[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 124 (Monday, June 29, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35168-35170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17079]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Ch. I
[CC Docket No. 98-94; FCC 98-118]
Testing New Technologies
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 11, 1998, the Federal Communications Commission
released a Notice of Inquiry to solicit public comment about the
effects of existing Title II regulations on experiments involving
advanced telecommunications technology conducted by firms subject to
those regulations. The document, part of the Commission's 1998 biennial
regulatory review, seeks comment about various initiatives the
Commission could undertake in order to promote technology testing,
including use of the Commission's biennial review power to repeal or
modify regulations, and, alternatively, use of the Commission's
authority to forbear from applying certain statutory provisions and
Commission rules.
DATES: Comments are due on or before July 21, 1998. Reply comments are
due on or before August 5, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments should be sent to the Office of
the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, NW,
Suite 222, Washington, DC 20554, with a copy to Scott Bergmann of the
Common Carrier Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, 2033 M
Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20554. Parties should also file
one copy of any documents filed in this docket with the Commission's
copy contractor, International Transcription Services, Inc. (ITS), 1231
20th St., NW, Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857-3800.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Beers, Deputy Chief of the
Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 418-0952,
or Scott K. Bergmann, Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier
Bureau, at (202) 418-7102.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Inquiry released June 11, 1998 (FCC 98-118). The full text of this
Notice of Inquiry is available for inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room 239, 1919 M Street,
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text also may be purchased from the
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc.
(202) 857-3800, 1231 20th St., NW, Washington, DC 20036.
Summary of the Public Notice
1. In the Notice of Inquiry (Notice), the Commission solicits
public comment about the effects of its existing Title II regulations
on experiments involving advanced telecommunications technology
conducted by firms subject to these regulations. The inquiry is based
on the Commission's belief that experiments involving new technology,
including technical trials and market trials, are a critical step in
the process of introducing new services that benefit the public. The
Commission seeks to ensure that its regulation does not unnecessarily
discourage applicants from conducting experiments involving new
technology and new applications of existing technology. The Commission
seeks comment on ways in which it may redesign its regulation in order
to encourage and facilitate such tests.
2. Section 7 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the
Communications Act or the Act), states that it is ``the policy of the
United States to encourage the provision of new technologies and
services to the public.'' More recently, Congress reinforced section 7
by adding section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Section
706(a) encourages the deployment of advanced telecommunications
services by directing the Commission to ``encourage the deployment on a
reasonable and timely basis of advanced telecommunications capability
to all Americans * * * by utilizing, in a manner consistent with the
public interest, convenience, and necessity, price cap regulation,
regulatory forbearance, measures that promote competition in the local
telecommunications market, or other regulating methods that remove
barriers to infrastructure investment.'' Pursuant to these
congressional directives, the Notice seeks public comment about a broad
range of issues relating to the Commission's regulation of technology
testing.
3. Pursuant to new section 11, Congress has required the Commission
to conduct a biennial review of regulations that apply to operations or
activities of any provider of telecommunications service and to repeal
or modify any regulation it determines to be ``no longer necessary in
the public interest.'' Accordingly, the Commission has begun a
comprehensive 1998 biennial review of telecommunications and other
regulations to promote ``meaningful deregulation and streamlining where
competition or other considerations warrant such action.'' The Notice
is thus undertaken in conjunction with the Commission's 1998 biennial
regulatory review and in it the Commission asks, inter alia, whether
and how the Commission can apply its section 11 deregulatory and
streamlining mandate to remove or restructure existing regulations in
order to promote technology testing.
4. Alternatively, the Commission asks in the Notice whether it
should and can
[[Page 35169]]
use its new forbearance authority to accomplish the same goal. New
section 10 of the Communications Act requires the Commission to forbear
from applying sections of the Act and its regulations to carriers and
services upon satisfying a stated three-part test. Telecommunications
carriers and classes of telecommunications carriers may file
applications seeking such forbearance treatment. The Notice seeks
comment on whether the Commission should undertake specific efforts to
encourage or promote such forbearance applications relating to
technology testing or, alternatively, should define a class of
experimental services that would qualify for forbearance treatment.
5. The Commission does not, however, limit the record of this
proceeding to those alternatives. Rather, the Commission encourages
commenters to offer any and all relevant and helpful suggestions to
promote technology testing by regulated companies. Well-considered
proposals to eliminate or streamline regulations governing technology
testing would further the Commission's on-going pro-competition and
pro-consumer regulatory mandate. In the last few decades, the
telecommunications industry has experienced radical changes in its
technologies, services, and markets. In response to these changes, the
Commission has increasingly adopted policies that reflect the view that
open entry and competition bring greater benefits to consumers and
society than traditional regulation of markets dominated by one or a
few carriers. Moreover, Congress in the 1996 Act has advanced this
trend by aggressively promoting a new, competition-driven marketplace.
New technologies and new applications of existing technologies will be
critical in ensuring that the United States benefits from the
competitive opportunities they will foster.
6. The Commission seeks comment about the effect of its regulation
on experiments involving new technology and on whether affirmative
steps are necessary to further encourage and facilitate testing by
removing regulatory barriers to such testing. The Commission believes
that its regulatory processes should not unduly impede experiments in
new technology, and asks commenters in this proceeding to discuss fully
how current Commission regulatory practices might tend to promote or
frustrate necessary and desirable technology testing. To this end, the
Notice asks commenters to address comprehensively those requirements
currently imposed pursuant to the Act, including all relevant
Commission rules and requirements, on those firms seeking to conduct
experiments.
7. For example, under current requirements, depending on the nature
of the technology or service to be tested, a firm seeking to conduct
technical or market trials might be required to obtain several
different approvals, including, e.g., a tariff authorization under
section 203, a certificate under section 214, approvals of Comparably
Efficient Interconnection (CEI) and Open Network Architecture (ONA)
plans under the Computer III rules, a developmental or experimental
radio license, as well as, in specific cases, waivers of various
Commission rules. All of these rule requirements serve legitimate and,
indeed, compelling regulatory ends under certain circumstances. Tariff
requirements, for example, are one way to help ensure that ratepayers
pay just and reasonable rates and do not suffer from unlawful
discrimination. CEI and ONA plans help ensure that carriers do not
prefer their own enhanced service operations to the detriment of
competitive enhanced service providers. Radio licensing, inter alia,
prevents radio frequency interference caused by and to co-channel and
adjacent channel service providers. The Commission seeks comment
regarding whether any existing rule requirements in these areas can be
relaxed or avoided in the context of short-term experimental testing of
new technology and new applications of existing technology.
8. The Commission asks commenters to develop a specific record on
how, from planning and regulatory perspectives, firms engage in
experiments, including both technical trials and market trials of
services using new technology. For example, commenters should indicate
whether carriers must have particular authorizations in place prior to
conducting technical or market trials of a service, or whether such
authorization is only required prior to the commercial offering of a
service. The Commission also seeks comment on the extent to which non-
carriers, i.e., equipment manufacturers or vendors, are responsible for
technology testing and the extent to which these non-carriers are
subject to any of the Commission's requirements in their testing of new
technologies.
9. Based on the inquiry described above, the Commission may
determine that certain of its common carrier regulations impede testing
and experimentation with new technologies and new applications of
existing technologies. For that reason, the Commission explores
possible alternative approaches to encourage and facilitate technology
experiments, namely, using section 11(b) to create streamlined
authorization procedures (based on current Part 5 procedures governing
wireless test applications) and applying regulatory forbearance under
section 10 of the Act to ``carve out'' exceptional treatment for
qualified tests. By suggesting these alternatives the Commission does
not preclude discussion of others, and encourages commenters to offer
any and all relevant and helpful suggestions. The Commission seeks
specific comment on the ramifications of allowing technology testing to
be conducted through market trials, i.e., trials in which customers pay
to obtain the service being tested. The Commission thinks that such
market trials can be a useful way to develop ``real world'' information
that is relevant to the introduction of new technology. At the same
time, the Commission will in every case take steps to ensure that
customers--including ratepayers of regulated carriers--do not
improperly subsidize technology testing, and the Commission solicits
comment on ways to ensure that the costs of such trials continue to be
borne by shareholders.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Ex Parte Presentations
10. Pursuant to Sec. 1.1204(b)(1) of the Commission's rules, the
proceeding is exempt from the prohibitions and restrictions in the ex
parte requirements.
B. Comment Filing Procedures
11. General. Pursuant to applicable procedures set forth in
Secs. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419,
interested parties shall file comments not later than July 21, 1998,
and reply comments not later than August 5, 1998. To file formally in
the proceeding, you must file an original and six copies of all
comments, reply comments, and supporting comments. If you want each
Commissioner to receive a personal copy of your comments, you must file
an original and twelve copies. Comments and reply comments should be
sent to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M
Street, NW, Room 222, Washington, DC 20554, with copies to: Thomas J.
Beers, Common Carrier Bureau, Industry Analysis Division, 2033 M
Street, NW, Room 500, Washington, DC 20554; Scott K. Bergmann, Common
Carrier Bureau, Industry Analysis Division, 2033 M Street, NW, Room
500, Washington, DC 20554. Parties should file one copy of any
documents filed in this docket with the Commission's copy contractor,
[[Page 35170]]
International Transcription Services, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW, Suite
140, Washington, DC 20037. Comments and reply comments will be
available for public inspection during regular business hours in the
FCC Reference Center, 1919 M Street, NW, Room 239, Washington, DC
20554.
12. Other requirements. Comments and reply comments must also
comply with Sec. 1.49 and all other applicable sections of the
Commission's rules. We also direct all interested parties to include
the name of the filing party and the date of the filing on each page of
their comments and reply comments.
13. Commenters may also file informal comments or an exact copy of
formal comments electronically via the Internet at:
. Only
one copy of electronically filed comments must be submitted. Commenters
must note on the subject line whether an electronic submission is an
exact copy of formal comments. Commenters also must include their full
name and U.S. Postal Service mailing address in their submissions.
Further information on the process of submitting comments
electronically is available at that location and at http://
www.fcc.gov/e-file>.
14. Parties are also asked to submit comments and reply comments on
diskette. Such diskette submissions would be in addition to and not a
substitute for the formal filing requirements addressed above. Parties
submitting diskettes should submit them to: Ms. Terry Conway, Common
Carrier Bureau, Industry Analysis Division, 2033 M Street, NW, Room
500, Washington, DC 20554. Such diskettes should be on a 3.5 inch
diskette formatted in an IBM compatible format using WordPerfect 5.1
for Windows software. The diskette should be submitted in ``read only''
mode. The diskette should be clearly labeled with the party's name,
proceeding, type of pleading (comment or reply comments) and date of
submission. The diskette should be accompanied by a cover letter.
III. Ordering Clauses
15. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 7,
10, 11, 218 and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. sections 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 161, 218, 403, that notice is
hereby given of the inquiry described above and that comment is sought
on these issues.
Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-17079 Filed 6-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
