[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 185 (Friday, September 24, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51710-51719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-24896]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 22, 24, and 64

[CC Docket No. 97-213, FCC 99-230]


Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document adopts technical requirements for wireline, 
cellular, and broadband Personal Communications Services (PCS) carriers 
to comply with the assistance capability requirements prescribed by the 
Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (CALEA, or 
the Act). Specifically, the Commission requires that all capabilities 
of J-STD-025 (interim standard) and six of nine ``punch list'' 
capabilities requested by the Department of Justice (DoJ)/Federal 
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) be implemented by wireline, cellular, and 
broadband PCS carriers.

DATES: Effective December 23, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodney Small, Office of Engineering 
and Technology, (202) 418-2452; internet: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Third 
Report and Order (Third R&O) adopted August 26, 1999, and released 
August 31, 1999. The full text of this Commission decision is available 
for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC 
Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC, 
and also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, 
International Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th 
Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036.

Summary of Third R&O

    1. CALEA, enacted in October 1994, was intended to preserve the 
ability of law enforcement officials to conduct electronic surveillance 
effectively and efficiently in the face of rapid advances in 
telecommunications technology. In enacting this statute, however, 
Congress recognized the need to protect privacy interests within the 
context of court-authorized electronic surveillance. Thus, in defining 
the terms and requirements of the Act, Congress sought to balance three 
important policies: (1) To preserve a narrowly focused capability for 
law enforcement agencies to carry out properly authorized intercepts; 
(2) to protect privacy in the face of increasingly powerful and 
personally revealing technologies; and (3) to avoid impeding the 
development of new communications services and technologies.
    2. Section 103 of CALEA establishes four general ``assistance 
capability requirements'' that carriers must meet to achieve compliance 
with CALEA. Specifically, section 103 requires a telecommunications 
carrier to ensure that its equipment, facilities, and services are 
capable of:
    (1) Isolating and enabling the government, pursuant to a lawful 
authorization, to intercept all wire and electronic communications;
    (2) Providing to the government access to call-identifying 
information that is ``reasonably available'' to the carrier;
    (3) Delivering to the government call content and call-identifying 
information in an acceptable form and at a remote location; and,
    (4) Facilitating government access unobtrusively and in a manner 
that protects privacy and security.
    3. CALEA does not specify how these four requirements are to be 
met, but section 107(a) specifies a ``safe harbor'' provision, whereby 
carriers and manufacturers are deemed CALEA-compliant if they meet 
publicly available standards adopted by industry. Between 1995 and 
1997, Subcommittee TR45.2 of the Telecommunications Industry 
Association (TIA) developed an interim standard, J-STD-025, to serve as 
a safe harbor for wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers and 
manufacturers under section 107(a). That standard defines services and 
features required by wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers to 
support lawfully authorized electronic surveillance, and specifies 
interfaces necessary to deliver intercepted communications and call-
identifying information to a law enforcement agency (LEA). However, two 
parties filed petitions for rulemaking with the Commission, pursuant to 
section 107(b) of CALEA, contending that the interim standard was 
either overinclusive or underinclusive. Specifically, DoJ/FBI argue 
that the interim standard does not satisfy CALEA requirements because 
it fails to include the nine essential punch list capabilities, and the 
Center for Democracy and Technology argues that the standard is 
overinclusive because it includes packet-mode communications and 
location information.
    4. The Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Further NPRM), 63 FR 
63639, November 16, 1998, in this proceeding addressed these alleged 
deficiencies in the interim standard. In the Further NPRM, the 
Commission stated that it did not intend to reexamine any of the 
uncontested technical requirements of the interim standard, but would 
make determinations only regarding whether the 11 disputed capabilities 
met the assistance capability requirements specified in section 103 of 
CALEA.
    5. The Further NPRM tentatively concluded that the provision by 
carriers to LEAs of location information and five punch list 
capabilities is necessary to meet the assistance capability 
requirements under section 103(a). Those five punch list capabilities 
are subject-initiated conference calls; party hold, join, drop on 
conference calls; subject-initiated dialing and signaling information; 
timing information; and dialed digit extraction (post-cut-through 
digits). The Further NPRM also tentatively concluded that the provision 
by carriers to LEAs of three punch list capabilities is not necessary 
to meet the assistance capability requirements under section 103(a). 
Those capabilities are surveillance status messages, continuity check 
tones, and feature status messages. Finally, the Further NPRM requested 
comment on the remaining punch list item--in-band and out-of-band 
signaling--and packet-mode communications issues.
    6. The Commission emphasized in the Further NPRM that it was 
directed by the Act to take into account five factors that must be 
considered under section 107(b) of CALEA. Those factors are: (1) 
Meeting the assistance capability requirements of section 103 by cost-
effective methods; (2) protecting the privacy and security of 
communications

[[Page 51711]]

not authorized to be intercepted; (3) minimizing the cost of CALEA 
compliance on residential ratepayers; (4) serving the policy of the 
United States to encourage the provision of new technologies and 
services to the public; and, (5) providing a reasonable time and 
conditions for CALEA compliance.
    7. The Commission also tentatively concluded in the Further NPRM 
that, if any additional technical requirements were adopted, they could 
be most efficiently implemented by permitting TIA to modify J-STD-025 
in accord with the Commission's determinations. The Commission stated 
that although TIA may have to undertake additional work to implement 
those additional requirements, TIA has the experience and resources to 
develop technical specifications and implement CALEA's requirements 
most rapidly. Finally, with respect to those additional requirements, 
the Further NPRM stated that the Commission would set a deadline for 
carrier compliance later than the June 30, 2000 CALEA compliance 
deadline specified in the Memorandum Opinion and Order in this 
proceeding.
    8. In the Third R&O, the Commission found no need to reexamine the 
entire interim standard. The Commission stated that no deficiencies in 
the interim standard were identified other than with respect to 
location information, packet-mode communications, and the punch list. 
Since section 107(b) requires the Commission to resolve specific 
disputes raised by petition regarding alleged deficiencies in the 
industry standard, the Commission declined to consider other aspects of 
that standard not challenged in this proceeding. Moreover, by focusing 
only on those specific technical issues properly raised before it, the 
Commission stated that it will achieve greater efficiency and will 
permit telecommunications manufacturers and carriers to deploy CALEA 
solutions on a more expedited basis. Accordingly, the Commission found 
that wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers must comply with 
all uncontested requirements of the interim standard by June 30, 2000.
    9. In the Third R&O, the Commission decided that location 
information must be provided to law enforcement under CALEA's 
assistance capability requirements for ``call-identifying 
information.'' CALEA defines call-identifying information as ``dialing 
or signaling information that identifies the origin, direction, 
destination, or termination of each communication generated or received 
by a subscriber by means of any equipment, facility, or service of a 
telecommunications carrier.'' The Third R&O concluded that location 
information identifies the ``origin'' or ``destination'' of a 
communication and thus is covered by CALEA. The Third R&O, however, did 
not adopt a location tracking capability. Rather, it permitted LEAs 
that have the proper legal authorization to receive from wireline, 
cellular, and broadband PCS carriers only the location of a cell site 
at the beginning and termination of a mobile call.
    10. With respect to a packet-mode capability, the Third R&O decided 
that no specific technical requirement should be adopted because the 
approach taken to packet-switching technology in J-STD-025 raises 
significant privacy concerns, and the record is not sufficiently 
developed to support proposing any particular technical requirement for 
packet-mode communications. Under J-STD-025, LEAs would be provided 
with both call-identifying information and call content even in cases 
where a LEA is authorized only to receive call-identifying information 
(i.e., under a pen register). Accordingly, the Third R&O invited TIA to 
study CALEA solutions for packet-mode technology and report to the 
Commission by September 30, 2000 on steps that can be taken, including 
amendments to J-STD-025, that will better address privacy concerns. In 
the interim, the Third R&O permitted packet-mode communications, 
including call-identifying information and call content, to be 
delivered to LEAs under the interim standard. Further, the Third R&O 
required that packet-mode communications be delivered to LEAs under the 
interim standard no later than September 30, 2001.
    11. With respect to the nine punch list items, the Third R&O added 
to J-STD-025 the five items that were proposed in the Further NPRM as 
capabilities mandated by CALEA, and excluded from the final industry 
standard the three items that the Further NPRM tentatively found were 
not capabilities mandated by CALEA. The Further NPRM also added to J-
STD-025 the item on which the Commission requested comment.
    12. Specifically, the following punch list items were included in 
the final industry standard:

    (1) Content of subject-initiated conference calls--Would enable law 
enforcement to access the content of conference calls supported by the 
subject's service (including the call content of parties on hold).

    13. The Third R&O found that CALEA permits law enforcement to 
access the content of subject-initiated conference calls. With 
appropriate lawful authorization, the LEA is entitled to ``all wire and 
electronic communications carried by the carrier within a service area 
to or from equipment, facilities, or services of a subscriber.'' When a 
subject is a participant in a conference call using facilities that 
have been placed under surveillance pursuant to a court order, the 
Third R&O concluded that CALEA requires delivery to law enforcement of 
all portions of a call to the extent the carrier's system architecture 
permits. However, as the Commission noted in the Further NPRM, 
different carriers provide conference calling features in various ways 
and not all carriers' system architecture is the same. Conference 
calling features include various types of multi-party calls, such as 
three-way calling where a bridge is established in the subscriber's 
serving switch, as well as ``meet me'' or conference bridge services 
where a bridge is established at a remote switch of another carrier. In 
the case of the latter type of bridge calls, when the subject 
terminates his circuit connection to the conference call, the 
communication between other participants no longer is to or from the 
subscriber's equipment, facilities, and services, and may no longer 
even be carried by the carrier within a service area to or from the 
subscriber of the carrier. The Third R&O concluded that it is not 
reasonable in such circumstances to require the carrier to provide the 
communications of other parties continuing on the conference call 
because to do so would not be a cost-effective method of implementing 
the conference call intercept and may not protect the privacy and 
security of communications not authorized to be intercepted.
    Finally, the Third R&O concluded that the anticipated costs to 
carriers of adding a conference call capability are not so exorbitant 
as to require automatic exclusion of the capability. In percentage 
terms, based on revenue data submitted by five manufacturers, these 
costs would be 4% of the core J-STD-025 and 9% of the total punch list.

    (2) Party hold, join, drop on conference calls--Messages would be 
sent to law enforcement that identify the active parties of a call. 
Specifically, on a conference call, these messages would indicate 
whether a party is on hold, has joined or has been dropped from the 
conference call.

    14. The Third R&O concluded that party hold/join/drop information 
falls within CALEA's definition of ``call-

[[Page 51712]]

identifying information'' because it is ``signaling information that 
identifies the origin, direction, destination, or termination of each 
communication generated or received'' by the subscriber. Party join 
information appears to identify the origin of a communication; party 
drop, the termination of a communication; and party hold, the temporary 
origin, temporary termination, or re-direction of a communication. This 
capability also appears to be necessary to enable law enforcement to 
isolate call-identifying and content information because, without it, a 
LEA would be unable to determine who is talking to whom, and, more 
accurately, to focus on the subject's role in the conversation. 
Further, the important privacy objectives set forth by CALEA are 
enhanced if law enforcement can better ascertain and isolate 
communications involving the subject from those involving only innocent 
third parties.
    15. Finally, the Third R&O concluded that party hold/join/drop 
information is reasonably available to the carrier in those cases where 
the carrier's facilities, equipment or services are involved in 
providing the service, and that the anticipated costs to carriers of 
adding this capability are not so exorbitant as to require automatic 
exclusion of the capability. In percentage terms, based on the 
manufacturers' aggregate revenue estimates, these costs would be 7% of 
the core J-STD-025 and 15% of the total punch list. To the extent that 
customer premises equipment (CPE) is used to provide party hold/join/
drop information, the Third R&O concluded that such information is not 
reasonably available to the LEA since no network signal would be 
generated.

    (3) Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information--Access to 
all dialing and signaling information available from the subject would 
inform law enforcement of a subject's use of features (such as the use 
of flash-hook and other feature keys).

    16. The Third R&O concluded that subject-initiated dialing and 
signaling information fits within the definition of call-identifying 
information contained in section 102(2) of CALEA. Call-forwarding 
signaling information identifies the direction and destination of a 
call, and call-waiting signaling information identifies the origin and 
termination of each communication. The Third R&O also concluded that 
access to subject-initiated dialing and signaling information may be 
necessary in order for the LEA to isolate and correlate call-
identifying and call content information. Knowing what features a 
subject is using will ensure that the LEA receives information ``in a 
manner that allows it to be associated with the communication to which 
it pertains.'' For example, without knowing that a subject has switched 
over to a call on call-waiting, the LEA may not be able to associate 
the call-identifying information with the call content to which it 
pertains and thus could be more likely to mistake one call for another. 
Finally, the Third R&O concluded that the anticipated costs to carriers 
of adding this capability are not so exorbitant as to require automatic 
exclusion of the capability. In percentage terms, based on the 
manufacturers' aggregate revenue estimates, these costs would be 4% of 
the core J/STD-025 and 8% of the total punch list. To the extent CPE is 
used to perform the signaling and no network signal is generated, that 
information is not reasonably available to a carrier, and thus, is not 
required to be provided.

    (4) In-band and out-of-band signaling (notification message)--A 
message would be sent to law enforcement whenever a subject's service 
sends a tone or other network message to the subject or associate 
(e.g., notification that a line is ringing or busy, call waiting 
signal).

    17. The Third R&O stated that modern networks are capable of using 
many types of in-band and out-of band signals. Certain types of 
signals, such as ringing and busy signals, clearly fall within the 
scope of call-identifying information because they indicate information 
about the termination of a call. Other types of signals, however, may 
simply be used by carriers for supervision or control of certain 
functions and features of the network and do not trigger any audible or 
visual message to the subscriber and, thus, would not be call-
identifying information. The Third R&O thus concluded that in-band and 
out-of-band signals that are generated at the intercept access point 
(IAP) toward the subscriber (e.g., call waiting or stutter dial tone) 
and that are being used for call processing purposes are call 
identifying information that is reasonably available to the carrier. 
Other signals that provide call identifying information (e.g., busy, 
fast busy, audible ringing tone), although generated elsewhere in the 
carrier's network, pass through the IAP on their way to the subject 
even if they are not used for call processing and can be made available 
without excessive modifications to the network and thus are reasonably 
available to the carrier. Finally, the Third R&O concluded that the 
anticipated costs to carriers of adding this capability are not so 
exorbitant as to require automatic exclusion of the capability. In 
percentage terms, based on the manufacturers' aggregate revenue 
estimates, these costs would be 6% of the core J-STD-025 and 14% of the 
total punch list. To the extent CPE is used to perform the signaling 
and no network signal is generated, that information is not reasonably 
available to a carrier, and thus, is not required to be provided.

    (5) Timing information--Information would be sent to a LEA 
permitting it to correlate call-identifying information with the call 
content of a communications interception.

    18. The Third R&O concluded that a timing information requirement 
is an assistance capability requirement of section 103 of CALEA. First, 
the Third R&O found that time stamping is call-identifying information 
as defined in section 102(2) of CALEA. This information is needed to 
distinguish among several calls occurring at approximately the same 
time. In other words, time stamp information is needed to identify 
``the origin, direction, destination, or termination'' of any given 
call and, thus, fits within the statutory definition of section 102(2). 
Second, the Third R&O found that delivery of time stamp information to 
the LEA must, pursuant to section 103(a)(2), be provided in such a 
timely manner to allow that information ``to be associated with the 
communication to which it pertains.'' Finally, the Third R&O found that 
the anticipated costs to carriers of adding this capability are not so 
exorbitant as to require automatic exclusion of the capability. In 
percentage terms, based on the manufacturers' aggregate revenue 
estimates, these costs would be 2% of the core J-STD-025 and 5% of the 
total punch list.

    (6) Dialed digit extraction--A carrier would provide to a LEA on 
the call data channel any digits dialed by the subject after connecting 
to another carrier's service.

    19. The Third R&O found that some digits dialed by a subject after 
connecting to a carrier other than the originating carrier are call-
identifying information. While a subject may dial digits after the 
initial call set-up that are not call-identifying--e.g., a bank account 
number to access his/her bank statement--some digits dialed after 
connecting to an interexchange carrier identify the ``origin, 
direction, destination or termination'' of communications. With respect 
to

[[Page 51713]]

whether this call-identifying information is ``reasonably available'' 
to the originating carrier, under the interim standard's definition of 
``reasonably available call-identifying information'' it would not be, 
because call-identifying information is ``reasonably available'' only 
if it is present at an IAP for call processing purposes. However, the 
Third R&O found that this definition should be modified. Specifically, 
the Third R&O found that if call-identifying information is present at 
an IAP and can be made available without the carrier being unduly 
burdened with network modifications, that information should be deemed 
``reasonably available.'' The record indicates that digits dialed by a 
subject after connecting to another carrier can be obtained from the 
originating carrier without that carrier being unduly burdened with 
network modifications.
    20. Additionally, the Third R&O noted that there appears to be a 
consensus that LEAs should be permitted to obtain in some fashion 
digits dialed by the subject after connecting to another carrier's 
service. The Personal Communications Industry Association, Ameritech, 
and BellSouth have proposed alternative methods of extracting such 
digits, and these methods would minimize the expense to originating 
carriers. However, each alternative method would shift the cost burden 
to LEAs, and each would also raise significant privacy concerns.
    21. Accordingly, the Third R&O found that adopting the Further NPRM 
proposal rather than one of the three alternatives suggested in the 
comments will best balance the directives of section 107(b) of CALEA 
that the capability requirements of section 103 be met by cost-
effective methods and that the privacy and security of communications 
not authorized to be intercepted be protected. The Third R&O noted that 
the manufacturers' revenue data indicate that the cost of a dialed 
digit extraction capability would exceed the cost of any other punch 
list capability. In percentage terms, based on the manufacturers' 
aggregate revenue estimates, this cost would be 13% of the core interim 
standard and 29% of the total punch list. Based on the manufacturers' 
wireless revenue estimates, this cost would be 17% of the core J-STD-
025 and 26% of the total punch list. However, in balancing these costs 
against other statutory requirements, the Third R&O found them not to 
be so exorbitant as to require automatic exclusion of the capability. 
Further, it is unclear whether any of the alternative methods proposed 
would be significantly less expensive; rather, they would simply shift 
the cost burden from carriers to LEAs.
    22. The following punch list items were excluded from the final 
industry standard:

    (1) Surveillance status--This capability would require the carrier 
to send a message to law enforcement to verify that a wiretap has been 
established and is still functioning correctly.

    23. The Third R&O concluded that providing surveillance status 
information does not constitute a technical requirement necessary for 
meeting CALEA's assistance capability requirements. Although CALEA 
requires carriers to ensure that authorized wiretaps can be performed 
in an expeditious manner--and the Third R&O found that a surveillance 
status message could assist carriers and law enforcement in determining 
the status of such wiretaps--the Third R&O also found that this feature 
does not fall within any of the assistance capability requirements 
expressly set forth in CALEA. This feature does not appear to be call-
identifying information as defined by CALEA, since the information that 
such a feature would provide would not identify ``the origin, 
direction, destination, or termination of each communication.'' The 
FBI's contrary interpretation is that this feature fits within CALEA's 
requirement that a carrier ``shall ensure'' that its system is capable 
of meeting the section 103(a) requirements. The Third R&O noted, 
however, that the plain language of the Act--``a telecommunications 
carrier shall ensure that its equipment, facilities, or services * * * 
are capable of'' intercepting communications and allowing law 
enforcement access to call identifying information--appears to mandate 
compliance with the assistance capability requirements but not to 
require that such capability be proven or verified on a continual 
basis.

    (2) Continuity check tone (C-tone)--Electronic signal that would 
alert law enforcement if the facility used for delivery of call content 
interception has failed or lost continuity.

    24. The Third R&O concluded that providing a C-tone does not 
constitute a CALEA technical requirement. As with the case of 
surveillance status, above, the Third R&O found that this feature could 
assist law enforcement to determine the status of a wiretap, but it 
does not fit within the assistance capability requirements expressly 
set forth in CALEA because the information such a feature would provide 
would not identify ``the origin, direction, destination, or termination 
of each communication.'' Nor does it appear to be required under 
section 103(a)(1), since it is not a wire or electronic communications 
carried on a carrier's system. The plain language of the statute 
mandates compliance with the capability requirements of section 103(a), 
but does not require that such capability be proven or verified on a 
continual basis. Ensuring that a wiretap is operational can be done in 
either a technical or non-technical manner, and section 103(a) does not 
include ``ensurance'' itself as a capability. Thus, the Third R&O 
concluded that the continuity tone punch list item is not an assistance 
capability requirement under section 103.

    (3) Feature status--Would affirmatively notify law enforcement 
when, for the facilities under surveillance, specific subscription-
based calling services are added or deleted, even when the subject 
modifies capabilities remotely through another phone or through an 
operator.

    25. The Third R&O concluded that provision of feature status 
messages does not constitute a CALEA technical requirement. As with the 
cases of surveillance status messages and continuity tones, the Third 
R&O found that feature status messages could be useful to an LEA, but 
that provision of these messages from a carrier to an LEA does not fit 
within the assistance capability requirements expressly set forth in 
CALEA. First, Third R&O stated that it is clear that feature status 
messages do not constitute call-identifying information because they do 
not pertain to the actual placement or receipt of calls. Further, 
feature status messages do not appear to be necessary to intercept 
either wire or electronic communications carried on a carrier's system. 
Rather, they would simply aid an LEA in determining how much capacity 
is required to implement and maintain effective electronic surveillance 
of a target facility, information that could be useful in assuring that 
an interception is fully effectuated and the intercepted material 
delivered as authorized. However, the information that would be 
provided by feature status messages can be provided by other means, 
such as a subpoena to the carrier. In any event, the plain language of 
the Act appears to mandate compliance with the assistance capability 
requirements, but does not appear to require carriers to implement any 
specific quality control capabilities to assist law enforcement.

[[Page 51714]]

    26. Finally, the Third R&O found that the new required capabilities 
can be most efficiently implemented by permitting TIA Subcommittee 45.2 
to make the modifications. LEAs, carriers, and manufacturers are voting 
members of the Subcommittee, and the Subcommittee has the experience 
and resources in place to resolve these issues quickly. Regarding the 
specific timing requirements, Third R&O found that seven months; i.e., 
by March 30, 2000, is a reasonable period of time for TIA to complete 
the necessary changes to J-STD-025. Commission staff will closely 
monitor the development of the revised standard, but will not 
participate directly so that the Commission can maintain its 
impartiality in the event of disputes relative to the revised standard.
    27. The Third R&O specified that wireline, cellular, and broadband 
PCS carriers make the six punch list capabilities available to LEAs in 
the same timeframe as packet-mode communications; i.e., by September 
30, 2001. Relative to implementation of the core J-STD-025, this will 
provide carriers an additional 15 months to implement these 
capabilities. Because manufacturers have had development of these 
capabilities under consideration for several years, the Third R&O found 
that this additional time will prove sufficient for the development 
process to be completed and for carriers to implement these 
capabilities.

Ordering Clauses

    28. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1, 4, 
229, 301, 303, and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 
and 107(b) of the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, 47 
U.S.C. 151, 154, 229, 301, 303, 332, and 1006(b), the Third Report and 
Order and the rules specified herein are adopted. 

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    29. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(RFA),1 an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) 
was incorporated in the Further NPRM.2 The Commission sought 
written public comments on the proposals in the Further NPRM, including 
the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to 
the RFA.3
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq., has 
been amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996, 
Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of the 
CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (SBREFA).
    \2\ 63 FR 63639, November 16, 1998, 13 FCC Rcd 22632 (1998).
    \3\ See 5 U.S.C. 604.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(A) Need for and Purpose of This Action

    30. The Third Report and Order responds to the legislative mandate 
contained in the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, 
Public Law 103-414, 108 Stat. 4279 (1994) (codified as amended in 
sections of 18 U.S.C. and 47 U.S.C.). The Commission, in compliance 
with 47 U.S.C. 229, promulgates rules in the Third Report and Order to 
ensure the prompt implementation of section 103 of CALEA. In enacting 
CALEA, Congress sought to balance three key policies with CALEA: ``(1) 
To preserve a narrowly focused capability for law enforcement agencies 
to carry out properly authorized intercepts; (2) to protect privacy in 
the face of increasingly powerful and personally revealing 
technologies; and (3) to avoid impeding the development of new 
communications services and technologies.''
    31. The rules adopted in this Third Report and Order implement 
Congress's goal to balance the three key policies enumerated above. The 
objective of the rules is to implement as quickly and effectively as 
possible the national telecommunications policy for wireline, cellular, 
and broadband PCS telecommunications carriers to support the lawful 
electronic surveillance needs of law enforcement agencies.

(B) Summary of the Issues Raised by Public Comments Made in Response to 
the IRFA

    32. Summary of Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA). In 
the Further NPRM, the Commission performed an IRFA and asked for 
comments that specifically addressed issues raised in the IRFA. No 
parties filed comments directly in response to the IRFA. In response to 
non-IFRA comments to the Further NPRM, we have modified several of the 
Commission's proposals, particularly regarding packet switching, 
conference call content, in-band and out-of-band signaling, and timing 
information, as discussed above.

(C) Description and Estimates of the Number of Entities Affected by 
This Third Report and Order

    33. 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 action taken.4 The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' 5 In addition, the term ``small business'' 
has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the 
Small Business Act.6 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).7 A 
small organization is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which 
is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 
8 Nationwide, as of 1992, there were approximately 275,801 
small organizations.9 And finally, ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' generally means ``governments of cities, counties, 
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, 
with a population of less than 50,000.'' 10 As of 1992, 
there were approximately 85,006 such jurisdictions in the United 
States.11 This number includes 38,978 counties, cities, and 
towns; of these, 37,566, or 96 percent, have populations of fewer than 
50,000.12 The United States Bureau of the Census (Census 
Bureau) estimates that this ratio is approximately accurate for all 
governmental entities. Thus, of the 85,006 governmental entities, we 
estimate that 81,600 (91 percent) are small entities. We further 
describe and estimate the number of small business concerns that may be 
affected by the actions taken in the Third Report and Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 5 U.S.C. 603(b)(3).
    \5\ Id. 601(6).
    \6\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition 
of ``small business concern'' in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to the 
RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies ``unless 
an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public 
comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are 
appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such 
definition(s) in the Federal Register.'' 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
    \7\ Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632.
    \8\ 5 U.S.C. 601(4).
    \9\ 1992 Economic Census, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Table 6 
(special tabulation of data under contract to Office of Advocacy of 
the U.S. Small Business Administration).
    \10\ 5 U.S.C. 601(5).
    \11\ U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, ``1992 Census 
of Governments.''
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. As noted, 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) meets any additional 
criteria established by the SBA.13 The SBA has defined a 
small business for Standard Industrial

[[Page 51715]]

Classification (SIC) categories 4812 (Radiotelephone Communications) 
and 4813 (Telephone Communications, Except Radiotelephone) to be small 
entities when they have no more than 1,500 employees.14 We 
first discuss the number of small telecommunications entities falling 
within these SIC categories, then attempt to refine further those 
estimates to correspond with the categories of telecommunications 
companies that are commonly used under our rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 632. See, e.g., Brown Transport Truckload, Inc. 
v. Southern Wipers, Inc., 176 B.R. 82 (N.D. Ga. 1994).
    \14\ 13 CFR 121.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    35. Total Number of Telecommunications Entities Affected. The 
Census Bureau reports that, at the end of 1992, there were 3,497 firms 
engaged in providing telephone services, as defined therein, for at 
least one year.15 This number contains a variety of 
different categories of entities, including local exchange carriers, 
interexchange carriers, competitive access providers, cellular 
carriers, mobile service carriers, operator service providers, pay 
telephone operators, PCS providers, covered SMR providers, and 
resellers. It seems certain that some of those 3,497 telephone service 
firms may not qualify as small entities or small incumbent LECs because 
they are not ``independently owned and operated.'' 16 For 
example, a PCS provider that is affiliated with an interexchange 
carrier having more than 1,500 employees would not meet the definition 
of a small business. It seems reasonable to conclude, therefore, that 
fewer than 3,497 telephone service firms are small entity telephone 
service firms or small incumbent LECs that may be affected by the 
actions taken in this Third Report and Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 
1992 Census of Transportation, Communications, and Utilities: 
Establishment and Firm Size, at Firm Size 1-123 (1995) (``1992 
Census'').
    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 632(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. The most reliable source of current information regarding the 
total numbers of common carrier and related providers nationwide, 
including the numbers of commercial wireless entities, appears to be 
data the Commission publishes annually in its Carrier Locator report, 
derived from filings made in connection with the Telecommunications 
Relay Service (TRS).17 According to data in the most recent 
report, there are 3,604 interstate carriers.18 These 
include, inter alia, local exchange carriers, wireline carriers and 
service providers, interexchange carriers, competitive access 
providers, operator service providers, pay telephone operators, 
providers of telephone toll service, providers of telephone exchange 
service, and resellers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ FCC, Carrier Locator: Interstate Service Providers, Figure 
1 (Jan. 1999) (Carrier Locator). See also 47 CFR 64.601-.608.
    \18\ Carrier Locator at Fig. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) 
in this 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.'' 
19 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.20 We have therefore included small incumbent LECs in 
this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no 
effect on FCC analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 5 U.S.C. 601(3).
    \20\ Letter from Jere W. Glover, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, 
SBA, to William E. Kennard, Chairman, FCC (May 27, 1999). The Small 
Business Act contains a definition of ``small business concern,'' 
which the RFA incorporates into its own definition of ``small 
business.'' See 15 U.S.C. 632(a) (Small Business Act); 5 U.S.C. 
601(3) (RFA). SBA regulations interpret ``small business concern'' 
to include the concept of dominance on a national basis. 13 CFR 
121.102(b). Since 1996, out of an abundance of caution, the 
Commission has included small incumbent LECs in its regulatory 
flexibility analyses. Implementation of the Local Competition 
Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CC Docket, 96-98, 
First Report and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 15499 (1996), 61 FR 45476, August 
29, 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. Wireline Carriers and Service Providers (SIC 4813). The Census 
Bureau reports that there were 2,321 telephone communications companies 
other than radiotelephone companies in operation for at least one year 
at the end of 1992.21 All but 26 of the 2,321 non-
radiotelephone companies listed by the Census Bureau were reported to 
have fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, even if all 26 of those 
companies had more than 1,500 employees, there would still be 2,295 
non-radiotelephone companies that might qualify as small entities or 
small incumbent LECs. Although it seems certain that some of these 
carriers are not independently owned and operated, we are unable at 
this time to estimate with greater precision the number of wireline 
carriers and service providers that would qualify as small business 
concerns under SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there 
are fewer than 2,295 small entity telephone communications companies 
other than radiotelephone companies that may be affected by the actions 
taken in this Third Report and Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 1992 Census, supra, at Firm Size 1-123.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    39. Local Exchange Carriers, Interexchange Carriers, Competitive 
Access Providers, and Resellers. Neither the Commission nor SBA has 
developed a definition of small LECs, interexchange carriers (IXCs), 
competitive access providers (CAPs), or resellers. The closest 
applicable definition for these carrier-types under SBA rules is for 
telephone communications companies other than radiotelephone (wireless) 
companies.22 The most reliable source of information 
regarding the number of these carriers nationwide of which we are aware 
appears to be the data that we collect annually in connection with the 
TRS.23 According to our most recent data, there are 1,410 
LECs, 151 IXCs, 129 CAPs, and 351 resellers.24 Although it 
seems certain that some of these carriers are not independently owned 
and operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, we are unable at this 
time to estimate with greater precision the number of these carriers 
that would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's definition. 
Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 1,410 small entity 
LECs or small incumbent LECs, 151 IXCs, 129 CAPs, and 351 resellers 
that may be affected by the actions taken in the Third Report and 
Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ 13 CFR 121.210, SIC Code 4813.
    \23\ See 47 CFR 64.601 et seq.; Carrier Locator at Fig. 1.
    \24\ Carrier Locator at Fig. 1. The total for resellers includes 
both toll resellers and local resellers. The TRS category for CAPs 
also includes competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) (total of 
129 for both).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. Wireless Carriers (SIC 4812). The Census Bureau reports that 
there were 1,176 radiotelephone (wireless) companies in operation for 
at least one year at the end of 1992, of which 1,164 had fewer than 
1,000 employees.25 Even if all of the remaining 12 companies 
had more than 1,500 employees, there would still be 1,164 
radiotelephone companies that might qualify as small entities if they 
are independently owned are operated. Although it seems certain that 
some of these carriers are not independently owned and operated, we are 
unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of 
radiotelephone carriers and service providers that would qualify as 
small business concerns under SBA's definition. Consequently, we 
estimate that there are fewer than 1,164 small

[[Page 51716]]

entity radiotelephone companies that may be affected by the actions 
taken in this Third Report and Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ United States Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 
1992 Census of Transportation, Communications, and Utilities: 
Establishment and Firm Size, at Firm Size 1-123 (1995) (``1992 
Census'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. Cellular, PCS, SMR and Other Mobile Service Providers. In an 
effort to further refine our calculation of the number of 
radiotelephone companies that may be affected by the actions taken in 
this Second Report and Order, we consider the data that we collect 
annually in connection with the TRS for the subcategories Wireless 
Telephony (which includes PCS, Cellular, and SMR) and Other Mobile 
Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a 
definition of small entities specifically applicable to these broad 
subcategories, so we will utilize the closest applicable definition 
under SBA rules, which is for radiotelephone communications 
companies.26 According to our most recent TRS data, 732 
companies reported that they are engaged in the provision of Wireless 
Telephony services and 23 companies reported that they are engaged in 
the provision of Other Mobile Services.27 Although it seems 
certain that some of these carriers are not independently owned and 
operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, we are unable at this time 
to estimate with greater precision the number of Wireless Telephony 
Providers and Other Mobile Service Providers, except as described 
below, that would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's 
definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 732 
small entity Wireless Telephony Providers and fewer than 23 small 
entity Other Mobile Service Providers that might be affected by the 
actions taken in this Second Report and Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id. To the extent that the Commission has adopted 
definitions for small entities in connection with the auction of 
particular wireless licenses, we discuss those definitions below.
    \27\ Carrier Locator at Fig. 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    42. Broadband PCS Licensees. The broadband PCS spectrum is divided 
into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission 
has held auctions for each block. The Commission defined ``small 
business'' for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross 
revenues of not more than $40 million in the three previous calendar 
years.28 These regulations defining ``small business'' in 
the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by 
SBA.29 No small businesses within the SBA-approved 
definition bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There have 
been 237 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the four 
auctions that have been held for licenses in Blocks C, D, E and F, all 
of which may be affected by the actions taken in this Second Report and 
Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 47 CFR 24.720(b)(1).
    \29\ Implementation of Section 309(j) of the Communications 
Act--Competitive Bidding, PP Docket No. 93-253, Fifth Report and 
Order, 9 FCC Rcd 5532 (1994), 59 FR 37566, July 22, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. Cellular Licensees. According to the Bureau of the Census, only 
twelve radiotelephone firms from a total of 1,178 such firms which 
operated during 1992 had 1,000 or more employees. Therefore, even if 
all twelve of these firms were cellular telephone companies, nearly all 
cellular carriers were small businesses under the SBA's definition. In 
addition, we note that there are 1,758 cellular licenses; however, a 
cellular licensee may own several licenses. In addition, according to 
the most recent Carrier Locator data, 732 carriers reported that they 
were engaged in the provision of either cellular service or PCS 
services, which are placed together in the data. We do not have data 
specifying the number of these carriers that are not independently 
owned and operated or have more than 1,500 employees, and thus are 
unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of 
cellular service carriers that would qualify as small business concerns 
under the SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are 
fewer than 732 small cellular service carriers that may be affected by 
the actions taken in this Second Report and Order.

(D) Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    44. No reporting and recordkeeping requirements are imposed on 
telecommunications carriers, thus burdens on carriers, including small 
carriers, are not increased as a result of actions taken herein. 
Telecommunications carriers, including small carriers, will have to 
upgrade their network facilities to provide to law enforcement the 
assistance capability requirements adopted herein. Although compliance 
with the technical requirements will impose costs on carriers, the 
record was not sufficient to analyze thoroughly the costs to carriers, 
including small carriers.

(E) Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities and Significant Alternatives Considered

    45. The need for the regulations adopted herein is mandated by 
Federal legislation. In the final regulations, we affirm our proposals 
in the Further NPRM to establish regulations for wireline, cellular, 
and broadband PCS telecommunications carriers. Costs to 
telecommunications carriers will be mitigated in several ways. For 
example, the final regulations will require telecommunications 
carrier's to make available to law enforcement call identifying 
information when it can be done without unduly burdening the carrier 
with network modifications, thus allowing cost to be a consideration in 
determining whether the information is reasonably available to the 
carrier and can be provided to law enforcement . Thus, compliance with 
the assistance capability requirements of CALEA will be reasonable for 
all carriers, including small carriers. Also, under CALEA some carriers 
will be able to request reimbursement from the Department of Justice 
for network upgrades to comply with the technical requirements adopted 
herein, and others may be able to defer network upgrades to their 
normal business cycle under a plan being developed by the Department of 
Justice.

Report to Congress

    46. The Commission will send a copy of this FRFA, along with this 
Third Report and Order, in a report to Congress pursuant to the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of this 
Third Report and Order, including the FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 22

    Public mobile services.

47 CFR Part 24

    Personal communications services.

47 CFR Part 64

    Miscellaneous rules relating to common carriers.

Federal Communications Commission.
Magalie Roman Salas,
Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble parts 22, 24 and 64 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is revised as follows:

PART 22--PUBLIC MOBILE SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for part 22 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 222, 303, 309 and 332.

    2. Part 22 is amended to add subpart J to read as follows:

[[Page 51717]]

Subpart J--Required New Capabilities Pursuant to the Communications 
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)

Sec.
22.1100  Purpose.
22.1101  Scope.
22.1102  Definitions.
22.1103  Capabilities that must be provided by a cellular 
telecommunications carrier.


Sec. 22.1100  Purpose.

    Pursuant to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act 
(CALEA), Public Law 103-414, 108 Stat. 4279 (1994) (codified as amended 
in sections of 18 U.S.C. and 47 U.S.C.), this subpart contains rules 
that require a cellular telecommunications carrier to implement certain 
capabilities to ensure law enforcement access to authorized 
communications or call-identifying information.


Sec. 22.1101  Scope.

    The definitions included in this subpart shall be used solely for 
the purpose of implementing CALEA requirements.


Sec. 22.1102  Definitions.

    Call identifying information. Call identifying information means 
dialing or signaling information that identifies the origin, direction, 
destination, or termination of each communication generated or received 
by a subscriber by means of any equipment, facility, or service of a 
telecommunications carrier. Call identifying information is 
``reasonably available'' to a carrier if it is present at an intercept 
access point and can be made available without the carrier being unduly 
burdened with network modifications.
    Collection function. The location where lawfully authorized 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information is 
collected by a law enforcement agency (LEA).
    Content of subject-initiated conference calls. Capability that 
permits a LEA to monitor the content of conversations by all parties 
connected via a conference call when the facilities under surveillance 
maintain a circuit connection to the call.
    Dialed digit extraction. Capability that permits a LEA to receive 
on the call data channel digits dialed by a subject when a call is 
connected to another carrier's service for processing and routing.
    In-band and out-of-band signaling. Capability that permits a LEA to 
be informed when a network message that provides call identifying 
information (e.g., ringing, busy, call waiting signal, message light) 
is generated or sent by the IAP switch to a subject using the 
facilities under surveillance. Excludes signals generated by customer 
premises equipment when no network signal is generated.
    Intercept Access Point (IAP). Intercept access point is a point 
within a carrier's system where some of the communications or call-
identifying information of an intercept subject's equipment, 
facilities, and services are accessed.
    J-STD-025. The interim standard developed by the Telecommunications 
Industry Association and the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry 
Solutions for wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers. This 
standard defines services and features to support lawfully authorized 
electronic surveillance, and specifies interfaces necessary to deliver 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information to a LEA.
    LEA. Law enforcement agency; e.g., the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation or a local police department.
    Party hold, join, drop on conference calls. Capability that permits 
a LEA to identify the parties to a conference call conversation at all 
times.
    Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information. Capability 
that permits a LEA to be informed when a subject using the facilities 
under surveillance uses services that provide call identifying 
information, such as call forwarding, call waiting, call hold, and 
three-way calling. Excludes signals generated by customer premises 
equipment when no network signal is generated.
    Timing information. Capability that permits a LEA to associate 
call-identifying information with the content of a call. A call-
identifying message must be sent from the carrier's IAP to the LEA's 
Collection Function within eight seconds of receipt of that message by 
the IAP at least 95% of the time, and with the call event time-stamped 
to an accuracy of at least 200 milliseconds.


Sec. 22.1103  Capabilities that must be provided by a cellular 
telecommunications carrier.

    (a) Except as provided under paragraph (b) of this section, as of 
June 30, 2000, a cellular telecommunications carrier shall provide to a 
LEA the assistance capability requirements of CALEA, see 47 U.S.C. 
1002. A carrier may satisfy these requirements by complying with 
publicly available technical requirements or standards adopted by an 
industry association or standard-setting organization, such as J-STD-
025.
    (b) As of September 30, 2001, a cellular telecommunications carrier 
shall provide to a LEA communications and call-identifying information 
transported by packet-mode communications and the following 
capabilities:

(1) Content of subject-initiated conference calls;
(2) Party hold, join, drop on conference calls;
(3) Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information ;
(4) In-band and out-of-band signaling;
(5) Timing information;
(6) Dialed digit extraction.

PART 24--PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES

    3. The authority citation for part 24 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, 309 and 332.

    4. Part 24 is amended to add subpart J to read as follows:

Subpart J--Required New Capabilities Pursuant to the Communications 
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)

Sec.
24.900  Purpose.
24.901  Scope.
24.902  Definitions.
24.903  Capabilities that must be provided by a broadcast PCS 
telecommunications carrier.


Sec. 24.900  Purpose.

    Pursuant to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act 
(CALEA), Public Law 103-414, 108 Stat. 4279 (1994) (codified as amended 
in sections of 18 U.S.C. and 47 U.S.C.), this subpart contains rules 
that require a broadband PCS telecommunications carrier to implement 
certain capabilities to ensure law enforcement access to authorized 
communications or call-identifying information.


Sec. 24.901  Scope.

    The definitions included in this subpart shall be used solely for 
the purpose of implementing CALEA requirements.


Sec. 24.902  Definitions.

    Call identifying information. Call identifying information means 
dialing or signaling information that identifies the origin, direction, 
destination, or termination of each communication generated or received 
by a subscriber by means of any equipment, facility, or service of a 
telecommunications carrier. Call identifying information is 
``reasonably available'' to a carrier if it is present at an intercept 
access point and can be made available without the

[[Page 51718]]

carrier being unduly burdened with network modifications.
    Collection function. The location where lawfully authorized 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information is 
collected by a law enforcement agency (LEA).
    Content of subject-initiated conference calls. Capability that 
permits a LEA to monitor the content of conversations by all parties 
connected via a conference call when the facilities under surveillance 
maintain a circuit connection to the call.
    Dialed digit extraction. Capability that permits a LEA to receive 
on the call data channel a digits dialed by a subject after a call is 
connected to another carrier's service for processing and routing.
    IAP. Intercept access point is a point within a carrier's system 
where some of the communications or call-identifying information of an 
intercept subject's equipment, facilities, and services are accessed.
    In-band and out-of-band signaling. Capability that permits a LEA to 
be informed when a network message that provides call identifying 
information (e.g., ringing, busy, call waiting signal, message light) 
is generated or sent by the IAP switch to a subject using the 
facilities under surveillance. Excludes signals generated by customer 
premises equipment when no network signal is generated.
    J-STD-025. The interim standard developed by the Telecommunications 
Industry Association and the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry 
Solutions for wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers. This 
standard defines services and features to support lawfully authorized 
electronic surveillance, and specifies interfaces necessary to deliver 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information to a LEA.
    LEA. Law enforcement agency; e.g., the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation or a local police department.
    Party hold, join, drop on conference calls. Capability that permits 
a LEA to identify the parties to a conference call conversation at all 
times.
    Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information. Capability 
that permits a LEA to be informed when a subject using the facilities 
under surveillance uses services that provide call identifying 
information, such as call forwarding, call waiting, call hold, and 
three-way calling. Excludes signals generated by customer premises 
equipment when no network signal is generated.
    Timing information. Capability that permits a LEA to associate 
call-identifying information with the content of a call. A call-
identifying message must be sent from the carrier's IAP to the LEA's 
Collection Function within eight seconds of receipt of that message by 
the IAP at least 95% of the time, and with the call event time-stamped 
to an accuracy of at least 200 milliseconds.


Sec. 24.903  Capabilities that must be provided by a broadband PCS 
telecommunications carrier.

    (a) Except as provided under paragraph (b) of this section, as of 
June 30, 2000, a cellular telecommunications carrier shall provide to a 
LEA the assistance capability requirements of CALEA, see 47 U.S.C. 
1002. A carrier may satisfy these requirements by complying with 
publicly available technical requirements or standards adopted by an 
industry association or standard-setting organization, such as J-STD-
025.
    (b) As of September 30, 2001, a cellular telecommunications carrier 
shall provide to a LEA communications and call-identifying information 
transported by packet-mode communications and the following 
capabilities:

(1) Content of subject-initiated conference calls;
(2) Party hold, join, drop on conference calls;
(3) Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information ;
(4) In-band and out-of-band signaling;
(5) Timing information;
(6) Dialed digit extraction.

PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS

    5. The authority citation for part 64 is amended to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 201, 202, 205, 218-220, and 332 
unless otherwise noted. Interpret or apply sections 201, 218, 225, 
226, 227, 229, 332, 48 Stat. 1070, as amended. 47 U.S.C. 201-204, 
208, 225, 226, 227, 229, 332, 501 and 503 unless otherwise noted.

    6. Part 64 is amended to add Subpart W to read as follows:

Subpart W--Required New Capabilities Pursuant to the Communications 
Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)

Sec.
64.2200  Purpose.
64.2201  Scope.
64.2202  Definitions.
64.2203  Capabilities that must be provided by a wireline 
telecommunications carrier.


Sec. 64.2200  Purpose.

    Pursuant to the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act 
(CALEA), Public Law 103-414, 108 Stat. 4279 (1994) (codified as amended 
in sections of 18 U.S.C. and 47 U.S.C.), this subpart contains rules 
that require a wireline telecommunications carrier to implement certain 
capabilities to ensure law enforcement access to authorized 
communications or call-identifying information.


Sec. 64.2201  Scope.

    The definitions included in this subpart shall be used solely for 
the purpose of implementing CALEA requirements.


Sec. 64.2202  Definitions.

    Call identifying information. Call identifying information means 
dialing or signaling information that identifies the origin, direction, 
destination, or termination of each communication generated or received 
by a subscriber by means of any equipment, facility, or service of a 
telecommunications carrier. Call identifying information is 
``reasonably available'' to a carrier if it is present at an intercept 
access point and can be made available without the carrier being unduly 
burdened with network modifications.
    Collection function. The location where lawfully authorized 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information is 
collected by a law enforcement agency (LEA).
    Content of subject-initiated conference calls. Capability that 
permits a LEA to monitor the content of conversations by all parties 
connected via a conference call when the facilities under surveillance 
maintain a circuit connection to the call.
    Dialed digit extraction. Capability that permits a LEA to receive 
on the call data channel a digits dialed by a subject after a call is 
connected to another carrier's service for processing and routing.
    IAP. Intercept access point is a point within a carrier's system 
where some of the communications or call-identifying information of an 
intercept subject's equipment, facilities, and services are accessed.
    In-band and out-of-band signaling. Capability that permits a LEA to 
be informed when a network message that provides call identifying 
information (e.g., ringing, busy, call waiting signal, message light) 
is generated or sent by the IAP switch to a subject using the 
facilities under surveillance. Excludes signals generated by customer 
premises equipment when no network signal is generated.
    J-STD-025. The interim standard developed by the Telecommunications 
Industry Association and the Alliance for Telecommunications Industry

[[Page 51719]]

Solutions for wireline, cellular, and broadband PCS carriers. This 
standard defines services and features to support lawfully authorized 
electronic surveillance, and specifies interfaces necessary to deliver 
intercepted communications and call-identifying information to a LEA.
    LEA. Law enforcement agency; e.g., the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation or a local police department.
    Party hold, join, drop on conference calls. Capability that permits 
a LEA to identify the parties to a conference call conversation at all 
times.
    Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information. Capability 
that permits a LEA to be informed when a subject using the facilities 
under surveillance uses services that provide call identifying 
information, such as call forwarding, call waiting, call hold, and 
three-way calling. Excludes signals generated by customer premises 
equipment when no network signal is generated.
    Timing information. Capability that permits a LEA to associate 
call-identifying information with the content of a call. A call-
identifying message must be sent from the carrier's IAP to the LEA's 
Collection Function within eight seconds of receipt of that message by 
the IAP at least 95% of the time, and with the call event time-stamped 
to an accuracy of at least 200 milliseconds.


Sec. 64.2203  Capabilities that must be provided by a wireline 
telecommunications carrier.

    (a) Except as provided under paragraph (b) of this section, as of 
June 30, 2000, a cellular telecommunications carrier shall provide to a 
LEA the assistance capability requirements of CALEA, see 47 U.S.C. 
1002. A carrier may satisfy these requirements by complying with 
publicly available technical requirements or standards adopted by an 
industry association or standard-setting organization, such as J-STD-
025.
    (b) As of September 30, 2001, a cellular telecommunications carrier 
shall provide to a LEA communications and call-identifying information 
transported by packet-mode communications and the following 
capabilities:

(1) Content of subject-initiated conference calls;
(2) Party hold, join, drop on conference calls;
(3) Subject-initiated dialing and signaling information ;
(4) In-band and out-of-band signaling;
(5) Timing information;
(6) Dialed digit extraction.

[FR Doc. 99-24896 Filed 9-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P