******************************************************** NOTICE ******************************************************** This document was converted from WordPerfect to ASCII Text format. Content from the original version of the document such as headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers will not show up in this text version. All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the original document will not show up in this text version. Features of the original document layout such as columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins will not be preserved in the text version. If you need the complete document, download the WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available. ***************************************************************** Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of) ) Implementation of the ) Pay Telephone Reclassification ) CC Docket No. 96-128 and Compensation Provisions of the ) Telecommunications Act of 1996 ) ) SBC Request to Extend Limited Waiver ) of Coding Digit Requirement ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Adopted: June 10, 1998 Released: June 10, 1998 By the Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. In this order we grant limited waivers of certain requirements relating to the provision of payphone-specific coding digits established in the Payphone Orders to Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, Pacific Bell, and Nevada Bell (collectively, "SBC"). These limited waivers extend the waiver period for certain technical problems which are included in the limited waivers previously granted by the Common Carrier Bureau ("Bureau"). These waivers are subject to the same requirements as applied to the waivers granted for these same technical problems in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order. Specifically, we grant limited waivers, until August 15, 1998, for provision of payphone-specific coding digits for 0- transfer calls from six DMS 200 traffic operator position system ("TOPS") switches; and until December 31, 1998, for 800-type database services calls routing to plain old telephone service ("POTS") phone numbers and 800- type database services calls routed to access tandem switches. We similarly grant payphone service providers ("PSPs") corresponding limited waivers of the requirement to provide payphone- specific coding digits before they can receive compensation from interexchange carriers ("IXCs") for the calls affected by SBC's technical problems. 2. We grant these limited waivers because we find that special circumstances exist, and that granting these waivers will promote the public interest. These waivers are limited in time and scope, and relate to specific payphone coding digit implementation problems that SBC states affect a small percentage of the total number of payphone calls. II. BACKGROUND A. Payphone-Specific Coding Digit Requirements 3. In the Payphone Orders, the Commission imposed a requirement that by October 7, 1997, local exchange carriers ("LECs") provide payphone-specific coding digits to PSPs, and that PSPs provide those digits from their payphones to IXCs. The provision of payphone-specific coding digits is a prerequisite to payphone compensation payments by IXCs to PSPs for subscriber 800 and access code calls. On October 7, 1997, we granted to LECs and PSPs, on our own motion, an extension of this requirement until March 9, 1998. 4. On March 9, 1998, in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order, the Bureau clarified the requirements established in the Payphone Orders for the provision of payphone-specific coding digits by LECs and PSPs, to IXCs. Specifically, the Bureau clarified that flexible automatic numbering identification ("FLEX ANI") and automatic number information indicators ("ANI ii") are the methods to provide payphone-specific coding digits that comply with the requirements of the Payphone Orders. The Bureau also granted limited waivers to LECs, PSPs, and IXCs to facilitate the transition to per-call compensation and affirmed its grant, in the Bureau Waiver Order, of a limited waiver of five months, until March 9, 1998, to those LECs and PSPs who asserted that they could not provide payphone-specific coding digits as required by the Payphone Orders. In addition, in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order the Bureau granted a waiver to SBC, and other similarly situated Bell Operating Companies ("BOCs"), until June 9, 1998, to resolve certain technical problems. 5. On May 22, 1998, SBC filed a petition stating that three of the six technical problems for which it received a waiver in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order would be resolved by the June 9, 1998 deadline, but that the other three of the original six problems could not be resolved by that deadline. SBC requests that the Bureau waive the June 9, 1998 deadline so that it can address three remaining technical problems. B. SBC Waiver Request 6. SBC seeks an extension of the previous waivers to solve three specific problems relating to the provision of payphone-specific coding digits. The problems relate to "0- transfer" calls and to the ability of tandem switches to handle payphone-specific coding digits. SBC states that the effect is not limited to calls from payphones operated by any particular PSP. SBC indicates that, altogether, the problems affect a small percentage of all payphone calls. 1. 0- Transfer Calls From DMS 200 TOPS Switches 7. SBC states that the "0- transfer" FLEX ANI problem occurs when a customer dials "0" without any additional numbers from a payphone and obtains a TOPS operator via a DMS 200 TOPS switch. SBC explains that at this stage, the call is carrying the FLEX ANI coding digit ("27," "29," or "70") that identifies the call as a payphone call. SBC states that when the customer then requests the operator to transfer the call to a carrier that participates in SBC's 0- transfer service, the call arrives at a TOPS switch that has its own outgoing table of ANI ii pairs. SBC states that if the incoming ANI ii coding digit pair matches a pair in the outgoing table, the incoming ANI ii pair is successfully sent forward. If, however, the incoming ANI ii pair cannot be matched with a pair in the outgoing table, the switch strips the call of its incoming ANI ii integers and sends the call forward with an ANI ii of "00," thus defeating the call tracking capability of FLEX ANI. SBC asserts that the problem occurs whether the originating payphone is "smart" or "dumb." 8. At the time of the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order, the 0- transfer program was present in forty-six of SBC's DMS 200 TOPS switches. At this time, only Pacific Bell has not resolved this problem. SBC estimates that all but six of Pacific Bell's switches will be fixed by the June 9, 1998 deadline. Pacific Bell calculates that less than one-seventh of one percent (0.14%) of all payphone calls connected to its network will continue to be affected by this problem. SBC projects that it can meet the requirements on the remaining six switches by August 15, 1998. 2. 800-Type Database Services Calls Routed to POTS Phones 9. SBC's second implementation problem ("tandem-POTS") pertains to the limits of tandem switches in delivering dial-around payphone-specific coding digits for direct calls to POTS terminals. SBC states that the problem arises when both end office and tandem switches serve as the Service Switching Point ("SSP"). SBC explains that under these circumstances, the original FLEX ANI coding digits cannot be passed on 800-type Database Services calls routed to POTS phone numbers, and when such a routing takes place, the original FLEX ANI coding digits are lost in the process of querying the 800 database. SBC indicates that the receiving carrier receives the coding digit "24," which signals that the call is an 800-type call; however, the receiving carrier is unable to determine if the call originated from a payphone. SBC states that although the problem affects both "smart" and "dumb" payphones, in total the problem affects less than one percent of payphone calls. 10. SBC states that it has discussed changes in industry standards with Bellcore to resolve the automatic replacement of the FLEX ANI coding digits with the "24" digit. Additionally, SBC states that Pacific Bell has submitted the issue to the Industry Numbering Committee. SBC explains that Pacific Bell has recommended to the Industry Numbering Committee that three new ANI ii digit pairs be established to essentially mirror the existing codes. SBC asserts that this solution would have the added benefit of identifying that the call is toll free, that it originates from a payphone, and that the call is being routed to a POTS terminal. 11. SBC also notes that the need for standards development will depend upon whether the vendors determine that the implementation of the three new codes will require altering the existing software in the switches at the SSP. In the event that switch development is deemed necessary, SBC asserts that the entire process will require the work and consensus of the industry forums and standards forums as well as additional vendor development. SBC states that this process normally takes a minimum of three to five years, and that even a development period of this length requires strong industry support to move the issue to the top of the list of standards proposals. 12. In the event that complete standards work is not found to be necessary, SBC has suggested that Bellcore may be able to accommodate the new applications and the need for vendor uniformity by amending its Generic Requirements ("GR") documents. SBC asserts that the GR amendments will involve a delay of at least nine months if the proper funding can be obtained and the parties involved can reach agreement, and assuming a timely turnaround on the GR amendments, switch vendors will still require 18 to 24 months to produce the necessary generic software releases. Moreover, SBC claims that even then, the transformation will not be complete until LEC-wide switch translations take place. SBC claims that it estimates the resulting delay to be in the range of three to five years. 3. 800-Type Database Services Calls Routed to Access Tandem Switches 13. SBC's third implementation problem ("tandem-screening") also relates to current limits on SBC's tandem switches. SBC states that currently its access tandem switches are not capable of identifying whether IXCs are ready to receive FLEX ANI coding digits. SBC explains that for calls where 800 database lookup is performed at the access tandem, not at the end office, no screening can occur to determine whether or not to send FLEX ANI coding digits. SBC asserts that the access tandem switches are not capable of distinguishing between those IXCs ready to receive FLEX ANI coding digits and those that are not. SBC claims that the call will be processed improperly if the IXC switches have not been prepared to receive FLEX ANI coding digits. 14. SBC states that this problem affects calls from both "smart" and "dumb" payphones. SBC estimates that the problem affects less than one tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the combined calls from payphones directly connected to SBC's members. The problem also occurs in an unknown percentage of calls from payphones connected to the networks of other competitive and independent LECs who use SBC's access tandems for 800 database lookups. 15. SBC suggests that solving this problem may require adapting the same screening functionality for access tandems that presently exists at end offices. SBC further states that resolving the problem will require standards development involving the full range of industry players as well as the subsequent research and development of the new feature by the switch vendors. SBC predicts that the process and time delays involved in implementing such far reaching changes are similar to those stated in the tandem-POTS problem. 16. In the event that a complete standards development process is not necessary, and the vendors are amenable to expediting their schedules, SBC estimates that it will need two to three years to complete the necessary changes. SBC additionally contends that the conversion of Nevada Bell's DMS-10 offices, which are incapable of performing the screening, to DMS-100 offices which can screen FLEX ANI integers, will not occur until late in the year 2000. III. DISCUSSION 17. In this order we grant SBC a limited waiver to resolve the 0- transfer problem until the requested time of August 15, 1998. We grant until December 31, 1998, limited waivers of the payphone-specific coding digit requirement associated with the tandem-POTS and tandem- screening problems. The limited waivers we grant herein applies to the requirement that, with respect to the technical problems for which the limited waivers are granted: (1) SBC provide payphone-specific coding digits to PSPs; and that (2) PSPs provide payphone-specific coding digits from their payphones in order to receive compensation. 18. Waiver of the Commission's rules is appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule, and such a deviation will serve the public interest. We conclude that the limited waivers we grant in this order meet both criteria. Each of the three problems described by SBC in its petition presents special circumstances justifying limited waivers from the time requirements for providing payphone-specific coding digits in general. The problems relate to the complexities of implementing FLEX ANI, of which the Commission already has taken note, and the delays in implementation appear reasonable in light of those complexities. The presence of the problems, and SBC's efforts to resolve them, also are in keeping with the spirit of the needed transition period the Commission provided to facilitate the implementation of payphone compensation. 19. We note that these waivers are not granted for a period beyond the waiver period granted to other LECs (December 31, 1998) in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order. SBC estimates that the technical problems for which it seeks a waiver affect a small number of payphone calls. SBC also indicates that it has worked expeditiously to try to solve the problems in question within the current deadlines. In some cases, SBC asserts that the solutions to the technical problems rest with entities outside of SBC's control. Moreover, the waivers we grant herein in response to the technical problems presented by SBC are limited in time and scope. 20. The waivers granted herein are in the public interest. The waivers reflect technical problems previously identified in the implementation of FLEX ANI. The waivers will promote the policies of the Payphone Orders by helping to ensure that payphone compensation payments to PSPs are not disrupted due to the technical problems identified by SBC in the implementation of FLEX ANI. According to SBC, the waivers relate to only a small portion of payphone calls made by the public. Finally, we condition these waivers as we conditioned the waivers for these technical problems in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order. 21. We grant SBC a limited waiver with regard to the 0- transfer problem until August 15, 1998. This time extension is short and a reasonable adjustment of the implementation schedule to accommodate adjustments in the remaining six switches. 22. We grant SBC limited waivers to resolve the tandem-POTS and tandem-screening problems until December 31, 1998. We are aware that SBC's solutions involve outside parties; however, although SBC requests an extension until October 9, 2000, we conclude that on balance such an extended time period is substantially beyond the December 31, 1998 waiver granted to all LECs, and does not reflect the urgency of implementing FLEX ANI to facilitate the payment of per-call compensation. An extension until December 31, 1998, is more than a six-month extension beyond the current June 9, 1998 deadline. In light of the urgency expressed by Congress in Section 276 to implement payphone compensation, we conclude that such extensions of the previous waivers until December 31, 1998 for these technical problems are reasonable. 23. As in the Bureau Coding Digit Order, we distinguish in this case between the requirement to provide payphone-specific coding digits and the requirement to pay payphone per- call compensation. IXCs must pay payphone compensation for payphone calls affected by this waiver as required in the Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order and the Per-phone Compensation Order. Compensation for the calls in question can be paid by IXCs to PSPs through the use of LEC-provided ANI lists on a per-call basis or on a per-phone basis as set forth in the Per- phone Compensation Waiver Order. IV. CONCLUSION 24. In this order, we grant limited waivers for certain technical problems of the June 9, 1998, deadline set by the March 9, 1998 Bureau Coding Digit Waiver Order for SBC to provide payphone-specific coding digits to PSPs. We conclude that these limited waivers granted herein to SBC serve the public interest to facilitate the transition to per-call compensation. We find that the special circumstances with regard to the technical problems identified by SBC in the provision of FLEX ANI and the identification of calls coming from payphones in order for IXCs to pay payphone compensation are consistent with Section 276 and are in the public interest. We do not anticipate granting any further extensions of these waivers beyond the time limits set forth in this order. V. ORDERING CLAUSES 25. Accordingly, pursuant to authority contained in Sections 1, 4, 201-205, 218, 226, and 276 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154, 201-205, 218, 226, and 276, and the authority delegated pursuant to Sections 0.91, 0.291 and 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291 and 1.3, IT IS ORDERED that the waiver extensions ARE GRANTED to the extent described herein, and otherwise ARE DENIED. 26. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order is effective immediately upon release thereof, and that the waivers included in this order are effective June 9, 1998. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Lawrence E. Strickling Deputy Bureau Chief, Common Carrier Bureau