[Federal Register: October 28, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 208)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 62811-62816]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28oc04-8]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CC Docket No. 96-115; FCC 04-206]
Telecommunications Carriers' Use of Customer Proprietary Network
Information and Other Customer Information
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
addresses the petitions for reconsideration of the Subscriber List
Information Order, which adopted rules to implement section 222(e) of
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Communications Act or Act).
The Commission denies requests for modification of certain aspects of
the complaint procedures, notification requirements, and unbundling
requirements established in the Subscriber List Information Order. The
Commission eliminates the requirement for carriers to provide
requesting directory publishers with notice of changes in subscriber
list information in circumstances where customers choose to cease
having their numbers listed, and modifies the contract disclosure
requirement to allow carriers to withhold from disclosure those
portions of their contracts that are unrelated to the provision of
subscriber list information and to subject such disclosures to
confidentiality agreements.
DATES: The amendments to Sec. 64.2341 are effective November 29, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. See Supplementary Information for further filing
instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Kehoe, Senior Attorney,
Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-
7122, or at William.Kehoe@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration (Reconsideration Order)
in CC Docket No. 96-114, FCC 04-206, adopted August 25, 2004, and
released September 13, 2004. The complete text of this Reconsideration
Order is available for inspection and copying during normal business
hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 20554. This document may
also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best
Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone 202-863-2893,
[[Page 62812]]
facsimile 202-863-2898, or via e-mail at bcpiweb.com. It is also
available on the Commission's Web site at http://www.fcc.gov.
Synopsis of the Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration
1. Background. Section 222(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the Act), requires
carriers that provide telephone exchange service to provide requesting
directory publishers with subscriber list information, that is listed
subscribers' names, addresses, telephone numbers, and headings under
which businesses are listed in the yellow pages, ``on a timely and
unbundled basis, under nondiscriminatory and reasonable rates, terms,
and conditions.'' In 1999, in the Subscriber List Information Order,
the Commission adopted comprehensive rules implementing section 222(e),
consistent with the congressional intent to prevent carriers from
leveraging their control over subscriber list information to impede
competition in directory publishing (64 FR 53944, Oct. 5, 1999). These
rules established procedures for carrier provision of subscriber list
information to directory publishers, established presumptively
reasonable rates for carrier provision of subscriber list information
to directory publishers, and provided processes for addressing
subscriber list information complaints. ALLTEL Corporate Services, Inc.
(ALLTEL), the Association of Directory Publishers (ADP), Bell Atlantic
(now Verizon), National Telephone Cooperative Association (NTCA), and
US WEST Communications, Inc., (now Qwest Communications International
Inc.) filed petitions for reconsideration that challenged certain
aspects of the Subscriber List Information Order. Subsequently, NTCA
withdrew its petition for reconsideration.
2. Complaint Procedures. In this order, the Commission denies a
request to modify current complaint procedures to allow a directory
publisher to pay the presumptively reasonable rates during the pendency
of a complaint. Additionally, the Commission denies a request that any
subscriber list information rate complaint will be given accelerated
docket treatment or otherwise resolved within 60 days of filing.
3. Treatment of Unlisted Numbers. The Commission grants a request
to eliminate a requirement for carriers to provide requesting directory
publishers with notice of changes in subscriber list information when
customers choose to have unlisted numbers.
4. Availability of Written Contracts. The requirement in the
Subscriber List Information Order regarding contract disclosure is
confirmed by the Commission as a useful tool to prevent discrimination.
However, the Commission specifies that carriers may limit such
disclosures to only those portions of contracts that are related to the
carrier's provision of subscriber list information. The Commission also
determines that carriers may subject such disclosures to
confidentiality agreements.
5. Timeframe for Provision of Subscriber List Information. In the
Subscriber List Information Order, the Commission adopted rules to help
ensure that carriers provide subscriber list information on a
``timely'' basis as required by section 222(e). One of these rules gave
carriers 30 days to inform directory publishers that they cannot comply
with requests for subscriber list information. In the Reconsideration
Order, the Commission declines to lower this timeframe to seven days.
6. Safeguards. In the Subscriber List Information Order, the
Commission allowed carriers to require entities requesting subscriber
list information pursuant to section 222(e) to certify that they will
use that information only for directory publishing purposes. The
Commission determined that once the directory publisher provides this
certification, the carrier must comply with the directory publisher's
request for subscriber list information absent a Commission order to
the contrary. In the Reconsideration Order, the Commission affirms this
requirement, stating that this ``innocent until proven guilty''
approach ensures that a directory publisher that meets the
certification requirement will have the subscriber list information it
needs to publish its directories pending resolution of any dispute
regarding subscriber list information usage. The Commission also states
that a ``guilty until proven innocent'' approach, even if limited to
entities that are not established directory publishers, would enable
carriers to delay entry by potential directory publishing competitors
by forcing them to obtain Commission determinations in their favor
prior to their receiving subscriber list information.
7. Role of Carrier Publishing Affiliates. In the Subscriber List
Information Order, the Commission determined that a carrier's decision
to have an affiliate or third party assign primary advertising
classifications as required under a state obligation does not absolve
the carrier of its obligation to provide those classifications to
requesting directory publishers in accordance with section 222(e).
Consistent with the principle behind this determination, the Commission
determines that in the Reconsideration Order that a carrier should not
be allowed to use an affiliate to evade its subscriber list information
responsibilities under section 222(e) and the Commission's implementing
rules.
8. Section 222(e) Unbundling. In implementing section 222(e)'s
unbundling requirement, the Commission concluded in the Subscriber List
Information Order that section 222(e) precludes a carrier from bundling
listings that the carrier is able to sell separately. The Commission
required carriers to unbundle subscriber list information, including
updates, on any basis requested by a directory publisher that the
carrier's internal systems can accommodate. The Commission stated that,
if this process results in the provision of listings in addition to
those the directory publisher requested, the carrier may impose charges
for, and the directory publisher may publish, only the requested
listings. In the Reconsideration Order, the Commission declines to
adopt suggested changes to these requirements. The Commission concludes
that the unbundling requirements adopted in the Subscriber List
Information Order properly balance carriers' and directory publishers'
competing interests.
9. Unpublished and Unlisted Information. In the Reconsideration
Order, the Commission denies a request that it rules that sections 201
and 202 of the Act mandate that carriers must provide information
regarding subscribers with unpublished and unlisted numbers to
competing publishers if the carriers provide that information to their
own publishing affiliates. The Commission determines that this request
is beyond the scope of this proceeding, which it had initiated to
consider adopting regulations to implement section 222 of the Act and
did not indicate that the Commission might act pursuant to sections 201
or 202.
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
10. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
incorporated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in CC Docket No. 96-
115 (Notice). The Commission sought written public comment on the
proposals in the Notice, including comment on the IRFA. In addition, a
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was incorporated in the Third
[[Page 62813]]
Report and Order in CC Docket No. 96-115 (Subscriber List Information
Order). This present Supplemental Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(SFRFA) on the Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration
(Reconsideration Order) conforms to the RFA.
Need for, and Objectives of, Adopted Rules
11. The need for and objectives of the rules adopted in this
Reconsideration Order are the same as those discussed in the FRFA on
the Subscriber List Information Order. In general, these rules
implement section 222(e) of the Communications Act, in order to further
Congress's goal of preventing unfair local exchange carrier (LEC)
practices in relation to subscriber list information and of encouraging
the development of competition in directory publishing. The Commission
promulgated rules pursuant to section 222(e) of the Communications Act
in the Subscriber List Information Order. We grant in part, and deny in
part the requests for reconsideration or clarification of the
Subscriber List Information Order. In particular, we deny a request
that the Commission modify the complaint procedures adopted in the
Subscriber List Information Order by allowing a publisher to pay the
presumptively reasonable rates during the pendency of a complaint and
by guaranteeing that any subscriber list information rate complaint
will be given accelerated docket treatment or otherwise resolved within
60 days of filing. We grant a request that the Commission eliminate a
requirement that carriers provide requesting directory publishers with
notice of changes in subscriber list information in circumstances where
customers choose to cease having their numbers listed. We confirm as a
useful tool to prevent discrimination the Subscriber List Information
Order's requirement regarding contract disclosure, but allow carriers
to limit such disclosures to only those portions of contracts that are
related to subscriber list information and subject such disclosures to
confidentiality agreements. Finally, the Commission affirms other
aspects of the Subscriber List Information Order that were subject to
petitions for reconsideration.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to
the FRFA
12. We received no comments directly in response to the FRFA in
this proceeding.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Adopted Rules Will Apply
13. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under section 3 of the
Small Business Act. Under the Small Business Act, a ``small business
concern'' is one that: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is
not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration
(SBA). A small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.''
14. In this section, we further describe and estimate the number of
small entity licensees and regulatees that may be affected by the rules
adopted in this Order. The most reliable source of information
regarding the total numbers of certain common carrier and related
providers nationwide, as well as the number of commercial wireless
entities, appears to be the data that the Commission published in its
Trends in Telephone Service August 2003 report. The SBA has developed
small business size standards for wireline and wireless small
businesses within the three commercial census categories of ``Wired
Telecommunications Carriers,'' ``Paging,'' and ``Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under these categories, a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Below, using the above size
standards and others, we discuss the total estimated numbers of small
businesses that might be affected by our actions.
15. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers
(incumbent LECs) in this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a
``small business'' under the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the
pertinent small business size standard (e.g., a telephone
communications business, having 1,500 or fewer employees), and ``is not
dominant in its field of operation.'' The SBA's Office of Advocacy
contends that, for RFA purposes, small incumbent LECs are not dominant
in their field of operation because any such dominance is not
``national'' in scope. We have therefore included small incumbent LECs
in this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no
effect on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA
contexts.
16. Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers,
which consists of all such companies having 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were a total of 2,225
firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this
total, 2,210 firms employed 999 or fewer employees, and an additional
24 firms employed 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this size
standard, the great majority of firms can be considered small.
17. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a specific small business size standard for
providers of incumbent local exchange services. The closest applicable
size standard under the SBA rules is for ``Wired Telecommunications
Carriers.'' Under that standard, such a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's Telephone Trends
Report data, 1,337 incumbent local exchange carriers reported that they
were engaged in the provision of local exchange services. Of these
1,337 carriers, an estimated 1,032 have 1,500 or fewer employees and
305 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, we estimate that the
majority of providers of local exchange service are small entities that
may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
18. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a specific small business size standard for
providers of competitive local exchange services or to competitive
access providers or to ``Other Local Exchange Carriers,'' all of which
are discrete categories under which TRS data are collected. The closest
applicable size standard under the SBA rules is for Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's
Telephone Trends Report data, 609 companies reported that they were
engaged in the provision of either competitive access provider services
or competitive local exchange carrier services. Of these 609 companies,
an estimated 458 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 151 have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the
majority of providers of competitive local exchange service,
competitive access providers, and ``Other Local
[[Page 62814]]
Exchange Carriers'' are small entities that may be affected by the
rules and policies adopted herein.
19. Local Resellers. The SBA has developed a specific size standard
for small businesses within the category of ``Telecommunications
Resellers.'' Under that standard, such a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's Telephone Trends
Report data, 133 companies reported that they were engaged in the
provision of local resale services. Of these 133 companies, an
estimated 127 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 6 have more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of
local resellers may be affected by the rules.
20. Toll Resellers. The SBA has developed a specific size standard
for small businesses within the category of ``Telecommunications
Resellers.'' Under that SBA definition, such a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's Telephone Trends
Report data, 625 companies reported that they were engaged in the
provision of toll resale services. Of these 625 companies, an estimated
590 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 35 have more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that a majority of
toll resellers may be affected by the rules.
21. Interexchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a specific size standard for small entities specifically
applicable to providers of interexchange services. The closest
applicable size standard under the SBA rules is for ``Wired
Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under that standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's
Telephone Trends Report data, 261 carriers reported that their primary
telecommunications service activity was the provision of interexchange
services. Of these 261 carriers, an estimated 223 have 1,500 or fewer
employees and 38 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, we
estimate that a majority of interexchange carriers may be affected by
the rules.
22. Operator Service Providers (OSPs). Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a specific size standard for small entities
specifically applicable to operator service providers. The closest
applicable size standard under the SBA rules is for ``Wired
Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under that standard, such a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's
Telephone Trends Report data, 23 companies reported that they were
engaged in the provision of operator services. Of these 23 companies,
an estimated 22 have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that a majority
of local resellers may be affected by the rules.
23. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. The SBA has developed a size
standard for small businesses within the category of
``Telecommunications Resellers.'' Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to the
FCC's Telephone Trends Report data, 37 companies reported that they
were engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these 37
companies, an estimated 36 have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that
a majority of prepaid calling providers may be affected by the rules.
24. Other Toll Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a specific size standard for small entities specifically
applicable to ``Other Toll Carriers.'' This category includes toll
carriers that do not fall within the categories of interexchange
carriers, operator service providers, prepaid calling card providers,
satellite service carriers, or toll resellers. The closest applicable
size standard under the SBA rules is for ``Wired Telecommunications
Carriers.'' Under that standard, such a business is small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. According to the FCC's Telephone Trends
Report data, 92 carriers reported that they were engaged in the
provision of ``Other Toll Services.'' Of these 92 carriers, an
estimated 82 have 1,500 or fewer employees and ten have more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that a majority of
``Other Toll Carriers'' may be affected by the rules.
25. Directory Publishers. Many directory publishers are members of
either of two trade associations, Association of Directory Publishers
(ADP) and Yellow Pages Integrated Media Association (YPIMA). ADP states
that its membership includes more than 135 directory publishers.
Collectively, these companies publish over 2,200 different directories
annually. While we have no current information on the number of YPIMA's
members, YPIMA states that its members deliver yellow pages directories
to virtually all telephone households within the United States. We have
also no data on how many ADP and YPIMA members have gross annual
revenues of $5 million or less. We assume, for purposes of this SFRFA,
that all of these publishers are small entities that may be affected by
this Reconsideration Order. Collectively, ADP and YPIMA members publish
the vast majority of the directories published in the United States.
There, however, likely are additional directory publishers that are
small entities.
Description of Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
26. In this section of the Supplemental FRFA, we analyze the
projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements
that may apply to small entities as a result of this Reconsideration
Order. We also describe the steps taken to minimize the economic impact
of our decisions on small entities, including the significant
alternatives considered and rejected.
27. In the Subscriber List Information Order, the Commission
adopted presumptively reasonable rates of $0.04 per listing for base
file subscriber list information and $0.06 per listing for updates. In
the Reconsideration Order, we deny a request that the Commission modify
the complaint procedures adopted in the Subscriber List Information
Order by allowing a publisher to pay those presumptively reasonable
rates during the pendency of a complaint and by guaranteeing that any
subscriber list information rate complaint will be given accelerated
docket treatment or otherwise resolved within 60 days of filing. We
grant a request that the Commission eliminate a requirement that
carriers provide requesting directory publishers with notice of changes
in subscriber list information in circumstances where customers choose
to cease having their numbers listed. We confirm as a useful tool to
prevent discrimination the Subscriber List Information Order's
requirement regarding contract disclosure, but allow carriers to limit
such disclosures to only those portions of contracts that are related
to subscriber list information and subject such disclosures to
confidentiality agreements. We decline ADP's request to change the
timeframe in which carriers must inform directory publishers that they
cannot comply with a request for subscriber list information to seven
days. We determine that the safeguards adopted in the Subscriber List
Information Order are sufficient and reject a request to allow a
carrier to refrain from providing subscriber list information to
directory publishers that the carrier believes will misuse it. We
affirm that carriers may not use their publishing affiliates to avoid
fulfilling their duties under section 222(e). We
[[Page 62815]]
reject Bell Atlantic's requests that we determine that if a carrier is
unable to unbundle subscriber list information in the manner that the
publisher requests, the publisher must pay for all the listings
received, not just the listings that the publisher uses. Finally, we
reject a request that we take action under sections 201 and 202 of the
Act, because such action would be beyond the scope of the original
Notice in this docket. Additionally, the collection of information
contained herein is contingent upon approval by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities,
and Significant Alternatives Considered
28. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its adopted approach,
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1)
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.
29. In choosing among the various alternatives in the
Reconsideration Order, we have sought to minimize the adverse economic
impact on carriers and directory publishers, including those that are
small entities. As was the case in the Subscriber List Information
Order, moreover, we recognize that Congress intended section 222(e) to
prevent carriers from deriving economic benefits from refusing to
provide subscriber list information on a timely and unbundled basis,
charging discriminatory or unreasonable rates for that information, or
imposing discriminatory or unreasonable terms or conditions in
connection with the provision of that information. In reconsidering our
rules implementing that section, we have sought to further this
congressional intent in a manner that minimizes regulatory burdens,
including the burdens on small entities. The effort has resulted in our
eliminating a requirement that carriers provide requesting directory
publishers with notice of changes in subscriber list information in
circumstances where customers choose to cease having their numbers
listed. We also amend our contract disclosure rules to allow carriers
to withhold from disclosure certain portions of subscriber list
information contracts and to subject disclosure of such contracts to
confidentiality agreements. These changes should reduce burdens on
carriers, including those that are small businesses, without adversely
affecting directory publishers.
30. In other instances, however, we reject as unsupported by the
record proposed alternatives to the rules adopted in the Subscriber
List Information Order. For instance, we reject as beyond the scope of
this proceeding a request that we take action, pursuant to sections 201
and 202 of the Communications Act, to prohibit carriers from favoring
their own directory publishing operations over their competitors'
operations in connection with information regarding subscribers with
unpublished or unlisted numbers. We believe that these actions properly
balance the interests of carriers and directory publishers, including
the members of each group that are small businesses.
Report to Congress
31. The Commission will send a copy of the Reconsideration Order,
including this SFRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to
the Congressional Review Act. In addition, the Commission will send a
copy of the Reconsideration Order, including the SFRFA, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. A copy of
the Reconsideration Order and SFRFA (or summaries thereof) also will be
published in the Federal Register. See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).
Ordering Clauses
32. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j),
201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r), and 403 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j),
201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403, that this Memorandum
Opinion and Order on Reconsideration is adopted.
33. It is further ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-
205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r), and 403 of the Communications
Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208,
222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403, that this Memorandum Opinion and Order
on Reconsideration shall become effective thirty days after publication
of the text or a summary thereof in the Federal Register, except for
paragraphs 7 through 10 of this summary, which contain collection
requirements that have not been approved by OMB. The Federal
Communications Commission will publish a document in the Federal
Register announcing the effective date.
34. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403 that the
petition for reconsideration of the Subscriber List Information Order
filed on November 4, 1999, by the Association of Directory Publishers
is granted to the extent indicated herein and otherwise is denied.
35. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403 that the
petition for reconsideration and clarification of the Subscriber List
Information Order filed on November 4, 1999, by ALLTEL Corporate
Services, Inc., is granted to the extent indicated herein and otherwise
is denied.
36. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403 that the
petition for reconsideration of the Subscriber List Information Order
filed on November 4, 1999, by the Bell Atlantic is granted to the
extent indicated herein and otherwise is denied.
37. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403 that the
petition for reconsideration of the Subscriber List Information Order
filed on November 4, 1999, by U S WEST Communications, Inc., is granted
to the extent indicated herein and otherwise is denied.
38. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained
in Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 251, 303(r),
and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 208, 222(e), 222(f), 303(r), and 403 that the
petition for reconsideration of the Subscriber List Information Order
filed on November 4, 1999, by National Telephone Cooperative
Association has been withdrawn.
39. It is further ordered, that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference
[[Page 62816]]
Information Center, shall send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and
Order on Reconsideration, including the Supplemental Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects
Subscriber List Information, Record Keeping, and Directory
Publishers.
Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.
Final Rules
PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS
0
1. The authority citation for part 64 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254(k); secs. 403(b)(2)(B),(c), Pub.
L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 218,
222, 225, 226, 228, and 254 (k) unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 64.2341 is amended by revising paragraph (c) and adding
paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 64.2341 Record keeping.
* * * * *
(c) Except to the extent specified in paragraph (d), a carrier
shall make the contracts and records described in paragraphs (a) and
(b) available, upon request, to the Commission and to any directory
publisher that requests those contracts and records for the purpose of
publishing a directory.
(d) A carrier need not disclose to a directory publisher pursuant
to paragraph (c) portions of requested contracts that are wholly
unrelated to the rates, terms, or conditions under which the carrier
provides subscriber list information to itself, an affiliate, or an
entity that publishes directories on the carrier's behalf.
(e) A carrier may subject its disclosure of subscriber list
information contracts or records to a directory publisher pursuant to
paragraph (c) to a confidentiality agreement that limits access to and
use of the information to the purpose of determining the rates, terms,
and conditions under which the carrier provides subscriber list
information to itself, an affiliate, or an entity that publishes
directories on the carrier's behalf.
[FR Doc. 04-23094 Filed 10-27-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P