect 
of creating the maps.''
    Although we retain the requirement to provide fiber maps, we 
clarify the obligations for identifying interconnection Nodes in the 
instructions to reduce burdens. First, we clarify that Competitive 
Providers can provide information reported to the Central Location 
Online Entry System (CLONES) database on their interconnection points 
in lieu of reporting information from their own internal records. 
Competitive Providers electing this option must certify that their 
CLONES data are current and accurately identify their points of 
interconnection and the associated ``live'' dates to the best of their 
knowledge. Second, we clarify in the instructions that Node locations 
need only be accurate to the nearest 0.0005 decimal 
degrees. Third, respondents do not have to report the year the Node 
went ``live'' if it occurred before 1995 and is unknown.
    These clarifications will not adversely affect the data needed for 
the Commission's analysis but will reduce burdens. The Commission 
intends to gather data on interconnection points to understand whether 
the decision to deploy in an area is in response to the demand for 
Dedicated Service. Based on the responses received from non-cable 
Competitive Providers to an earlier voluntary data request, we believe 
the deployment and interconnecting decisions of non-cable Competitive 
Providers are largely driven by the demand for high-capacity, business 
services. The reporting of interconnection points by these entities is 
thus valuable to the Commission.
    The CLONES database is widely used by industry to create, update, 
and maintain codes to uniquely identify the location of geographic 
places and certain equipment. It also contains historical data on 
interconnection points as reported by the service providers. 
Competitive Providers can therefore provide the information reported to 
CLONES without affecting the analysis provided they certify to the best 
of their knowledge that the data accurately reflect their 
interconnecting points and ``live'' dates.
    As for the location accuracy level for those Nodes identified, the 
Commission needs to know the neighborhood of the interconnection point. 
Clarifying the accuracy level for Nodes to the nearest 0.0005 decimal degrees accomplishes this. In addition, reporting 
the year a Node went ``live'' going as far back as 1995 will help the 
Commission understand decisions to deploy facilities to meet the demand 
for Dedicated Service. After 1995, significant competitive entry and 
merger activity occurred following the enactment of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996. This timeframe will capture that 
activity along with those headends recently upgraded by cable operators 
to provide Metro Ethernet (or its equivalent) service. Accordingly, we 
will not adversely affect the Commission's analysis by allowing 
respondents to only report ``live'' dates prior to 1995 if available.
    These clarifications will ease the reporting burden for Competitive 
Providers while ensuring that the Commission has sufficient data for 
its analysis. Entities do not always retain historical data on 
interconnection points, so allowing for the submission of CLONES data 
and for the reporting of

[[Page 67059]]

``live'' dates prior to 1995 only if available will ease the burden on 
these respondents. These clarifications will also reduce, or completely 
eliminate, the need to conduct walkouts or surveys at the street or 
manhole level.
Billing Information
    The collection contains a section of questions asking for data on 
the Dedicated Services billed to customers by Competitive Providers and 
ILECs. The billing section consists of three interrelated questions: 
(1) Reporting monthly billing information, billed at the level of the 
rate element, but tied to the circuit; (2) identifying adjustment 
codes; and (3) identifying billing codes. In addition to making minor 
revisions to the billing questions--discussed in Section III.C below, 
the instructions contain a detailed breakdown of how to interpret and 
respond to each required data field for these questions. The 
instructions address many of the requests for clarification on what is 
required. For example, some parties interpreted the ILEC-centric 
diagram of billed circuit elements contained in Question II.A.14 as a 
mandatory method of assigning billing codes. As clarified in the 
instructions, there are two options for describing billing codes for 
circuit elements. A filer can either use the diagram and descriptions 
provided to describe the billed circuit element or create its own 
descriptions for the billed elements, e.g., a party could assign a 
billing code to a circuit element described as ``private line end-to-
end service.'' Parties also questioned whether they can use Uniform 
Service Order Codes (USOCs) for their unique billing code IDs. The 
instructions clarify that providers can use any unique billing code, 
including USOCs. These and other clarifications are provided in the 
instructions.
Headquarters Information
    Question II.A.9 asks Competitive Providers to report the locations 
of their U.S. headquarters and the headquarters of certain affiliates, 
going as far back as 1995. NCTA questions the need for this information 
and asks the Commission to eliminate this requirement or limit the 
years covered to 2010 and 2012.
    Like the data sought on interconnection points, the purpose of this 
question is to assess certain non-price factors that may be relevant to 
where Competitive Providers build or expand their network. The question 
asks for the locations of a Competitive Provider's current and prior 
U.S. headquarters, going as far back as 1995. In addition, Competitive 
Providers must identify the headquarters of affiliated entities and 
entities acquired through merger that no longer exist if the affiliated 
or acquired entity owned (or leased under an IRU agreement) Connections 
to five or more Locations in a given MSA at the time of affiliation/
acquisition, going as far back as 1995. We use 1995 as the cutoff 
because significant competitive entry and merger activity occurred 
after 1995. The longer period thus helps us understand why a competitor 
chose to expand its facilities in certain areas over time.
    For certain Competitive Providers, namely cable system operators, 
the decision of where to deploy Dedicated Service facilities is 
significantly influenced by the FAs awarded to the cable operator, 
which are often unrelated to the location of its headquarters. For 
example, the headquarters for Cox, the third largest cable provider in 
the United States, is located in Atlanta but Cox has no cable network 
in that metropolitan area. In addition, cable operators have only 
recently upgraded systems in their FAs to provide Dedicated Service. 
With this in mind, we question the benefits of obtaining information on 
headquarters going as far back as 1995 from cable companies because 
while this question is not particularly burdensome, it is unlikely to 
help us understand why a cable company deployed facilities in an area 
to provide Dedicated Service. We will therefore allow cable operators 
to respond to this question by indicating ``Not Applicable.''
    The rationale for treating cable system operators differently does 
not apply, however, to other Competitive Providers who do not deploy 
facilities according to designated FAs. We therefore continue to find 
value and intend to collect headquarters information from non-cable 
Competitive Providers for the analysis.
Certain Questions Requiring Narrative Responses From Purchasers
    The data collection requires Purchasers to provide a narrative 
response to certain questions. For example, Questions II.F.8-10 and 12 
ask for information about any problems experienced with terms and 
conditions, switching of Providers, or having to pay One Month Term 
Only Rates. Smith Bagley et al. objects to the mandatory submission of 
this ``qualitative'' information because it is not quantitative or 
verifiable and asks for the voluntary submission of responses to these 
types of questions.
    Questions II.F.8-10 and 12 give Purchasers an opportunity to 
provide factual details to highlight any problems experienced in their 
dealings with Providers of Dedicated Service. The Commission plans to 
use the information to help identify and document problems previously 
alleged by Competitive Providers in this proceeding. While these 
questions are not particularly burdensome, and are instead an 
opportunity, we have clarified in the instructions that if a Purchaser 
does not need, or want, to provide a response, i.e., the Purchaser is 
not experiencing or does not want to highlight any alleged problems, 
then the Purchaser can simply respond stating as much.
Modifications and Amendments to the Data Collection
    The following is a list of the modifications and amendments to the 
data collection definitions and questions based on the received 
feedback and our further internal review. These changes are consistent 
with the terms of the Special Access Data Collection Order.
     Affiliated Company. Definition revised to include not only 
affiliations with Providers but also Purchasers. This revision will 
assist the Commission with internally linking information on sales and 
purchases reported by filers to entities that have common ownership. In 
addition, we have changed the ownership interest for determining an 
affiliation from 25 to 10 percent. Use of the lower percentage is 
consistent with the definition of affiliate used for the Form 499-A 
``Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet,'' which is based on the 
statutory definition of ``affiliate'' in Section 153(2) of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
     Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service. 
Term modified to clarify that only best efforts services with a minimum 
advertised bandwidth connection of at least 1.5 Mbps in both directions 
(upstream/downstream) must be reported. The addition of ``advertised 
bandwidth'' also provides a clearer standard for respondents than the 
prior language that suggested an actual capacity, which could vary 
depending on case-specific variables such as time of day, traffic 
congestion, etc.
     Circuit-Based Dedicated Service (CBDS). Term modified to 
clarify the Commission's intent of only capturing those categories of 
time-division multiplexing-based services, such as DS1s and DS3s, which 
largely remain subject to dominant carrier regulation.
     Collocation. Definition deleted because the term is not 
used in the data collection.
     Connection. We modified the definition to eliminate 
potential

[[Page 67060]]

confusion over the reference to ``end user's location,'' which was a 
combination of two defined terms, End User and Location. As modified, 
the term now drops the modifier ``End User's'' and just references 
Location, which is already defined as a point where the End User is 
connected. We have also changed subsequent references to end user 
location in the collection to Location. In addition, consistent with 
our clarification of ``capable'' Connections in the instructions, we 
have modified the definition to clarify that an Unbundled Copper Loop 
is only considered a Connection once modified to provide a Dedicated 
Service.''
     Dedicated Service. Changed reference in definition from 
megabytes to megabits. In addition, we clarified that the minimum 
bandwidth rate of 1.5 Mbps applies in both directions, upstream and 
downstream.
     End User. Revised this term to include not just entities 
that purchase Dedicated Service for their own use and not for resale 
but also entities that more broadly purchase communications services 
for their own use and not for resale.
     Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU). The definition for this 
term previously included a list of elements typically found in IRU 
agreements, including a substantial upfront fee, a minimum term of ten 
years and no unreasonable limit on the grantee's right to use the 
asset. The definition gave respondents considerable discretion to 
determine whether a lease is an IRU agreement. Sprint is concerned the 
definition will result in the over inclusion of contracts that are 
effectively service level agreements but called IRUs by the parties. 
Conversely, AT&T said the term could be read to exclude IRUs with 
shorter terms and with upfront payments of less than 25 percent.
    The definition is intended to capture facilities where the grantee 
effectively has an ownership interest in the Connection and has the 
right to use the asset for an extended period of time to provide a 
competitive service of its choosing. While IRUs of less than ten years 
in total duration and with minimal upfront payments may indeed exist, 
for purposes of our analysis of facilities-based competition, we will 
focus on IRUs with a total term of at least ten years where the grantee 
has a right to access and exclusively use the Connection absent 
unreasonable limits. We have modified the definition as suggested by 
AT&T to clarify that the duration period of the IRU agreement need not 
equal the remaining economic life of the asset.
     Packet-Based Dedicated Service (PBDS). Modified this 
definition to capture those types of services for which the Commission 
has largely granted relief from dominant carrier regulation.
     Prior Purchase-Based Commitment. Term revised to include 
commitments based on a dollar amount of revenues in addition to a 
percentage of revenues.
     Revenues. Deleted second sentence in definition to 
eliminate confusion over the billed revenue amounts to report.
     Tariff. Revised definition to clarify that term broadly 
includes both Tariff Plans and Contract-Based Tariffs.
     Transport Service. Definition revised to clarify intent of 
including dedicated transport and special access services other than 
End User Channel Terminations.
     Question II.A.1: Affiliated Company. Expanded the types of 
affiliated entities reported to Providers and Purchasers, not just 
Providers, to internally track commonly-owned entities and rephrased 
question to simplify electronic filing, i.e., deleted yes/no response.
     Questions II.A.3-4: Locations Data for Competitive 
Providers. Consistent with our guidance on capable Connections in 
Section III.B.1.a of this Report and Order, we revised these questions 
to include not only facilities in-use, i.e., provisioned Connections to 
Locations, but also idle Connections to capture data on potential 
competition. In addition, to match the reported month-to-month billing 
information, filers will report connected Locations during 2010 and 
2012 instead of Locations as of year-end. The wording of Question 
II.A.3 is also changed to clarify that Competitive Providers need only 
report Locations with Connections in total and not separately by the 
enumerated categories. We also added Question II.A.4.k to obtain the 
total bandwidth provided over the Connection for the respondents' own 
internal use or the internal use of an Affiliated Company. This last 
piece of information will help us evaluate whether Competitive 
Providers are self-providing service as an alternative to buying 
Dedicated Service.
     Question II.A.5: Fiber Network Map(s). We received 
inquiries from parties requesting clarification of the mapping question 
requirements and have revised the question to only require a single map 
showing the fiber routes of a Competitive Provider's network that are 
owned or leased under an IRU agreement.
     Question II.A.8: Business Rules for Deployment. Clarified 
question to remove ambiguities and to help develop competition proxy 
variables for the Commission's econometric analysis.
     Question II.A.9: Headquarters. As mentioned in Section 
III.B.5 above, question revised to facilitate responses for proxy 
variables for competition, i.e., filers must now also report the 
headquarters of entities acquired through merger where the filer or its 
subsidiary was the surviving entity.
     Questions II.A.12-14: Billing Information from Competitive 
Providers. Based on feedback, we revised these questions so they now 
refer to circuit element instead of rate element. Question II.A.12 is 
also amended to require the reporting of the customer's name in 
addition to the Form 499-A Filer ID, where applicable, or other unique 
identifier (ID), and Question II.A.13 is amended to require the 
reporting of a unique ID to link adjustments to a particular Tariff or 
contract. These changes to Questions II.A.12-13 will help the 
Commission identify and internally track purchases by commonly-owned 
customers and link billing adjustments to particular plans. Lastly, we 
added a new Question II.A.12.l to capture the per unit charge for the 
circuit element in addition to the total billed amount; modified former 
Question II.A.12.l to remove redundant language; and deleted the 
requirement to report whether the circuit element is owned or leased as 
an IRU in former Question II.A.12.o to address concerns over 
differentiating between owned and leased facilities.
     Question II.A.19: Justification for Term and Volume 
Commitments. Question amended to include Tariffs and agreements in 
effect with a customer, in addition to those offered.
     Question II.B.1: Affiliated Company. As with the parallel 
question for Competitive Providers, we expanded the types of affiliated 
entities reported to Providers and Purchasers, not just Providers, to 
assist with the internal tracking of commonly owned entities and 
modified the phrasing of this question to simplify electronic filing, 
i.e., deleted the yes/no response.
     Questions II.B.2-3: Locations Data for ILECs. We revised 
these questions to eliminate the reporting of Connections sold as an 
Unbundled Copper Loop by the ILEC. As explained in Section III.B.1.b of 
this Report and Order, we do not intend to collect data on copper loops 
with a bandwidth of less than 1.5 Mbps. If a Competitive Provider has 
obtained an Unbundled Copper Loop from the ILEC as a UNE and modified 
the loop to provide a Dedicated Service, we will get that data directly 
from the Competitive Provider. This change will

[[Page 67061]]

greatly reduce the reporting burden for ILECs.
    In addition, like the Competitive Provider questions on connected 
Locations, we have revised these questions to require the reporting of 
Locations connected during 2010 and 2012 instead of Locations as of 
year-end; this change is necessary to match the reported month-to-month 
billing information. Question II.B.2, similar to its counterpart 
question for Competitive Providers, is clarified so that ILECs report 
Locations in total and not separately by the enumerated categories.
     Question II.B.4-6: Billing Information from ILECs. Similar 
to the questions on billing for Competitive Providers, we revised these 
questions based on feedback to reference circuit element instead of 
rate element. In addition, we made the following changes: (1) Amended 
Question II.B.4.b to require the reporting of the customer's name to 
identify and internally track purchases by commonly-owned customers; 
(2) removed the reference to Unbundled Copper Loops in Question II.B.4 
because Locations connected with Unbundled Copper Loops are no longer 
reported by ILECs; (3) revised Question II.B.5.g-h to refer to 
``contract or Tariff'' and not just contract; (4) deleted references to 
accuracy levels in Question II.B.4.h-k; (5) added a new Question 
II.B.4.t to capture the per unit charge for the circuit element in 
addition to the total billed amount; (6) modified former Question 
II.B.4.t to remove redundant language; (7) deleted former Question 
II.B.4.w because a revenue commitment is included in the definition of 
Volume Commitment referenced in a subsequent part of this question; (8) 
deleted the requirement to report whether the circuit element is owned 
or leased as an IRU in II.B.4.y; and (9) deleted former II.B.4.aa 
because the burden outweighed the benefit of linking the billing 
information for a circuit to a particular tariff name and section 
number.
     Question II.B.12: All Tariffs. Deleted ``available'' from 
the initial sentence to capture not only available tariffs but also 
tariffs currently in effect for the purchase of DS1, DS3, and PBDS 
services; this change enables us to obtain information on all Tariffs 
that are currently used, or could be used, to purchase Dedicated 
Service from ILECs. We amended Question II.B.12.g to obtain additional 
information on the geographic areas covered by the identified plans to 
help the Commission differentiate between urban and rural areas. Added 
new Question II.B.12.k-l to indicate whether purchases in areas where 
pricing flexibility has been granted count towards meeting a Volume 
Commitment. Added new Question II.B.12.n to indicate whether tariffed 
purchases of PBDS count towards meeting a Volume Commitment. Revised 
former Question II.B.12.n (now Question II.B.12.q) to only require the 
reporting of Revenues in total and not separately by additional 
categories, and deleted former Question II.B.12.o-p because the burden 
of reporting outweighed the potential benefit of collecting the 
information. Lastly, we amended former Question II.B.12.r (now Question 
II.B.12.s) to address concerns raised by Level 3 about plans that 
effectively contain Prior Purchase-Based Commitments without explicitly 
containing such provisions.
     Question II.B.13: Non-Tariffed Agreements. Rephrased 
language to simplify electronic filing, i.e., eliminated the need for a 
yes/no response.
     Question II.C.1-2: Entities Providing Best Efforts 
Services. Condensed Questions II.C.1-2 into one question and rephrased 
so that only covered entities, i.e., those not exempted, must answer. 
Modified former Question II.C.2.c.ii and d.ii to require reporting for 
areas where service is offered, instead of where service is provided. 
This is consistent with how data are reported for the State Broadband 
Initiative (SBI) program.
     Question II.D.3: Procedures when Changing Transport 
Providers. We are deleting this question and will instead rely on 
information obtained from similar questions directed at Purchasers and 
follow-up as necessary with Providers based on those responses.
     Sections II.E-F: Questions for Purchasers. To 
differentiate information from Purchasers that are mobile wireless 
service providers from other Purchasers, we have duplicated Questions 
II.F.2-14 and added them to Section II.E. Purchasers that are mobile 
wireless service providers will now only answer the questions on 
purchases in Section II.E. All other Purchasers will answer the 
questions in Section II.F.
     Question II.E.2: Cell Site Locations. Revised Question 
II.E.2.g-h to clarify that the total bandwidth is reported.
     Questions II.F.3-4 (II.E.4-5): Added subpart asking 
Purchasers to identify the percentage of expenditures made pursuant to 
purchases under a Tariff in 2012 that were subject to a Term Commitment 
of five or more years. This will help us gauge the scope of 
expenditures tied to longer-term plans.
     Question II.F.8 (II.E.9): Terms and Conditions 
Constraints. As suggested by parties, we clarified this question to 
give Purchasers an opportunity to highlight alleged problems with terms 
and conditions not otherwise captured by the collection.
     Question II.F.9 (II.E.10): Changing Transport Providers. 
Revised language to clarify intent of obtaining information in those 
instances where a Purchaser buys both Transport Service and End User 
Channel Terminations from one Provider and then subsequently switches 
Transport Providers while continuing to purchase the ``last-mile'' 
facilities from the original Provider.
     Question II.F.10 (II.E.11): Purchases Solely for the 
Purpose of Meeting a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment. Modified language 
to cover purchases that would not have been made but for the commitment 
instead of purchases not utilized to meet a commitment. We further 
amended the question to obtain additional details on such purchases 
where applicable.
     Question II.F.11 (II.E.12): Switching Providers. Modified 
question based on feedback from parties asking about the scope of the 
question.
     Question II.F.13 (II.E.14): Tariffs under which you 
Purchase Service. Deleted ``available'' from the initial sentence to 
capture all Tariffs used by the Purchaser to obtain DS1, DS3, and PBDS 
services; made minor improvements to the language in subparts (k.ii), 
(m.ii), (n.ii), and (o.ii) as to the geographic areas identified and 
added the reporting of the Provider's name; and separated subpart (m) 
into two questions--one for purchases in areas where the Commission has 
granted Phase I Pricing Flexibility and the other for Phase II Pricing 
Flexibility areas.
     Question II.F.14 (II.E.15): Non-Tariffed Agreements. 
Rephrased language to simplify electronic filing, i.e., eliminated the 
need for a yes/no response.
     Question II.G.1: Revised question so that entities 
providing Best Efforts Business Internet Access Services that are 
exempt from providing data and information in response to the data 
collection can certify as such and clarified language to cover entities 
required to report broadband connections to end user locations on the 
Form 477 for 2012.
Other Requests for Clarifications and Changes
    We have reviewed all of the requests for changes and clarifications 
to the data collection and have addressed many of the requests in the 
revised questions described in Section III.C or in the attached 
instructions. Clarifications or changes not made as requested were

[[Page 67062]]

because the benefit of collecting the information outweighed the burden 
or because the requested clarification or change is inconsistent with 
the terms of the Special Access Data Collection Order, outside the 
scope of our delegated authority, or because the Commission previously 
considered and rejected the requested relief.

Procedural Matters

    Deadline for Responding. Once OMB has approved the data collection, 
we will publish notice of such approval in the Federal Register and 
issue a public notice announcing the deadline for responding.
    Responding to the Data Collection. In addition to the attached 
instructions discussing the data specifications, we will post 
additional instructions on the submission process on the Commission's 
Web site. The Commission will create an electronic interface for the 
submission of information. Submissions will involve the uploading of 
documents in response to various questions and interrogatories and the 
electronic delivery of data. We will provide a data container file for 
submitting data that will include validation scripts to verify that the 
filer is providing the data in the appropriate format.
    Confidential Information. The data collection seeks information on 
facilities, billing, revenue, and expenditure that is considered 
confidential by businesses. The Bureau will release separately a 
Protective Order outlining procedures for designating and accessing 
information deemed confidential and highly confidential.
    Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis. This Report and Order further 
implements the information collection requirement adopted by the 
Commission in the Special Access Data Collection Order. The Commission 
is in the process of seeking approval for the collection from OMB 
pursuant to the PRA, Public Law 104-13. The actions taken in the Report 
and Order are based on comments received during the initial 60-day PRA 
comment period, meetings with industry, and our own internal further 
review to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the collection.
    Final Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 
1980, as amended (RFA) requires that a regulatory flexibility analysis 
be prepared for rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies 
that ``the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally defines 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration.
    The Special Access Data Collection Order contains a Final 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) that can be found at Appendix B 
of that Order. We incorporate the FRFA contained in the Special Access 
Data Collection Order into this Report and Order. The actions taken in 
this Report and Order do not create any burdens, benefits, or 
requirements that were not addressed by the FRFA attached to the 
Special Access Data Collection Order.
    Congressional Review Act. As required by the Congressional Review 
Act (CRA), the Commission previously sent a copy of the Special Access 
Data Collection Order to Congress and the Government Accountability 
Office. The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order to 
Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the CRA.
    Ex Parte Presentations. This is a permit-but-disclose proceeding 
and subject to the requirements of Section 1.1206(b) of the rules. 
Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentations must contain a summary of the substance 
of the presentation and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed. 
More than a one-sentence or two-sentence description of the views and 
arguments presented is generally required.

Mandatory Data Collection

I. Definitions

    The following definitions apply for purposes of this collection 
only. They are not intended to set or modify precedent outside the 
context of this collection.
    Affiliated Company means a company, partnership, corporation, 
limited liability company, or other business entity that is affiliated 
with an entity that provides and/or purchases Dedicated Service. Two 
entities are affiliated if one of them, or an entity that controls one 
of them, directly or indirectly holds a greater than 10 percent 
ownership interest in, or controls, the other one.
    Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Service means a 
best efforts Internet access data service with a minimum advertised 
bandwidth connection of at least 1.5 megabits per second (Mbps) in both 
directions (upstream/downstream) that is marketed to enterprise 
customers (including small, medium, and large businesses). For purposes 
of this data collection, Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet 
Access Services do not include mobile wireless services, as that term 
is used in the 16th Annual Mobile Wireless Competition Report.
    Circuit-Based Dedicated Service (CBDS) means a Dedicated Service 
that is circuit-based. Examples of CBDS include time-division 
multiplexing-based, DS1 and DS3 services.
    Competitive Provider means a competitive local exchange carrier 
(CLEC), interexchange carrier, cable operator, wireless provider or any 
other entity that is subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and either provides a Dedicated 
Service or provides a Connection over which a Dedicated Service could 
be provided. A Competitive Provider does not include an ILEC operating 
within its incumbent service territory.
    Connection means a wired ``line'' or wireless ``channel'' that 
provides a dedicated communication path between a Location and the 
first Node on a Provider's network. Multiple dedicated communication 
paths serving one or more End Users at the same Location should be 
counted as a single Connection. A Connection may be a UNE, including an 
Unbundled Copper Loop if modified to provide a Dedicated Service. A 
Connection must have the capability of being used to provide one or 
more Dedicated Services; however, a Connection can be used to provide 
other services as well. For example, a dedicated communication path 
that is currently being used to provide a mass market broadband service 
but has the capability to provide a Dedicated Service is considered a 
Connection for the purpose of this data collection.
    Contract-Based Tariff means a Tariff, other than a Tariff Plan, 
that is based on a service contract entered into between a customer and 
an ILEC which has obtained permission to offer contract-based tariff 
services pursuant to 47 CFR 69.701 et seq. of the Commission's pricing 
flexibility rules or a comparable tariffed intrastate service contract 
between a customer and an ILEC.
    Dedicated Service transports data between two or more designated 
points, e.g., between an End User's premises and a point-of-presence, 
between the central office of a local exchange carrier

[[Page 67063]]

(LEC) and a point-of-presence, or between two End User premises, at a 
rate of at least 1.5 Mbps in both directions (upstream/downstream) with 
prescribed performance requirements that include bandwidth-, latency-, 
or error-rate guarantees or other parameters that define delivery under 
a Tariff or in a service-level agreement. Dedicated Service includes, 
but is not limited to, CBDS and PBDS. For the purpose of this data 
collection, Dedicated Service does not include ``best effort'' 
services, e.g., mass market broadband services such as DSL and cable 
modem broadband access.
    Disconnection means the process by which a Provider, per a customer 
request, terminates billing on one or more of a customer's Dedicated 
Service circuits.
    DS1 and DS3, except where specified, refer to DS1s and DS3s that 
are not UNEs. DS1s and DS3s are Dedicated Services.
    End User means a business, institutional, or government entity that 
purchases a communications service for its own purposes and does not 
resell such service. A mobile wireless service provider is considered 
an End User when it purchases communications services to make 
connections within its own network, e.g., backhaul to a cell site.
    End User Channel Termination means, as defined in 47 CFR 
69.703(a)(2), a dedicated channel connecting a LEC end office and a 
customer premises, offered for purposes of carrying special access 
traffic.
    Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier (ILEC) means, for the purpose of 
this data collection, a LEC that provides a Dedicated Service in study 
areas where it is subject to price cap regulation under Sections 61.41-
61.49 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 64.41-61.49.
    Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU) means an indefeasible long-term 
leasehold interest for a minimum total duration of ten years that gives 
the grantee the right to access and exclusively use specified strands 
of fiber or allocated bandwidth to provide a service as determined by 
the grantee. An IRU confers on the grantee substantially all of the 
risks and rewards of ownership. IRUs typically include the following 
elements: (i) Payment of a substantial fee up front to enter into the 
IRU contract; (ii) conveyance of tax obligations commensurate with the 
risks and rewards of ownership to the grantee (e.g. as opposed to the 
lesser tax burdens associated with other forms of leases); (iii) terms 
for payment to the grantor for ancillary services, such as maintenance 
fees; (iv) all additional rights and interests necessary to enable the 
IRU to be used by the grantee in the manner agreed to; and (v) no 
unreasonable limit on the right of the grantee to use the asset as it 
wishes (e.g., the grantee shall be permitted to splice into the IRU 
fiber, though such splice points must be mutually agreed upon by 
grantor and the grantee of the IRU).
    Location means a building, other man-made structure, a cell site on 
a building, a free-standing cell site, or a cell site on some other 
man-made structure where the End User is connected. A Node is not a 
Location. For the purposes of this data collection, cell sites are to 
be treated as Locations and not as Nodes.
    Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is a geographic area as defined 
by 47 CFR 22.909(a), 69.703(b).
    Node is an aggregation point, a branch point, or a point of 
interconnection on a Provider's network, including a point of 
interconnection to other Provider networks. Examples include LEC 
central offices, remote terminal locations, splice points (including, 
for example, at manholes), controlled environmental vaults, cable 
system headends, cable modem termination system (CMTS) locations, and 
facility hubs.
    Non-MSA is the portion of an ILEC's study area that falls outside 
the boundaries of an MSA.
    Non-Rate Benefit means a benefit to the customer other than a 
discount on the One Month Term Only Rate, e.g., a credit towards 
penalties or non-recurring charges or the ability to move circuits 
without incurring a penalty.
    One Month Term Only Rate means, for purposes of this data 
collection, the non-discounted monthly recurring tariffed rate for DS1, 
DS3 and/or PBDS services.
    Packet-Based Dedicated Service (PBDS) means a Dedicated Service 
that is packet-based. Examples of PBDS include Multi-Protocol Label 
Switched (MPLS) services; permanent virtual circuits, virtual private 
lines and similar services; ATM and Frame Relay service; (Gigabit) 
Ethernet Services and Metro Ethernet Virtual Connections; and Virtual 
Private Networks (VPN). PBDS includes those categories of packet-based 
and optical transmission services for which the Commission has granted 
forbearance relief from dominant carrier regulation.
    Phase I Pricing Flexibility means regulatory relief for the pricing 
of End User Channel Terminations pursuant to 47 CFR 69.711(b), 
69.727(a) of the Commission's rules.
    Phase II Pricing Flexibility means regulatory relief for the 
pricing of End User Channel Terminations pursuant to 47 CFR 69.711(c), 
69.727(b) of the Commission's rules.
    Prior Purchase-Based Commitment means a type of Volume Commitment 
where the commitment is based on either:
    (i) A certain percentage or number of the customer's purchased in-
service circuits or lines as measured at the time of making the Volume 
Commitment or measured during a period of time prior to making the 
Volume Commitment, e.g., based on the customer's billing records for 
the current month or prior month(s); or
    (ii) a certain percentage or dollar amount of Revenues generated by 
the customer's purchases as measured at the time of making the Volume 
Commitment or during a period of time prior to making the Volume 
Commitment.
    Providers collectively refers to both ILECs and Competitive 
Providers.
    Purchasers means Competitive Providers and End Users that are 
subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, and purchase Dedicated Service.
    Revenues means intrastate and interstate billed amounts without any 
allowance for uncollectibles, commissions or settlements.
    Tariff means an intrastate or interstate schedule of rates and 
regulations filed by common carriers. This term includes both Tariff 
Plans and Contract-Based Tariffs.
    Tariff Plan means a Tariff, other than a Contract-Based Tariff, 
that provides a customer with either a discount from any One Month Term 
Only Rate for the purchase of DS1 and/or DS3 services or a Non-Rate 
Benefit that could be applied to these services.
    Term Commitment means a commitment to purchase a Dedicated Service 
for a period of time, greater than a month, in exchange for a circuit-
specific discount and/or a Non-Rate Benefit.
    Transport Service means a dedicated circuit that connects a 
designated Competitive Provider's premises to the wire center that 
serves the Competitive Provider's customer. Such an arrangement may or 
may not include channel mileage. See 47 CFR 69.709(a).
    Transport Provider means a Provider that supplies Transport 
Service.
    Unbundled Copper Loop means a copper wire local loop provided by 
ILECs to requesting telecommunications carriers on a non-discriminatory 
basis pursuant to 47 CFR 51.319(a)(1) that can be used by a Competitive 
Provider to provide a Dedicated Service, e.g.,

[[Page 67064]]

Ethernet over Copper. An Unbundled Copper Loop is typically a 2- or 4- 
wire loop that the ILEC has conditioned to remove intervening equipment 
such as bridge taps, load coils, repeaters, low pass filters, range 
extenders, etc. between a Location and the serving wire center to allow 
for the provision of advanced digital services by a Competitive 
Provider. These loops are commonly referred to as dry copper, bare 
copper, or xDSL-compatible loops. An Unbundled Copper Loop is a type of 
UNE.
    Unbundled Network Element (UNE) means a local loop provided by an 
ILEC to a requesting telecommunications carrier on a non-discriminatory 
basis pursuant to 47 CFR 51.319(a).
    Upgrade means that a customer transitions one or more circuits to a 
higher capacity circuit.
    Volume Commitment means a commitment to purchase a specified 
volume, e.g., a certain number of circuits or Revenues, to receive a 
discount on Dedicated Services and/or a Non-Rate Benefit.

II. Mandatory Data Collection Questions

A. Competitive Providers must respond to the following:
    II.A.1. Indicate whether you are an Affiliated Company. If you are 
an Affiliated Company, you must identify the entities that provide and/
or purchase Dedicated Service with which you have an affiliation (name/
FRN).
    II.A.2. Do you (i) own a Connection; (ii) lease a Connection from 
another entity under an IRU agreement; or (iii) obtain a Connection as 
a UNE from an ILEC to provide a Dedicated Service?

[square] Yes [square] No
    a. If yes, are any of these Connections to a Location within an 
area where the ILEC is subject to price cap regulation or within an 
area where the Commission has granted Phase I or Phase II Pricing 
Flexibility?

[square] Yes [square] No
    If you answered ``no'' to question II.A.2 or II.A.2.a, then you are 
not required to respond to the remaining questions in II.A or the 
questions in II.D.
Facilities Information
    II.A.3. Provide the total number of Locations to which you had a 
Connection during 2010 and during 2012 where your company: (i) owned 
the Connection; (ii) leased the Connection from another entity under an 
IRU agreement; or (iii) obtained the Connection as a UNE from an ILEC 
in the form of DS1s, DS3s, or Unbundled Copper Loops to provide a 
Dedicated Service.
    II.A.4. Provide the information requested below for each Location 
to which your company had a Connection during 2010 and during 2012 that 
you: (i) owned; (ii) leased from another entity under an IRU agreement; 
or (iii) obtained as a UNE from an ILEC to provide a Dedicated Service.
    a. A unique ID for the Location;
    b. The actual situs address for the Location (i.e., land where the 
building or cell site is located);
    c. The geocode for the Location (i.e., latitude and longitude);
    d. The Location type (e.g., building, other man-made structure, 
cell site in or on a building, free-standing cell site, or a cell site 
on some other man-made structure like a water tower, billboard, etc.);
    e. Whether the Connection provided to the location uses facilities 
leased from another entity under an IRU or obtained as a DS1/DS3 UNE or 
Unbundled Copper Loop, and in each case, the name of the lessor of the 
majority of the fiber strands and/or copper loop;
    f. Whether any of the Connection to the Location was provided using 
fiber;
    g. The total sold bandwidth of the Connection provided by you to 
the Location in Mbps;
    h. The total bandwidth to the Location sold directly by you to an 
End User;
    i. The total sold fixed wireless bandwidth provided by you to the 
Location; and
    j. The total bandwidth sold by you to any cell sites at the 
Location.
    k. The total bandwidth provided to you or an Affiliated Company for 
internal use.
    II.A.5. Provide a map showing the fiber routes that you (a) own or 
(b) lease pursuant to an IRU agreement that constitute your network, 
including the fiber Connections to Locations. In addition, include the 
locations of all Nodes used to interconnect with third party networks, 
and the year that each Node went live.
    II.A.6. We will provide you with a selected list of the Locations 
you reported in response to question II.A.4. For each identified 
Location, state the month and year that you first provided a Connection 
to that Location, whether you originally supplied the Location over a 
UNE, and if so, when (if at all) you switched to using a Connection 
that you own or lease as an IRU. If the Location was first served by 
your Connection on or before January 2008, and the date the Location 
was first served is unknown, then enter 00/0000.
    II.A.7. For each ILEC wire center where your company is collocated, 
provide the actual situs address, the geocode, and the CLLI code.
    II.A.8. Explain your business rule(s) used to determine whether to 
build a Connection to a particular Location. Provide underlying 
assumptions.
    a. Describe the business rules and other factors that determine 
where you build your Connections. Examples of such rules/factors are 
minimum Term Commitments or minimum capacity commitments by the buyer; 
maximum build distances from the building to your core network; and/or 
number of competitors in the area. Include, also, any factors that 
would prevent you from building a Connection to an otherwise suitable 
Location. These could be factors that are under your control or those 
that are not.
    b. Explain how, if at all, business density is incorporated into 
your business rule, and if so, how you measure business density.
    c. In areas where your business rule has been most successful, 
explain why. Provide examples of geographic regions (if any) where you 
generally were or are able to successfully deploy Connections, and 
where you generally have experienced or currently experience serious 
difficulties in deploying Connections, and, if you are able to provide 
examples of both kind of regions, indicate what distinguishes these 
different regions.
    II.A.9. Provide the following information:
    a. The current situs address of your U.S. headquarters (i.e., the 
address of the land where the headquarters is located);
    b. The year that this site became your headquarters;
    c. Year established and situs address for any prior U.S. 
headquarters' location for your company, going as far back as 1995, if 
different from the headquarters' location listed in response to 
question II.A.9.a;
    d. Going as far back as 1995, the date of acquisition and the situs 
address for the U.S. headquarters location of any entity that owned, or 
leased under an IRU agreement, Connections to five or more Locations in 
any MSA at the time you acquired the entity in a merger where you or 
your subsidiary was the surviving entity.
    e. The name of any Affiliated Company that owned, or leased under 
an IRU agreement, Connections to five or more Locations in any MSA at 
the time you became affiliated with the Affiliated Company, going as 
far back as 1995.
    f. For each Affiliated Company listed in response to question 
II.A.9.e, provide:
    i. The year of affiliation;

[[Page 67065]]

    ii. The situs address for each Affiliated Company's U.S. 
headquarters at the time of affiliation;
    iii. The year that the Affiliated Company established the situs 
address listed in response to question II.A.9.f.i for its U.S. 
headquarters; and
    iv. The year established and situs address for any prior U.S. 
headquarters' location designated by the Affiliated Company, going as 
far back as 1995 or the year of affiliation, whichever is most recent, 
if different from the headquarters' location listed in response to 
question II.A.9.f.i.
    II.A.10. Provide data, maps, information, marketing materials, and/
or documents identifying those geographic areas where you, or an 
Affiliated Company, advertised or marketed Dedicated Service over 
existing facilities, via leased facilities, or by building out new 
facilities as of December 31, 2010 and as of December 31, 2012, or 
planned to advertise or market such services within twenty-four months 
of those dates.
    II.A.11. Identify the five most recent Requests for Proposals 
(RFPs) for which you were selected as the winning bidder to provide 
each of the following: (a) Dedicated Services; (b) Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services; and, to the extent 
different from (a) or (b), (c) some other form of high-capacity data 
services to business customers. In addition, identify the five largest 
RFPs (by number of connections) for which you submitted an unsuccessful 
competitive bid between 2010 and 2012 for each of (a) Dedicated 
Services; (b) Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Services; 
and, to the extent different from (a) or (b), (c) some other form of 
high-capacity data services to business customers. For each RFP 
identified, provide a description of the RFP, the area covered, the 
price offered, and other competitively relevant information. Lastly, 
identify the business rules you rely upon to determine whether to 
submit a bid in response to an RFP.
Billing Information
    II.A.12. For all Dedicated Services provided using transmission 
paths that you (i) own; (ii) lease from another entity under an IRU 
agreement; or (iii) obtain as a UNE from an ILEC to provide a Dedicated 
Service, submit the following information by circuit element by circuit 
billed for each month from January 1 to December 31 for the years 2010 
and 2012.
    a. The closing date of the monthly billing cycle in mm/dd/yyyy 
format;
    b. The name and six-digit 499-A Filer ID of the customer, where 
applicable, or other unique ID if customer does not have a 499-A Filer 
ID;
    c. The Location ID from question II.A.4.a that is used to link the 
circuit elements to the terminating Location of the circuit (where 
applicable);
    d. The circuit ID common to all elements purchased in common for a 
particular circuit;
    e. The type of circuit (PBDS, or DS1 or DS3, etc.) and its 
bandwidth;
    f. A unique billing code for the circuit element (see question 
II.A.14);
    g. The number of units billed for this circuit element (note that 
the bandwidth of the circuit must not be entered here);
    h. The dollar amount of non-recurring charges billed for the first 
unit of this circuit element;
    i. The dollar amount of non-recurring charges billed for additional 
units of this circuit element (if different from the amount billed for 
the initial unit);
    j. The monthly recurring dollar charge for the first unit of the 
circuit element billed;
    k. The monthly recurring dollar charge for additional units (if 
different from the amount billed for the initial unit);
    l. Per unit charge for the circuit element;
    m. The total monthly dollar amount billed for the circuit element;
    n. The Term Commitment associated with this circuit in months;
    o. Indicate whether this circuit element is associated with a 
circuit that contributes to a Volume Commitment; and
    p. The adjustment ID (or multiple adjustment IDs) linking this 
circuit element to the unique out-of-cycle billing adjustments in 
question II.A.13.a (below) if applicable.
    II.A.13. For each adjustment, rebate, or true-up for billed 
Dedicated Services, provide the information requested below.
    a. A unique ID number for the billing adjustment, rebate, or true-
up (see question II.A.12.p above) and a unique ID number for the Tariff 
or contract from which the adjustment originates;
    b. The beginning date of the time period covered by the adjustment 
or true-up;
    c. The ending date of the time period covered by the adjustment or 
true-up;
    d. The scope of the billing adjustment, i.e., whether the 
adjustment applies to a single circuit element on a single circuit, 
more than one circuit element on a single circuit, more than one 
circuit element across multiple circuits, or an overall adjustment that 
applies to every circuit element on every circuit purchased by the 
customer;
    e. The dollar amount of the adjustment or true-up; and
    f. A brief description of the billing adjustment, rebate or true-
up, e.g., term discount, revenue target rebate, etc.
    II.A.14. For each unique billing code, please provide the following 
information below.
    a. The billing code for the circuit element;
    b. Select the phrase that best describes the circuit element from 
the list. Names of some common rate elements are shown on the 
generalized circuit diagram below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR08NO13.013

    i. Channel mileage facility, channel mileage, interoffice channel 
mileage, special transport (a transmission path between two serving 
wire centers associated with customer designated locations; a serving 
wire center and an

[[Page 67066]]

international or service area boundary point; a serving wire center and 
a hub, or similar type of connection);
    ii. Channel mileage termination, special transport termination (the 
termination of channel mileage facility or similar transmission path);
    iii. Channel termination, local distribution channel, special 
access line, customer port connection (Ethernet) (a transmission path 
between a customer designated location and the associated wire center);
    iv. Clear channel capability (not shown) (an arrangement which 
allows a customer to transport, for example, 1.536 Mbps of information 
on a 1.544 Mbps line rate with no constraint on the quantity or 
sequence of one and zero bits);
    v. Cross-connection (not shown) (semi-permanent switching between 
facilities, sometimes combined with multiplexing/demultiplexing);
    vi. Multiplexing (not shown) (channelizing a facility into 
individual services requiring a lower capacity or bandwidth); and
    vii. Class of service and/or committed information rate (not shown) 
(for Ethernet, the performance characteristics of the network and 
bandwidth available for a customer port connection).
    c. If none of the possible entries describes the circuit element, 
enter a short description.
Revenues, Terms and Conditions Information
    II.A.15. What were your Revenues from the sale of CBDS in 2010 and 
2012? For each year, report Revenues in total, separately by DS1, DS3, 
and other CBDS sales, and separately by customer category, i.e., sales 
to Providers and End Users.
    II.A.16. What were your Revenues from the sale of PBDS in 2010 and 
2012? For each year, report Revenues in total, separately by customer 
category, i.e., sales to Providers and End Users, and separately by 
bandwidth for the following categories:
    a. Less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    b. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    c. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    d. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 Gbps; and
    e. greater than 1 Gbps.
    II.A.17. What percentage of your Revenues from the sale of DS1, 
DS3, and PBDS services in 2012 were generated from an agreement or 
Tariff that contains a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment?
    II.A.18. If you offer Dedicated Services pursuant to an agreement 
or Tariff that contains either a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment or a 
Non-Rate Benefit, then explain how, if at all, those sales are 
distinguishable from similarly structured ILEC sales of DS1s, DS3s, 
and/or PBDS.
    II.A.19. Provide the business justification for the Term or Volume 
Commitments associated with any Tariff or agreement you offer or have 
in effect with a customer for the sale of Dedicated Services.
    B. ILECs must respond to the following:
    II.B.1. Indicate whether you are an Affiliated Company. If you are 
an Affiliated Company, you must identify the entities that provide and/
or purchase Dedicated Service with which you have an affiliation (name/
FRN).
Facilities Information
    II.B.2. Provide the total number of Locations to which you provided 
a Connection in your company's study areas during 2010 and during 2012 
where your company: (i) owned the Connection; or (ii) leased the 
Connection from another entity under an IRU agreement.
    II.B.3. Provide the information requested below for each Location 
to which your company had a Connection during 2010 and during 2012 that 
you (i) owned or (ii) leased from another entity under an IRU 
agreement:
    a. A unique ID for the Location;
    b. The actual situs address for the Location (i.e., land where the 
building or cell site is located);
    c. The geocode for the Location (i.e., latitude and longitude);
    d. The Location type (e.g., building, other man-made structure, 
cell site in or on a building, free-standing cell site, or a cell site 
on some other man-made structure like a water tower, billboard, etc.);
    e. Whether any of the Connection to the Location was provided using 
fiber;
    f. The total sold bandwidth of the Connection provided by you to 
the Location in Mbps;
    g. The total bandwidth to the Location sold by you as UNEs in the 
form of DS1s and/or DS3s;
    h. The total bandwidth to the Location sold directly by you to an 
End User;
    i. The total sold fixed wireless bandwidth provided by you to the 
Location; and
    j. The total bandwidth sold by you to any cell sites at the 
Location.
Billing Information
    II.B.4. For all Dedicated Services provided using transmission 
paths that you (i) own or (ii) lease from another entity under an IRU 
agreement, submit the following information by circuit element by 
circuit billed for each month from January 1 to December 31 for the 
years 2010 and 2012.
    a. The closing date of the monthly billing cycle in mm/dd/yyyy 
format;
    b. The name and six-digit 499A Filer ID of the customer, where 
applicable, or other unique ID if customer does not have a 499A Filer 
ID;
    c. The Location ID from question II.B.3.a that is used to link the 
circuit elements to the terminating Location of the circuit (where 
applicable);
    d. The circuit ID common to all elements purchased in common for a 
particular circuit;
    e. The type of circuit, (DS1 sold as a UNE, DS3 sold as a UNE, 
PBDS, non-UNE DS1s or DS3s, etc.) and the bandwidth of the circuit;
    f. The serving wire center/mileage rating point Common Language 
Location Identification (CLLI) of one end of the circuit (MRP1);
    g. The serving wire center/mileage rating point CLLI of the other 
end of the circuit (MRP2);
    h. The latitude of MRP1;
    i. The longitude of MRP1;
    j. The latitude of MRP2;
    k. The longitude of MRP2;
    l. End of the circuit (1 = MRP1 or 2 = MRP2) associated with this 
circuit element;
    m. The billing code for the circuit element (see question II.B.6);
    n. The density pricing zone for the circuit element;
    o. The number of units billed for this circuit element (note that 
the bandwidth of the circuit must not be entered here);
    p. The dollar amount of non-recurring charges billed for the first 
unit of this circuit element;
    q. The dollar amount of non-recurring charges billed for additional 
units of this circuit element (if different from the amount billed for 
the initial unit);
    r. The monthly recurring dollar charge for the first unit of the 
circuit element billed;
    s. The monthly recurring dollar charge for additional units (if 
different from the amount billed for the initial unit);
    t. Per unit charge for the circuit element;
    u. The total monthly dollar amount billed for the circuit element;
    v. The Term Commitment associated with this circuit in months;
    w. Indicate whether this circuit element is associated with a 
circuit that contributes to a Volume Commitment;
    x. Indicate whether this circuit element was purchased pursuant to 
a Contract-Based Tariff; and

[[Page 67067]]

    y. The adjustment ID (or multiple adjustment IDs) linking this 
circuit element to the unique out-of-cycle billing adjustments in 
question II.B.5.a (below) if applicable.
    II.B.5. For each adjustment, rebate, or true-up for billed 
Dedicated Services, provide the information requested below.
    a. A unique ID for the billing adjustment or true-up (see question 
II.B.4.y above);
    b. A unique ID number for the contract or Tariff from which the 
adjustment originates;
    c. The beginning date of the time period covered by the adjustment 
or true-up;
    d. The ending date of the time period covered by the adjustment or 
true-up;
    e. The scope of the billing adjustment, i.e., whether the 
adjustment applies to a single circuit element on a single circuit, 
more than one circuit element on a single circuit, more than one 
circuit element across multiple circuits, or an overall adjustment that 
applies to every circuit element on every circuit purchased by the 
customer;
    f. The dollar amount of the adjustment or true-up;
    g. Whether the adjustment is associated with a Term Commitment, and 
if so, the length of the term specified in the contract or Tariff 
necessary to achieve the rebate;
    h. Whether the adjustment is associated with a Volume Commitment, 
and if so, the number of circuits and/or dollar amount specified in the 
contract or Tariff necessary to achieve the rebate; and
    i. If the adjustment is for some other reason, a brief description 
of the reason for the adjustment.
    II.B.6. For each unique billing code, please provide the following 
information below.
    a. The billing code for the circuit element;
    b. The phrase that best describes the circuit element from the 
list. Names of some common rate elements are shown on the generalized 
circuit diagram below:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR08NO13.014

    i. Channel mileage facility, channel mileage, interoffice channel 
mileage, special transport (a transmission path between two serving 
wire centers associated with customer designated locations; a serving 
wire center and an international or service area boundary point; a 
serving wire center and a hub, or similar type of connection);
    ii. Channel mileage termination, special transport termination (the 
termination of channel mileage facility or similar transmission path);
    iii. Channel termination, local distribution channel, special 
access line, customer port connection (Ethernet) (a transmission path 
between a customer designated location and the associated wire center);
    iv. Clear channel capability (not shown) (an arrangement which 
allows a customer to transport, for example, 1.536 Mbps of information 
on a 1.544 Mbps line rate with no constraint on the quantity or 
sequence of one and zero bits);
    v. Cross-connection (not shown) (semi-permanent switching between 
facilities, sometimes combined with multiplexing/demultiplexing);
    vi. Multiplexing (not shown) (channelizing a facility into 
individual services requiring a lower capacity or bandwidth); and
    vii. Class of service and/or committed information rate (not shown) 
(for Ethernet, the performance characteristics of the network and 
bandwidth available for a customer port connection).
    c. If none of the possible entries describes the rate element, 
enter a short description.
    II.B.7. List the CLLI code for each one of your wire centers that 
was subject to price cap regulation as of December 31, 2010 and as of 
December 31, 2012, i.e., those wire centers in your incumbent territory 
where the Commission had not granted you pricing flexibility. For those 
MSAs and Non-MSAs where the Commission granted you Phase I or Phase II 
Pricing Flexibility as of December 31, 2010 and as of December 31, 
2012, list the CLLI codes for the wire centers associated with each MSA 
and Non-MSA for each year, the name of the relevant MSA and Non-MSA for 
each year, and the level of pricing flexibility granted for the MSA and 
Non-MSA, i.e., Phase I and/or Phase II Pricing Flexibility.
Revenues, Terms and Conditions Information
    II.B.8. What were your Revenues from the sale of CBDS services in 
2010 and 2012? For each year, report Revenues in total, separately by 
DS1, DS3, and other CBDS sales, and separately by customer category, 
i.e., sales to Competitive Providers and End Users.
    II.B.9. What were your Revenues from the sale of PBDS services in 
2010 and 2012? For each year, report Revenues in total, separately by 
customer category, i.e., sales to Competitive Providers and End Users, 
and separately by bandwidth for the following categories:
    a. Less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    b. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    c. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    d. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 gigabyte per 
second (Gbps); and
    e. greater than 1 Gbps.
    II.B.10. What were your Revenues from the One Month Term Only Rate 
charged for DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS services in 2010 and 2012? For each 
year, report Revenues in total, separately by DS1, DS3, and PBDS sales 
as applicable, and separately by customer category, i.e., sales to 
Competitive Providers and End Users.
    II.B.11. How many customers were purchasing DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS 
services pursuant to your One Month Term Only Rates as of December 31, 
2012? Report customer numbers in total, separately for DS1, DS3, and 
PBDS

[[Page 67068]]

services as applicable, and separately by customer category, i.e., the 
number of DS1, DS3, and PBDS service customers that were Competitive 
Providers and End Users.
    II.B.12. Separately list all Tariff Plans and Contract-Based 
Tariffs that can be applied to the purchase of DS1, DS3 and/or PBDS 
services and provide the information requested below for each plan.
    a. This plan is a:

[square] Tariff Plan [square] Contract-Based Tariff (select one)

    b. Plan name:
    c. Tariff and Section Number(s):
    d. This plan contains:

[square] Term Commitment(s) [square] Volume Commitment(s)

[square] Non-Rate Benefit option(s) (select all that apply)

    e. If the plan contains options for Non-Rate Benefits, explain the 
available Non-Rate Benefits.
    f. This plan can be applied to the purchase of:

[square] DS1 services [square] DS3 services [square] PBDS [square] 
Other (select all that apply)

    g. In what geographic areas is this plan available, e.g., 
nationwide or certain MSAs?

i. Is plan available in [square] MSAs, [square] Non-MSAs, or [square] 
both types of areas?
ii. If plan is available in Non-MSAs, indicate the states where the 
Non-MSA areas are located?
h. To receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan, must the 
customer make a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment?

[square] Yes [square] No

    i. Do purchases of DS1 or DS3 services in areas outside of the 
study area(s) where you are subject to price cap regulation (e.g., 
purchases from an Affiliated Company that is a CLEC) count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    j. Do DS1 or DS3 purchases in areas where you are subject to price 
cap regulation and where pricing flexibility has not been granted count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    k. Do DS1 or DS3 purchases in areas where you have been granted 
Phase I Pricing Flexibility count towards meeting any Volume Commitment 
to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    l. Do DS1 or DS3 purchases in areas where you have been granted 
Phase II Pricing Flexibility count towards meeting any Volume 
Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    m. Do non-tariffed PBDS purchases by the customer count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    n. Do tariffed PBDS purchases by the customer count towards meeting 
any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under 
this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    o. Do purchases by the customer for services other than DS1s, DS3s, 
and PBDS count towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a 
discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment)

    p. Is the discount or Non-Rate Benefit available under this plan 
conditioned on the customer limiting its purchase of UNEs, e.g., 
customer must keep its purchase of UNEs below a certain percentage of 
the customer's total spend?

[square] Yes [square] No

    q. What were your Revenues from the provision of Dedicated Service 
under this plan in 2010 and in 2012?
    r. What is the business justification for any Term or Volume 
Commitments associated with this plan?
    s. How many customers were subscribed to this plan as of December 
31, 2012? Report customer numbers in total, separately for DS1, DS3, 
and PBDS services as applicable, and separately by customer category, 
i.e., the number of DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS customers that were 
Competitive Providers and End Users.
    i. If there were five or fewer customers subscribed to this plan as 
of December 31, 2012, indicate the number of subscribers to this plan 
that were new customers (as opposed to an existing or prior customer) 
at the time they subscribed to this plan.
    ii. For those subscribers to this plan that were existing or prior 
customers at the time they committed to purchasing services under this 
plan, explain how the purchase commitment made under this plan compares 
to the customer's previous purchase commitment. For example, indicate 
what percentage of the previous purchase commitment, the new purchase 
commitment equals.
    t. Of those customers subscribed as of December 31, 2012, how many 
in 2012 failed to meet any Volume Commitment or Term Commitment 
required to retain a discount or Non-Rate Benefit they originally 
agreed to when entering into this plan?
    II.B.13. Indicate whether you have any non-tariffed agreement with 
an End User or Competitive Provider that, directly or indirectly, 
provides a discount or a Non-Rate Benefit on the purchase of tariffed 
DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS, restricts the ability of the End User or 
Competitive Provider to obtain UNEs, or negatively affects the ability 
of the End User or Competitive Provider to purchase Dedicated Services. 
If so, identify each agreement, including the parties to the 
agreements, the effective date, end date, and a summary of the relevant 
provisions.
    C. Certain Entities that provide Best Efforts Business Broadband 
Internet Access Services must respond to the following:
    II.C.1. If you provide Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet 
Access Services to 15,000 or more customers or 1,500 or more business 
broadband customers in areas where the ILEC is subject to price cap 
regulation, then answer the following questions:
    a. Did you submit data in connection with the State Broadband 
Initiative (SBI) Grant Program for 2010?

[square] Yes [square] No

    b. Did you submit data in connection with the SBI Grant Program for 
2012?

[square] Yes [square] No

    If you answered ``no'' to questions II.C.1.a and II.C.1.b, then you 
do not need to answer any further questions in this section.
    c. Did the data you submitted in connection with the SBI Grant 
Program in 2010 accurately and completely identify the areas in which 
you offered Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Services 
and exclude those areas where you did not offer such services as of 
December 31, 2010?

[square] Yes [square] No

    i. If yes, then provide the list of prices for those Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services that you were marketing in 
each census

[[Page 67069]]

block submitted in connection with the SBI Grant Program as of December 
31, 2010. If there is a price variation within your service footprint, 
indicate which prices are associated with which census blocks.
    ii. If no, then provide a list of all the census blocks in which 
you offered Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Services as 
of December 31, 2010, and a list of the prices for those Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services that you were marketing in 
each census block as of December 31, 2010. If there is a price 
variation within your service footprint, indicate which prices are 
associated with which census blocks.
    d. Did the data you submitted in connection with the SBI Grant 
Program in 2012 accurately and completely identify the areas in which 
you offered Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Services 
and exclude those areas where you did not offer such services as of 
December 31, 2012?

[square] Yes [square] No

    i. If yes, then provide the list of prices for those Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services that you were marketing in 
each census block submitted in connection with the SBI Grant Program as 
of December 31, 2012. If there is a price variation within your service 
footprint, indicate which prices are associated with which census 
blocks.
    ii. If no, then provide a list of all the census blocks in which 
you offered Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet Access Services as 
of December 31, 2012, and a list of the prices for those Best Efforts 
Business Broadband Internet Access Services that you were marketing in 
each census block as of December 31, 2012. If there is a price 
variation within your service footprint, indicate which prices are 
associated with which census blocks.
    D. All Providers must respond to the following:
    II.D.1. Describe your company's short term and long-range 
promotional and advertising strategies and objectives for winning new--
or retaining current--customers for Dedicated Services. In your 
description, please describe the size (e.g., companies with 500 
employees or less, etc.), geographic scope (e.g., national, southeast, 
Chicago, etc.), and type of customers your company targets or plans to 
target through these strategies.
    II.D.2. Identify where your company's policies are recorded on the 
following Dedicated Service-related processes: (a) Initiation of 
service; (b) service Upgrades; and (c) service Disconnections. For 
instance, identify where your company records recurring and non-
recurring charges associated with the processes listed above. If 
recorded in a Tariff, provide the specific Tariff section(s). If these 
policies are recorded in documents other than Tariffs, list those 
documents and state whether they are publicly available. If they are 
publicly available, explain how to find them. For documents that are 
not publicly available, state whether they are conveyed to customers 
orally or in writing.
    E. Purchasers that are mobile wireless service providers must 
respond to the following:
    II.E.1. How many cell sites do you have on your network?
    II.E.2. Provide the information requested below for each cell site 
on your network as of December 31, 2010 and as of December 31, 2012.
    a. A unique ID for the cell site;
    b. The actual situs address of the cell site (i.e., land where the 
cell site is located) if the cell site is located in or on a building;
    c. The geocode for the cell site (i.e., latitude and longitude);
    d. The CLLI code of the incumbent LEC wire center that serves the 
cell site, where applicable;
    e. Whether the cell site is in or on a building, is a free-standing 
cell site, or is on some other type of man-made structure, e.g., a 
water tower, billboard, etc.;
    f. If the cell site is served by a CBDS, indicate the equivalent 
number of DS1s used;
    g. If the cell site is served by a PBDS, indicate the total 
bandwidth of the circuit or circuits in Mbps;
    h. If the cell site is served by a wireless Connection, indicate 
the total bandwidth of the circuit or circuits in Mbps;
    i. The name of the Provider(s) that supplies your Connection to the 
cell site; and
    j. If you self-provide a Connection to the cell site, the 
provisioned bandwidth of that self-provided Connection.
Expenditures Information
    II.E.3. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on Dedicated Services for 2010 and 2012? For each year, 
report expenditures in total, separately for CBDS and PBDS purchases, 
and separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers.
    II.E.4. Provide your company's expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, for DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from ILECs pursuant to 
a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012. For each of the following categories, 
report expenditures for each year in total and separately for DS1s, 
DS3s and PBDS:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at One Month Term Only Rates;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs;
    e. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans that contained 
a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    f. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans that contained 
a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the One Month 
Term Only Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    For purposes of calculating the percentages described above, an 
example would be a Tariff Plan that requires a purchase of 20 DS1s and 
10 DS3s and generates expenditures of $2,000 for calendar-year 2012. If 
those same circuits were purchased at One Month Term Only Rates of $100 
per DS1 and $200 per DS3, then total expenditures would instead be 
$4,000. Since the Tariff Plan under this scenario generated 50% of the 
expenditures that would be generated from One Month Term Only Rates, 
the discount would be 50%.
    g. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs that 
contained a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment; and
    h. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs that 
contained a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1 and DS3 totals if 
available), indicate the average discount from the One Month Term Only 
Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.E.4.f.i.
    i. What percentage of your expenditures in 2012 were subject to a 
Term Commitment of five or more years?
    II.E.5. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from Competitive 
Providers pursuant to a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012? Report expenditures 
in total and separately for DS1s, DS3s and PBDS, as applicable, for the 
following categories for each year:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at One Month Term Only Rates;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariffs that contained a 
Term

[[Page 67070]]

Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariffs that contained a 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the One Month 
Term Only Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.E.4.f.i
    e. What percentage of your expenditures in 2012 were subject to a 
Term Commitment of five or more years?
    II.E.6. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from ILECs and 
Competitive Providers pursuant to an agreement (not a Tariff) in 2010 
and in 2012? Report expenditures in total, separately for purchases 
from ILECs and Competitive Providers, and separately for DS1s, DS3s and 
PBDS, as applicable, for the following categories for each year:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at a non-discounted rate;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under a non-tariffed agreement 
that contained a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under a non-tariffed agreement 
that contained a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the non-
discounted rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.E.4.f.i
    II.E.7. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on PBDS purchased under a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012?
    a. Separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers 
for the following service bandwidth categories:
    i. less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    ii. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    iii. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    iv. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 Gbps; or
    v. greater than 1 Gbps.
    II.E.8. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on non-tariffed PBDS in 2010 and in 2012?
    a. Separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers 
for the following service bandwidth categories:
    i. less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    ii. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    iii. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    iv. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 Gbps; or
    v. greater than 1 Gbps.
Terms and Conditions Information
    II.E.9. Explain whether the terms and conditions of any Tariff or 
contract to which you are a party for the purchase of Dedicated 
Services or the policies of any of your Providers constrain your 
ability to:
    a. Decrease your purchases from your current Provider(s);
    b. Purchase services from another Provider currently operating in 
the geographic areas in which you purchase services;
    c. Purchase non-tariffed services, such as Ethernet services, from 
your current Provider of tariffed DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS services or 
from other Providers operating in the geographic areas in which you 
purchase tariffed services;
    d. Contract with Providers that are considering entering the 
geographic areas in which you purchase tariffed services;
    e. Move circuits, for example, moving your DS1 and/or DS3 End-User 
Channel Terminations to connect to another Transport Provider; or
    f. Otherwise obtain Dedicated Services or change Providers.
    Relevant terms and conditions, among others, may include: (a) Early 
termination penalties; (b) shortfall provisions; (c) overlapping/
supplemental discounts plans with different termination dates; (d) 
requirements to include all services, including new facilities, under a 
Tariff Plan or Contract-Based Tariff; or (e) requiring purchases in 
multiple geographic areas to obtain maximum discounts.
    In your answer, highlight contracts where you contend that a term 
or condition is a particularly onerous constraint by comparison with 
more typical provisions in other contracts. Also, at a minimum, list: 
(a) The Provider and indicate whether the Provider is an ILEC or a 
Competitive Provider; (b) a description of the term or condition; (c) 
the geographic area in which the services are provided; (d) the name of 
the vendor providing the service; and (e) where relevant, the specific 
Tariff number(s) and section(s), or if the policy at issue is recorded 
in documents other than Tariffs, list those documents and how you 
obtained them.
    If you allege that a term, condition, or Provider's policy 
negatively affects your ability to obtain Dedicated Services, state 
whether you have brought a complaint to the Commission, a state 
commission or court about this issue and the outcome. If you have not 
brought a complaint, explain why not.
    II.E.10. If you purchase, or purchased, Transport Service and End 
User Channel Terminations from the same Provider, explain your 
experience with changing Transport Service from one Provider to another 
between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012 while keeping your End 
User Channel Terminations with the original Provider. Where 
appropriate, identify the Provider(s) in your responses below and 
indicate whether they are an ILEC or a Competitive Provider.
    a. How many times did you change Transport Service while keeping 
your End User Channel Terminations with the original Provider? An 
estimate of the number of circuits moved to a new Transport Provider, 
or the number of such changes requested for each year, is sufficient.
    b. What was the length of time, on average, it took for the 
original Provider to complete the process of connecting your last-mile 
End-user Channel Terminations to another Transport Provider? An 
estimate is sufficient.
    c. Were you given the opportunity to negotiate the amount of time 
it would take to complete the process of connecting your End User 
Channel Terminations to another Transport Provider on a case-by-case 
basis? In answering this question, also describe and provide citations 
to the ILEC's or Competitive Provider's policies, rules or, where 
relevant, Tariff provisions, if known, explaining the transition 
process.
    d. How did connecting to a new Transport Provider impact the rate 
you paid for the End User Channel Terminations you continued to 
purchase from the original Provider?
    e. Did connecting to a new Transport Provider typically impact the 
rate you continued to pay for Transport Service from the original 
Provider while the change in Transport Providers remained pending? If 
so, how? What was the average percentage change in rates? For example, 
did you ever pay a One Month Term Only Rate during that time?
    II.E.11. Describe any circumstances since January 1, 2010, in which 
you have purchased circuits pursuant to a Tariff, solely for the 
purpose of meeting a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment required for a 
discount or Non-Rate Benefit from your Provider (i.e., you would not 
have purchased the circuit but for the requirement that you meet a 
Volume Commitment required for a

[[Page 67071]]

discount or Non-Rate Benefit from your Provider). In your description, 
provide at least one example, which at a minimum, lists:
    a. The name of the Provider providing the circuits at issue;
    b. A description of the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    c. The Tariff and section number(s) of the specific terms and 
conditions described;
    d. The number of circuits you would not have purchased but for the 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment requirement to receive a discount or 
Non-Rate Benefit;
    i. Of the circuits reported in II.E.11.d, how many did you not use 
at all?
    e. A comparison of the dollar amount of the unnecessary circuit(s) 
purchased versus the dollar amount of penalties your company would have 
had to pay under the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment had it not 
purchased and/or maintained the circuit(s), and a description of how 
that comparison was calculated.
    f. How many circuits were activated under the identified Tariff 
plan and not used when you initially entered into the plan? What were 
these unused circuits as a percent of the total circuits currently 
purchased under this Tariff plan? Indicate the percent of the total 
circuits currently purchased under this Tariff plan that exceed your 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment.
    g. For the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment, indicate whether you 
are able to buy any DS1s or DS3s from the Provider outside of the 
identified Tariff plan, or are you required to make all purchases from 
the Provider pursuant to the identified Tariff plan?
    II.E.12. For each year for the past five years, state the number of 
times and in what geographic area(s) you have switched from purchasing 
End-User Channel Terminations from one Provider of Dedicated Services 
to another.
    II.E.13. Explain the circumstances since January 1, 2010 under 
which you have paid One Month Term Only Rates for DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS 
services and the impact, if any, it had on your business and your 
customers. In your response, indicate any general rules you follow, if 
any, concerning the maximum number of circuits and maximum amount of 
time you will pay One Month Term Only Rates, and your business 
rationale for any such rules.
    II.E.14. Separately list all Tariffs under which your company 
purchases DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS and provide the information requested 
below for each plan.
    a. This plan is a:

[squ] Tariff Plan [squ] Contract-Based Tariff (select one)

    b. Plan name:
    c. Provider name:
    d. Tariff and Section Number(s):
    e. Tariff type:

[squ] Interstate [squ] Intrastate

    f. This plan contains:

[squ] Term Commitment(s) [square] Volume Commitment(s)

[squ] Non-Rate Benefit option(s) (select all that apply)

    g. If the plan contains Non-Rate Benefits, identify the Non-Rate 
Benefits that were relevant to your decision to purchase services under 
this plan.

    h. This plan can be applied to the purchase of:

[squ] DS1 services [square] DS3 services [squ] PBDS [squ] Other (select 
all that apply)

    i. In what geographic areas do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS 
under this plan, e.g., nationwide, certain states, or certain MSAs?
    j. To receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan, does 
your company make a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment?

[squ] Yes [square] No

    k. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3, or tariffed PBDS purchases 
your company makes outside the study area(s) of the ILEC (e.g., 
purchases from an Affiliated Company of the ILEC that is providing out-
of-region service as a CLEC) count towards meeting any Volume 
Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [squ] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an ILEC 
plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas outside the study 
area(s) of the ILEC, do you purchase these DS1s, DS3s and/or tariffed 
PBDS?

    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the discounts or Non-Rate Benefits received under this plan? 
In your response, indicate whether the Provider that you would have 
purchased from has Connections serving that geographic area and the 
Provider's name.

    l. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3, and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in price cap areas where the 
Commission has not granted the ILEC pricing flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, then identify the price cap areas where you 
purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count towards meeting 
any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under 
this plan?
    m. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3 and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in areas where the 
Commission has granted Phase I Pricing Flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas subject to pricing 
flexibility do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan?
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the requirements of the Tariff Plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    n. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3 and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in areas where the 
Commission has granted Phase II Pricing Flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[squ] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an ILEC 
plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas subject to pricing 
flexibility do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan?
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the requirements of the Tariff Plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    o. If this is an ILEC plan, do non-tariffed PBDS purchases your 
company makes from this ILEC count towards meeting any Volume 
Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas do you purchase 
non-

[[Page 67072]]

tariffed PBDS that counts towards meeting any Volume Commitment to 
receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan.
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased non-tariffed PBDS from a different Provider, if at 
all, had it not been for the requirements of the plan? In your 
response, indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased 
from has Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's 
name.
    p. If this is an ILEC plan, do purchases you make for services 
other than DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS from this ILEC count towards meeting 
any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under 
this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, identify the other services purchased and 
the geographic areas where you purchase these services that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan.
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased those other services from a different Provider, 
had it not been for the requirements of the plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    q. Is the discount or Non-Rate Benefit available under this plan 
conditioned on the customer limiting its purchase of UNEs, e.g., the 
customer must keep its purchase of UNEs below a certain percentage of 
the customer's total spend? If yes, then provide additional details 
about the condition.
    II.E.15. Indicate whether you have any non-tariffed agreement with 
an ILEC that, directly or indirectly, provides a discount or a Non-Rate 
Benefit on the purchase of tariffed DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS services, 
restricts your ability to obtain UNEs, or negatively affects your 
ability to purchase Dedicated Services. If so, identify each agreement, 
including the parties to the agreement, the effective date, end date, 
and a summary of the relevant provisions.
    F. Purchasers that are not mobile wireless service providers must 
respond to the following:
    II.F.1. What is the principal nature of your business, e.g., are 
you a CLEC, cable system operator, fixed wireless service provider, 
wireless Internet service provider, interconnected VoIP service 
provider, etc.?
Expenditures Information
    II.F.2. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on Dedicated Services for 2010 and 2012? For each year, 
report expenditures in total, separately for CBDS and PBDS purchases, 
and separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers.
    II.F.3. Provide your company's expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, for DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from ILECs pursuant to 
a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012. For each of the following categories, 
report expenditures for each year in total and separately for DS1s, 
DS3s and PBDS:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at One Month Term Only Rates;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs;
    e. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans that contained 
a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    f. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariff Plans that contained 
a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the One Month 
Term Only Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    For purposes of calculating the percentages described above, an 
example would be a Tariff Plan that requires a purchase of 20 DS1s and 
10 DS3s and generates expenditures of $2,000 for calendar-year 2012. If 
those same circuits were purchased at One Month Term Only Rates of $100 
per DS1 and $200 per DS3, then total expenditures would instead be 
$4,000. Since the Tariff Plan under this scenario generated 50% of the 
expenditures that would be generated from One Month Term Only Rates, 
the discount would be 50%.
    g. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs that 
contained a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment; and
    h. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Contract-Based Tariffs that 
contained a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1 and DS3 totals if 
available), indicate the average discount from the One Month Term Only 
Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.F.3.f.i.
    i. What percentage of your expenditures in 2012 were subject to a 
Term Commitment of five or more years?
    II.F.4. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from Competitive 
Providers pursuant to a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012? Report expenditures 
in total and separately for DS1s, DS3s and PBDS, as applicable, for the 
following categories for each year:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at One Month Term Only Rates;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariffs that contained a 
Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under Tariffs that contained a 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the One Month 
Term Only Rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.F.3.f.i
    e. What percentage of your expenditures in 2012 were subject to a 
Term Commitment of five or more years?
    II.F.5. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS purchased from ILECs and 
Competitive Providers pursuant to an agreement (not a Tariff) in 2010 
and in 2012? Report expenditures in total, separately for purchases 
from ILECs and Competitive Providers, and separately for DS1s, DS3s and 
PBDS, as applicable, for the following categories for each year:
    a. All DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS;
    b. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased at a non-discounted rate;
    c. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under a non-tariffed agreement 
that contained a Term Commitment but not a Volume Commitment;
    d. DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS purchased under a non-tariffed agreement 
that contained a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    i. Of the total (and for the separate DS1, DS3, and PBDS totals 
where applicable), indicate the average discount from the non-
discounted rate incorporated in the expenditures.
    An example of how to calculate this percentage can be found at 
question II.F.3.f.i
    II.F.6. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on PBDS purchased under a Tariff in 2010 and in 2012?
    a. Separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers 
for the following service bandwidth categories:

[[Page 67073]]

    i. less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    ii. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    iii. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    iv. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 Gbps; or
    v. greater than 1 Gbps.
    II.F.7. What were your expenditures, i.e., dollar volume of 
purchases, on non-tariffed PBDS in 2010 and in 2012?
    a. Separately for purchases from ILECs and Competitive Providers 
for the following service bandwidth categories:
    i. less than or equal to 1.5 Mbps;
    ii. greater than 1.5, but less than or equal to 50 Mbps;
    iii. greater than 50, but less than or equal to 100 Mbps;
    iv. greater than 100, but less than or equal to 1 Gbps; or
    v. greater than 1 Gbps.
Terms and Conditions Information
    II.F.8. Explain whether the terms and conditions of any Tariff or 
contract to which you are a party for the purchase of Dedicated 
Services or the policies of any of your Providers constrain your 
ability to:
    a. Decrease your purchases from your current Provider(s);
    b. Purchase services from another Provider currently operating in 
the geographic areas in which you purchase services;
    c. Purchase non-tariffed services, such as Ethernet services, from 
your current Provider of tariffed DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS services or 
from other Providers operating in the geographic areas in which you 
purchase tariffed services;
    d. Contract with Providers that are considering entering the 
geographic areas in which you purchase tariffed services;
    e. Move circuits, for example, moving your DS1 and/or DS3 End-User 
Channel Terminations to connect to another Transport Provider; or
    f. Otherwise obtain Dedicated Services or change Providers.
    Relevant terms and conditions, among others, may include: (a) Early 
termination penalties; (b) shortfall provisions; (c) overlapping/
supplemental discounts plans with different termination dates; (d) 
requirements to include all services, including new facilities, under a 
Tariff Plan or Contract-Based Tariff; or (e) requiring purchases in 
multiple geographic areas to obtain maximum discounts. In your answer, 
highlight contracts where you contend that a term or condition is a 
particularly onerous constraint by comparison with more typical 
provisions in other contracts. Also, at a minimum, list: (a) The 
Provider and indicate whether the Provider is an ILEC or a Competitive 
Provider; (b) a description of the term or condition; (c) the 
geographic area in which the services are provided; (d) the name of the 
vendor providing the service; and (e) where relevant, the specific 
Tariff number(s) and section(s), or if the policy at issue is recorded 
in documents other than Tariffs, list those documents and how you 
obtained them.
    If you allege that a term, condition, or Provider's policy 
negatively affects your ability to obtain Dedicated Services, state 
whether you have brought a complaint to the Commission, a state 
commission or court about this issue and the outcome. If you have not 
brought a complaint, explain why not.
    II.F.9. If you purchase, or purchased, Transport Service and End 
User Channel Terminations from the same Provider, explain your 
experience with changing Transport Service from one Provider to another 
between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012 while keeping your End 
User Channel Terminations with the original Provider. Where 
appropriate, identify the Provider(s) in your responses below and 
indicate whether they are an ILEC or a Competitive Provider.
    a. How many times did you change Transport Service while keeping 
your End User Channel Terminations with the original Provider? An 
estimate of the number of circuits moved to a new Transport Provider, 
or the number of such changes requested for each year, is sufficient.
    b. What was the length of time, on average, it took for the 
original Provider to complete the process of connecting your last-mile 
End-user Channel Terminations to another Transport Provider? An 
estimate is sufficient.
    c. Were you given the opportunity to negotiate the amount of time 
it would take to complete the process of connecting your End User 
Channel Terminations to another Transport Provider on a case-by-case 
basis? In answering this question, also describe and provide citations 
to the ILEC's or Competitive Provider's policies, rules or, where 
relevant, Tariff provisions, if known, explaining the transition 
process.
    d. How did connecting to a new Transport Provider impact the rate 
you paid for the End User Channel Terminations you continued to 
purchase from the original Provider?
    e. Did connecting to a new Transport Provider typically impact the 
rate you continued to pay for Transport Service from the original 
Provider while the change in Transport Providers remained pending? If 
so, how? What was the average percentage change in rates? For example, 
did you ever pay a One Month Term Only Rate during that time?
    II.F.10. Describe any circumstances since January 1, 2010, in which 
you have purchased circuits pursuant to a Tariff, solely for the 
purpose of meeting a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment required for a 
discount or Non-Rate Benefit from your Provider (i.e., you would not 
have purchased the circuit but for the requirement that you meet a 
Volume Commitment required for a discount or Non-Rate Benefit from your 
Provider). In your description, provide at least one example, which at 
a minimum, lists:
    a. The name of the Provider providing the circuits at issue;
    b. A description of the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment;
    c. The Tariff and section number(s) of the specific terms and 
conditions described;
    d. The number of circuits you would not have purchased but for the 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment requirement to receive a discount or 
Non-Rate Benefit;
    i. Of the circuits reported in II.F.10.d, how many did you not use 
at all?
    e. A comparison of the dollar amount of the unnecessary circuit(s) 
purchased versus the dollar amount of penalties your company would have 
had to pay under the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment had it not 
purchased and/or maintained the circuit(s), and a description of how 
that comparison was calculated.
    f. How many circuits were activated under the identified Tariff 
plan and not used when you initially entered into the plan? What were 
these unused circuits as a percent of the total circuits currently 
purchased under this Tariff plan? Indicate the percent of the total 
circuits currently purchased under this Tariff plan that exceed your 
Prior Purchase-Based Commitment.
    g. For the Prior Purchase-Based Commitment, indicate whether you 
are able to buy any DS1s or DS3s from the Provider outside of the 
identified Tariff plan, or are you required to make all purchases from 
the Provider pursuant to the identified Tariff plan?
    II.F.11. For each year for the past five years, state the number of 
times and in what geographic area(s) you have switched from purchasing 
End-User Channel Terminations from one Provider of Dedicated Services 
to another.
    II.F.12. Explain the circumstances since January 1, 2010 under 
which you have paid One Month Term Only Rates for DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS 
services and the impact, if any, it had on your

[[Page 67074]]

business and your customers. In your response, indicate any general 
rules you follow, if any, concerning the maximum number of circuits and 
maximum amount of time you will pay One Month Term Only Rates, and your 
business rationale for any such rules.
    II.F.13. Separately list all Tariffs under which your company 
purchases DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS and provide the information requested 
below for each plan.

    a. This plan is a:

[square] Tariff Plan [square] Contract-Based Tariff (select one)

    b. Plan name:
    c. Provider name:
    d. Tariff and Section Number(s):
    e. Tariff type:

[square] Interstate [square] Intrastate

    f. This plan contains:

[square] Term Commitment(s) [square] Volume Commitment(s)
[square] Non-Rate Benefit option(s) (select all that apply)

    g. If the plan contains Non-Rate Benefits, identify the Non-Rate 
Benefits that were relevant to your decision to purchase services under 
this plan.
    h. This plan can be applied to the purchase of:

[square] DS1 services [square] DS3 services [square] PBDS [square] 
Other (select all that apply)

    i. In what geographic areas do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or PBDS 
under this plan, e.g., nationwide, certain states, or certain MSAs?
    j. To receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan, does 
your company make a Prior Purchase-Based Commitment?

[square] Yes [square] No

    k. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3 or tariffed PBDS purchases 
your company makes outside the study area(s) of the ILEC (e.g., 
purchases from an Affiliated Company of the ILEC that is providing out-
of-region service as a CLEC) count towards meeting any Volume 
Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)
    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas outside the study 
area(s) of the ILEC, do you purchase these DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed 
PBDS?
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the discounts or Non-Rate Benefits received under this plan? 
In your response, indicate whether the Provider that you would have 
purchased from has Connections serving that geographic area and the 
Provider's name.
    l. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3, and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in price cap areas where the 
Commission has not granted the ILEC pricing flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, then identify the price cap areas where you 
purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count towards meeting 
any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under 
this plan?
    m. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3, and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in areas where the 
Commission has granted Phase I Pricing Flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)
    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas subject to pricing 
flexibility do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan?
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the requirements of the Tariff Plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    n. If this is an ILEC plan, do DS1, DS3, and/or tariffed PBDS 
purchases your company makes from the ILEC in areas where the 
Commission has granted Phase II Pricing Flexibility count towards 
meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit 
under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas subject to pricing 
flexibility do you purchase DS1s, DS3s, and/or tariffed PBDS that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan?

    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased from a different Provider, if at all, had it not 
been for the requirements of the Tariff Plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    o. If this is an ILEC plan, do non-tariffed PBDS purchases your 
company makes from this ILEC count towards meeting any Volume 
Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)

    i. If you answered yes, in what geographic areas do you purchase 
non-tariffed PBDS that counts towards meeting any Volume Commitment to 
receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under this plan.
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased non-tariffed PBDS from a different Provider, if at 
all, had it not been for the requirements of the plan? In your 
response, indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased 
from has Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's 
name.
    p. If this is an ILEC plan, do purchases you make for services 
other than DS1s, DS3s, and PBDS from this ILEC count towards meeting 
any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate Benefit under 
this plan?

[square] Yes [square] No [square] N/A (no Volume Commitment, not an 
ILEC plan)
    i. If you answered yes, identify the other services purchased and 
the geographic areas where you purchase these services that count 
towards meeting any Volume Commitment to receive a discount or Non-Rate 
Benefit under this plan.
    ii. For each geographic area identified, state whether your company 
would have purchased those other services from a different Provider, 
had it not been for the requirements of the plan? In your response, 
indicate whether the Provider that you would have purchased from has 
Connections serving that geographic area and the Provider's name.
    q. Is the discount or Non-Rate Benefit available under this plan 
conditioned on the customer limiting its purchase of UNEs, e.g., the 
customer must keep its purchase of UNEs below a certain percentage of 
the customer's total spend? If yes, then provide additional details 
about the condition.
    II.F.14. Indicate whether you have any non-tariffed agreement with 
an ILEC that, directly or indirectly, provides a discount or a Non-Rate 
Benefit on the purchase of tariffed DS1, DS3, and/or PBDS services, 
restricts your ability to obtain UNEs, or negatively affects your 
ability to purchase Dedicated Services.

[[Page 67075]]

If so, identify each agreement, including the parties to the agreement, 
the effective date, end date, and a summary of the relevant provisions.
    G. Non-Providers, Non-Purchasers, and other entities not covered by 
the scope of this inquiry but that were instructed to respond to this 
data collection must respond to the following:
    II.G.1. If you must respond to this data collection because you 
were required to file the FCC Form 477 to report the provision of 
``broadband connections to end user locations'' for Year 2012 but are 
not (a) a Provider or a Purchaser as defined in this data collection or 
(b) an entity that provides Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet 
Access Services to 15,000 or more customers or 1,500 or more business 
broadband customers in areas where the ILEC is subject to price cap 
regulation, then indicate as such below and complete the certification 
accompanying this data collection.

[square] I am not a Provider.
[square] I am not a Purchaser.
[square] I do not provide Best Efforts Business Broadband Internet 
Access Services to15,000 or more customers or 1,500 or more business 
broadband customers in areas where the ILEC is subject to price cap 
regulation.

    (select all that apply)
CERTIFICATION
    I have examined the response and certify that, to the best of my 
knowledge, all statements of fact, data, and information contained 
therein are true and correct.

Signature:-------------------------------------------------------------

Printed Name:----------------------------------------------------------

Title:-----------------------------------------------------------------

Date:------------------------------------------------------------------

    * Respondents are reminded that failure to comply with these data 
reporting requirements may subject them to monetary forfeitures of up 
to $150,000 for each violation or each day of a continuing violation, 
up to a maximum of $1,500,000 for any single act or failure to act that 
is a continuing violation. False statements or misrepresentations to 
the Commission may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under Title 18 
of the U.S. Code.
Ordering Clauses
    Accordingly, it is ordered pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 5, 
201-205, 211, 215, 218, 219, 303(r), 332, 403, and 503 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 
155, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 211, 215, 218, 219, 303(r), 332, 403, 
503, and section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. 
1302, Sec. Sec.  0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.91 
and 0.291, and the authority delegated to the Bureau in the Special 
Access Data Collection Order, that this Report and Order is adopted.
    It is further ordered that, pursuant to Sec.  1.102(b)(1) of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.102(b)(1), this Report and Order shall be 
effective December 9, 2013. The information collection and 
recordkeeping requirements contained in the Special Access Data 
Collection Order, 78 FR 2571, January 11, 2013, as implemented by this 
Report and Order, are not effective until the Office of Management and 
Budget approves them and the Commission has published a notice in the 
Federal Register announcing the effective date of the information 
collection.

Federal Communications Commission.
Julie A. Veach,
Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2013-26478 Filed 11-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P