97-30798. Public Information Collections Approved by Office of Management and Budget  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 226 (Monday, November 24, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 62608-62611]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-30798]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
    
    
    Public Information Collections Approved by Office of Management 
    and Budget
    
    November 18, 1997.
        The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has received Office of 
    Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the following public 
    information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
    1995, Pub. L. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person 
    is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it 
    displays a currently valid control number. For further information 
    contact Shoko B. Hair, Federal Communications Commission, (202) 418-
    1379.
    
    Federal Communications Commission
    
        OMB Control No.: 3060-0802.
        Expiration Date: 05/31/1998.
        Title: Administration of the North American Numbering Plan, Order 
    on Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 92-237 (Message Intercept 
    Requirement).
        Form No.: N/A.
        Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
        Estimated Annual Burden: 1400 respondents; 9 hours per response 
    (avg.); 12,600 total annual burden hours.
        Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
        Frequency of Response: On occasion.
        Description: In response to concern expressed in the 
    reconsideration record that LECs should develop intercept messages to 
    inform dial-around customers that they need to dial additional digits, 
    the Order on Reconsideration in CC Docket No. 92-237, titled, 
    ``Administration of the North American Numbering Plan,'' requires that 
    LECs offer a standard intercept message beginning on or before June 30, 
    1998, explaining that a dialing pattern change has occurred and 
    instructing the caller to contact its IXC for further information. In 
    developing an intercept message, LECs must consult with IXCs and reach 
    agreement on the content of the message and on the period of time 
    during which the message will be provided. The Commission leaves to 
    resolution by the parties decisions about who should have the ultimate 
    responsibility for determining the content of the intercept message and 
    the period of time during which the message must be offered. The 
    Commission states that it will resolve any disputes arising from 
    parties' inability to reach agreement on such matters. Finally, the 
    Commission
    
    [[Page 62609]]
    
    concludes that the determination of how best to cover the costs of 
    providing the intercept message should be left to individual LECs, 
    including whether their access customers should be charged a reasonable 
    fee to cover those costs. The Commission has imposed these third party 
    disclosure requirements to educate end users about their inability to 
    reach carriers using five-digit access codes, and the need to dial 
    seven-digit access codes instead. Compliance obligation is required.
    
        OMB Control No.: 3060-0760.
        Expiration Date: 05/31/1998.
        Title: Access Charge Reform--CC Docket No. 96-262, First Report and 
    Order; Second Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and 
    Order.
        Form No.: N/A.
        Respondents: Business or other for profit.
        Estimated Annual Burden: 14 respondents; 128,906 hours per response 
    (avg.); 1,804,690 total annual burden hours.
        Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $31,200.
        Frequency of Response: On occasion and one-time.
        Description: In the First Report and Order (Order), CC Docket No. 
    96-262, Access Charge Reform and the Second Order on Reconsideration 
    and Memorandum Opinion and Order, the FCC adopts, that, consistent with 
    principles of cost-causation and economic efficiency, non-traffic 
    sensitive (NTS) costs associated with local switching should be 
    recovered on an NTS basis, through flat-rated, per month charges. The 
    information collections are as follows: a. Showings Under the Market-
    Based Approach: As competition develops in the market, the FCC will 
    gradually relax and ultimately remove existing Part 69 federal access 
    rate structure requirements and Part 61 price caps restrictions on rate 
    level changes. Regulatory reform will take place in two phases. The 
    first phase of regulatory reform will take place when an incumbent 
    Local Exchange Carrier's (LEC) network has been opened to competition 
    for interstate access services. The second phase of rate structure 
    reforms will take place when an actual competitive presence has 
    developed in the marketplace. Detariffing will take place when 
    substantial competition has developed for the access charge elements. 
    In our initial statement, we proposed that in order for LECs to meet 
    this standard, they have to demonstrate that: (1) Unbundled network 
    element prices are based on geographically deaveraged, forward-looking 
    economic costs in a manner that reflects the way costs are incurred; 
    (2) transport and termination charges are based on the additional cost 
    of transporting and terminating another carrier's traffic; (3) 
    wholesale prices for retail services are based on reasonably avoidable 
    costs; (4) network elements and services are capable of being 
    provisioned rapidly and consistent with a significant level of demand; 
    (5) dialing parity is provided by the incumbent LEC to competitors; (6) 
    number portability is provided by the incumbent LEC to competitors; (7) 
    access to incumbent LEC rights-of-way is provided to competitors; and 
    (8) open and non-discriminatory network standards and protocols are put 
    into effect. We propose that the second phase of rate structure reforms 
    would take place when an actual competitive presence has developed in 
    the marketplace. LECs would have to show the following to indicate that 
    actual competition has developed in the marketplace by: (1) 
    Demonstrated presence of competition; (2) full implementation of 
    competitively neutral universal service support mechanisms; and (3) 
    credible and timely enforcement of pro-competitive rules. In the NPRM, 
    we sought comment on four options for a prescriptive approach: 
    reinitializing price cap indices (PCIs) to economic cost-based levels; 
    reinitializing PCIs to levels targeted to yield no more than an 11.25 
    percent rate of return, or some other rate of return; adding a policy-
    based mechanism similar to the CPD to the X-Factor; or prescribing 
    economic cost-based rates. We have decided above to rely primarily on a 
    market-based approach, and impose prescriptive requirements only when 
    market forces are inadequate to ensure just and reasonable rates for 
    particular services or areas. We will determine the details of our 
    market-based approach in a future Order. In that Order, we will also 
    discuss in more detail what prescriptive requirements we will use as a 
    backstop to our market-based access charge reform. Because we are not 
    adopting the prescriptive approach at this time, we are removing the 
    collections associated with the prescriptive approach from our 
    statement. If the collections are adopted at a later date, we will 
    request that OMB reinstates them at that time. (No. of respondents: 13; 
    hour burden per respondent: 137,986 hours; total annual burden: 
    1,793,818). b. Cost Study of Local Switching Costs: The FCC does not 
    establish a fixed percentage of local switching costs that incumbent 
    LECs must reassign to the Common Line basket or newly created Trunk 
    Cards and Ports service category as NTS costs. In light of the widely 
    varying estimates in the record, we conclude that the portion of costs 
    that is NTS costs likely varies among LEC switches. Accordingly, we 
    require each price cap LEC to conduct a cost study to determine the 
    geographically-averaged portion of local switching costs that is 
    attributable to the line-side ports, as defined above, and to dedicated 
    trunk side cards and ports. These amounts, including cost support, 
    should be reflected in the access charge elements filed in the LEC's 
    access tariff effective January 1, 1998. (No. of respondents: 13; hours 
    per respondent: 400; total annual burden: 5200 hours). c. Cost Study of 
    Interstate Access Service That Remain Subject to Price Cap Regulation: 
    The 1996 Act has created an unprecedented opportunity for competition 
    to develop in local telephone markets. We recognize, however, that 
    competition is unlikely to develop at the same rate in different 
    locations, and that some services will be subject to increasing 
    competition more rapidly than others. We also recognize, however, that 
    there will be areas and services for which competition may not develop. 
    We will adopt a prescriptive ``backstop'' to our market-based approach 
    that will serve to ensure that all interstate access customers receive 
    the benefits of more efficient prices, even in those places and for 
    those services where competition does not develop quickly. To implement 
    our backstop to market-based access charge reform, we require each 
    incumbent price cap LEC to file a cost study no later than February 8, 
    2001, demonstrating the cost of providing those interstate access 
    services that remain subject to price cap regulation because they do 
    not face substantial competition. (No. of respondents: 13; hours per 
    respondent: 8; total annual burden: 104 hours). d. Tariff Filings: In 
    the First Report and Order, the Commission requires the filing of 
    various tariffs, with modifications. For example, the FCC directs 
    incumbent LECs to establish separate rate elements for the multiplexing 
    equipment on each side of the tandem switch. LECs must establish a 
    flat-rated charge for the multiplexers on the SWC side of the tandem, 
    imposed pro-rata on the purchasers of the dedicated trunks on the SWC 
    side of the tandem. Multiplexing equipment on the EO side of the tandem 
    shall be charged to users of common EO-to-tandem transport on a per-
    minute-of-use basis. These multiplexer rate elements must be included 
    in the LEC access tariff filings to be effective January 1, 1998. In 
    the
    
    [[Page 62610]]
    
    Second Order on Reconsideration, the FCC clarifies that the TIC 
    exemption for access customers using competitive transport providers 
    only applies to that portion of the residual per-minute TIC that is 
    related to transport facilities, and directs incumbent local exchange 
    carriers to include, in their access tariff filing, the amount of per-
    minute transport interconnection charge (TIC) they anticipate will be 
    allocated to facilities-based rate elements in the future. (No. of 
    respondents: 13; hours per respondent: 256 hours; total annual burden: 
    3328 hours). e. Third-Party Disclosure: In the Second Order on 
    Reconsideration, the Commission requires LECs to provide IXCs with 
    customer-specific information about how many and what type of 
    presubscribed interexchange carrier charges (PICCs) they are assessing 
    for each of the IXC's presubscribed customers. One of the primary goals 
    of our First Report and Order was to develop a cost-recovery mechanism 
    that permits carriers to recover their costs in a manner that reflects 
    the way in which those costs are incurred. Without access to 
    information that indicates whether the LEC is assessing a primary or 
    non-primary residential PICC, or about how many local business lines 
    are presubscribed to a particular IXC, the IXC will be unable to 
    develop rates that accurately reflect the underlying costs. (No. of 
    respondents: 14; hours per respondent: 160 hours; total annual burden: 
    2240 hours). Our authority to collect this information is provided 
    under 47 U.S.C. 201-205 and 303(r). The information collected under 
    these Orders would be submitted to the FCC by incumbent LECs for use in 
    determining whether the incumbent LECs should receive the regulatory 
    relief proposed in the Orders. The information collected under the 
    Second Order on Reconsideration and Memorandum Opinion and Order would 
    be submitted by the LECs to the interexchange carriers (IXCs) for use 
    in developing the most cost-efficient rates and rate structures. 
    Obligation to respond: mandatory.
    
        OMB Control No.: 3060-0787.
        Expiration Date: 10/31/2000.
        Title: Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes 
    Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
        Form No.: N/A.
        Respondents: Business or other for profit.
        Estimated Annual Burden: 4275 respondents; 2.34 hours per response 
    (avg.); 10,044 total annual burden hours for all collections.
        Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
        Frequency of Response: On occasion.
        Description: Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
    amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, makes it unlawful for 
    any telecommunications carrier to ``submit or execute a change in a 
    subscriber's selection of a provider of telephone exchange service or 
    telephone toll service except in accordance with such verification 
    procedures as the Commission shall prescribe.'' The section further 
    provides that any telecommunications carrier that violates the 
    Commission's verification procedures and that collects charges for 
    telecommunications service from a subscriber must pay to the carrier 
    previously selected by the subscriber an amount equal to all charges 
    paid by the subscriber after the violation occurred. The Commission's 
    current rules pertaining to changes in subscriber carrier selections 
    are contained in Sections 64.1100 and 64.1150 of the Commission's 
    rules, 47 CFR Secs. 64.1100, 64.1150. These rules apply only to 
    interexchange carriers (IXCs). Section 64.1100 requires that IXCs 
    verify orders for long distance service generated by telemarketing, and 
    Section 64.1150 prescribes the proper content and form for letters of 
    agency (or, written authorization of subscriber carrier changes). The 
    proposed modifications and additions to the rules are necessary to 
    accommodate the Commission's expanded scope of authority to require all 
    telecommunication carriers to verify change orders for telephone 
    exchange and telephone toll service, and to provide that unauthorized 
    carriers forfeit to the subscriber's authorized carrier, all charges 
    collected as a result of their unlawful action. (Burden estimate for 
    proposed Section 64.1100 is as follows: No. of respondents: 675; hours 
    per respondent: 1.25; total annual burden: 844. Burden estimate for 
    proposed 64.1150 is as follows: No. of respondents: 1800; hours per 
    respondent: 2 hours; total annual burden: 3600 hours). Proposed Section 
    47 CFR Sec. 64.1160 mirrors Section 258 of the 1996 Act by providing 
    that no telecommunications carrier shall submit or execute a carrier 
    change except in accordance with the Commission's verification 
    procedures, and that a carrier that violates the verification 
    procedures shall be liable to the subscriber's properly authorized 
    carrier in an amount equal to all charges paid by the subscriber after 
    the violation occurs. Under proposed Section 47 CFR Section 64.1170, a 
    subscriber's properly authorized carrier must, within 10 days of 
    receiving notification that the subscriber's carrier selection was 
    changed without authorization, request from the unauthorized carrier 
    the amount of charges paid by the subscriber to the unauthorized 
    carrier, and the value of any premiums to which the subscriber would 
    have been entitled had the subscriber's carrier selection not been 
    changed. Upon notification that the subscriber's carrier selection was 
    changed without authorization, the unauthorized carrier must remit 
    these amounts to the subscriber's properly authorized carrier. The 
    subscriber's properly authorized carrier must, upon receiving the value 
    of lost premiums from the unauthorized carrier, restore any lost 
    premiums (or an equivalent premium or dollar amount where the premium 
    cannot be restored) to the subscriber. This section also provides that 
    carriers disputing liability under this section must pursue private 
    settlement negotiations prior to petitioning the Commission to resolve 
    any dispute regarding the transfer of charges and the value of lost 
    premiums from the unauthorized carrier to the properly authorized 
    carrier. (No. of respondents: 1800; hours per respondent: 3 hours; 
    total annual burden: 5400 hours). The information will be used to 
    promulgate regulations to implement Section 258 of the 
    Telecommunications Act of 1996, and to determine what additional 
    measures should be taken to deter unauthorized switching of 
    subscriber's carrier selections in light of the Act's new provisions. 
    Specifically, we are proposing to expand the scope of our current 
    verification rules to be applicable to all telecommunications carriers. 
    Also, new proposed Sections 64.1160 and 64.1170 are intended to ensure 
    that carriers that violate our verification rules do not retain any 
    revenue gained from their unlawful activity, and that subscribers 
    receive prompt and full reparation for harm suffered as a consequence 
    of unauthorized carrier changes. We also seek comment on whether the 
    verification rules should apply when carriers solicit preferred carrier 
    freezes; whether the ``welcome package'' described in Section 
    64.1100(d) continues to be a necessary and viable verification 
    alternative; whether we should exempt in-bound (or customer-initiated) 
    calls from the verification rules; what the liability among carriers 
    and subscribers should be; and whether to establish a ``bright-line'' 
    evidentiary standard for determining whether a subscriber has relied on 
    a resale carrier's identity of its underlying facilities-based
    
    [[Page 62611]]
    
    network provider, hence requiring that the resale carrier notify the 
    subscriber if the underlying network provider is changed.
        OMB Control No.: 3060-0106.
        Expiration Date: 10/31/2000.
        Title: Reports of Overseas Telecommunications Traffic--Section 
    43.61.
        Form No.: FCC 43-61.
        Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
        Estimated Annual Burden: 248 respondents; 30.45 hours per response 
    (avg); 7,554 total annual burden hours.
        Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $96,000.
        Frequency of Response: Annually, semi-annually.
        Description: The telecommunications traffic data report is an 
    annual reporting requirement imposed on common carriers engaged in the 
    provision of overseas telecommunications services. The reported data is 
    useful for international planning, facility authorization, monitoring 
    emerging developments in communications services, analyzing market 
    structures, tracking the balance of payments in international 
    communications services, and market analysis purposes. The reported 
    data enables the Commission to fulfill its regulatory responsibilities. 
    In addition to the annual filing requirement, private line resellers 
    must report their U.S. outbound and inbound traffic originating or 
    terminating over resold U.S. private lines on a semi-annual basis. This 
    requirement applies for three years following a Commission finding that 
    a particular country offers U.S. carriers ``equivalent'' opportunities 
    for resale. The information is collected so that the Commission can 
    closely monitor the equivalency decision's impact on the amount of IMTS 
    traffic diverted from the settlements process. Sections 211, 214, 218, 
    219, 220 and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, accord 
    the Commission broad authority to obtain information from common 
    carriers. Part 43 of the Commission's rules establishes the procedures 
    for filing periodic reports and certain other information, including 
    annual traffic and revenue reports. Obligation to respond: mandatory.
        Public reporting burden for the collections of information is as 
    noted above. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or any other 
    aspect of the collections of information, including suggestions for 
    reducing the burden to Performance Evaluation and Records Management, 
    Washington, D.C. 20554.
    
    Federal Communications Commission.
    William F. Caton,
    Acting Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 97-30798 Filed 11-21-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
11/24/1997
Department:
Federal Communications Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
97-30798
Dates:
05/31/1998.
Pages:
62608-62611 (4 pages)
PDF File:
97-30798.pdf