[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 234 (Monday, December 7, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67483-67484]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-32458]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[CC Docket No. 95-155]


Toll Free Service Access Codes

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice; letter.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Network Services Division, Common Carrier Bureau, has 
issued a letter stating that 145 RespOrgs failed to report to Database 
Service Management, Inc., as required, that they gave notice to all of 
their subscribers having right of first refusal for set-aside 888 
numbers. By December 11, 1998, these RespOrgs must explain why they 
failed to comply with this requirement and must describe their actions 
to remedy their non-compliance. RespOrgs that fail to submit 
explanations or that fail to provide satisfactory explanations will be 
subject to possible forfeiture penalties, decertification as RespOrgs, 
or fines, imprisonment, or both.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marty Schwimmer 202-418-2334.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Bureau's letter is attached.

Federal Communications Commission.
Anna M. Gomez,
Chief, Network Services Division, Common Carrier Bureau.

Attachment

November 24, 1998.
Mr. Michael Wade
President, Database Service Management, Inc.
6 Corporate Place
Room PYA--1F286
Piscataway, NJ 08854-4157

Re: RespOrg non-compliance with the set-aside 888 number right-of-
first-refusal process--Requirement for specified RespOrgs to submit 
letters of explanation by December 11, 1998

    Dear Mr. Wade: The Bureau's letter to you dated April 15, 1998, 
initiated the process for subscribers to exercise their right of 
first refusal to request 888 numbers that had been set aside for 
them. It required RespOrgs to give notice of this right to their 
subscribers. Further, among other things, it required RespOrgs, for 
each set-aside 888 number, to submit to DSMI either the subscriber's 
request to accept or reject an 888 set-aside number, with 
documentation, or certification that the subscriber did not respond 
to the notice.
    The Bureau's letter to you dated May 15, 1998, extended to 
August 21, 1998, the time for RespOrgs to give the required notice 
to their subscribers, although it provided that requests received 
from subscribers after that date must still be processed. It also 
explained that the certification that RespOrgs were required to 
provide for subscribers who did not respond must include contact 
information containing the subscriber's name, address, and phone 
number, as well as the date and means by which the RespOrg notified 
the subscriber.
    The attachment to this letter summarizes the RespOrgs' 
compliance with this process, using information provided by your 
staff in response to the Bureau's request. For each of 179 RespOrgs, 
the attachment shows the total percentage of requests and 
certifications of no response reported to DSMI as of October 5, 
1998, based on the RespOrg's initial count of set-aside 888 numbers 
as of July 1998. It indicates that only 34 RespOrgs reported 
subscriber notification results for all of their set-aside 888 
numbers (100%). Of the remaining 145 RespOrgs, 93 reported results 
for some but not all of their set-aside 888 numbers (0.1% to 99.7%), 
and 52 did not report any results for their set-aside 888 numbers 
(0%).
    The Commission is concerned that a RespOrg's failure to report 
that it gave notice to each of its set-aside 888 number subscribers 
may indicate that the RespOrg is operating in defiance of Commission 
orders, that it is warehousing set-aside 888 numbers or the 
corresponding 800 numbers, or that it has falsely indicated that it 
has identified subscribers for those numbers. The Commission stated 
last year that it may penalize RespOrgs that warehouse toll free 
numbers, by imposing forfeiture penalties on them or referring them 
to the Department of Justice to determine whether a fine, 
imprisonment, or both are warranted, or may decertify them as 
RespOrgs. It also stated that RespOrgs that falsely indicate they 
have identified subscribers for particular numbers may be criminally 
liable for false statements under Title 18 of the United States 
Code. The Commission stated as follows:

    ``We conclude that the Commission's exclusive jurisdiction over 
the portions of the North American Numbering Plan that pertain to 
the United States, found at section 251(e)(1) of the Communications 
Act, as amended, authorizes the Commission to penalize RespOrgs that 
warehouse toll free numbers. We may impose a forfeiture penalty 
under section 503(b). In addition, if a person violates a provision 
of the Communications Act or a rule or regulation issued by the 
Commission under authority of the Communications Act, the Commission 
can refer the matter to the Department of Justice to determine 
whether a fine, imprisonment, or both are warranted under section 
501 or section 502 of the Communications Act. We also may limit any 
RespOrg's allocation of toll free numbers or possibly decertify it 
as

[[Page 67484]]

a RespOrg under section 251(e)(1) or section 4(i). In addition, 
RespOrgs that falsely indicate that they have identified subscribers 
for particular numbers may be liable for false statements under 
Title 18 of the United States Code. . . .'' (footnotes omitted).

    Toll Free Service Access Codes, Second Report and Order and 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, CC Docket No. 95-155, 12 
F.C.C. Rcd. 11162 (1997).
    In light of the above enforcement policy, the Bureau in this 
letter directs DSMI to forward a copy of this letter, with the 
attachment, to all RespOrgs. With this letter, the Bureau directs 
all RespOrgs that have reported less than 100% subscriber results to 
submit a letter to the Commission's Common Carrier Bureau, Network 
Services Division, by December 11, 1998, explaining why the process 
required by the Bureau was not completed as directed. Such RespOrgs 
must also describe any action they have taken or are now taking to 
remedy this apparent non-compliance with their legal obligations. 
The names of RespOrgs that fail to provide satisfactory explanation 
in their letters or that fail to submit letters altogether will be 
referred to the Bureau's Enforcement Division for action in accord 
with the Commission's enforcement policy.

        Sincerely,
Anna M. Gomez,
Chief, Network Services Division, Common Carrier Bureau.
[FR Doc. 98-32458 Filed 12-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P