[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 227 (Friday, November 26, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72773-72777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29669]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 64
[CG Docket Nos. 10-207 and 09-158; FCC 10-180]
Empowering Consumers to Avoid Bill Shock; Consumer Information
and Disclosure
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission proposes rules that would
require mobile service providers to provide usage alerts and
information that will assist consumers in avoiding unexpected charges
on their bills. The Commission believes its proposals will allow
consumers to understand the costs associated with use of their mobile
service plans and take advantage of safeguards against bill shock by
providing them with timely information to better manage those costs and
thereby avoid incurring unexpected charges on their bills.
DATES: Comments are due on or before December 27, 2010. Reply comments
are due on or before January 25, 2011. Written comments on the proposed
information collection requirements, subject to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (PRA), should be submitted on or before
January 25, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by [CG Docket No. 10-
207], by any of the following methods:
[dec222] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/ or the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers should follow
the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments and
transmit one electronic copy of the filing to each docket number
referenced in the caption, which in this case is CG Docket No. 10-207.
For ECFS filers, in completing the transmittal screen, filers should
include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the
applicable docket number.
Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail.
To get filing instructions, filers should send an e-mail to
[email protected], and include the following words in the body of the
message, ``get form .'' A sample form and
directions will be sent in response.
[dec222] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and four copies of each filing. Because two docket
numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit
two additional copies for the additional docket number. In addition,
parties must send one copy to the Commission's duplicating contractor,
Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC
20554, or via e-mail to [email protected]. Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class
or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to
the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission.
[dec222] All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at
445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. All hand
deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any
envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. The filing
hours are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
[dec222] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class,
Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
In addition, document FCC 10-180 contains proposed information
collection requirements subject to the PRA. It will be submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 3507 of
the PRA. OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies are
invited to comment on the proposed information collection requirements
contained in this document. PRA comments should be submitted to Cathy
Williams, Federal Communications Commission via e-mail at [email protected]
and [email protected], and to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of
Management and Budget, via fax at (202) 395-5167, or via e-mail to
[email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard D. Smith, Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Policy Division, at (717) 338-2797
(voice), or e-mail [email protected].
For additional information concerning the PRA information
collection requirements contained in this document, contact Cathy
Williams, Federal Communications Commission, at (202) 418-2918, or via
e-mail [email protected].
[[Page 72774]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's
Empowering Consumers to Avoid Bill Shock; Consumer Information and
Disclosure, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), document FCC 10-180,
adopted and released on October 14, 2010, in CG Docket Nos. 10-207 and
09-158. The full text of document FCC 10-180 and copies of any
subsequently filed documents in this matter will be available for
public inspection and copying via ECFS, and during regular business
hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th
Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. They may also be
purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and
Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone: (800) 378-3160, fax: (202) 488-5563,
or Internet: http://www.bcpiweb.com. Document FCC 10-180 can also be
downloaded in Word or Portable Document Format (PDF) at http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/policy. To request materials in accessible formats for
people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio
format), send an e-mail to [email protected] or call the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432
(TTY). To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR)
submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the Web page http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, (2) look for the section of the Web page called ``Currently
Under Review,'' (3) click on the downward-pointing arrow in the
``Select Agency'' box below the ``Currently Under Review'' heading, (4)
select ``Federal Communications Commission'' from the list of agencies
presented in the ``Select Agency'' box, (5) click the ``Submit'' button
to the right of the ``Select Agency'' box, (6) when the list of FCC
ICRs currently under review appears, look for the OMB control number of
this ICR and then click on the ICR Reference Number. A copy of the FCC
submission to OMB will be displayed.
Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq., this matter shall be treated as
a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the
Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making oral ex parte presentations
are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentations must contain
summaries of the substances of the presentations and not merely a
listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence
description of the views and arguments presented is generally required.
Other rules pertaining to oral and written ex parte presentations in
permit-but-disclose proceedings are set forth in 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork burdens, invites the general public and OMB to comment on the
proposed information collection requirements contained in this
document, as required by the PRA. Public and agency comments are due
January 25, 2011. Comments should address: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or other forms of information
technology. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork
Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the
Commission seeks specific comment on how it may ``further reduce the
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees.''
OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.
Title: Empowering Consumers to Avoid Bill Shock; Consumer
Information and Disclosure, CG Docket Nos. 10-207 and 09-158.
Form No.: N/A.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 1,500 respondents and 3,000
responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 40 to 100 hours.
Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement; Third
party disclosure requirement.
Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The
statutory authority for these proposed information collections is found
at sections 1-2, 4, 201, 258, 301, 303, 332, and 403 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
Total Annual Burden: 210,000 hours.
Total Annual Costs: $10,000,000.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: An assurance of
confidentiality is not offered because this information collection does
not require the collection of personally identifiable information from
individuals.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).
Needs and Uses: In document FCC 10-180, the Commission proposes
rules that would require mobile service providers to provide usage
alerts, such as voice or text messages, to subscribers when they are
approaching or reach an allotted limit of voice, text or data usage or
are incurring international or roaming charges. In addition, the
Commission proposes that mobile service providers make clear and
ongoing disclosure of any tools they offer which allow subscribers to
set usage limits or monitor usage balances. The provision of this
information in a timely and easily accessible manner will allow
consumers to avoid incurring sudden, unexpected charges on their
wireless bills.
Synopsis
In document FCC 10-180, the Commission proposes that mobile
providers actively provide consumers with notification messages to
assist them in managing the costs of using their service and ensure
that subscribers are not shocked by overage or roaming charges.
Specifically, the Commission proposes that mobile providers provide
notification when a subscriber is approaching their plan's allotted
limit for voice, text, or data usage. The Commission seeks comment on
whether such notifications should be provided in ``real time,''
including any technical limitations or other considerations that should
be taken into consideration when reviewing this issue. How should such
notifications be provided in the case of multi-line family plans? The
Commission seeks comment on the most effective way to provide this
notification to consumers, including methods such as providing voice or
text alerts. In addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether we
should establish a precise usage level at which this initial
notification message would be triggered. In reviewing this issue, the
Commission seeks comment on the utility of providing multiple usage
alerts to the consumer against the potential burdens to the wireless
providers--particularly smaller providers--who must supply them. The
Commission seeks comment on whether there are aspects of the existing
usage alert systems or other tools that have proven particularly
helpful to consumers in avoiding bill shock that it should consider
incorporating in any rule it adopts to reduce bill shock.
Alternatively, are there aspects of those tools that have reduced their
effectiveness for consumers and should not be adopted? The Commission
also
[[Page 72775]]
seeks comment on what it can learn from the experience with bill shock
regulation in the European Union.
In addition, the Commission proposes that mobile providers supply a
notification message to consumers once they reach their monthly
allotment limit and begin incurring overage charges. The Commission
seeks comment on whether it is sufficient to notify consumers that they
have begun incurring overage charges or whether specific cost
information and cut off mechanisms such as these would also be useful
to consumers or create additional challenges. In that regard, the
Commission seeks to balance consumer protections and expectations with
the costs and technical limitations that might arise by imposing any
additional requirements. In this regard, are there concerns or issues
the Commission should consider with respect to smaller, regional and/or
rural mobile providers? Moreover, the Commission does not intend for
any alert system to hamper the ability of consumers to complete
critical voice or data communications such as access to E911, and seeks
comment on how to avoid such effects. In addition, the Commission seeks
comment on whether consumers should be allowed to opt-out if they
determine that they do not want to receive these mandatory usage alerts
from their mobile service provider.
Similarly, the Commission proposes that mobile service providers
supply a notification message to consumers when they are about to incur
international or other roaming charges in excess of their normal rates.
The Commission seeks comment on the technical feasibility of providing
such international alerts, including whether such alerts require, in
any way, the international provider's cooperation or any changes to its
network. How often should such international alerts be provided? For
example, should an alert be provided every time a consumer is about to
incur international roaming charges? Should the Commission also require
mobile providers to better disclose how to turn off any mobile device
function that cause them to incur roaming charges? Several industry
commenters contend that domestic roaming in the United States presents
fewer difficulties to consumers because there is little or no domestic
roaming for many subscribers. To what extent, if any, should this
factor into our analysis? For example, should any roaming notification
requirement be limited to international situations? Or should
notification also be required for regional providers that use partners
for domestic roaming? In addition, the Commission seeks comment on
whether such notifications should include the applicable rates and
associated charges for international or roaming charges, including any
technical limitations--particularly for smaller providers--of providing
this level of information in real time.
The Commission seeks comment on the length of time that would be
required for mobile providers to implement any such usage alert
requirement based upon a proposal that requires providers to notify
subscribers when they are approaching and then reach the 100 percent
threshold mark of their monthly usage allotment. Based on the comments
received in response to the Bill Shock PN, published at 75 FR 28249,
May 20, 2010, it may be easier for the national providers to start
providing alerts. As a result, the Commission seeks comment on whether
there are concerns, issues or cost considerations to implement such
usage alerts that it should consider with respect to smaller, regional
and/or rural mobile providers. Is there a need for varying
implementation schedules between the larger and smaller, regional and/
or rural providers to alleviate the burden for smaller providers? If
so, what are the exact timeframes by which providers could modify their
existing systems to comply with this requirement? Alternatively, should
the Commission consider exempting smaller, regional and/or rural
providers from any usage alert or roaming requirement due to the costs
such a requirement might impose on them? If so, what size providers
should this exemption apply to?
Methods for Reviewing and Capping Usage
The Commission proposes that mobile providers make clear,
conspicuous and ongoing disclosure of any tools they offer which allow
subscribers to either limit usage or monitor usage history. The
Commission seeks additional information about the methods available for
monitoring usage balances and ways to limit usage available to
subscribers of smaller, regional, and rural mobile providers.
Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on the best methods to
ensure that consumers are made aware of the available tools for
monitoring usage balances and limiting usage, how to access these tools
and any applicable charges. For example, should mobile providers be
required to provide this information on their bills or in annual bill
inserts? What would be the most cost effective way to better ensure
that consumers have access to this information and make full use of the
currently available tools that can protect subscribers from bill shock?
In particular, the Commission seeks comment on these issues as they
relate to consumers with disabilities. What is the best method to
minimize costs for smaller, regional and/or rural mobile providers
while ensuring their customers have access to this information? The
Commission seeks comment on how effective the existing usage controls
have been in helping consumers avoid bill shock. The Commission also
seeks comment on the extent to which the effectiveness of usage
controls is impacted by the conditions under which they are provided to
consumers. To the extent that existing usage control tools have proven
effective in addressing bill shock, the Commission seeks comment on
whether it should explore the possibility of mandating that all mobile
service providers offer consumers the means to set their own usage
limits. For example, should consumers be allowed to cap their usage in
advance at a level specified by the customer (either for individual
users or the entire account) or allowed to opt-out entirely of certain
services (e.g. text messages) so that they cannot incur charges for any
service that they don't want. Would such a requirement be overly
burdensome for smaller, regional and rural providers?
Prepaid Services
The Commission seeks comment on whether prepaid mobile services
should be exempt from any usage alert requirements that might evolve
from this proceeding to address consumer bill shock. Prepaid services
include traditional, pay-as-you-go services, in which customers buy
minutes ahead of time on a card, as well as unlimited prepaid services,
in which customers pay in advance for unlimited voice and/or data
services each month with no long-term contract. The Commission seeks
comment on these analyses, including those situations in which prepaid
service users might benefit from receiving usage alerts. The Commission
asks that parties distinguish between traditional, pay-as-you-go and
unlimited prepaid services in their comments.
Scope of Covered Entities and Services and Legal Authority
The Commission seeks comment on the types of wireless services that
should be covered by our proposals. Should any rules the Commission
adopts apply to all communications services provided by mobile wireless
providers, including voice, text, and data services? Should providers
of mobile data services that do not also offer Commercial Mobile Radio
Service
[[Page 72776]]
(CMRS) be included? Although mobile data services may be provided by
companies that are also CMRS carriers, such services may also be
provided by entities that do not offer any CMRS. Therefore, the
Commission seeks comment on whether the scope of covered entities
should be broader than CMRS providers. On the other hand, are there
services for which these rules are not necessary?
Next, the Commission seeks comment on the best sources of authority
for the Commission to adopt bill shock related obligations for the
different types of mobile wireless services. Several provisions of
Title III provide the Commission authority to establish license
conditions in the public interest. In addition, to the extent that some
of the mobile services covered by the rules promulgated in this
proceeding are common carrier or telecommunications services, what
other provisions of the Act, in Title II or elsewhere, would provide
the Commission additional authority to impose bill shock-related
obligations? What other authority-related issues should the Commission
consider?
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended,
(RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed
in document FCC 10-180. Written public comments are requested on this
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be
filed by the deadlines for comments on document FCC 10-180 provided on
the first page of this document. The Commission will send a copy of
document FCC 10-180, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
In document FCC 10-180, the Commission summarized the record
compiled in response to the Consumer Information NOI and Bill Shock PN
indicating that mobile consumers receive inadequate usage-related
information to manage the costs associated with their mobile service
plans. Recent reports from both GAO and the Better Business Bureau
confirm that wireless consumers continue to experience problems with
unexpected charges appearing on their bills. In many cases, these
charges result from consumers unknowingly exceeding a monthly allotment
limit and incurring substantial overage charges. These charges can
result in significant expenditures of time, effort, and money for more
than 270 million American consumers that use mobile services. In the
document FCC 10-180, the Commission seeks comment on proposals designed
to empower consumers to avoid bill shock by ensuring that they receive
baseline information about their monthly usage balances in a timely and
consistent manner to make informed decisions regarding the costs
associated with their mobile service.
Legal Basis
The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to
document FCC 10-180 is contained in sections 1-2, 4, 201, 258, 301,
303, 332 and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 47
U.S.C. 151-152, 154, 201, 258, 301, 303, 332 and 403.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply
The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that will be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. 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 Small Business Administration (SBA). Nationwide,
there are a total of approximately 29.6 million small businesses,
according to the SBA. The document FCC 10-180 seeks comment generally
on mobile providers of voice, text and data services. However, as noted
in section IV of the document FCC 10-180, the Commission is seeking
comment on the scope of entities that should be covered by the
proposals contained therein.
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since
2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms within this new,
broad, economic census category. Prior to that time, such firms were
within the now-superseded categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under the present and prior
categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees. Because Census Bureau data are not yet
available for the new category, the Commission will estimate small
business prevalence using the prior categories and associated data. For
the category of Paging, data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 804 firms had
employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of
1,000 employees or more. For the category of Cellular and Other
Wireless Telecommunications, data for 2002 show that there were 1,397
firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had
employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of
1,000 employees or more. Thus, the Commission estimates that the
majority of wireless firms are small.
Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, personal
communications services, and specialized mobile radio telephony
carriers. As noted, the SBA has developed a small business size
standard for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite).
Under the SBA small business size standard, a business is small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to FCC data, 434 carriers
report that they are engaged in wireless telephony. Of these, an
estimated 222 have 1,500 or fewer employees, and 212 have more than
1,500 employees. Therefore, the Commission estimates that 222 of these
entities can be considered small.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements
In document FCC 10-180, the Commission proposes requirements that
would require mobile service providers to offer notification alerts to
consumers regarding their usage balances. Specifically, the Commission
proposes that mobile service providers offer notification alerts to
consumers when: (1) Subscribers are approaching their plan's allotted
limit for voice, text, and data usage; (2) subscribers have reached
their monthly allotment limit and begin incurring overage charges for
any subsequent use of that service and (3) subscribers will incur
international or roaming charges not covered under their monthly plans.
In addition, the Commission proposes that mobile service providers
shall make ongoing disclosure of any tools or services they offer which
allow subscribers to set usage limits or monitor usage balances
including any applicable charges for those services. Many mobile
service
[[Page 72777]]
providers already offer some of these services. However, mobile service
providers may have to review and adjust their current alert systems to
ensure compliance with these requirements. In addition, the
Commission's proposed rules may require mobile providers to include
information regarding how to request and use any usage controls and
monitoring tools that they currently offer in the service providers'
bills or in annual bill inserts. This would necessitate providing
additional information to consumers via the monthly bill or an annual
bill insert.
Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities,
and Significant Alternatives Considered
The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives
that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may
include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The
establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to small
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small
entities.
In document FCC 10-180, the Commission seeks comment on the costs
for small providers to implement usage alerts including whether there
is a need for varying implementation schedules between the larger and
smaller providers to alleviate the burden for smaller providers. In
addition, the Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission should
consider exempting the smaller providers from any usage alert or
roaming notification requirement due to the costs such a requirement
might impose on them. In reviewing the frequency of mandatory usage
alerts, the Commission seeks comment on the utility of providing
multiple usage alerts to the consumer against the potential burdens to
the wireless providers particularly smaller providers--who must supply
them. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on the best methods to
minimize costs for smaller, regional and/or rural mobile providers
while ensuring their customers have access to information relating to
any methods to monitor or set limits on usage offered by their service
provider.
Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
None.
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-2, 4, 201, 258,
301, 303, 332 and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47
U.S.C. 151-152, 154, 201, 258, 301, 303, 332 and 403, document FCC 10-
180 is adopted.
The Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau,
Reference Information Center, shall send a copy of document FCC 10-180,
including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 64
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Telecommunications,
Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 64 as follows:
PART 64--MISCELLANEOUS RULES RELATING TO COMMON CARRIERS
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 254(k); secs. 403(b)(2)(B), (c), Pub.
L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. Interpret or apply 47 U.S.C. 201, 218,
222, 225, 226, 228 and 254(k) unless otherwise noted.
1. Sec. 64.2402 is added to subpart Y to read as follows:
Sec. 64.2402 Usage alerts and information for mobile services.
(a) This section shall apply to providers of mobile services as
defined in paragraph (b) of this section. The purpose of this section
is to require mobile service providers to provide consumers with
timely, baseline information relating to their monthly usage so that
consumers can avoid unexpected overage charges.
(b) [Reserved].
(c) Usage notifications. Mobile service providers shall provide
notification alerts when:
(1) Subscribers are approaching an allotted limit for voice, text,
and data usage.
(2) Subscribers have reached their monthly allotment limit and
begin incurring overage charges for any subsequent use of that service.
(3) Subscribers will incur international or roaming charges that
are not covered by their monthly plans, and notification if they will
be charged at higher than normal rates.
(d) Mobile service providers shall make clear, conspicuous, and
ongoing disclosure of any tools or services they offer which allow
subscribers to set usage limits or monitor usage balances, including
any applicable charges for those services. This information should be
made available in a manner that is accessible to and usable by
consumers with disabilities, in accordance with section 716 of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (Act), and the Commission's
rules implementing sections 255 and 716 of the Act.
[FR Doc. 2010-29669 Filed 11-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P