******************************************************** 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 ) ) Billed Party Preference for ) CC Docket No. 92-77 InterLATA 0+ Calls ) ORDER Adopted: June 30, 1998 Released: June 30, 1998 By the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau: 1. In its Second Report and Order in this proceeding, the Commission adopted rules applicable to carriers providing interstate operator services, particularly non-access code calls from aggregator locations and from phones set aside for use by prison inmates. In this Order, we grant certain limited waivers or extensions of time to come into compliance with such rules. 2. In its Second Report and Order, the Commission amended its rules to require, inter alia, that operator service providers (OSPs): [d]isclose audibly and distinctly to the consumer, at no charge and before connecting any interstate, domestic, interexchange, non-access code operator service call, how to obtain the total cost of the call, including any aggregator surcharge, or the maximum possible total cost of the call, including any aggregator surcharge, before providing further oral advice to the consumer on how to proceed to make the call. The new oral disclosure rule also requires OSPs to instruct consumers that they may obtain applicable rate and surcharge quotations for 0+ calls either, at the option of the OSP, by dialing no more than two digits or by remaining on the line. The Commission also amended its rules to require: all providers of operator services from inmate-only telephones to identify orally themselves to the party to be billed for any interstate call and orally disclose to such party how, without having to dial a separate number, it may obtain the charge for the first minute of the call and the charge for additional minutes, prior to billing for any interstate call from such a telephone. 3. The Commission ordered that all providers of interstate operator services from aggregator locations and all providers of inmate operator services must comply with these requirements by July 1, 1998. The Commission provided an extension of the compliance date through October 1, 1999, however, for those carriers using store-and-forward payphones to provide operator services. The Commission stated that it was prepared to consider waiver requests on a specific factual showing of good cause. 4. Following the release of the Second Report and Order, a number of petitioners sought clarification or reconsideration of a variety of issues, including the scope of the oral disclosure rules and the July 1, 1998 effective date of the rules. This Order only issues certain waivers of the rules. 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 grant certain waivers herein because parties have shown special circumstances in their requests and granting those requests is in the public interest. The petitions for which we grant waivers reflect technical problems that will delay the implementation of the Commission's rules. Consumers are better served by giving carriers additional time, when justified, to implement a working system to offer rate quotations. To the extent that the petitioners may have asked for clarification or reconsideration of other issues in their petitions, such issues will be dealt with in a subsequent order. We also note that the Commission adopted the original July 1, 1998 effective date because it found that it was in the public interest to provide protection for consumers as soon as possible in the area of operator services. Although we grant certain limited waivers at this time, we will not hesitate to enforce the Commission's rules to the fullest extent should carriers fail to comply with extended compliance dates. Ameritech's Petition for Limited Stay and U S WEST Petition for Waiver 5. In its Emergency Petition for Stay, Ameritech requests that the new oral disclosure rules be stayed to the extent that the Second Report and Order could be deemed to apply to interstate intraLATA operator services. Concurrent with its stay petition before the Bureau, Ameritech has petitioned the Commission to clarify, or rule on reconsideration, that this rule does not apply to interstate intraLATA operator service. 6. In its Petition for Clarification or Waiver or, in the Alternative, for Clarification and Reconsideration, U S WEST, inter alia, supports Ameritech's position that the oral disclosure rules do not apply to LEC provision of interstate intraLATA operator services. Alternatively, U S WEST seeks a waiver of the oral disclosure requirements. 7. The petitions of Ameritech and U S WEST currently are under consideration by the Commission. We find that it is in the public interest for the Commission to address and resolve, prior to the deadline for compliance, the claims of Ameritech and U S WEST that the requirements need to be clarified or reconsidered with regard to their applicability to interstate intraLATA operator services, so such carriers need not incur compliance costs while the possibility of changes to the requirements still exists. Accordingly, we find good cause to stay the rule as it applies to interstate intraLATA operator services until 60 days after the release of a Commission reconsideration order addressing these issues. MCI's Petition for Waiver 8. MCI Telecommunications Corp., for itself and its common carrier affiliates Teleconnect Company and SouthernNet, Inc. d/b/a Telecom USA, and MCI International, Inc. (collectively MCI) states that it will use live operators to deliver rate quotations for the majority of its interexchange 0+ calls. MCI requests a waiver until July 1, 1999 for the application of the rules to its collect calls, however, because MCI's network is not currently capable of offering the called party to a collect call the ability to access a live rate operator. MCI states that it is developing network modifications that will allow the called party to be given the option of acquiring operator assistance to obtain rate information. MCI also requests a waiver until November 1, 1998 for its inmate operator services because of delays encountered with the equipment vendors who provide inmate call control. 9. We find that MCI has made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver for collect calls and inmate operator services through December 31, 1998. MCI has demonstrated that it stands ready to implement oral rate disclosure for the majority of its interstate operator services calls. MCI's technical problems with regard to its collect call operator services, and equipment vendor problems associated with its inmate operator services justify granting a limited extension to MCI for these services only. We are not granting the full extension requested by MCI with regard to collect calls because, as noted by the Commission in the Second Report and Order, providing the rate disclosure option is necessary to better inform consumers, foster a more competitive marketplace, and serve the public interest. Extending the compliance date through December 31, 1998, which is almost a year from the release date of the Second Report and Order, is a reasonable accommodation. Accordingly, we grant MCI a waiver of the rules through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services and inmate operator services. LCI's Petition for Limited Waiver 10. LCI International Telecom. Corp. (LCI) seeks a limited waiver, for itself and its affiliate USLD, which provides operator services on behalf of other carriers, of the rate disclosure requirement for automatic collect (auto collect) calls and for prison auto collect calls through December 31, 1998. LCI explains that the auto collect system currently only gives the called party the option to either accept or deny the call. The automated system cannot provide rate quotation information to the party that pays for the call (the called party in this instance), nor is it able to transfer the called party to a live operator to receive a rate quotation. LCI's inmate auto collect calling services have technical problems similar to those of LCI's regular auto collect calls. For the auto collect and inmate auto collect calling services, LCI plans to create an interface between each automated system and LCI's rate system so as to make rate quotations available to the called party. 11. We find that LCI has made a showing of good cause to grant the waiver requests for itself and its affiliate USLD. LCI has demonstrated that it stands ready to implement oral rate disclosure for the majority of its interstate operator services calls. LCI's technical problems with regard to collect call operator services and inmate operator services justify granting an extension to LCI and USLD for these limited services. We note that, for collect calls, the disclosure is made after, not before, the call has been sent. The rate disclosure procedures in such a case are more complex than when the disclosure is made at the "front" end of the call to the calling party. Accordingly, we grant LCI's request for a waiver of the rules for itself and its affiliate USLD through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services and inmate operator services. Opticom's Petition for Waiver 12. One Call Communications, Inc., d/b/a OPTICOM (Opticom) requests a waiver of the July 1, 1998 implementation date to allow Opticom until October 1, 1999 to implement the new rules as they apply to the called party of a collect call. At this time, Opticom cannot provide a rate quotation to the called party of a collect call. Opticom explains that recipients of collect calls only have two options: to deny or accept the call. For automated collect calls, Opticom's switches must be modified either to electronically provide an appropriate rate quotation or to allow the called party to access a live operator to receive a rate quotation. For live operator collect calls, Opticom's operator work stations must be modified to enable the operators to operate the on-demand rate branding software which is still in development. 13. We find that Opticom has made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver through December 31, 1998. Opticom's technical problems with regard to collect call operator services justify granting an extension to Opticom for these services. We are not granting the full extension requested by Opticom because it is in the public interest to provide consumers with the rate disclosure option as soon as possible. Extending the compliance date through December 31, 1998 gives Opticom a reasonable amount of time in which to comply with the Commission's oral disclosure rules. Although Opticom did not request a different or separate extension for inmate operator services, we are granting other petitioners extensions through December 31, 1998 for these types of calls and wish to create consistency in implementation dates. Therefore, we grant Opticom a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services and inmate operator services, if applicable. AMNEX's Request for Waiver 14. American Network Exchange, Inc. (AMNEX) requests a waiver until October 31, 1998 for its automated collect, calling card, and credit card calls. AMNEX plans to implement the rate disclosure requirement on all live operator calls. For automated calling card and credit card calls, customers wishing to obtain specific rate information will have to be transferred to a live operator. Because any information already given by the customer, such as the destination number, will be lost in the transfer, AMNEX asserts that customer inconvenience and increased operator time will result. For automated collect calls, the AMNEX system is incapable of transferring a call back to a live operator once the automated system has reached the called party. AMNEX states that it is in the process of implementing a new operator services system that will provide customers with the option of obtaining automated call rating and that this system will be implemented by October 31, 1998 at the latest. 15. We find that AMNEX has made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver through October 31, 1998 and conclude that an extension of four months is reasonable. Although AMNEX did not request a different or separate extension for collect call operator services or inmate operator services, we are granting other petitioners extensions beyond October 31, 1998 for these types of calls and wish to create consistency in implementation dates. Therefore, we grant to AMNEX, on our own motion, a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services, as well as inmate operator services, if applicable. AT&T's Petition for Waiver 16. AT&T Corp. (AT&T) states that technical reasons prevent it from implementing the new requirements by July 1, 1998. It requests a waiver for all operator services calls until October 1, 1999, the date by which OSPs that rely on store-and-forward technology must comply with the same rules. AT&T states that "[m]ultiple AT&T systems must be modified to implement the rate offer rules for interstate calls from aggregator telephones . . . [and that] technical obstacles prevent it from completing any of these modifications by July 1, l998. AT&T then explains, with considerable detailed support, the reasons for this conclusion. 17. AT&T notes that the Commission recognized that the primary problems it has observed in this market segment "have not involved AT&T." AT&T states that, unlike many OSPs, its rates are essentially identical to its rates for calls from ordinary home and business phones. In particular, AT&T states that it does not impose location-specific surcharges, or premises-imposed-fees ("PIFs"), on 0+ calls from any aggregator locations, which the Commission said was "a principal, if not the principal reason for consumer complaints about OSP rates and charges." In view of the foregoing, AT&T maintains that its requested waiver would not have a significant impact on consumers. AT&T supports requests to extend the compliance date to October 1, 1999 for all OSPs, stating that such action would "permit a coordinated information campaign to maximize the impact of the new rules on consumers." 18. We find that AT&T has made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver of the obligation to comply with the oral disclosure rules for its calling card and credit card operator services through October 31, 1998. We are not granting the full extension requested by AT&T because it is in the public interest to provide consumers with the rate disclosure option as soon as possible. Extending the compliance date through October 31, 1998 for calling card and credit card operator services gives AT&T a reasonable amount of time in which to comply with the Commission's oral disclosure rules. We understand that AT&T needs additional time to implement an automated rate disclosure system. In the interim, however, AT&T may comply with the oral rate disclosure requirement by using live operators to deliver rate quotations or by providing maximum rate information on every call. We note that other carriers in this proceeding have indicated that they intend to comply with the requirements by using live operators. Although AT&T did not make a special case for an extension for collect call and inmate operator services, we recognize that there are technical difficulties inherent in transferring the billed party to a live operator to obtain rate disclosure. Therefore, we grant AT&T a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator service, if applicable, and inmate operator service, if applicable. Petition for Waiver of Joint Petitioners 19. Cleartel Communications, Inc., Operator Service Company, and Teltrust Communications Services, Inc. (Joint Petitioners) have submitted a joint Petition for Reconsideration or Waiver and request that the Commission apply to all OSPs the same compliance date of October 1, 1999. The Joint Petitioners state that they are in the process of implementing automated rate disclosure systems that will not be ready by the July 1, 1998 compliance date. The Joint Petitioners state that an interim solution using live operators may be implemented more quickly, but that using live operators will divert resources away from the long-term automated system solution. 20. We find that the Joint Petitioners have made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver through October 31, 1998. We are not granting the full extension requested by the Joint Petitioners because it is in the public interest to provide consumers with the rate disclosure option as soon as possible. Extending the compliance date through October 31, 1998 gives the Joint Petitioners a reasonable amount of time in which to comply with the Commission's rules. We understand that the Joint Petitioners need additional time in order to implement an automated rate disclosure system. In the interim, however, the Joint Petitioners may comply with the oral rate disclosure requirement by using live operators to deliver rate quotations. We note that other carriers in this proceeding have indicated that they intend to comply with the Commission's rules by using live operators. Although the Joint Petitioners did not make a special case for an extension with respect to collect call operator service and inmate operator service, we recognize that there are technical difficulties inherent in transferring the billed party to a live operator to obtain rate disclosure. Therefore, we grant the Joint Petitioners a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. Joint Petition for Waiver of McLeodUSA 21. McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc., Consolidated Communications Telecom Services, Inc., Consolidated Communications Public Services, Inc., and Consolidated Communications Operator Service, Inc. (Applicants) have filed a Joint Petition for Waiver until October 1, 1999. The Applicants provide operator services through either a live operator platform or an automated platform. Because neither platform stores any rate information, the Applicants state that they are unable to provide rate disclosures upon request through their operators. The Applicants have hired an outside vendor to help develop the software necessary to allow the platforms to interface with the rate database, but "because no software with these capabilities currently exist, [the vendor] will not be able to deliver a product to the Applicants for a number of months." The Applicants state that they need at least nine months to one year for development and implementation of the software necessary to enable their live operator and automated platforms to interface with their rate database. 22. We find that the Applicants have made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver through October 31, 1998. We are not granting the full extension requested by the Applicants because it is in the public interest to provide consumers with the rate disclosure option as soon as possible. Extending the compliance date through October 31, 1998 gives the Applicants a reasonable amount of time in which to comply with the Commission's oral disclosure rules. We understand that the Applicants need additional time in order to implement a system to provide actual rate quotations to callers. In the interim, however, the Applicants may comply with the oral rate disclosure requirement by delivering maximum rate quotations rather than actual rate quotations obtained from the rate database. Although the Applicants did not make a special case for extension with respect to collect call operator service and inmate operator services, we are granting other petitioners an extension beyond October 31, 1998 for the application of the rules to these types of calls and wish to create consistency in implementation dates. Therefore, we grant the Applicants a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. Sharenet's Petition for Waiver 23. National Brands, Inc. d/b/a Sharenet Communications Co. (Sharenet), requests a waiver until at least May 31, 1999 for operator services calls placed from aggregator locations. Sharenet states that the automated rate disclosure system software has not been tested and will not be ready for implementation until at least May 31, 1999. Sharenet states that the interim solution of using a live operator is not economically feasible because Sharenet does not have its own live operator center. Therefore it must purchase live operator services on a per transaction basis from an unaffiliated third party vendor, which provides appropriate live operator services treatment and then completes the call over its own network facilities. 24. We find that Sharenet has made a showing of good cause to grant a waiver through October 31, 1998. We are not granting the full extension requested by Sharenet because it is in the public interest to provide consumers with the rate disclosure option as soon as possible. Extending the compliance date through October 31, 1998 gives Sharenet a reasonable amount of time in which to comply with the Commission's oral disclosure rules. We understand that Sharenet needs additional time in order to implement an automated rate disclosure system. In the interim, however, Sharenet may comply with the oral rate disclosure requirement by contracting to use live operators to deliver rate quotations. We note that other carriers in this proceeding have indicated that they intend to comply with the Commission's requirements by using live operators. Although Sharenet did not make a special case for an extension for collect call and inmate operator services, we recognize that there are technical difficulties inherent in transferring the billed party to a live operator to obtain rate disclosure. Therefore, we grant Sharenet a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. Opus' Petition for Waiver 25. Opus Correctional, Inc. (Opus) requests a waiver of the July 1, 1998 implementation date of Sections 64.703 and 64.710 of the Commission's rules to October 1, 1999. Opus states that it provides pay telephones to various prison systems, which are used mainly for making collect calls, and that "[a]lthough Opus has diligently attempted to comply with the implementation date . . . it will not be able conform its systems to provide real-time rate quotes by July 1, 1998." According to Opus, "the necessary modification to the current systems and full deployment of workable software throughout the network could likely take nine months to a year, barring any further unforeseen problems." 26. We recognize that there are technical difficulties inherent in transferring the billed party to a live operator to obtain rate disclosure for inmate operator services calls. Therefore, we grant Opus a waiver of the oral rate disclosure requirements through December 31, 1998 for inmate operator services and, if applicable, collect call operator services. 27. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 154(j), and the authority delegated under Sections 0.91 and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, that Ameritech's Emergency Petition for Stay, filed April 9, 1998, IS GRANTED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE STAYED with respect to interstate intraLATA interexchange calls until 60 days after the release of the Commission's order addressing Ameritech's Petition for Clarification or Reconsideration, filed April 9, 1998, and U S WEST's Petition for Clarification or Waiver or, in the Alternative, for Clarification and Reconsideration, filed April 9, 1998. 28. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Waiver filed by MCI Telecommunications Corporation and its affiliates, Teleconnect Company, SouthernNet, Inc. d/b/a Telecom USA, and MCI International, Inc., filed on June 5, 1998, as amended on June 12, 1998, IS GRANTED in part and otherwise IS DENIED, and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED for it and its affiliates through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services and inmate operator services. 29. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Limited Waiver filed by LCI International Telecom Corp. and its affiliate USLD, on June 8, 1998, IS GRANTED in part and otherwise IS DENIED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED for it and its affiliate through December 31, 1998 for collect call operator services and inmate operator services. 30. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Waiver filed by One Call Communications, Inc. d/b/a OPTICOM, on June 25, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for its collect call operator services, and for its inmate operator services, if applicable. 31. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request for waiver filed by American Network Exchange, Inc. on June 26, 1998, IS GRANTED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through October 31, 1998, and further that such provisions ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for its collect call operator services, and inmate operator services, if applicable. 32. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the AT&T Corp.'s Petition for Waiver, filed May 18, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED, and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED for it and its affiliates through October 31, 1998, except that such provisions ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for its collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. 33. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petition for waiver filed jointly by Cleartel Communications Services, Inc., Operator Service Company, and Teltrust Communications, Inc. on April 9, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED, and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through October 31, 1998, except that such provisions ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for their collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. 34. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Waiver jointly filed by McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc., Consolidated Communications Telecom Services, Inc., Consolidated Communications Public Services, Inc., and Consolidated Communications Operator Services, Inc. on June 15, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through October 31, 1998, except that such provisions ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for their collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. 35. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Waiver filed by National Brands, Inc. d/b/a Sharenet Communications Co., on June 17, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through October 31, 1998, except that such provisions ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for its collect call operator services, if applicable, and inmate operator services, if applicable. 36. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Petition for Waiver filed by Opus Correctional, Inc. on June 26, 1998, IS GRANTED IN PART and otherwise IS DENIED and that the provisions of Section 64.703(a)(4) and Section 64.710 of the Commission's Rules ARE WAIVED through December 31, 1998 for its inmate operator services and, if applicable, for its collect call operator services. 37. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order is effective upon its adoption. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Kathryn C. Brown Chief, Common Carrier Bureau