PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission 1919 M St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 D A 98-483 R eleased: March 11, 1998 C OMMON CARRIER BUREAU SOLICITS COMMENTS ON PROPOSED M ODIFICATIONS TO ARMIS SERVICE QUALITY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A AD File No. 98-22 1.In this Public Notice ("Notice"), the Common Carrier Bureau ("the Bureau") proposes a number of improvements to the ARMIS Report 43-05 Service Quality Report, which provides data regarding service quality, and the ARMIS Report 43-06 Customer Satisfaction Report, which provides data concerning customer satisfaction. The ARMIS 43- 05 Service Quality Report captures important service quality trends of price cap carriers on a study area basis. ARMIS Report 43-05 contains five tables: (1) installation and repair intervals for interexchange carriers; (2) installation and repair intervals for local access customers; (3) common trunk blockage; (4) total switch downtime and occurrences of two minutes or more duration; and (5) service quality complaints. ARMIS Report 43-06, the Customer Satisfaction Report, reflects the results of customer satisfaction surveys conducted by carriers. The report captures trends in service quality as measured by the perception of residential, small business, and large business customers. All incumbent local exchange carriers ("LECs") subject to price cap regulation file the Service Quality Report, but only the Bell operating companies and GTE file the Customer Satisfaction Report. A. Service Quality in Rural Areas 2. We are particularly interested in the quality of service available in rural areas. We seek additional comments on modifications to both the ARMIS 43-05 Service Quality Report and the ARMIS 43-06 Customer Satisfaction Report that would permit detailed analysis of the quality of service provided to rural areas. For ARMIS Report 43-05, carriers already disaggregate the reported data into MSA and non-MSA categories throughout most of the report. For ARMIS Report 43-06, the Customer Satisfaction Report, we propose disaggregating the reported data to reflect customer satisfaction by MSA and non-MSA categories. We seek comment on whether this level of disaggregation adequately illustrates the quality of service provided to rural areas, or whether we should consider a greater level of detail. 3. Additionally, although ARMIS Report 43-05 collects data concerning switch outages, the report does not collect data concerning facility outages caused by cable cuts, which are the primary source of network outages. Because many rural areas do not meet the reporting threshold identified in the Commission's network outage reports, the ARMIS 43-05 Service Quality Report does not provide a complete picture of the quality of service in many rural areas. Therefore, we propose modifying ARMIS Report 43-05 to include a table for reporting facility outages resulting in a threshold number of customers out of service for longer than twelve hours. There are very few, if any, rural areas that meet the threshold number of 30,000 customers set in the Commission's rules for reporting network outages, so the Commission does not collect all the information needed to monitor the quality of service in rural areas. Therefore, we propose using a percentage of subscribers in wire center serving area that are affected by the facility outage. Carriers would report facility outages affecting greater than five -- or perhaps ten -- percent of the subscribers served in a wire center serving area. Carriers would disaggregate this data into MSA and non-MSA categories. We seek comment on this proposal, on the recommended format of a facility outage table in ARMIS Report 43-05, and on the suggested reporting threshold necessary to provide an accurate picture of rural service quality. B. ARMIS 43-05 Service Quality Report 1. Table I -- Installation and Repair Intervals (Interexchange Access) 4. Table I of the ARMIS Service Quality Report 43-05 presents incumbent LEC installation and repair intervals for service provided to interexchange carriers. This table contains useful information regarding the number of complaints, referred to as "trouble reports," received by an incumbent LEC from an interexchange carrier in a given period and percentages of service commitments met by the incumbent LECs. It does not, however, contain information regarding the total number of switched or special access lines that could trigger trouble reports. Consequently, it is difficult for the Commission and other interested parties to benchmark data for incumbent LECs of varying sizes. We propose that incumbent LECs should report the total number of switched and all special access lines provided to interexchange carriers in each study area. 2. Table II -- Installation and Repair Intervals (Local Service) 5. Table II is the primary source of service quality information regarding the services provided by price cap LECs to their local customers. Table II consists of two major columns (one for residential customers and one for business customers) and five major rows (Installation Intervals, Repair Intervals, Initial Trouble Reports, Repeat Trouble Reports, No Trouble Found) that contain data on how price cap LECs perform during the reporting period in the installation and repair of basic local telecommunications services. Each column and row is further disaggregated to provide greater detail regarding the installation and repair of lines. As a whole, Table II illustrates the service quality provided by the price cap LECs to residential and business customers. This information is used by the Commission state commissions, and other interested parties to evaluate and benchmark carriers' installation and repair data. 6. Customer trouble reporting measures both the number and the types of service problems that local business and residential customers report to the reporting carrier. These trouble reports are categorized as either "initial" trouble reports or "repeat" trouble reports. A "repeat trouble" is a trouble reported on a line within thirty days of the disposition of a previous trouble; all other trouble reports are categorized as "initial." In addition to the quantity and type of troubles, carriers also report the time needed to close out the troubles. One way for closing out a trouble is the "no trouble found" report. Currently, carriers are required to report only the total number of instances in which, upon investigation, no trouble was found. Analysis of existing reports shows a substantial increase in the number of troubles closed out as "no trouble found." We propose that carriers should be required to disaggregate this information into two rows in Table II -- one showing the total number of "no trouble found" reports for "initial" trouble reports, and one for "repeat" trouble reports. 7. Incumbent LECs provide local special service circuits, which are circuits other than those used for basic telephone service, to business customers. In its current format, Table II does not require incumbent LECs to report information on local (intraLATA or intrastate) special service circuits. Many types of special service circuits perform the same function as those circuits that incumbent LECs already report in Table II. We propose modifying Table II to require carriers to report data on local special service circuits and to disaggregate this data by MSA and non-MSA categories. We seek comment on this proposal and additional suggestions for the reporting format of information on local special service circuits. 3. Table IV -- Switches 8. Table IV of ARMIS Report 43-05 contains information about the number of switches of various sizes and a count of those switches that experience operating downtime of two minutes or more. Switch size is reported according to the number of lines each switch serves. Currently, carriers are required to report outages by various switch sizes up to 20,000 lines with all larger switches being categorized into a single row. Because 47 C.F.R.  63.100 requires that carriers report network outages for switches over 30,000 lines, we propose that a new row should be added to Table IV for switches over 20,000 lines but less than 30,000 lines with the last row modified to include switches with 30,000 or more lines. III. PROCEDURAL MATTERS 9. Paperwork Reduction Act. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, we invite the general public to take this opportunity to comment on information collections contained in this Public Notice, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 104-13. Public and agency comments are due at the same time as other comments on this Public Notice. Comments should address: (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. 10.Comment Filing Procedures. Interested parties may file comments no later than April 9, 1998. Reply comments may be filed no later than April 30, 1998. All pleadings should reference AAD File No. 98-22. The original and six copies should be submitted to the Secretary of the Commission; one copy should be submitted to Anthony Dale, Accounting and Audits Division, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC, 2000 L Street, Suite 201, Washington, DC 20554. In addition, one copy of each pleading must be filed with International Transcription Services (ITS), the Commission's duplicating contractor, at its office at 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, (202) 857-3800. All pleadings will be made available for public inspection and copying in the Accounting and Audits public reference room. Action by the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, FCC.