Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Dec 1996 20:40:56 -0500 (EST)
From:      Shaun Finn <sfinn@thecore.com>
To:        Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
Cc:        isp-marketing@sparknet.net, isp@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ISP's will get *NO* refunds
Message-ID:  <Pine.NEB.3.95.961220202617.19558A-100000@guardian.thecore.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.93.961220165218.5944M-100000@sidhe.memra.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 20 Dec 1996, Michael Dillon wrote:
> It now appear that the whole issue of ISP exemption from FCC Subscriber
> Line Charges is wrong, wrong, wrong. As I mentioned a month or so ago it
> appears that the people who have promoted this idea were getting the
> Network Access Charges (around two cents per minute) confused with the
> Subscriber Line Charge of $6 per line per month. ISP's are considered
> Enhanced Service Providers by the FCC and are thus exempt from the 
> NAC but are explicitly required to pay the SLC. Period, end of story.

I found the same to be true in my own investigation. I talked to a
Kevin Werbach in the Plans & Policies Bureau of the FCC just this week
on this very subject. He corroborates everything you say about the 
confusion over NAC vs. SLC. He even said they are aware of the
misleading Email making its rounds on the Internet.

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Shaun M. Finn                    TechnoCore Communications, Inc. |
| sfinn@thecore.com                P.O. Box 106                    |
| (908)928-7400 FAX:(908)928-7402  Jackson, NJ 08527-0106          |
+------------------- http://www.thecore.com/ ----------------------+




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.3.95.961220202617.19558A-100000>