3060-0807
September 2007
SUPPORTING STATEMENT A. Justification:
1. Any interested party seeking preemption of a state commission's jurisdiction based on the state commission's failure to act shall notify the Commission as follows:
file
with the Secretary of the Commission a detailed petition, supported
by an
affidavit,
that states with specificity the basis for any claim that it has
failed to act: and
serve
the state commission and other parties to the proceeding on the same
day that
the
party serves the petition on the Commission. Within 15 days of the
filing of the
petition,
the state commission and parties to the proceeding may file a
response to the
petition.
See 47 U.S.C. Section 252 and C.F.R. Section 51.803.
In the attached Public Notice (DA 97-2540), the Commission set out procedures for filing petitions for preemption pursuant to section 252(e)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Section 252(e)(5) provides that "if a State commission fails to act to carry out its responsibility under this section in any proceeding or other matter under this section, then the Commission shall issue an order preempting the State commission's jurisdiction of the proceeding or matter within 90 days after being notified (or taking notice) of such failure, and shall assume the responsibility of the State commission under this section with respect to the proceeding or matter and act for the State commission."
a. (1) Filing of Petitions for Preemption. Each party seeking preemption should caption its preemption petition, "Petition of {Petitioner's Name} pursuant to Section 252(e)(5) of the Communications Act." In addition, on the date or the petition's filing, the petitioner should serve a copy of the petition by hand delivery on the Wireline Competition Bureau, and send a copy to the Commission's contractor for records duplication and research services.
(2) Section 51.803(a)(2) of the Commission's rules requires each party seeking preemption pursuant to section 252(e)(5) to 'ensure that the state commission and the other parties to the proceeding or matter for which preemption is sought are served with the petition ... on the same date that the petitioning party serves the petition on the Commission." Therefore, each section 252(e)(5) petitioner should state in its certificate of service the steps it is taking to comply with this requirement (e.g., hand delivery or overnight mail).
(3) Petitions seeking preemption must be supported by affidavit and state with specificity the basis for the petition and any information that supports the claim that the state has failed to act. See 47 C.F.R. § 51.803. Each petitioner should append to its petition the full text of any State commission decision regarding the proceeding or other matter giving rise to the petition as well as the relevant portions of any transcripts, letters, or other documents on which the petitioner relies. Each petitioner should also provide a chronology of that proceeding or matter that lists, along with any other relevant dates, the date the petitioner requested interconnection, services, or network elements pursuant to section 251 of the Act, the dates of any requests for mediation or arbitration pursuant to section 252(a)(2) or (b)(l), and the dates of any arbitration decisions in connection with the proceeding or matter.
b. Submission of Written Comments by Interested Third Parties. Interested third parties may file comments on a preemption petition in accordance with a public notice to be issued by the Commission. Commenters should provide material identical to that required of petitioners to the extent the relevant documents or information is not already included in the record in the proceeding.
The attached Public Notice describes in detail all the requirements and procedures associated with this process.
Statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in Section 252(e)(5) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 252(e)(5).
This information collection does not affect individuals or household; thus, there are no impacts under the Privacy Act.
All of the requirements are
used to ensure that petitioners have complied with
their
obligations under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.
The
collection of information does not involve the use of
automated,
electronic,
mechanical or other technological collection techniques or other
forms of
information
technology.
There
will be no duplication of information. The information sought is
unique
to
each petitioner.
The
collection of information may impact small businesses or other
small
entities.
The burden is the same for all respondents.
Failing
to collect the information could violate the language and/or intent
of
the
Act to provide relief to petitioners on a timely basis.
The
requirements do not impose any obligations that would require
parties to
submit
information to the FCC more than once. Because of the shortness of
the review
period,
petitioners are asked to submit a copy to the Wireline Competition
Bureau and to
the Commission's contractor for records duplication and research services, as well as provide notice that the proper state commission and other interested parties have been served with a copy of the petition. These requirements will allow expeditious processing of the petitions.
The
Commission placed a notice in the Federal Register as required by 5
CFR
1320.8(d).
See 72 FR 7987, February 22, 2007. No comments were
received.
The
Commission does not anticipate providing any payment or gift
to
respondents.
The Commission is not
requesting petitioners to submit confidential
information to
the Commission.
There are no questions of a sensitive nature with respect to the information
collected.
12. The
following represents the estimates of hour burden of the collections
of
information:
a. Filing of Petitions for Preemption:
Number of respondents: No more than 20.
Frequency
of response: On occasion reporting requirement; third
party
disclosure
requirement.
Annual
hour burden per respondent: 40 hours per petition. Total
annual
burden
is 800 hours.
Total
estimate of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens
of
collection
of information: $40,000 ($50 per hour).
Explanation
of calculation: We estimate that preparation time will
be
approximately
40 hours per petition. 40 (hours/petition) x $50 (per hour) x 20
petitions =
$40,000.
b. Submission of Written Comment by Interested Third Parties.
Number of respondents: 40.
Frequency
of response: On occasion. Probably only once for many
respondents.
A state commission will only file a response in its state.
Annual
hour burden per respondent: 20 hours per respondent. Total
annual
burden
is 800 hours.
Total
estimate of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens
of
collection
of information: $40,000 ($50 per hour).
(5) Explanation
of calculation: We estimate that preparation time will
be
approximately 20 hours per comment. 20 (hours/comment) x $50
(per hour) x 40
petitions
= $40,000.
Total annual burden for this submission: 800 + 800 = 1,600 hours.
We
estimate that there will not be capital or start-up costs for any of
these
requirements.
We do not believe that these requirements will necessitate any
additional
equipment.
We estimate that there will be no operating and maintenance or
purchase of
services
costs of these requirements. There is no filing fee associated with
these
petitions.
The
following represents the Commission's estimates of the annual costs
to
the
federal government as a result of the proposed requirements:
Review of submission: 400 hours to process submissions x $27 (average grade and hourly salary of staff) = $10,800.
15. A
change in burden is requested. The total annual burden is now
1,600
burden
hours. The collections are necessary to implement the requirements of
section
252(e)(5)
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
When the Commission published the 60-day Federal Register notice (72 FR 7987) the number of respondents, responses and burden hours were incorrectly reported. The actual information represented in this submission is correct.
Not applicable.
The
Commission asks OMB for waiver of the display of the expiration
date
as a means to reducing its cost. As mentioned above, the
requirements are set out in a
public notice. The Commission
believes that costs can be saved by not having to re-issue
a
public notice periodically solely to update the expiration date.
As explained in no. 17 above, the Commission asks OMB for waiver of the display of the expiration date.
B. Collections of Information Employing Statistical Methods:
Not applicable.
| File Type | application/msword |
| File Title | 3060-0807 |
| Author | Terrance.Judge |
| Last Modified By | Jerry.Cowden |
| File Modified | 2007-09-27 |
| File Created | 2007-09-27 |