because such companies are considered price cap carriers for the FCC’s Connect America Fund (“CAF”) funding, but remain rate of return for ICC purposes. Effective January 1, 2012, FairPoint rate of return ILECs were placed under the price cap CAF Phase I interim support mechanism, whereby the ILECs continued to receive frozen Universal Service Fund (“USF”) support for all forms of USF support received during 2011, including LSS. The rate of return rules for ICC included LSS support in that mechanism as well; therefore, NECA subtracted the frozen LSS support from the ICC Eligible Recovery amounts in accordance with FCC rules prohibiting duplicate recovery. When FairPoint accepted CAF Phase II support effective January 1, 2015, there was no longer any duplicate support and FairPoint requested NECA to stop subtracting LSS from FairPoint’s ICC Eligible Recovery. NECA declined to make that change, which led to FairPoint filing the Petition with the FCC asking the FCC to direct NECA to comply with FCC rules on ICC Eligible Recovery for rate of return ILECs. This issue also applies to Consolidated’s operations in Minnesota, which are also rate of return ILECs associated with a price cap company. The combined LSS support for the period from January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2017 was approximately $12.3 million. Our ongoing ICC Eligible Recovery support for 2018 increased by approximately $3.6 million, and thereafter, is expected to decline by 5% per year through 2021. On March 31, 2018, we obtained the required votes necessary for an approved order and on April 19, 2018, the FCC issued its order approving our Petition. As a result, during the six months ended June 30, 2018, we recognized subsidies revenue of $5.4 million and a contingent asset of $8.7 million as a pre-acquisition gain contingency for the FairPoint LSS revenue prior to the acquisition date.
Access Charges
In 2014, Sprint Communications Company L.P. (“Sprint”) along with MCI Communications Services, Inc. and Verizon Select Services Inc. (collectively, “Verizon”) filed lawsuits against certain subsidiaries of the Company including FairPoint, and many other Local Exchange Carriers (collectively, “LECs”) throughout the country challenging the switched access charges LECs assessed Sprint and Verizon, as interexchange carriers (“IXCs”), for certain calls originating from or terminating to mobile devices that are routed to or from these LECs through these IXCs. The plaintiffs’ position is based on their interpretation of federal law, among other things, and they are seeking refunds of past access charges paid for such calls. The disputed amounts total $4.8 million and cover periods dating back as far as 2006. CenturyLink, Inc. and its LEC subsidiaries (collectively “CenturyLink”), requested that the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the “Panel”), which has the authority to transfer the pretrial proceedings to a single court for multiple civil cases involving common questions of fact, transfer and consolidate these cases in one court. The Panel granted CenturyLink’s request and ordered that these cases be transferred to and centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (the “U.S. District Court”).
On November 17, 2015, the U.S. District Court dismissed these complaints based on its interpretation of federal law and held that LECs could assess switched access charges for the calls at issue (the “November 2015 Order”). The November 2015 Order also allowed the plaintiffs to amend their complaints to assert claims that arise under state laws independent of the dismissed claims asserted under federal law. While Verizon did not make such a filing, on May 16, 2016, Sprint filed amended complaints and on June 30, 2016, the LEC defendants named in such complaints filed, among other things, a Joint Motion to Dismiss them, which the U.S. District Court granted on May 3, 2017. Certain of our FairPoint LEC entities filed counterclaims against Sprint and Verizon.
Relatedly, in 2016, numerous LECs across the country, including a number of our legacy Consolidated and FairPoint LEC entities, filed complaints in various U.S. district courts against Level 3 Communications, LLC and certain of its affiliates (collectively, “Level 3”) for its failure to pay access charges for certain calls that the November 2015 Order held could be assessed by LECs. The Company’s LEC entities, including FairPoint, sought from Level 3 a total amount of at least $2.3 million, excluding attorneys’ fees. These complaint cases were transferred to and included in the above-referenced consolidated proceeding before the U.S. District Court. Level 3 filed a Motion to Dismiss these complaints that, in part, repeated arguments, which the November 2015 Order rejected. On March 22, 2017, the U.S. District Court denied Level 3’s Motion to Dismiss.
On March 12, 2018, a motion for summary judgment was filed by various LECs with counterclaims against Verizon and Sprint. On March 26, 2018, a motion for summary judgment was filed by various LECs with claims against Level 3. On May 15, 2018, the U.S. District Court granted all pending motions for summary judgment against Sprint, Verizon, and Level 3, and directed the entry of formal judgments in these cases.