Report and Order Sample Clauses

Report and Order and Order requires that applicants must provide a detailed description of how the applicant will meet all non-waived mandatory minimum standards applicable to each form of TRS offered, including documentary and other evidence, and in the case of VRS, such documentary and other evidence shall demonstrate that the applicant leases, licenses or has acquired its own facilities and operates such facilities associated with TRS call centers and employs their own communications assistants (CAs), on a full or part-time basis, to staff such call centers at the date of the application. Such evidence shall include but not be limited to:

Report and Order. The rates, terms and conditions (including rates which may be applicable under true-up) specified in both the "GTE Terms" and the "MCI Terms" are further subject to amendment, retroactive to the Effective Date of the Agreement, to provide for charges or rate adjustments resulting from future Commission or other proceedings, including but not limited to any generic proceeding to determine GTE's unrecovered costs (e.g., historic costs, contribution, undepreciated reserve deficiency, or similar unrecovered GTE costs (including GTE's end user surcharge)), the establishment of a competitively neutral universal service system, or any appeal or other litigation. If the Commission (or any other commission or federal or state court) in reviewing this Agreement pursuant to applicable state and federal laws, including Section 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, deletes or modifies in any way this Section 46, then the Parties agree that they will reopen negotiations within ten (10) days after receipt of the final decision making such deletion or modification in order to negotiate replacement provisions which comply with such Commission or court requirements and which provide substantially the same protections to the Parties as this Section 46. If the Parties cannot reach agreement as to replacement provisions for this Section 46 within twenty (20) calendar days of the initiation of negotiations, the Parties agree that this entire Section 46 is void. In such event, within twenty five (25) days following the close of the 20 day negotiation period, either Party may initiate the Dispute Resolution Process provided in Article III, Section 14.1 herein regarding issues in dispute for such replacement provisions.

Report and Order. The rates, terms and conditions (including rates which may be applicable under true-up) specified in both the GTE Terms and the OtherCLEC Terms are further subject to amendment, retroactive to the Effective Date of the Agreement, to provide for charges or rate adjustments resulting from future Commission or other proceedings, including but not limited to any generic proceeding to determine GTE's unrecovered costs (e.g., historic costs, contribution, undepreciated reserve deficiency, or similar unrecovered GTE costs (including GTE's end user surcharge)), the establishment of a competitively neutral universal service system, or any appeal or other litigation. If the Commission (or any other commission or federal or state court) in reviewing this Agreement pursuant to applicable state or federal laws, including Section 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, deletes or modifies in any way this Section 46, then the Parties agree that they will reopen negotiations within ten (10) days after receipt of the final decision making such deletion or modification in order to attempt to craft the new provision that will provide substantially the same protections to GTE and DTI as this Section 46. If the Parties cannot reach agreement on such a provision within twenty (20) calendar days thereafter, the Parties agree that this entire Agreement is void and will not become effective, and DTI agrees to withdraw this Agreement from consideration by the Commission (or any other commission or federal or state court). In such event, each Party shall have 25 days following the close of the 20-day negotiation period within which to file a petition for arbitration before the Commission under Section 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 of the issues that remain in dispute under this paragraph.

Report and Order. A ‘‘small business’’ is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $40 million.59 A ‘‘very small business’’ is an entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $15 million.60 The SBA has approved these small business size standards.61 There is also one megahertz of narrowband PCS spectrum that has been held in reserve and that the Commission has not yet decided to release for licensing. The Commission cannot predict accurately the number of licenses that will be awarded to small entities in future actions. However, four of the 16 winning bidders in the two 45 Id. at paragraph 172. CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517211. 46 Id. at paragraph 172. 47 See ‘‘Lower 700 MHz Band Auction Closes,’’ 17 FCC Red 17272 (2002). 48 Service Rules for the 746–764 and 776–794 MHz Bands, and Revisions to Part 27 of the Commission’s Rules, WT Docket No. 99–168, Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, 16 FCC Red 1239 (2001). 49 220 MHz Third Report and Order, 12 FCC Red at 11068–70, paragraphs 291–295, 62 FR 16004 at paragraphs 291–295 (1997). 50 See Letter from ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, Administrator, Small Business Administration to ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇, Chief, Auctions and Industry Analysis Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, Federal Communications Commission (June 4, 1999).

Report and Order. On Rehearing in Case No. EO-2004-0108 contains a typographical error that transposed the second and third digits in the annual contribution amount to the Missouri jurisdictional subaccount. (See 13 Mo.P.S.C.3d at 297 and 304 compared to 13 Mo.P.S.C.3d at 296). Because this error has an insignificant impact on trust fund funding, Ameren Missouri used this actual ordered amount as its present annual contribution amount. File No. ER-2011-0028. In Case Nos. ▇▇-▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇, ▇▇-▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇, and EO-2009-0081, a methodology was utilized by which Missouri ratepayers were responsible for less than 100% of Ameren Missouri’s decommissioning liability. Ameren Missouri serves wholesale customers, such as municipals, with power from Callaway. The provision of service to other than Missouri retail ratepayers was recognized by the utilization of an allocation methodology with a Missouri jurisdictional demand allocator of less than 100% to Missouri retail customers. Starting in Ameren Missouri’s last general rate increase case, File No. ER-2011-0028, and continued in the present Ameren Missouri general rate increase case File No. ER-2012-0166, Ameren Missouri did not perform and has not performed an allocation. Callaway was treated and is being treated as allocated 100% to the Missouri retail jurisdiction, and municipal customers, sales, and costs were and are being treated as off-system customers, sales, and costs. The $6,758,605 of annual decommissioning expense accrual was included in the determination of Ameren Missouri customer rates approved by the Commission as part of Re Union Electric Co., File No. ER-2011-0028 (July 13, 2011) when the Missouri jurisdictional demand allocator was reflected as 100%. The Staff agreed to this methodology in File No. ER-2011-0028, and the Staff has filed its direct case in the presently pending File No. ER-2012-0166 on the basis of this methodology. 2. On September 1, 2011, Ameren Missouri filed its Application along with the 2011 Cost Study and Economic Analysis. Ameren Missouri requests the Commission recognize in its Order for this case that Ameren Missouri's Application, the 2011 Cost Study, and Economic Analysis meet the requirements of 4 CSR 240-3.185(3). The Staff noted in several of its Status Reports to the Commission that the Staff and Ameren Missouri had engaged in discussions on the basis of the Staff’s review and analysis of Ameren Missouri’s application and its responses to Staff data requests, and on the basis of those discu...

Report and Order. If the Commission (or any other commission or federal or state court) in reviewing this Agreement pursuant to applicable state and federal laws, including Section 252(e) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, deletes or modifies in any way this Section 49, US Dial Tone agrees that this entire Agreement is void and will not become effective, and US Dial Tone agrees to withdraw this Agreement from consideration by the Commission (or any other commission or federal or state court).

Report and Order. The Commission has before it for consideration its Notice of Proposed Rule Making, adopted Au­ gust 5, 1970 (FCC 70-858) proposing to amend its rules so as to provide for the operation of low-power relay stations in the Instructional Television Fixed Serv­ ice (ITFS). The Notice was based on petitions filed by the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ Electronics Corp. (▇▇▇▇▇▇▇) and the Solid State Di­ vision, Micro-Link Products (Micro- Link) of Varian Associates, respectively (RM-1599 and RM-1613).

Report and Order. On May 1,1987, the Commission released a N otice o f Proposed Rulem aking (N otice), CC Docket No. 87- 113, FCC 87-271, seeking comment on proposed amendments to Part 69 of its Rules. The Commission stated that its primary objective was to conform these Access Charge Rules to the recently revised jurisdictional separations rules. Accordingly, it proposed numerous conformance changes that, with only two exceptions, related to the apportionment of costs among the existing access cost elements. The two exceptions were a proposal to eliminate the Local Switching subelments and a proposal to consolidate the Line Termination, Local Switching and Intercept cost elements into a single cost element called Switching. In addition to proposing conformance changes, the Commission also proposed several minor changes to enhance its ability to review annual access tariff filings. Specifically, the N otice included a proposal to limit the annual October filings to rate level changes and it discouraged filings during the three- month period following the October filings. Finally, the Commission encouraged interested parties to provide data identifying any revenue requirement shifts expected to result Federal Register / V o l 54, N o. 37 / M on d ay, ▇▇▇▇▇ ary 27, 1989 / Ru les and Reg u lation s 8197 from implementation of the proposed revisions.

Report and Order on Rehearing in Case No. EO-2004-0108 contains a typographical error that transposed the second and third digits in the annual contribution amount to the Missouri jurisdictional subaccount. (See 13 Mo.P.S.C.3d at 297 and 304 compared to 13 Mo.P.S.C.3d at 296). Because this error has an insignificant impact on trust fund funding, Ameren Missouri used this actual ordered amount as its present annual contribution amount. customers, sales, and costs were treated as off-system customers, sales, and costs. The $6,758,605 of annual decommissioning expense accrual was included in the determination of Ameren Missouri retail customer rates approved by the Commission as part of Re Union Electric Co., File No. ER-2011-0028 (July 13, 2011) and the Missouri jurisdictional demand allocator was reflected as 100%. Ameren Missouri and the Staff followed this methodology in File No. EO-2012-0070, Ameren Missouri’s most recent prior Triennial Decommissioning Update, and File No. ER-2012- 0166, Ameren Missouri’s most recent general rate increase case. 4. In the four triennial decommissioning cost study cases prior to Case No. EO-2004- 0108, Ameren Missouri’s Missouri retail jurisdiction, annual trust fund accrual and payment requirement remained at $6,214,184, as that amount was determined to be adequate for the funding of decommissioning expenses. In Case No. EO-2004-0108, the Missouri retail jurisdiction annual trust fund accrual and payment requirement was increased to $6,486,378 to reflect the increased liability for decommissioning costs assumed by the Missouri retail ratepayers as a result of the MetroEast Property Transfer. In Case No. EO-2006-0098, a Unanimous Stipulation and Agreement was accepted by the Commission which identified the costs in 2005 dollars to immediately decommission Callaway, as if it had completed 40 years of service, as being $586,515,200. Ameren Missouri’s Missouri retail jurisdiction annual trust fund accrual and payment requirement remained at $6,486,378, as that amount was determined to be adequate for the funding of future decommissioning expenses. The 2011 Cost Study estimated the decommissioning cost for the DECON alternative to be $754,500,000 in 2011 dollars, which was 8.7% higher than the 2008 estimate of $693,907,000 (Case No. EO-2009-0081) and represented approximately a 2.83% annualized escalation rate over the 3-year period. Ameren Missouri’s economic analysis found the annual contribution of $6,758,605 to the nuclear decommissioning...