WPC 2MBVRKZ3|j 7jC:,Xj\  P6G;XP"i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxdHP LaserJet 4PostScriptHPLAS4.PRSXj\  P6G;\}HXP2  K3|j "i~'^:DPddDDDdp4D48dddddddddd88pppX|pDL|pp||D8D\dDXdXdXDdd88d8ddddDL8ddddX`(`lD4l\DDD4DDDDDDDDd8XXXXXX|X|X|X|XD8D8D8D8ddddddddddXdbdddpdXXXXXlX~|X|X|X|XdddldldD8DdDDDdplld|8|P|D|D|8dvddddDDDpLpLpLpl|T|8|\ddddddl|X|X|Xd|DdpL|Dd~4ddC$CWxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxNHxxH\dDXddddd8@d<@d<DDXXdDDxddzHxxHvppDXd<"dxtldpxxd2 Z vzpk`HP LaserJet 4HPLAS4.PRS 4Xj\  P6G;\}HXPa8DocumentgDocument Style StyleXX` `  ` a4DocumentgDocument Style Style . a6DocumentgDocument Style Style GX  2 khv t a5DocumentgDocument Style Style }X(# a2DocumentgDocument Style Style<o   ?  A.  a7DocumentgDocument Style StyleyXX` ` (#` BibliogrphyBibliography:X (# 2 )  f  a1Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers:`S@ I.  X(# a2Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers C @` A. ` ` (#` a3DocumentgDocument Style Style B b  ?  1.  a3Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers L! ` ` @P 1. ` `  (# 2   _'a4Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers Uj` `  @ a. ` (# a5Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbers _o` `  @h(1)  hh#(#h a6Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph Numbersh` `  hh#@$(a) hh#((# a7Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumberspfJ` `  hh#(@*i) (h-(# 2Y)a8Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersyW"3!` `  hh#(-@p/a) -pp2(#p Tech InitInitialize Technical Style. k I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) 1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1DocumentgDocument Style Style\s0  zN8F I. ׃  a5TechnicalTechnical Document Style)WD (1) . 2 ga6TechnicalTechnical Document Style)D (a) . a2TechnicalTechnical Document Style<6  ?  A.   a3TechnicalTechnical Document Style9Wg  2  1.   a4TechnicalTechnical Document Style8bv{ 2  a.   2@?3 a1TechnicalTechnical Document StyleF!<  ?  I.   a7TechnicalTechnical Document Style(@D i) . a8TechnicalTechnical Document Style(D a) . Doc InitInitialize Document Stylez   0*0*0*  I. A. 1. a.(1)(a) i) a) I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)Documentg2rev[PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading PaperE!n    X X` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:lmDTechnical 5Technical 5;` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 6Technical 6<` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 2Technical 2= Technical 3Technical 3> 2K?$ E@l/GA$GB$ITechnical 4Technical 4?` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 1Technical 1@ Technical 7Technical 7A` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#Technical 8Technical 8B` hp x (#X` hp x (# X` hp x (#` hp x (#2QCLDLEMFOWP Heading 2WP Heading 2C44#6X@C@##Xv6X@CX@#WP Heading 1WP Heading 1D44#6X@C@# #Xv6X@CX@#toc 1toc 1E` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#toc 2toc 2F` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#2{ZGRH!TI?VJ]Xtoc 3toc 3G` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#toc 4toc 4H` hp x (# !(#  !(# ` hp x (#toc 5toc 5I` hp x (#h!(# h!(# ` hp x (#toc 6toc 6J` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#2}aKvZL#[MA]N__toc 7toc 7K toc 8toc 8L` hp x (#!(#!(#` hp x (#toc 9toc 9M` hp x (#!(#B!(#B` hp x (#index 1index 1N` hp x (#` !(# ` !(# ` hp x (#2fOaPcQveRlafindex 2index 2O` hp x (#` !(#B` !(#B` hp x (#toa headingtoa headingP` hp x (#!(# !(# ` hp x (#captioncaptionQ _Equation Caption_Equation CaptionR 2RnSrfKqgKiKlendnote referenceendnote referenceS "i~'^#)0<A.SSxSSJJSJS+SSSSS8SSSSSSSSS.xJxJxJxJxJorJiJiJiJiJ8.8.8.8.{SxSxSxSxS{S{S{S{SxSxJ{SxSxSxS{S`SxIxSxIqIqIrSrS{dgIiSiSgIxSxSxSxSxS{S{S8.SSSS8Sz]SSuSg/ga݅@  I.   X(# SubheadingSubheadingV0\ E A.  2Wl%Xfootnote textfootnote textW` hp x (#4 <DL!#XP\  P6QXP##C\  P6QP#4 <DL!` hp x (#head1 #X'd#2p}wC@ # X-  @@#Xj\  P6G;XP#X01Í ÍX01Í Í $/Memorandum Opinion and  } = Order/Rules and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification Service Caller ID/$ $//400.64.1601, 400.64.1603, 400.64.1604//$  X-RECORD ONLY PABefore the  X-lU` `  FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION xx- DA 96439+Washington, D.C. 20554 lU  XH-  X -In the Matter of  hh,) ` `  hh,)  X -Rules and Policies Regardinghh,)VCC Docket No. 91281  X -Calling Number Identificationhh,)  X -Service Caller ID hh,) llU MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER lUl lU  X4- Adopted:` ` March 27, 1996hh,VReleased:ppMarch 29, 1996 By the Chief, Common Carrier Bureau:  X- INTRODUCTION and BACKGROUND  X-1.` ` On January 16, 1996, Sprint Communications Co. (Sprint) filed a petition for  X|-stay and waiver of the Commission's calling party number (CPN) delivery and privacy rules.|< X-ԍ Petition of Sprint for Extension of Stay and Waiver of January 16, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Sprint Petition). The Commission's CPN delivery rules require that common carriers using Signaling System 7 (SS7), and offering or subscribing to any service based on SS7 call set up functionality,  X7-transmit the CPN associated with an interstate call to interconnecting carriers.E7b< XJ!-ԍ 47 C.F.R.  64.1601(a).E The Commission's CPN privacy rules require, in part, that carriers must honor a caller's privacy  X -request and that no carrier may override a caller's privacy indicator.H < X$-ԍ Id. at  64.1601(b). H On May 5, 1995, the Commission issued an Order on Reconsideration that affirmed these CPN delivery and privacy"0*((<"  X-rules, and established an effective date for these rules of December 1, 1995.< Xy-ԍ Rule and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification Service Caller ID, Memorandum Opinion and Order on Reconsideration, Second Report and Order and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 10 FCC 11700 (1995).  X-ԙ2.` ` On October 24, 1995, Sprint filed a petition requesting a waiver of the Commission's CPN delivery rule until March 31, 1996. In its waiver petition, Sprint stated that a waiver was needed to give it time to modify CPN delivery software in its switches because, in certain instances when CPN was not available to it, its switches would pass  X-Automatic Number Identification (ANI) or charge number information in place of CPN._< X-ԍ Sprint Petition for Waiver of October 24, 1995. ANI and charge number information contain the billing number for a caller. Typically, in the residential setting the billing number is the same as the caller's telephone number. A privacy indicator is not technically available for either ANI or charge number._ Subsequently, several other interexchange carriers identified similar problems in their  Xv-networks and requested waivers.vv4< X[ -ԍ See Cable & Wireless, Inc. (CWI) Petition for Waiver of November 13, 1995; Competitive Telecommunications Association (CompTel) Petition for Temporary Waiver of November 8, 1995; General Communication, Inc. (GCI) Petition for Waiver of November 20, 1995; LCI International Telecom Corporation (LCI) Request for Declaratory Ruling or, in the Alternative, Petition for Temporary Waiver of November 13, 1995. None of these parties have petitioned for additional time to modify their switches. On November 30, 1995, the Commission provided the relief sought by Sprint and other interexchange carriers (IXCs) and stayed the effective date of Sections 64.1601(a) and 64.1603 of the Commission's rules until March 31, 1996 as applied to interexchange carriers that use certain switches. Specifically, the rules were stayed as applied to Digital Switch Corporation (DSC) and Northern Telecom, Inc. switches used by interexchange carriers that populate the CPN parameter with ANI or charge number  X -information.  r < X-ԍ Rule and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification Service Caller ID, Order and Fourth Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 10 FCC 13819 (1995) (hereinafter referred to as  X-December 1st Order).   X -3.` ` Sprint now seeks additional time to comply with the Commission's CPN delivery and privacy rules for two types of circumstances. First, Sprint requests either an extension of the existing stay or a waiver of the CPN delivery and customer notification rules contained in Sections 64.1601(a) and 64.1603 of the Commission's rules until April 30, 1996 to allow additional time to correct the switch problem that Sprint identified to the  XK-Commission in October 1995.?K< X!-ԍ Sprint Petition at 3.? It indicates that software modifications correcting its  X4-original problem are expected to be delivered by March 15, 1996.3 4< X$-ԍ Id.3 Sprint contends that, following this date, it needs six weeks, or until April 30, 1996, to properly install the software"W 0*(( "  X-modifications.3 < Xy-ԍ Id.3 It claims that it and its vendor have been working diligently to correct the problem and that the testing and installation schedule it has established represents a highly  X-expedited schedule for these activities.3 y< X-ԍ Id.3 Thus, Sprint submits that the additional time it seeks  X-would be in the public interest.3 *< X-ԍ Id.3  X-4.` ` Additionally, Sprint indicates that after the Commission's stay was ordered, it discovered another circumstance in which a caller's privacy may be violated and it now requests a waiver related to this problem. This problem concerns calls placed to Sprint that require the assistance of a live operator. These calls are passed to "live operators" at Sprint  X1-operator centers over ISDN primary rate interface (PRI) trunks.3 1< X-ԍ Id.3 Sprint indicates that because the ISDN PRI protocol does not contain a charge number field, Sprint populates the CPN parameter with ANI or charge number information that may be conveyed to its operator  X -centers.3 < X)-ԍ Id.3 Sprint states that the CPN information is then passed to the local exchange carriers  X -with no privacy flag.; = < X-ԍ Id. at 34.; It claims that this ISDN interface arrangement complicates software modifications to its switches, and the software modifications to correct the problem for "live  X -operator" calls will not be delivered to Sprint until the middle of July.9 < XF-ԍ Id. at 4.9 Thus, it contends that although it can modify its switches to correct the original problem by April 30, 1996, it cannot modify its switches for calls handled by "live operators" until July 31, 1996. Sprint contends that it is faced with two options: (1) delay the delivery of CPN on all calls to the LECs until the live operator problem can be fixed; or (2) commence delivery of CPN as soon as the midMarch 1996 software modifications can be tested and installed. Under the second option, ANI or charge number will be delivered as CPN to LECs, with no opportunity for a caller to prevent his or her number from being revealed, on calls passing through "live  X-operators."3 < X?#-ԍ Id.3  X-5.` ` Sprint estimates that under the second option a caller's privacy would be"P0*(("  X-violated in five out of a million calls.=< Xy-ԍ Id. at 5 n.4.= Sprint seeks to pursue the second option, and proposes that it be allowed to commence CPN delivery by April 30, 1996, but that it be granted a waiver of the prohibition against populating CPN with ANI or charge number  X-information and no privacy flag, for calls traversing live operators, until July 31, 1996.9y< X-ԍ Id. at 5.9  X-Sprint indicates that it believes option two best balances the various equities involved,r*< X -ԍ Id. Sprint does not indicate why it believes this to be the case.r and under this option, it would include, in the customer notification required by Section 64.1603, a notice to customers that they may not be able to suppress delivery of their number if their  X_-call utilizes a live operator.3_< X -ԍ Id.3 If the Commission chooses not to grant the privacy waiver necessitated by option two, Sprint alternatively requests a waiver of the CPN delivery rules  X1-through July 31, 1996 under option one.31< Xn-ԍ Id.3  X - DISCUSSION  X -6.` ` The Commission may waive any provision of its rules, in whole or in part, if  X -good cause is shown.F = < X-ԍ See 47 C.F.R  1.3.F An applicant for waiver must demonstrate that special circumstances  X -warrant a deviation from the general rule and such deviation will serve the public interest.} < XF-ԍ Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C.Cir. 1990).} The Commission has delegated authority to the Common Carrier Bureau to rule on petitions  Xy-for waivers and stays related to its caller ID rules.y < X-ԍ Rules and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification Service Caller ID, Order, 10 FCC Rcd 13819 (1995) at para. 9. Acting pursuant to that delegated  Xb-authority and after reviewing Sprint's petition,b9< XL!-ԍ Sprint's petition was placed on public notice, DA 96112 on February 1, 1996. No party filed comments or reply comments. we hereby grant Sprint a waiver of the Commission's CPN delivery rules until June 1, 1996, subject to the conditions explained below. During this period Sprint should not pass CPN information until it has fixed both the original switch problem and the "live operator" problem.  X-7.` ` We conclude that Sprint has demonstrated that technical problems within its"0*((E" network create special circumstances warranting deviation from our rules because those problems prevent Sprint switches from properly passing CPN and may result in the privacy of calling parties being compromised. This conclusion is consistent with the Bureau's previous recognition that unique technical problems constitute a special circumstance contemplated by  X-Section 1.3 for the purposes of evaluating the appropriateness of granting a waiver.< X-ԍ Rules and Policies Regarding Calling Number Identification Service Caller ID, Order, DA 952415, FCC Rcd, (Com.Car.Bur. 1995) at para 43. We conclude also that Sprint has demonstrated that the public interest would be served by granting it a waiver of our rules so that it not be required to pass CPN until June 1, 1996. In  X_-its December 1st Order, the Commission recognized that it was faced with an undesirable choice between (1) granting the requested waivers of IXCs and temporarily frustrating its federal objective of widespread CPN availability, or (2) denying the waivers and temporarily  X -frustrating its federal privacy objectives.O b< X--ԍ December 1st Order at para. 43.O Given its careful balancing of privacy interests throughout this proceeding, the Commission chose to stay the effective date of its CPN rules because it found that, although its objective of widespread CPN availability would be  X -temporarily delayed, compromising the privacy of callers would be unacceptable.@ < X-ԍ Id. at para. 44.@ It determined that suggestions by commenting parties that opposed the waivers provided inappropriate solutions because they placed unacceptable burdens on callers and a caller's  X-privacy was still at risk of being compromised.4< X-ԍ Id. 4 These considerations continue to be valid, and therefore we grant Sprint a waiver that it not be required to pass CPN until June 1, 1996.  XK-8.` ` With respect to Sprint's waiver request for additional time until July 31, 1996, to correct its problem involving "live operators," we determine not to grant this additional time because (1) we find Sprint has provided inadequate information to allow a determination whether a waiver of our CPN rules until July 31, 1996 would be in the public interest, and (2) we believe Sprint may have adequate time to correct the "live operator" problem prior to the June 1, 1996 expiry of the waiver we now grant. Ordinarily, planning time on a nonexpedited schedule for major network software upgrades is eighteen months. Here, Sprint has not indicated that the problems it is confronting require changes comparable to those incorporated in a major network software upgrade, and thus we believe the necessary software upgrade can be accomplished in much less time. Furthermore, Sprint has indicated that its vendor is working on an expedited schedule. Given that Sprint will have had eight months  XN-since identifying its technical problems to correct themNu< Xt%-ԍ Sprint originally requested a waiver of the caller ID rules in October 1995 because of technical problems with its switches. and that the software changes here do not appear to be a major network upgrade, we believe that Sprint can expedite its"7 0*((" development and deployment schedule to correct the "live operator" problem by June 1, 1996. Additionally, on June 1, 1996, the Commission's stay applicable to interstate calls made to  X-and from California expires.O < XK-ԍ December 1st Order at para. 23.O We seek to avoid unnecessary customer confusion associated with interstate calls that do not contain caller ID information beyond this date. By granting this waiver until June 1, 1996 and denying Sprint's request for additional time, the major sources of customer confusion related to interstate caller ID will be eliminated as of June 1, 1996.  XH-9.` ` To assist the Bureau in tracking Sprint's diligence in complying with the Commission's rules, we condition the waiver we now grant on the following reports being filed with the Network Services Division of the Common Carrier Bureau. Not later than April 15, 1996 and again on May 10, 1996, Sprint should file a report that presents the information below: (1) The status of development and deployment of a software patch that corrects the original switch problem. This report should indicate the date by which Sprint will eliminate this problem from its network and the specific facts causing continued delayed implementation. (2) The status of development and deployment of a software patch that corrects the "live operator" problem. This report should indicate the date by which Sprint will eliminate this problem from its network and the specific facts causing continued delayed implementation. (3) If Sprint believes it will not be able to correct the "live operator" problem by June 1, 1996, it should provide the following information in the report due May 10, 1996:  X-` ` (a) an estimated date by which the "live operator" problem will be ` `  corrected;  Xe-` ` (b) what steps Sprint has taken to correct the "live operator" problem since ` `  it was identified;  X7-` ` (c) the number of Sprint personnel assigned to correct the problem since it ` `  was identified;  X -` ` (d)  the number of Sprint personnel and other resources necessary to have ` `  the problem corrected by June 1, 1996 and by the new estimated date ` `  specified in (a);  X -` ` (e) the type of the calls placed through a "live operator," that is, the ` `  percentage of "live operator" calls originated at a residence, ` `  payphones and elsewhere. If data are unavailable, Sprint should ` `  estimate the percentages and explain the basis for these estimates; and  Xh$-` ` (f) an analysis of the ability of Sprint to have its "live operators"  X(#(#"h$y 0*((F#"ԑ` `  advise a caller that his or her telephone number may be revealed. This ` `  analysis should address Sprint's ability to provide such notification and ` `  Sprint's subjective assessment of the effectiveness of such an approach  X-` `  in preventing a caller's number from being revealed without his or her (#(#` `  knowledge.  Xv- 10.` ` The analysis required by part (f) should address what alternatives (e.g., using another carrier, using a calling card, etc.) an operator might offer to the caller that does not want his or her number revealed. Additionally, this analysis should include discussion of alternatives that could ensure that a caller, who wishes to request privacy, will not incur additional costs to complete the call because of Sprint's technical problem. Finally, Sprint should provide additional alternatives regarding customer notifications that may be available to reduce or eliminate the probability that a caller's telephone number will not be revealed  X -without the caller's knowledge. ! < XN-ԍ Sprint indicates in its petition that it would advise callers that telephone numbers of calls passing through a live operator may be revealed, when it complies with the customer notification requirements of Section 64.1603.  Given that the caller ID rules at issue here were first adopted in March 1994 and that Sprint has repeatedly requested for waiver of those rules, we believe such a reporting condition is necessary to ensure that Sprint complies with the Commission's caller ID rules in a manner consistent with the public interest.  Xb- 11.` ` Finally, in its December 1st Order, the Commission addressed the possibility of taking enforcement action against carriers not complying with its caller ID rules. Although it chose not to take enforcement action at that time, the Commission stated that if at the expiration of the stay it then granted, the IXCs had not corrected their technical problems, it would determine whether enforcement action, including monetary fines and other remedial  X-measures, was appropriate.V"K< X-ԍ December 1st Order at para. 43, n.144.V We do not find it necessary, at this time, to take enforcement action against Sprint. We find that, at least with respect to the original switch problem, Sprint appears to be diligently working to correct the problem. We, however, emphasize that the Commission will not tolerate repeated delays in achieving the Commission's CPNrelated  X-objectives. In its December 1st Order, the Commission made clear that using ANI or charge number to populate the CPN parameter without giving the caller the opportunity to request blocking would violate the Commission's rules. We reiterate that passage of CPN as a result of either the original switch problem identified by Sprint or its "live operator" problem would violate the Commission's caller ID delivery and privacy rules contained in Section 64.1601(a) and (b). The rules embody a fundamental Commission policy that the privacy interests of a calling party should not be violated. This policy was first enunciated in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in this docket issued by the Commission in 1991, and the rules at issue here, which require carriers to honor a caller's privacy request and not override the privacy indicator, were adopted in 1994 and have remained unchanged since that time. Sprint's" "0*((" failure to correct the original switch problem and the "live operator" problem by June 1, 1996 and to exhibit due diligence in complying with the Commission's rules, could lead to Commission enforcement action in the form of monetary fines, other remedial actions, or both.  X- ORDERING CLAUSES  X_- 12.` ` Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to Section 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.3, and authority delegated in Section 0.91 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, and Section 0.291 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.291, that Sprint's request for a waiver of Section 64.1601(a) and Section 64.1603 of the Commission's rules IS GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. This waiver is effective until June 1, 1996, and is subject to the conditions specified herein.  X - 13.` ` IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order is effective upon release. ` `  hh,FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION ` `  hh,Regina M. Keeney ` `  hh,Chief, Common Carrier Bureau