[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 167 (Thursday, August 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45647-45649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22850]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Public Information Collections Approved by Office of Management 
and Budget

August 21, 1997.
    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has received Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the following public 
information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995, Pub. L. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person 
is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid control number. For further information 
contact Shoko B. Hair, Federal Communications Commission, (202) 418-
1379.

Federal Communications Commission

    OMB Control No.: 3060-0742.
    Expiration Date: 12/31/99.
    Title: Number Portability--47 CFR Part 52, Subpart C, Sections 
52.21-52.31.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 237 respondents; 4.74 hours per response 
(avg.); 1125 total annual burden hours for all collections.
    Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Description: In the First Memorandum Opinion and Order on 
Reconsideration (First Reconsideration Order) issued in CC Docket No. 
95-116, the Commission generally affirms and clarifies rules 
promulgated in the First Report and Order issued in this proceeding 
which implements the statutory requirement that local exchange carriers 
(LECs) provide number portability as set forth in Section 251 of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act). The Commission requires the 
following information to be collected from various entities: a. Field 
Test report: The First Report and Order requires carriers participating 
in a field test of number portability in the Chicago, Illinois area to 
jointly file with the Commission a report of their findings within 30 
days after completion of the test. At this time, it is not clear how 
many carriers will be participating, but it is likely to include 
several new entrant local exchange carriers (LECs) and the dominant 
incumbent LEC in the region. See 47 CFR Section 52.23(g). (11 
respondents=20 hours per respondent=220 annual burden hours). b. 
Requests for long-term number portability in areas inside or outside 
the 100 largest MSAs: The First Memorandum Opinion and Order on 
Reconsideration requires that long-term number portability must be 
provided by LECs and CMRS providers inside the 100 largest Metropolitan 
Statistical Areas (MSAs) in switches for which another carrier has made 
a specific

[[Page 45648]]

request for number portability, according to the Commission's 
deployment schedule. A carrier must make its specific requests for 
deployment of number portability in particular switches at least nine 
months before the deadline for completion of number portability in that 
MSA. After carriers have submitted requests for number portability, a 
wireline carrier or CMRS provider must make readily available upon 
request, to any interested parties, a list of its switches for which 
portability has been requested, and those for which portability has not 
been requested. (80 respondents=3 hours per response=240 total annual 
hours). States will have the option of aggregating switch requests in 
the 100 largest MSAs. (50 respondents=3 hours per response=150 total 
annual hours). After the deadline for deployment in an MSA, carriers 
must deploy number portability in additional switches in that MSA upon 
request within certain time frames. After December 31, 1998, for LECs 
and after June 30, 1999, for CMRS providers outside the 100 largest 
MSAs, the First Report and Order continues to require deployment within 
six months after a specific request by another telecommunications 
carrier. The request must specifically request long-term number 
portability, identify the area covered by the request, and provide a 
tentative date six or more months in the future when the carrier 
expects to need number portability in order to port prospective 
customers. See 47 CFR Sections 52.23(b) and 52.31(a). (80 
respondents x 3 hours per response=240 hours). c. State notification of 
intention to ``opt out'' of regional database system: The First Report 
and Order requires state regulatory commissions to file with the 
Commission a notification if they opt to develop a state-specific 
database for the provision of number portability in lieu of 
participating in a regional database system. See 47 CFR Section 
52.25(g). ( 5 respondents x 3 hours=15 annual hours). d. Carrier 
petitions challenging state decision to ``opt out'' of regional 
database system: The First Report and Order permits carriers to 
challenge decisions made by states to develop a state-specific number 
portability database in lieu of participating in the regional databases 
by filing a petition with the Commission. Such carrier petitions must 
demonstrate that the state decision to opt out would significantly 
delay deployment of permanent number portability or result in excessive 
costs to carriers. See 47 CFR Section 52.25(g). (2 respondents x 10 
hours=20 hours). e. Proposal to administer database(s): The item 
requires any administrator selected by a state prior to the release of 
the First Report and Order, that wishes to bid for administration of 
one of the regional databases, must submit a new proposal in accordance 
with the guidelines established by the NANC. See 1st Report and Order, 
paragraph 97. (1 respondent=160 hours=160 annual hours). f. Petitions 
to extend implementation deadline: The First Report and Order requires 
carriers that are unable to meet the deadlines for implementing a long-
term number portability solution to file with the Commission at least 
60 days in advance of the deadline a petition to extend the time by 
which implementation in its network will be completed. See 47 CFR 
Sections 52.23(3) and 52.31(d). (8 respondents x 10 hours=80 annual 
hours). The information collected by the Commission under the field 
test report requirement will be used by the Commission to evaluate the 
implementation of long-term number portability measures and to 
safeguard the reliability of the public switched network. The specific 
request requirements will serve to trigger the obligation of LECs to 
provide long-term number portability. The requirement that states 
notify the Commission of their intention to opt out of the regional 
database system will assist the Commission in monitoring the nationwide 
implementation of number portability. The option for states to 
aggregate switch requests in the top 100 MSAs will also enable the 
states and Commission to monitor nationwide implementation. The 
requirement that any administrator selected prior to the First Report 
and Order's release must submit a new proposal to administer other 
databases ensures that such proposals conform with the requirements 
specified by the NANC, consistent with the principles enunciated by the 
Commission in the First Report and Order. Petitions to extend 
implementation deadlines will be used by the Commission to determine 
whether circumstances exist which warrant extension of any of the 
deadlines announced by the Commission in the First Report and Order. 
The list of switches for which portability has been requested as 
required by the First Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration 
in the top 100 MSAs will enable the Commission, states and carriers to 
monitor implementation of nationwide number portability. You are 
required to respond.

    OMB Control No.: 3060-0777.
    Expiration Date: 08/31/2000.
    Title: Access Charge Reform--CC Docket No. 92-262 (Further Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking).
    Form No.: N/A.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit.
    Estimated Annual Burden: 26 respondents; 360 hours per response 
(avg.); 9360 total annual burden hours for all collections.
    Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $289,000.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Description: In the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) 
issued in CC Docket No. 263, Access Charge Reform, the FCC proposes to 
make changes in the allocation of price cap LECs' interstate costs 
between regulated interstate services and nonregulated billing and 
collection activities. The Commission proposes collection of 
information under the following regulatory framework. a. General 
Purpose Computer Assets Study: Under this proposal, a price cap LEC 
would study the uses of the general purpose computer assets recorded in 
Account 2124 to determine the percentage of investment in that account 
that is used for billing collection activities. That percentage 
multiplied by the ratio of the dollar amount in Account 2124 to the 
dollar amount in Account 2110, which accumulates the total General 
Support Facilities (GSF) investment, would be applied to the interstate 
portion of Account 2110 to determine a dollar amount that represents 
general purpose computer assets used for interstate billing and 
collection category. The remainder of the interstate portion of Account 
2110 shall be apportioned among the access elements and the 
interexchange category using the current investment allocator. General 
purpose computer expenses recorded in Account 6124 would be treated in 
a similar fashion to Account 2124. The interstate portion of Account 
6124 would be allocated between (a) the billing and collection category 
and (b) all other elements and categories using the percentage derived 
for Account 2124. The remainder of Account 6120 (GSF expense) would be 
apportioned based on current GSF allocators. Appropriate downward 
exogenous cost adjustments would be made to all price cap baskets. We 
recognize that there are costs attached to a special study approach. To 
remedy this concern, we propose that each price cap LEC add to its cost 
allocation manual (CAM) a new section entitled ``Interstate Billing and 
Collection.'' That section would describe: (1) the manner in which the 
price cap LEC provides interstate billing and collection services, and 
(2) the

[[Page 45649]]

study it uses to determine the portion of Account 2124 investment that 
it attributes to the billing and collection category. The special study 
would then be subject to the same independent audit requirements as 
other regulated and nonregulated cost allocations. In addition, to 
obtain an independent certification of the validity of the procedures 
adopted by the price cap LEC, we would instruct the independent 
auditors to examine the design and execution of the study during the 
first independent audit following the addition of the billing and 
collection section to the CAM and to report their conclusions on the 
validity of the study. We also note, that price cap LECs may already be 
required to study the use of computer investment in Account 2124 as 
part of the process of allocating that investment between regulated and 
nonregulated activities pursuant to the Part 64 joint cost rules. (13 
respondents  x  700 hours per response = 9100 total annual hours). b. 
Tariff Filings: The FNPRM contains a proposal that may require the 
filing of tariffs with the Commission. The Commission proposes to 
permit price cap LECs to assess a PICC on special access lines to 
recover revenues for the common line basket. The special access PICC 
would be no higher than the PICC that an incumbent LEC could charge of 
a multi-line business line. Under our proposal, the special access PICC 
would not recover TIC or marketing expense. Consistent with our 
approach to reform the interstate access charge regime, however, we 
tentatively conclude that the scope of this proceeding should be 
limited to incumbent price cap LECs. (13 respondents  x  20 hours per 
response=260 hours). Our authority to collect this information is 
provided under 47 U.S.C. Secs. 201-205 and 303(r). The information 
collected under this FNPRM would be used by the FCC by incumbent LECs 
for use in determining the proper allocation of general purpose 
computer costs to the billing and collection category. Your response 
would be mandatory. Public reporting burden for the collection of 
information is as noted above. Send comments regarding the burden 
estimate or any other aspect of the collections of information, 
including suggestions for reducing the burden to Performance Evaluation 
and Records Management, Washington, D.C. 20554.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-22850 Filed 8-27-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P