FCC Web Documents citing 64.1201

as compiled by hallikainen.com/FccRules on 2012 06 01

• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.txt
  • intended to protect subscriber privacy and public safety without unnecessarily restricting legitimate telephone marketing and sales. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 227. Section Number and Title: 64.1200, generally, 64.1200(e)(2)(iv), (vi) and (f)(3)(iii) Delivery Restrictions. Brief Description: This rule imposes restrictions on the use of billing name and address information by telecommunications service providers and their authorized billing and collection agents. Section 64.1201 requires local exchange carriers (LECs) to provide interstate common carriers non-discriminatory access to the billing name and address (BNA) of LEC subscribers who use a LEC calling card or authorize collect and third party calls to pay for a carrier's services. The rule also includes safeguards protecting the privacy interests of end users. Need: The Commission adopted this rule to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.txt
  • 4-C740, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20554. . V. Ordering Clause Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 1-4, 227 and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, Pub. L. No. 108-10, 117 Stat. 557; 47 U.S.C. §§ 151-154, 227 and 303(r); and 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1200 and 64.1201 of the Commission's rules, the FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING IS ADOPTED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene H. Dortch Secretary Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, Pub. L. No. 108-10, 117 Stat. 557 (2003). 47 C.F.R. § 310.4(b). Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-243, 105 Stat. 2394 (1991), codified at 47 U.S.C. § 227. The TCPA amended Title II of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.txt
  • could provide consistency within the industry, and could eliminate a significant percentage of consumer complaints concerning billing errors. We focus here primarily on the proposals outlined in the Joint Petition, and do not address Americatel's petition in full at this time. In particular, with respect to Americatel's request for declaratory relief regarding LECs' BNA service obligations, we note that § 64.1201 makes no distinction between the responsibilities of independent LECs and competitive LECs, and places the obligations of notice and access on all LECs. As a general matter, we believe that a uniform process observed by all regulated entities - competitive LECs, incumbent LECs, and interexchange carriers alike - could also provide a better framework for fair and consistent enforcement activity
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.txt
  • local service provider. Americatel also asks the Commission to clarify that the obligation to provide BNA service to IXCs extends to all LECs, and not just to ILECs. The NPRM sought comment on the first two issues raised in the Americatel Petition. With respect to Americatel's request for declaratory relief regarding LECs' BNA service obligations, the Commission noted that section 64.1201 of its rules makes ``no distinction'' between the responsibilities of independent LECs and competitive LECs, and ``places the obligations of notice and access on all LECs.'' The Coalition Proposal. On November 8, 2004, a coalition of interexchange carriers and local exchange carriers including AT&T, MCI, Sprint, BellSouth, Qwest, SBC, and Verizon (``the Coalition'') filed with the Commission a proposed ``set
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.wp
  • amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer of a telecommunications carrier . . . ." 19 47 U.S.C. § 222(f)(1)(B). 20 We note that telecommunications carriers have additional obligations with respect to the disclosure of billing name and address, under the Commission's rules adopted in the Billing Name and Address (BNA) proceeding. 47 CFR § 64.1201; see also In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Local Exchange Carrier Validation and Billing Information for Joint Use Calling Cards, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4478 (1993). 7 customer's name, address, and telephone number that have been published, in the manner described by section 222(f)(3)(B). The question remains, however, as to whether such information that has
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.wp
  • amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer of a telecommunications carrier . . . ." 19 47 U.S.C. § 222(f)(1)(B). 20 We note that telecommunications carriers have additional obligations with respect to the disclosure of billing name and address, under the Commission's rules adopted in the Billing Name and Address (BNA) proceeding. 47 CFR § 64.1201; see also In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Local Exchange Carrier Validation and Billing Information for Joint Use Calling Cards, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4478 (1993). 7 customer's name, address, and telephone number that have been published, in the manner described by section 222(f)(3)(B). The question remains, however, as to whether such information that has
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99223.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99223.txt
  • that falls outside the scope of the existing service Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-223 454 Clarification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 12396-97, ¶ 9. 455 MCI Petition at 13. We note, as the Bureau did, that our conclusion is not intended to override any other obligations carriers may have with respect to customer information, such as those imposed under section 64.1201 of the Commission's rules relating to carrier disclosure of customer billing names and addresses. See Clarification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 12396, ¶ 9, n.20. 456 U S WEST Comments at 14. 457 U S WEST Comments at 14-15. 458 SBC Comments at 14. 459 MCI Petition at 14. 460 E.g., Bell Atlantic Comments at 5-6; GTE Comments at 23-24;
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/at&t.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/at&t.wp
  • issues relating to access by interexchange carriers to other BNA data in three rulemaking orders adopted between June and December, 1993. Second Report and Order, 8 F.C.C.R. 4478 (1993) ("BNA Order"); Order (Reconsideration and Petitions for Stay), 8 F.C.C.R. 6393 (1993) and Second Order on Reconsideration, 8 F.C.C.R. 8798 (1993). These orders culminated in the regulation, codified at 47 C.F.R. 64.1201 (1996), which permits local carriers to disclose BNA information to interexchange carriers, such as AT&T and MCI, for limited purposes, including billing customers for long-distance calls and collecting amounts due, purposes "associated with meeting the "equal access' requirement of United States v. AT&T, 552 F. Supp. 131 (D.D.C. 1982)," verification of service orders for new customers, identification of customers who
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-05-1524A1.txt
  • intended to protect subscriber privacy and public safety without unnecessarily restricting legitimate telephone marketing and sales. Legal Basis: 47 U.S.C. 227. Section Number and Title: 64.1200, generally, 64.1200(e)(2)(iv), (vi) and (f)(3)(iii) Delivery Restrictions. Brief Description: This rule imposes restrictions on the use of billing name and address information by telecommunications service providers and their authorized billing and collection agents. Section 64.1201 requires local exchange carriers (LECs) to provide interstate common carriers non-discriminatory access to the billing name and address (BNA) of LEC subscribers who use a LEC calling card or authorize collect and third party calls to pay for a carrier's services. The rule also includes safeguards protecting the privacy interests of end users. Need: The Commission adopted this rule to
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-62A1.txt
  • 4-C740, 445 12th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20554. . V. Ordering Clause Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in Sections 1-4, 227 and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; the Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, Pub. L. No. 108-10, 117 Stat. 557; 47 U.S.C. §§ 151-154, 227 and 303(r); and 47 C.F.R. §§ 64.1200 and 64.1201 of the Commission's rules, the FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING IS ADOPTED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Marlene H. Dortch Secretary Do-Not-Call Implementation Act, Pub. L. No. 108-10, 117 Stat. 557 (2003). 47 C.F.R. § 310.4(b). Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-243, 105 Stat. 2394 (1991), codified at 47 U.S.C. § 227. The TCPA amended Title II of
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-50A1.txt
  • could provide consistency within the industry, and could eliminate a significant percentage of consumer complaints concerning billing errors. We focus here primarily on the proposals outlined in the Joint Petition, and do not address Americatel's petition in full at this time. In particular, with respect to Americatel's request for declaratory relief regarding LECs' BNA service obligations, we note that § 64.1201 makes no distinction between the responsibilities of independent LECs and competitive LECs, and places the obligations of notice and access on all LECs. As a general matter, we believe that a uniform process observed by all regulated entities - competitive LECs, incumbent LECs, and interexchange carriers alike - could also provide a better framework for fair and consistent enforcement activity
• http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.doc http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.pdf http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-05-29A1.txt
  • local service provider. Americatel also asks the Commission to clarify that the obligation to provide BNA service to IXCs extends to all LECs, and not just to ILECs. The NPRM sought comment on the first two issues raised in the Americatel Petition. With respect to Americatel's request for declaratory relief regarding LECs' BNA service obligations, the Commission noted that section 64.1201 of its rules makes ``no distinction'' between the responsibilities of independent LECs and competitive LECs, and ``places the obligations of notice and access on all LECs.'' The Coalition Proposal. On November 8, 2004, a coalition of interexchange carriers and local exchange carriers including AT&T, MCI, Sprint, BellSouth, Qwest, SBC, and Verizon (``the Coalition'') filed with the Commission a proposed ``set
• http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.pdf http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.wp
  • amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer of a telecommunications carrier . . . ." 19 47 U.S.C. § 222(f)(1)(B). 20 We note that telecommunications carriers have additional obligations with respect to the disclosure of billing name and address, under the Commission's rules adopted in the Billing Name and Address (BNA) proceeding. 47 CFR § 64.1201; see also In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Local Exchange Carrier Validation and Billing Information for Joint Use Calling Cards, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4478 (1993). 7 customer's name, address, and telephone number that have been published, in the manner described by section 222(f)(3)(B). The question remains, however, as to whether such information that has
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1998/da980971.wp
  • amount of use of a telecommunications service subscribed to by any customer of a telecommunications carrier . . . ." 19 47 U.S.C. § 222(f)(1)(B). 20 We note that telecommunications carriers have additional obligations with respect to the disclosure of billing name and address, under the Commission's rules adopted in the Billing Name and Address (BNA) proceeding. 47 CFR § 64.1201; see also In the Matter of Policies and Rules Concerning Local Exchange Carrier Validation and Billing Information for Joint Use Calling Cards, Second Report and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 4478 (1993). 7 customer's name, address, and telephone number that have been published, in the manner described by section 222(f)(3)(B). The question remains, however, as to whether such information that has
• http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99223.pdf http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Orders/1999/fcc99223.txt
  • that falls outside the scope of the existing service Federal Communications Commission FCC 99-223 454 Clarification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 12396-97, ¶ 9. 455 MCI Petition at 13. We note, as the Bureau did, that our conclusion is not intended to override any other obligations carriers may have with respect to customer information, such as those imposed under section 64.1201 of the Commission's rules relating to carrier disclosure of customer billing names and addresses. See Clarification Order, 13 FCC Rcd at 12396, ¶ 9, n.20. 456 U S WEST Comments at 14. 457 U S WEST Comments at 14-15. 458 SBC Comments at 14. 459 MCI Petition at 14. 460 E.g., Bell Atlantic Comments at 5-6; GTE Comments at 23-24;
• http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/at&t.html http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/at&t.wp
  • issues relating to access by interexchange carriers to other BNA data in three rulemaking orders adopted between June and December, 1993. Second Report and Order, 8 F.C.C.R. 4478 (1993) ("BNA Order"); Order (Reconsideration and Petitions for Stay), 8 F.C.C.R. 6393 (1993) and Second Order on Reconsideration, 8 F.C.C.R. 8798 (1993). These orders culminated in the regulation, codified at 47 C.F.R. 64.1201 (1996), which permits local carriers to disclose BNA information to interexchange carriers, such as AT&T and MCI, for limited purposes, including billing customers for long-distance calls and collecting amounts due, purposes "associated with meeting the "equal access' requirement of United States v. AT&T, 552 F. Supp. 131 (D.D.C. 1982)," verification of service orders for new customers, identification of customers who