UTILITIES AND TRANSPORTATION
[General Order No. R-442, Docket No. UT 960942--Filed August 29, 1997, 3:37 p.m.]
In the matter of adopting WAC 480-120-139 and amending WAC 480-120-042 relating to changes in local exchange and intrastate toll services and directory services.
statutory or other authority: The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission takes this action under Notice No. WSR 97-11-072, filed with the code reviser on May 21, 1997. The commission brings this proceeding pursuant to RCW 80.01.040.
statement of compliance: This proceeding complies with the Open Public Meetings Act (chapter 42.30 RCW), the Administrative Procedure Act (chapter 34.05 RCW), the State Register Act (chapter 34.08 RCW), the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (chapter 34.21C RCW), and the Regulatory Fairness Act (chapter 19.85 RCW).
date of adoption: The commission adopted this rule on August 1, 1997.
concise statement of purpose and effect of the rule: The rule would establish customer options and safeguards during initiation of new services, or change in existing services, and provide information through directories of companies serving an exchange. The rule gives consumers uniform protection from involuntary unauthorized changes in service and service providers. It ensures consumer service orders are fair and consistent across the telecommunications industry. The rule ensures that consumer choices in services and providers will be exercised voluntarily and in an informed manner.
reference to affected rules: This rule amends the following sections of the Washington Administrative Code:
WAC 480-120-042 Directory services. The amended section provides the option for new local exchange service companies to be included in a directory in the area in which they provide service. The rule gives consumers the information needed to select a provider in the customer's service area.
New WAC 480-120-139 Changes in local exchange and intrastate toll services. The new section defines the consumer protections all companies must assure when taking orders for service from customers, including: Protection against involuntary and unauthorized changes in service providers; assurance of privacy for customer proprietary network information; and remedies for violations of the rule requirements.
preproposal statement of inquiry and actions thereunder: The commission filed a preproposal statement of inquiry (CR-101) on July 24, 1996, under WSR 96-15-130.
additional notice and activity pursuant to preproposal statement: The statement advised interested persons that the commission was considering a rule making to explore, with the telecommunications industry and interested parties, the need for consumer protections addressing fair practices during contacts with customers where choice of service provider for some component of service is an issue, including protection against involuntary and unauthorized change in service provider. The commission informed interested persons of the inquiry into this matter by providing notice of the subject; providing the preproposal statement of inquiry (CR-101) to all persons on the commission's list of persons requesting such information pursuant to RCW 34.05.320(3), providing notice to all registered telecommunications companies, and providing notice to the commission's list of telecommunications attorneys.
The commission engaged in two public workshops in September 1996, and January 1997, with members of the public, public counsel, industry representatives, and commission staff. After the workshops, the commission developed rule language incorporating specific language suggested by stakeholders. The commission requested comments on the various proposals throughout the rule development process.
notice of proposed rule making: The commission decided to file a notice of proposed rule making at its regularly scheduled open public meeting on May 16, 1997. The commission filed a notice of proposed rule making (CR-102) on May 21, 1997, under WSR 97-11-072. The commission scheduled this matter for oral comment and adoption under Notice No. WSR 97-11-072 at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, July 30, 1997, in the Commission's Hearing Room, Second Floor, Chandler Plaza Building, 1300 South Evergreen Park Drive S.W., Olympia, WA. The notice provided interested persons the opportunity to submit written comments to the commission.
commenters: The commission received written comments from eleven interested parties on notice for proposed rule making (CR-102) WSR 97-11-072 in June 1997. Comments were filed by TCG Seattle, NEXTLINK, SPRINT Communications Company L.P. (Sprint), BCI, TRA, Bell Atlantic Communications, Inc., United Telephone Company of the Northwest, Washington Independent Telephone Association (WITA), US WEST Communications, Inc. (US WEST), AT&T Communications of the Pacific Northwest, Inc. (AT&T), and public counsel.
Commission staff incorporated editorial revisions and clarifications filed in comments by the eleven parties, and subsequently drafted and distributed modified rule language. The proposed rule language and a letter summarizing parties who filed comments on the CR-102 proposed rule making was mailed to all interested parties on July 2, 1997. Further comments were filed regarding the commission letter of July 2, by public counsel on July 14, US WEST on July 23, and VoiceLog on July 29, 1997.
Public counsel identified three issues in filed comments and suggested language previously filed by public counsel be used in the rule. The changes sought were: Require equal distribution of service information packages to all customers by the new telecommunications company; state commission authority and penalties in the rule in the event a violation occurs; and either limit the rule language on privacy or adopt a more comprehensive privacy section in the rule, incorporating a federal statute in protecting privacy for Washington customers.
US WEST filed comments suggesting the commission direct parties to work further on rule language. US WEST proposed specific language in four areas: WAC 480-120-042(1) revise proposed rule requirements on publication responsibility; WAC 480-120-139(1) identify interLATA toll as well as intraLATA toll as the serving market; WAC 480-120-139(2) drop the requirement for the postpaid postcard; and WAC 480-120-139(4) rewrite or delete the prohibition to use nonpublished and unlisted numbers for telemarketing.
VoiceLog LLC (VoiceLog) filed comments in support of WAC 480-120-139(5) (Use of customer information). Additionally, VoiceLog suggested the commission consider modifying the rules to allow customers to permit the use of nonpublished and unlisted customer information, and that the commission require companies document permission through a written or oral recorded process.
Commission staff met informally with representatives of PTI, US WEST, WITA, GTE Northwest, Inc. (GTE), SPRINT, VoiceLog, and public counsel on July 28 and 29, 1997, to address additional verbal and filed comments. Staff considered supplementary edits to the rule language, and incorporated modified revisions suggested by US WEST and public counsel. Those revisions included public counsel's clarification on distribution of information packages to all customers in WAC 480-120-139(1), and a remedies section (5) of WAC 480-120-139 reiterating the commission authority to penalize companies that violate the statute and customer protections on payment to companies that violate the statute. US WEST's language in WAC 480-120-042(1) was considered and WAC 480-120-042(1) was changed back to the current rule language. This was due to stated uncertainty among industry members regarding new requirements. In WAC 480-120-139 "intrastate" was substituted for "intraLATA" for clarification based on US WEST's recommendation. WAC 480-120-042 and 480-120-139 were distributed through facsimile to industry members, public counsel and interested parties on July 25, July 28 and again on July 29, 1997.
rule making hearing: The rule proposal was considered for adoption, pursuant to the notice, at the commission's regularly scheduled open public meeting on July 30, 1997, before Chairman Sharon L. Nelson and Commissioner William R. Gillis.
Testimony was taken and the rule was considered. Public counsel, Mr. Simon ffitch, supported the general rule intent and suggested WAC 480-120-139(4) (remedies) be enhanced using suggested language filed in the CR-102 proposed rule making in June 1997. Public counsel also confirmed its preference that subsection (2)(viii) (referencing postpaid postcards) be a positive option for customers.
WITA counsel, Mr. Richard Finnigan, expressed reservations regarding WAC 480-120-139 (5)(a) (use of customer information for telemarketing purposes).
TCG and NEXTLINK counsel, Mr. Greg Kopta, suggested a revision to WAC 480-120-139(2) to clarify telemarketing practices and the use of the postpaid postcard for customer notification. He suggested the requirement on postpaid postcards be waived in instances where the new telecommunications company had obtained a customer's written authority to place an order for services.
US WEST, represented by Ms. Theresa Jensen, reiterated its concerns filed on July 23, 1997, regarding WAC 480-120-042(5) (use of customer information), and suggested revisions to subsection (4) (remedies) to address potential customer fraud.
BCI counsel, Mr. Robert Taylor, asked the commission to reject the adoption of WAC 480-120-139 due to BCI concerns about third-party verification in subsection (2), and lack of appropriate remedies for customer fraud in subsection (4).
Consideration of the rule was continued until the August 1, 1997, continued session of the commission open public meeting, so commission staff and the commission could consider comments brought before the commission. The continuation was announced on the record during the regularly scheduled July 30, 1997, open public meeting.
The rule proposal was considered for adoption, at the continued open public meeting on August 1, 1997, before Chairman Sharon L. Nelson, Commissioner Richard Hemstad and Commissioner William R. Gillis.
Commission staff, represented by Rebecca Beaton, informed the commissioners that parties had met informally on July 31, 1997, and revisions were made in the rule with general consensus. Public counsel, US WEST, WITA, PTI, and BCI offered suggested rule language that addressed issues brought before the commission on July 30, 1997. Public counsel, US WEST, WITA and PTI proposed language was modified, and incorporated into minor revisions of the rule language in WAC 480-120-139. BCI's suggestions were considered but not incorporated, due to commission staff and industry concerns regarding modification of the rule intent.
The revisions incorporated into WAC 480-120-139 and brought before the commission at the August 1, 1997, open public meeting were: Subsection (2)(x) which allowed waiver of requirements in the rule to send postpaid postcards to customers if written permission had been obtained by the new telecommunications company; subsection (4) (remedies) which was modified to include a revision that may prevent customer fraud against the authorized telecommunications company; and subsection (5)(c) (customer information) which was modified to allow solicitation of nonpublished and unlisted customers if customers are informed once a year of the option to be removed from telemarketing lists.
WITA, represented by Mr. Terry Vann, suggested a minor modification to clarify payment for calls in subsection (4) (remedies). Language was revised by the addition of "service provided" which replaced "calls made" and adding "after receipt of the refund for such service" inserted in sentence one of subsection (4). Mr. Vann also asked that the record reflect the fact that local exchange companies have no authority to remove unlisted or nonpublished customer numbers in lists generated through independent companies, such as Federal Express.
US WEST counsel, Ms. Lisa Andrl, responded to commission questions on refund processes and telemarketing to nonpublished and unlisted customers, confirming US WEST was in agreement with the revised rule language.
BCI attorney, Mr. Robert Taylor, restated his concerns as expressed in the July 30 public meeting on WAC 480-120-139(2) (orders), on third party verification and subsection (4) (remedies). The commission chose not to include the language on remedies proposed due to concerns about billing by telecommunications companies for services not rendered.
MCI attorney, Mr. David Hackett, requested the commission consider readdressing the proposed rules as a separate set of requirements for long distance service companies and for those providing local exchange. Mr. Hackett expressed concerns about third-party verification requirements and that prepaid postcards must be sent to all customers.
NEXTLINK and TCG counsel, Mr. Greg Kopta, confirmed with the commission that his client's issues had been addressed by modifying and clarifying subsection (2) of the WAC.
Public counsel, Mr. Simon ffitch, confirmed general support of
commission staff recommendation that, at a minimum, the rules are
appropriate for the emerging competitive market conditions.
Upon review of the proposed rule and rule amendment and the record in this matter, the commission is satisfied that the rule and rule amendment are in the public interest and should be adopted and accepted. The parties are to be commended for their cooperative efforts regarding the issues in this proceeding. The commission had certain specific concerns, which were addressed in the discussion and incorporated.
the commission finds:
1. The Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission is an agency of the state of Washington, vested by statute with authority to regulate rules, rates, regulations, practices, accounts, securities, property transfers, and mergers of public service companies.
2. On July 29, 1996, the commission initiated a rule making to address consumer issues around choice of telecommunications services in the local exchange and intrastate toll market in Washington state. Due to changes in the emerging competitive telecommunications market, new categories of providers of services have developed. The commission considered a rule making the appropriate vehicle to address consumer protections.
3. The rules are intended to ensure consumers are protected from unfair competitive practices, that privacy is safeguarded, and that consumers have access to information about competitive alternatives for telecommunications services.
4. The commission finds that the advent of competition in the local exchange market and intrastate toll services necessitates consumer protections and fair practices. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, consumers are offered choices among many providers for some component of service. A rule in place will allow consumer education and provide a clear standard to consumer specialists in the companies and at the commission. Voluntary standards such as those cited by the incumbent local exchange carriers were deemed insufficient with emerging competition and voluntary standards were additionally deemed unfair to companies with responsible practices who may risk losing business to companies without such standards.
5. Docket No. UT-960942 is a rule amendment in WAC 480-120-042 and the creation of a new rule in WAC 480-120-139.
6. The commission held two public workshops and a hearing on the rule proposal and received testimony from eleven parties at the hearing.
7. The changes incorporated in the rule(s) after publication of the CR-102 proposed rule making, are not deemed significant. The changes clarify the language proposed but do not vary from the intent or purpose of the rule draft previously published. Deleting the reference to (a) of subsection (1) in WAC 480-120-139 (2)(A) will cause the rule to more closely reflect the federal requirements.
8. The amended rule in WAC 480-120-042 and new rule WAC 480-120-139 provide reasonable assurance that consumer protections will not degenerate with competition. The rules strike a balance between interests of customers and the telecommunications industry that preserves availability of services and fair practices. The telecommunications industry stakeholders stated in formal comments and in the hearing that the rule requirements codify existing practices for consumer protection. The purpose of including these existing practices in rules is to provide uniformity in safeguards.
9. The rule mirrors language at the federal level for interstate services. Companies currently abide by these requirements at the federal level and, thus, the imposition at the state level is consistent with current company practices.
10. The rules will assist the commission in carrying out its role and responsibility to protect the interests of consumers and industry.
commission action: After considering all of the information regarding this proposal, the commission adopted the rule amendment and rule.
changes from proposal: The commission adopted the proposal with the following changes from the text noticed under WSR 97-11-072.
Changes: WAC 480-120-042
"Each local exchange company shall regularly publish"
"Shall be regularly published"
"Each local exchange company shall, through the use of a common data base or other means, provide all other local exchange companies serving an exchange with the directory listing information required to publish an accurate and complete directory."
"local exchange company that is providing service in an area covered by a (directory published pursuant to this rule) may, upon request have (an informational listing of) its (name and telephone number) placed in each such directory"
"each local exchange company that is providing service in the area covered by the directory which requests such a listing"
Changes: WAC 480-120-139
"Changes in local exchange and intrastate toll services (1) A local exchange or intrastate toll carrier to whom service is being changed ("new telecommunications company") may not submit"
Subsection (4) (all)
Subsection (5) (all)
Brief Description of Changes Between the Proposal at WSR and the
Text Adopted: The following table sets out the changes between the text
noticed at WSR and the text that the commission has adopted. As noted,
most reflect a consensus among participants that the commission, upon
review, believes appropriate for purposes of the rule.
Change: WAC 480-120-042(1)
Remove: "each local exchange company shall regularly publish"
"Each local exchange company shall, through the use of a common data base or other means, provide all other local exchange companies serving an exchange with the directory listing information required to publish an accurate and complete directory"
Add: "shall be regularly published"
Reason: WAC 480-120-042(1)
The commission accepts the consensus of participants that language
may impose requirements on nonregulated entities and further investigation is necessary.
Change: Subsection (4)
Remove: "all telecommunications service listings in telephone directories published by any incumbent local exchange carriers or competitive local exchange carriers shall include the name and telephone number of all exchange carriers registered to provide service in the geographic area covered by such directory"
Add: "Each local exchange company that is providing service in an area covered by a directory published pursuant to this rule may, upon request, have an informational listing of its name and telephone number placed in each such directory. Each directory publisher may impose reasonable requirements on the timing and format of informational listings, provided that these requirements do not discriminate between local exchange carriers"
Reason: Subsection (4)
The commission agrees with commentaries that clear identification
of company, company serving area and requirements is necessary for
Change: Subsection (6)
Add: "subscriber's local exchange"
Reason: Subsection (6)
Clarifying language and definition agreed by all parties and the
Change: Subsection (7)
Add: "local exchange company"
Reason: Subsection (7)
Definition of reference to a specific utility deemed appropriate by
commission and parties in the WAC.
Change: WAC 480-120-139(1)
Remove: "Change in service"
Add: "Changes in local exchange and intrastate toll"
Remove: "carrier" (in all references in WAC)
Add: "telecommunications company" and "one of"
Reason: WAC 480-120-139(1)
The commission accepts the clarifying language by parties defining
the utility referenced and service type and clear identification of
changes in service procedures shall be in accordance with one of the
processes, clarifying not all options must be used for order
Change: Subsection (2)(a)(x)
Remove: "a" "carriers must wait fourteen days after the form is mailed to customers before submitting their change orders."
Add: "The requirements in (a)(vii) and (viii) of this subsection do not apply if authorization is obtained pursuant to subsection (1) of this section"
Reason: Subsection (2)(a)(x)
The commission accepts the consensus that the original subsection
(x) is stated in (viii) and that authorization requirements for service
verification options should consider FCC requirements and maintain
consistency, although not identical.
Change: Subsection (2)(b)
Remove: "Business practices"
Reason: Subsection (2)(b)
The commission accepts the consensus the section title is not
necessary as stated.
Change: Subsection (3)
Add: "within three business days of the order, the telecommunications company must send each new customer an information package by first class mail containing at least the following information concerning the request to change as defined in subsection (2)(a)(ii), (iii), (iv), (v) of this section"
Reason: Subsection (3)
The commission accepts parties recommendation to include specific
service information to all customers.
Change: Subsection (4)
Add: "Remedies. In addition to any other penalties provided by law, a telecommunications company initiating an unauthorized change order shall receive no payment for service provided as a result of the unauthorized change and shall promptly refund any amounts collected as a result of the unauthorized change. The subscriber may be charged, after receipt of the refund, for such service at a rate no greater than what would have been charged by its authorized telecommunications company, and any such payment shall be remitted to the customer's authorized telecommunications company"
Reason: Subsection (4)
The commission accepts parties recommendation to include a statement
of commission authority regarding penalty assessment for rule violations
and include some company protection in the case of consumer fraud.
Change: Subsection (5)
Add: "Use of customer information"
Reason: Subsection (5)
The commission accepts title identification regarding privacy.
Change: Subsection (5)(a)
Remove: "(2)(a) A carrier may not, except as authorized by law, disclose to any person, customer information, except to provide internal billing, collection, and network operations"
"(b) A carrier may not, except as authorized by law, disclose to any person, customer information, except to provide internal billing, collection, and network operations"
"(c) A carrier is prohibited from telemarketing its service to its customers with nonpublished and unlisted telephone numbers"
Add: "(5)(a) A telecommunications company may not use its customer proprietary network information or the customer proprietary network information of another telecommunications company."
"(b) Except to provide its own billing, collection, network operations, and as authorized by law, a telecommunications company may not disclose customer proprietary network information."
"(c) A telecommunications company may not make telephone solicitation or telemarketing calls using its list of customers with nonpublished or unlisted customer at least once in the past year that the company makes such calls to its customers with nonpublished or unlisted numbers and that the customer has the right to request that the company make no such calls."
Reason: Subsection (5)(a)
The commission accepts parties consensus recommendation on privacy and customer information to be consistent with the FCC definition of customer proprietary information as "CPNI" and clarifying language in the section. Language regarding telemarketing was revised to clarify jurisdictional authority and clarify requirements and prohibitions.
Other editorial comments and suggested rule language were rejected for being outside the scope and intent of the rule, nonjurisdictional or an imposition of costs to companies or ratepayers. The commission determined that the language participants proposed and were adopted by general consensus satisfies the expressed needs of the carriers and result in satisfactory consumer protections.
statement of action; statement of effective date: In reviewing the entire
record, the commission determines that WAC 480-120-042 shall be amended
and adopted, and that WAC 480-120-139 shall be adopted to read as set
forth in Appendix A, as a rule of the Washington Utilities and
Transportation Commission, to take effect pursuant to RCW 34.05.380(2)
on the thirty-first day after filing with the code reviser.
the commission orders:
1. WAC 480-120-042 and 480-120-139 are adopted to read as set forth in Appendix A, as rules of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, to take effect on the thirty-first day after the date of filing with the code reviser pursuant to RCW 34.05.380(2).
2. This order and the rule set out below, after being recorded in the register of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, shall be forwarded to the code reviser for filing pursuant to chapters 80.01 and 34.05 RCW and chapter 1-21 WAC.
3. The commission adopts the commission staff memoranda presented when the commission considered filing a preproposal statement of inquiry, when it considered filing the formal notice of proposed rule making, and when it considered adoption of this proposal in conjunction with the text of this order, as its concise explanatory statement of the reasons for adoption, as required by RCW 34.05.025.
dated at Olympia, Washington, this 13th day of August 1997.
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
Sharon L. Nelson, Chairman
Richard Hemstad, Commissioner
William R. Gillis, Commissioner
AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order R-242, Cause No. U-85-56, filed
WAC 480-120-042 Directory service. (1) A telephone directory shall be regularly published for each exchange, listing the name, address (unless omission is requested), and telephone number of the subscribers who can be called in that exchange, except those subscribers who have a nonlisted or nonpublished telephone number.
(2) Any subscriber to residential service may request a dual name
primary directory listing which contains, in addition to the subscriber's
surname, the given names or initials (or combination thereof) of the
subscriber and (1) one other person with the same surname who resides at
the same address; or (2) a second name, other than surname, by which the
subscriber is also known, including the married name of a woman whose
husband is deceased. Any additional directory listing requested by a
subscriber pursuant to tariff provision shall also reflect said dual name
listing if requested by the subscriber. ((
(Each subscriber to
residential service as of the effective date of this rule shall be
entitled for a six month period to request on a one-time basis at no cost
a change in the manner of listing the subscriber's name to the dual name
listing provided for above, so long as there has been no other change
requested and made in the subscriber's directory listing since the
(3) Each local exchange company shall furnish a copy of any required
shall be furnished)) to each of its subscribers in each
exchange. If that directory does not also contain such listings for all
subscribers who can be called toll free from that exchange (excluding
WATS), a copy of the directory or directories required for that coverage
shall be furnished each subscriber upon request and without charge. If
anyone requests a directory other than the one(s) provided for above, the
company may apply a charge equal to, but not to exceed, its actual cost
for the directory, plus freight, postage, and $0.50.
(4) Each local exchange company that is providing service in an area covered by a directory published pursuant to this rule may, upon request, have an informational listing of its name and telephone number placed in each such directory. Each directory publisher may impose reasonable requirements on the timing and format of informational listings, provided that these requirements do not discriminate between local exchange carriers.
(5) Normally, telephone directories shall be revised annually; otherwise they shall be revised at least once every fifteen months, except when it is known that impending service changes require rescheduling of directory revision dates. The revision of directories may at times be required more often than specified to keep the directory correct and up to date. Exemptions from these requirements may be allowed by the commission upon application if it can be shown that it is unnecessary to revise the directory within the specified time limit for good cause and/or due to a relatively small number of changes resulting from new listings or changed numbers and if the exchange is equipped for adequate intercept in the case of dial exchanges.
(6) In the event of an error in the listed number of any subscriber,
telecommunications)) subscriber's local exchange company shall,
until a new directory is published, intercept all calls to the
incorrectly listed number to give the calling party the correct number
of the called party, providing that this is permitted by existing central
office equipment and the incorrectly listed number is not a number
presently assigned to another subscriber. In the event of an error or
omission in the name listing of a subscriber, such subscriber's correct
name and telephone number shall be maintained in the files of the
directory assistance operator, and the correct number shall be furnished
the calling party upon request.
(7) Whenever a subscriber's telephone number is changed for any
reason after a directory is published, the ((
utility)) local exchange
company shall intercept all calls to the former number, if existing
office equipment will permit, for a minimum period of thirty days or
until a new directory is published, and give the calling party the new
number for that subscriber unless the subscriber has requested that such
referral not be made.
(8) When additions or changes to plant or records are scheduled
which will necessitate a large group of number changes, a minimum of six
months notice shall be given to all subscribers then of record and so
affected even though the additions or changes may be coincidental with
the issuance of a new directory.
[Statutory Authority: RCW 80.01.040 and 1985 c 450. 85-23-001 (Order
R-242, Cause No. U-85-56), 480-120-042, filed 11/7/85; Order R-92,
480-120-042, filed 2/9/77.]
WAC 480-120-139 Changes in local exchange and intrastate toll services. (1) Verification of orders. A local exchange or intrastate toll carrier to whom service is being changed ("new telecommunications company") may not submit a change order for local exchange or intrastate toll service until the order is confirmed in accordance with one of the following procedures:
(a) The telecommunications company has obtained the customer's written authorization to submit the order which includes the following information from the customer:
(i) The customer billing name, billing telephone number and billing address and each telephone number to be covered by the change order;
(ii) The decision to change; and
(iii) The customer's understanding of the change fee.
(b) The new telecommunications company has obtained the customer's authorization, as described in (a) of this subsection, electronically.
Telecommunications companies electing to confirm sales electronically shall establish one or more toll free telephone numbers exclusively for that purpose.
Calls to the number(s) shall connect a customer to a voice response unit, or similar, that records the required information regarding the change, including automatically recording the originating automatic number identification (ANI).
(c) An appropriately qualified and independent third party operating in a location physically separate from the telemarketing representative has obtained the customer's oral authorization to submit the change order that confirms and includes appropriate verification data in (a) of this subsection.
(2) Implementing order changes.
(a) Telemarketing orders. Within three business days of any telemarketing order for a change, the new telecommunications company must send each new customer an information package by first class mail containing at least the following information concerning the requested change:
(i) The information is being sent to confirm a telemarketing order placed by the customer.
(ii) The name of the customer's current telecommunications company.
(iii) A description of any terms, conditions or charges that will be incurred.
(iv) The name of the newly requested telecommunications company.
(v) The name of the person ordering the change.
(vi) The name, address and telephone number of both the customer and the soliciting telecommunications company.
(vii) A postpaid postcard which the customer can use to deny, cancel or confirm a service order.
(viii) A clear statement that if the customer does not return the postcard, the customer's service will be switched fourteen days after the date the information package was mailed. If customers have cancelled their orders during the waiting period, the new telecommunications company cannot submit the customer's order.
(ix) The name, address and telephone number of a contact point at the commission for consumer complaints.
(x) The requirements in (a)(vii) and (viii) of this subsection do not apply if authorization is obtained pursuant to subsection (1) of this section.
(b) The documentation of the order shall be retained by the new telecommunications company, at a minimum, for twelve months to serve as verification of the customer's authorization to change telecommunications company. The documentation will be made available to the customer and to the commission upon request.
(3) Customer initiated orders. The new telecommunications company receiving the customer initiated request for a change of local exchange and/or intrastate toll shall keep an internal memorandum or record generated at the time of the request. Such internal record shall be maintained by the telecommunications company for a minimum of twelve months to serve as verification of the customer's authorization to change telecommunications company. The internal record will be made available to the customer and to the commission upon request. Within three business days of the order, the telecommunications company must send each new customer an information package by first class mail containing at least the following information concerning the request to change as defined in subsection (2)(a)(ii), (iii), (iv), (v) of this section.
(4) Remedies. In addition to any other penalties provided by law, a telecommunications company initiating an unauthorized change order shall receive no payment for service provided as a result of the unauthorized change and shall promptly refund any amounts collected as a result of the unauthorized change. The subscriber may be charged, after receipt of the refund, for such service at a rate no greater than what would have been charged by its authorized telecommunications company, and any such payment shall be remitted to the customer's authorized telecommunications company.
(5) Use of customer information.
(a) A telecommunications company may not use its customer proprietary network information or the customer proprietary network information of another telecommunications company.
(b) Except to provide its own billing, collection, network operations, and as authorized by law, a telecommunications company may not disclose customer proprietary network information.
(c) A telecommunications company may not make telephone solicitation
or telemarketing calls using its list of customers with nonpublished or
unlisted numbers unless it has notified each such customer at least once
in the past year that the company makes such calls to its customers with
nonpublished or unlisted numbers and that the customer has a right to
request that the company make no such calls.