Published on: 16050898. George Huber, on behalf of IDI Billing Solutions; Petitioner sought the Board’s interpretation of §365.172(8)(e), F.S., and Rule 60FF1-5.004, F.A.C., regarding categorizing service identifiers on monthly reports; additionally, of §365.172(8)(a)(1), (3), F.S., regarding the preferred methodology for calculating the total number of surcharges to be assessed on a subscriber’s invoice. The Board considered the Petition at a duly-noticed public meeting held on February 11, 2015, in Tallahassee, Florida.
The Board’s Order, filed March 11, 2015, answers the issues stated in the petition in the negative finding that: Petitioner is not a “substantially affected person” as used in §120.542, F.S.; Petitioner supplies billing services to service carriers but is not a voice communications service provider; Petitioner sought a statement of general applicability but failed to allege any facts and circumstances unique to Petitioner’s particular circumstances.
Published on: 15494894. George Huber, on behalf of IDI Billing Solutions, on October 17, 2014.; Petitioner seeks the Board’s interpretation of §365.172(8)(e), F.S., and Rule 60FF1-5.004, F.A.C., regarding categorizing service identifiers on monthly reports; additionally, of §365.172(8)(a)(1), (3), F.S., regarding the preferred methodology for calculating the total number of surcharges to be assessed on a subscriber’s invoice. The Board will consider this petition at its meeting currently scheduled for February 12-13, 2015. Except for good cause shown, motions for leave to intervene must be filed within 21 days after publication of this notice.