Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of

Federal State Joint Board on
Universal Service

CC Docket 96-45


Comments of the Iowa Telephone Association

The Iowa Telephone Association (ITA),  an  association  including  153  local  exchange  telephone
companies in the State of Iowa, offers the following comments in response  to  the  Commission's
Notice of Proposed Rule Making and Order Establishing  Joint  Board(NPRM)  released  on  March  8,
1996 (Ref. FCC 96-93). Comments offered are on  a  limited  number  of  subjects  raised  in  the
NPRM although the ITA has a wide interest in the impacts that may occur to end users in the  State
of Iowa and to the ITA's member exchange telephone companies as a result of this proceeding.
The State of Iowa is provided telephone service by 153 local exchange  telephone  companies,  the
largest number of telephone companies in any one state in  the  nation.  While  there  are  a  three
companies owned by regional and national holding companies, most of the  companies  in  the  state
provide service in small areas and communities of the state serving, in  most  instances,  only  a  few
hundred customers. (The largest small company in the state serves about 8,500 customers.) For  the
most part, service areas are rural, many of them with stable  or  declining  populations.  Overall
borrowers  had  digital  switches;  in  1993  100%  of  the  REA  borrowers'   exchanges   had   digital
switches.  Furthermore U.S. Census data shows that the percentage of households in Iowa a
telephone in service has increased from 95. 1% in  1985  to  96.8%  in  1994.  All  of  these  measures
give evidence to the fact that telephone service has  improved  in  Iowa  since  the  Universal  Service
Fund and DEM weighting mechanisms have been in effect.


TRANSITIONAL MECHANISMS (Paragraph 40, NPRM

Because of the potential impacts on customers that could result  from  significant  changes  in  support
flows, the ITA recommends that the  Joint  Board  and  FCC  fully  analyze  the  alternatives  that  are
proposed in  this  proceeding  to  evaluate  the  cumulative  impacts  that  individual  local  exchange
telephone companies will incur from any alternative that it intends to adopt, and  its  implications  on
end user rates from  their  customers.  The  ITA  strongly  recommends  that  a  transitional  mechanism
be  established  to  mitigate  the  financial  impacts  of  any  change  in  funding  for  USF  and  DEM
weighting  mechanisms  over  several  vears.  Such  a  transitional  mechanism  seems  consistent   with
the Act' S requirement that Universal Service mechanisms be predictable.

Telecommunications Carriers to Receive Support for Providing Educational Services
(Paragraph 88)

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

4	Data for 1985 and 1993 comes from the 1985 and 1993 Statistical Report Rural Telephone Borrowers prepared by
the United States Department of Agriculture, Rural Electrification Administration, Information Publication 300-4,
Respectively.

5	See Monitoring Rep=, op. cit., Table 1.2.

6	The Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub.  L. No. 104-104, loo Stat. 56 (1996) (to be codified at 47 U.S.C.

7	See Section 254(b)(5) of the Act.
                                                      3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The NPRM notes that reimbursement for discounted services to schools and libraries under
Section 254 (h)(1)(B) must be given to "all telecommunications carriers serving a geographic
area." In developing rules implementing this section the Joint Board and Commission must be
certain to refer to the definitions in the Act to determine eligibility for receipt of such funds.
Specifically the Act defines a telecommunications carrier as:
....any provider of telecommunications services. except that such term does not include
aggregators of telecommunications services  (as defined in section 226). A
telecommunications carrier shall be treated as a common carrier under this Act only to the
extent that it is engaged in providing telecommunications services, except that the
Commission shall determine whether the provision of fixed and mobile satellite service
shall be treated as common carriage."[8]

Furthermore the Act specifically defines telecommunications service as:
"...the offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public, or to such classes of
users as to be effectively available directly to the public, regardless of the facilities
used."[9]
While carriers providing services for a fee directly to the public thus meet the definition of a
telecommunications carrier, private network providers (such as electric company networks or
corporate networks) and state sponsored private networks (such as Iowa Communications
Network) that do not provide services directly to the public should not be eligible for these
support funds.

Carrier Common Line Recovery (Paragraphs 112-114)

The Commission's discussion in the NPRM suggests that the imposition of charges on
interexchange carriers for the use of the facility from the central office to the subscriber location

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

8	Section 3(r)(48).

9	Section 3(r)(50).

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

(the local loop) instead of recovering such costs directly from end users could be considered a
"universal service support flow" which  might  not  be  consistent  with  the  Act.  The  Commission's
discussion suggests that commentors argue that "..all costs associated with  facilities  dedicated  to
the use of a single subscriber should be recovered through a flat ... charge assessed on end
users."[10]
The Association does not believe that the "universal service support flow" characterization is
warranted. First of all, in an increasing number of cases, the use of digital loop  carrier  and  loop
concentrators is changing the nature of local loop plant so that an increasing portion of  it  is  not
"dedicated to the use of a single subscriber". The local loop is an essential part of  the  facilities
necessary for interexchange carriers to originate calls from and terminate calls  to  their  end  user
subscribers. To suggest that requiring them to pay some of the cost of using  those  facilities  is  a
"universal service support flow" is inappropriate. The Association will leave it other
commentors to explore the question of  the  economic  efficiency  of  end  users  charges  as  opposed
to charges to carriers to recover such costs.

Respectfully       Submitted,

J. Kent Jerome
Secretary-Treasurer
Iowa Telephone Association
1601 - 22 Street, Suite 290
West Des Moines, Iowa 50266
515-225-2091

April 10, 1996

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

10	NPPM, Paragraph 113.

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