goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred R. Goldstein) (03/15/90)
In article <5084@accuvax.nwu.edu>, res@cblpe.att.com (Robert E Stampfli) writes... > > >[Moderator's Note: ... (concerning the FCC Toll Access charge) > >... This charge you question, mandated by law, is > >to compensate the local telco for providing access to the long > >distance carrier of your choice. I know the system stinks; much of > >divestiture does; but them's the breaks. ... > >OK, then it would seem to me that if I request my second line be for >local calls only, with no long distance access, that I should not be >charged this fee. Well, to be sure, the explanation of the charge above is somewhat in error, but it's a common misunderstanding brought about by the use of the slang term "access charge" to refer to what's formally known as the "customer access line charge" (CALC). Under the 1930-ish court ruling Smith v. Illinois, local telephone service is jurisdictionally both interstate and intrastate. Since the same local wires are used for both, the cost must be charged to both. From then until 1984, a system called Separations & Settlements was in place. This apportioned the cost of local telco plant (the non-traffic-sensitive stuff, or NTS) according to relative interstate and intrastate use. The interstate was marked up by a "Subscriber Plant Factor" (SPF) to increase the interstate share; this constituted the subsidy from AT&T Long Lines to the local telcos! The interstate money all came from usage (traffic sensitive) charges, even though it paid for NTS. Without this in place, long distance would have been cheaper, local costlier. In 1984, the rules changed. SPFs remained in place, but instead of charging 100% of the interstate NTS costs to toll/WATS usage, the FCC decided that non-traffic-sensitive costs should have non-traffic- sensitive charges. (Sort of makes sense, doesn't it?) So that's the CALC, or "access charge". It's the FCC's way of levying a monthly charge for what's jurisdictionally theirs, the same way your state has the telco levy a monthly charge for what's jurisdictionally theirs. (Imagine if the states gave away lines for FREE but charge more for intrastate calls ... that's the equivalent of the old FCC system. Come to think of it, that's almost California!) If your line had NO interstate "contamination", then 100% of its cost would be borne at the state level. You wouldn't pay CALC, but you'd have a MUCH higher local charge to make up for the money that your local telco isn't getting from the interstate pool. In sum, it's not access TO interstate, it's just the result of having two regulators splitting your bill. Incidentally, this FCC proceeding began WELL BEFORE divestiture was even dreamt up, and while it was installed coincident with it, it technically has NOTHING TO DO with divestiture! It would have happened had the Bell System remained in place. Really. Check it out. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 486 7388 opinions are mine alone. sharing requires permission.