RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 52—PUBLIC UTILITIES
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
[ 52 PA. CODE CH. 63 ]
[ L-2009-2123673 ]
Call Recording for Telephone Companies
[42 Pa.B. 3728]
[Saturday, June 30, 2012]The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, on March 15, 2012, adopted a final rulemaking order which establishes regulatory conditions under which telephone companies may record customer communications for training and quality of service purposes.
Executive Summary
This Final Rulemaking was prompted by requests in 2007-2008 from eight (8) local exchange carriers (LECs) requesting waivers of 52 Pa. Code § 63.137 to allow them to record telephone calls between their customers and employees for training and quality of service purposes. Currently, pursuant to section 63.137, telecommunications carriers cannot record customer contact calls for any reason. Other jurisdictional utilities do not have such a restriction and are able to record calls for training and quality of service purposes. The eight LECs were granted individual waivers, and the Commission established terms and conditions for a temporary blanket waiver of section 63.137 (2) in a Blanket Waiver Order at Docket No. M-2008-2074891.
On April 19, 2010, the Commission entered a Proposed Rulemaking Order at Docket No. L-2009-2123673, which proposed to amend section 63.137 to remove the prohibition against call recording and to establish parameters for permitting call recording of customer contact calls for training and quality of service purposes. Additionally, the rulemaking proposed the ministerial edit of changing ''employe'' to ''employee.'' After comments from individual jurisdictional telecommunications utilities, a statewide telecommunications organization, and IRRC, a final rulemaking order was entered on March 15, 2012. The Final Rulemaking Order reflects the comments filed in this matter.
This Final Rulemaking Order seeks to benefit every LEC by allowing uniformity across multistate service territories and establishing consistency in utility regulation. The jurisdictional utilities affected by the regulation will benefit from the regulation as they will know what is expected of them if they choose to record calls. The regulations are designed to help the utility improve training methods and quality of service provided to customers by their employees. Better trained utility employees and improved quality of service benefits utility customers. The regulations are not financially or unduly burdensome upon the jurisdictional utilities because the utilities can continue to operate without choosing to record calls. Furthermore, the utilities operating pursuant to the individual waivers and under the blanket waiver have not noted any problems with the terms of those waivers that would be codified as regulations under the proposed rulemaking. Utilities that have not requested a waiver or opted-in to the blanket waiver will be saved the time and expense of such a request.
The Commission will benefit from a more uniform approach to the methods that all utilities may use to improve quality of service and to ensure adequate employee training. Additionally, it will save time and money by eliminating the need to process individual requests for waivers or for opting into the blanket waiver.
Public Meeting held
March 15, 2012Commissioners Present: Robert F. Powelson, Chairperson; John F. Coleman, Jr., Vice Chairperson; Wayne E. Gardner; James H. Cawley; Pamela A. Witmer
Elimination of the Call Recording Prohibition in 52 Pa. Code § 63.137 and Establishment of Regulations to Govern Call Recording for Telephone Companies; Doc. No. L-2009-2123673
Final Rulemaking Order By the Commission:
On April 19, 2010, we issued for comment a proposed rulemaking relative to the regulatory prohibition against call recording at 52 Pa. Code § 63.137(2) relating to telephone companies1 and to establish regulatory conditions under which telephone companies may record customer contact communications. Comments have been received. This order eliminates the language in section 63.137(2) relating to the prohibition of call recording applicable to jurisdictional telephone companies, adds ''recording'' to section 63.137(1) relating to compliance with state and federal laws, and makes the ministerial edit of changing ''employe'' to ''employee'' throughout section 63.137. This order is effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
Background
52 Pa. Code § 63.137(2)
Section 63.137(2) was promulgated in an effort to balance customer privacy interests with the business interests of the telephone companies.2 To establish this balance, telephone company call center supervisors are allowed to monitor communications between customers and utility company service representatives (i.e., customer contact calls) through ''live'' or ''real-time'' listening in, but calls may not be recorded. Substantively, section 63.137(2) provides, in relevant part, as follows:
(2) Service evaluation and monitoring. The telephone company may evaluate and monitor those aspects of its operations, including customer communications, necessary for the provision of service to its customers. The recording of conversations is prohibited.52 Pa. Code § 63.137(2) (emphasis added). No other jurisdictional utility industry is subject to similar customer contact or call-center call-recording prohibitions under our regulations. Section 63.137(2)(iii) relating to administrative monitoring sets the parameters for monitoring existing customer contact calls and employee-to-employee calls for quality of service provided to customers. This process is currently limited to live monitoring by the absolute prohibition in section 63.137(2).
Subsections 63.137(2)(i) and (ii) explain the processes of service evaluation and maintenance monitoring of customer-to-customer telephone calls that a telephone company has been able to perform in the provision of service to its customers. Under section 63.137(2), these calls may not be recorded. No other jurisdictional utility has similar access to customer-to-customer calls or transactions by virtue of the service it renders. The proposed rulemaking did not propose that these calls could be recorded.
Eight (8) local exchange carriers (LECs) petitioned for and received waivers of section 63.137(2).3 The individual waivers allow them to record, for training and quality of service purposes, customer calls to their call centers. On November 20, 2008, we entered a tentative order at Docket No. M-2008-2074891 soliciting comments on proposed guidelines for a blanket waiver to avoid addressing such waiver requests on a piecemeal basis in the future. Guidelines for Temporary Waiver of the Call Recording Prohibition Set Forth at 52 Pa. Code § 63.137(2), M-2008-2074891 (November 20, 2008) (Tentative Order). The Tentative Order proposed a process whereby a telephone company could petition the Commission for a one-year partial waiver of section 63.137(2) and up to two one-year extensions, subject to proposed uniform terms and conditions applicable to operations under the temporary partial waiver.
The Tentative Order provided notice to the public, in general, and to the Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA), the Office of Small Business Advocate (OSBA), and the Office of Trial Staff (OTS), in particular. The Pennsylvania Telephone Association (PTA) filed comments asserting that continued requirement of individual petitions with a one-year limitation and two renewals would not be consistent with a ''blanket'' waiver.
By order entered July 29, 2009, at Docket No. M-2008-2074891, we adopted a blanket partial waiver of section 63.137(2) thereby permitting customer contact call recording under certain circumstances. Guidelines for Waiver of the Call Recording Prohibition at 52 Pa. Code § 63.137(2) Pending Rulemaking, M-2008-2074891 (July 29, 2009). (Blanket Waiver Order). Specifically, the Blanket Waiver Order permits telephone companies to record customer contact calls for quality of service and training purposes subject to the following terms and conditions:
• File notice with the Commission, and copy the Bureau of Consumer Services, giving thirty (30) days notice;
• Provide customers with a bill insert (or equivalent information) explaining the call recording process and the opt-out process to customers thirty (30) days before commencing call recording operations;
• Provide a pre-recorded message to the effect that the call may be monitored or recorded for training or quality control purposes. The pre-recorded message must advise callers that they have the option to discontinue the call and to request a call back from an unrecorded line and must also provide instructions on how to request a call back prior to any aspect of the call being recorded;
• Use recorded calls solely for the purpose of training or measuring and improving service quality;
• Erase recorded calls after a ninety (90)-day (or shorter) retention period.
Under the Blanket Waiver Order, all other provisions of 52 Pa. Code § 63.137 remain in full force and effect. A number of telephone companies have since provided notice that they were opting to operate pursuant to the Blanket Waiver Order.
A carrier with a pre-existing waiver that had not commenced actual recording of customer contact calls pursuant to the pre-existing waiver could only subsequently commence call recording pursuant to the Blanket Waiver Order terms and conditions. A carrier that had commenced call recording of customer contact calls without a previously granted specific waiver or pursuant to the Blanket Waiver Order (i.e., a carrier that was recording customer contact calls contrary to section 63.137(2)) had twenty (20) days to come into compliance with that order or to discontinue call recording.
Pursuant to the Blanket Waiver Order, telephone companies are also permitted to petition individually for a partial temporary waiver of section 63.137(2) if they wish to request other terms than those in the Blanket Waiver Order. Only one such waiver request has been received.
When we established terms and conditions for temporary partial waiver of section 63.137(2) in the Blanket Waiver Order, we noted that we would take under consideration at another docket the matter of opening a rulemaking to eliminate the call recording prohibition.
Proposed Rulemaking Order
Our April 19, 2010 order at this docket commenced that further proceeding. In particular, the April 19, 2010 proposed rulemaking order would have permitted the recording of customer contact calls subject to the following terms and conditions:
63.137(2)(a)(iv)—Call recording. A telephone company may record calls by employees to or from customers, potential customers, or applicants only under the following circumstances:(A) A telephone company shall give notice to its customers with a bill insert or equivalent customer contact explaining the call recording process and the opt-out process at least 30 days before commencing call recording or to new customers at the time service commences.(B) A telephone company shall provide callers calling a company telephone number equipped to record customer or prospective customer calls with a pre-recorded message that the call may be monitored or recorded for training or quality control purposes.(C) The pre-recorded message shall advise callers that they have the option to discontinue the call and to request a call back on an unrecorded line and shall provide instructions on how to request a call back prior to any aspect of the call being recorded.(D) Recorded telephone calls shall be used solely for the purpose of training or measuring and improving service quality and may not be used for formal or informal evidentiary purposes.(E) Recorded calls shall be erased after a 90-day or shorter retention period.On September 28, 2010, the order was provided to the Office of Attorney General for review as to form and legality and to the Governor's Budget Office for review as to fiscal impact. At the same time, it was also provided to the Legislative Standing Committees and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) for review. The order was published on October 9, 2010, in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, at 40 Pa.B. 5819. A public comment period was established.
The Verizon LECs filed comments at this docket supporting elimination of the call recording prohibition. PTA, on behalf of its members, also filed comments at this docket in support of elimination of the call recording prohibition. These comments are available at www. puc.state.pa.us. IRRC also submitted comments. IRRC's comments are available at www.irrc.state.pa.us. The comment period concluded November 23, 2011.
In addition to the substantive changes, we also addressed a grammatical inconsistency in the proposed rulemaking order. Both ''employe'' and ''employee'' are used in various places in section 63.137. We proposed to change the spelling of ''employe'' to ''employee'' to reflect the generally accepted form of the term and to promote consistency throughout section 63.137.
Wiretap Act
In reviewing this matter it is essential to consider the pertinent provisions of Pennsylvania's Wiretap Act, Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, 18 Pa.C.S. §§ 5701—5704. The Wiretap Act provides, in pertinent part, that:
It shall not be unlawful and no prior court approval shall be required under this chapter for:* * * * * (6) Personnel of any public utility to record telephone conversations with utility customers or the general public relating to receiving and dispatching of emergency and service calls provided there is, during such recording, a periodic warning which indicates to the parties to the conversation that the call is being recorded.* * * * * (15) The personnel of a business engaged in telephone marketing or telephone customer service by means of wire, oral or electronic communication to intercept such marketing or customer service communications where such interception is made for the sole purpose of training, quality control or monitoring by the business, provided that one party involved in the communications has consented to such intercept. Any communications recorded pursuant to this paragraph may only be used by the business for the purpose of training or quality control. Unless otherwise required by Federal or State law, communications recorded pursuant to this paragraph shall be destroyed within one year from the date of recording.18 Pa.C.S. §§ 5704(6) and (15). Because the Pennsylvania Wiretap Act is more stringent than the federal act, we have omitted discussion of the federal law.
Comments to the Proposed Rulemaking Order
Verizon LECs
The Verizon LECs would have the Commission eliminate the call recording prohibition without imposing any conditions. They assert that the Wiretap Act provides sufficient protection to parties participating in customer contact calls that might be recorded relative to the retention and use of such calls. Verizon at 7 and 10. They assert that Chapter 30, in particular 66 Pa.C.S. § 3011(13), mandates the elimination of existing conditions and prevents the imposition of new conditions because competitive alternative service providers are not subject to any conditions. Verizon at 5.
The Verizon LECs assert that conditions are unnecessary and that recording customer contact calls will improve service. Verizon at 6. They assert that the Commission has already waived some of the proposed conditions, namely the opt-out and call-back process, relative to call analysis software4 that Verizon had proposed using. Verizon at 7-8. The Verizon LECs assert that the opt-out process would exacerbate call-waiting times and that the bill insert provision would be unreasonably burdensome. Verizon at 9-10.
PTA
PTA supports the elimination of the prohibition applicable only to telephone companies asserting that the elimination will avoid perpetuating the discrimination against telephone companies. PTA at 3 and 5. PTA opposes, as unnecessary and costly, an obligatory bill insert or other form of customer contact 30 days before a telephone company begins recording customer contact calls. PTA also asserts that the proposed ''opt-out'' process that would allow customers to conduct telephone company business over unrecorded lines is ''unclear'' and will not strike a balance between customer privacy interests and telephone company interests. PTA has no objections to the recorded message before a call is recorded. PTA at 4. PTA believes that the regulation need not address evidentiary uses or length of retention of recorded customer contact calls because the state and federal wiretap laws are adequate protection in this regard. PTA at 5-7. PTA has no objection to change from ''employe'' to ''employee.'' PTA at 3.
IRRC
IRRC raised four points. First, IRRC commented that if the proposed conditions in (A), (C), (E), and parts of (D) are retained, then the Commission should provide a more detailed explanation of why they are needed and why they are reasonable. Second, IRRC asserts that the costs of the conditions have not been quantified and justified. Third, IRRC queries the prohibition on evidentiary use. Finally, IRRC questions the proposed 90-day time frame when the Wiretap Act provides for a year-long retention. IRRC at 2.
Discussion and Resolution
This action continues the process of eliminating the call recording provision in section 63.137(2). We are persuaded by the comments from the Verizon LECs, PTA, and IRRC to not adopt the proposed provisions of subsections 63.137(2)(iv)(A), (B), (C), (D), and (E) in the final regulation. The change addresses IRRC's concerns and also addresses PTA's concerns and the substance of Verizon's concerns.
Among other arguments supporting the elimination of the section 63.137(2) prohibition on call recording, the most pressing argument is that telephone companies are the only class of jurisdictional utilities prohibited from recording customer contact calls for training and measuring and improving service quality. Other utilities, as well as other businesses and this Commission, routinely record calls for service quality purposes within the bounds of applicable laws concerning wiretaps and trap and trace devices. Further, the provisions of the Wiretap Act address the concerns that these eliminated proposals were initially included to address. The addition of ''recording'' to the itemized list in section 63.137(1) recognizes that any recording of calls by a jurisdictional telephone company must be consistent with state and federal law.
It is expressly noted that the modifications promulgated herein to section 63.137(2) neither enlarge nor limit, in any way, a jurisdictional utility's obligations or a customer's protections pursuant either to the Wiretap Act or to any applicable state or federal statutes or regulations.
The elimination of the prohibition in section 63.137(2) will increase efficiency in industry operations and facilitate the entry and participation of competitors in the telecommunications market by allowing each to standardize operations throughout its national service territories. Additionally, in the time since telephone companies in the Commonwealth have had the ability to record customer contact calls either pursuant to specific individual petition or to the Blanket Waiver Order, we have not seen any problems or customer complaints arise.
The regulatory changes to section 63.137(2) to be adopted herein are consistent with the waivers granted to the petitioning LECs and to telephone companies operating pursuant to the Blanket Waiver Order and will require no further notice to the Commission or customers to remain in compliance. We shall issue an order at the Blanket Waiver Order docket rescinding the blanket waiver after the regulatory changes promulgated herein become final.
To the extent that the PTA or the Verizon LECs' comments may have suggested further revisions to section 63.137, we have chosen not to change the provisions of sections 63.137(3)—(6). These sections refer to compliance with other laws and appropriate authorization in circumstances where service observing, call monitoring, or call recording is permitted. Further, we have chosen not to change the provisions of sections 63.137(2)(i) relating to service evaluation, 63.137(2)(ii) relating to maintenance monitoring, and 63.137(2)(iii) relating to administrative monitoring. The exiting sections 63.137(2)(i) and (ii) address telephone company access to customer-to-customer calls for telephone company purposes. Section 63.137(iii) in the existing regulations addresses telephone company access to customer contact calls as well as employee-to-employee calls. Not all companies will commence recording of customer contact calls, some companies will continue to perform service evaluation and maintenance and administrative monitoring without recording calls, and this rulemaking does not address employee-to-employee calls. Therefore, the provisions of sections 63.137(2)(i), (ii), and (iii) are still essential to protect the public interest.
Accordingly, the final changes to section 63.137 relative to the call recording prohibition are set forth in Annex A to the order. This reflects a modification from the proposal in the April 19, 2011 order, consistent with the comments filed in response thereto.
In addition to the substantive changes, we also propose to eliminate a grammatical inconsistency in the proposed rulemaking order. Both ''employe'' and ''employee'' are used in various places in section 63.137. We proposed to conform the spelling of ''employe'' to ''employee'' to reflect the generally accepted and standard form of the term and to promote consistency throughout section 63.137. There are no objections to this change. Further, this change will provide for more consistent, complete, and efficient use of electronic database tools for research relative to our regulations. It is not logical to expect the owners of the various databases to program their research engines to look for ''employe'' if someone has requested a search for ''employee.'' Accordingly, this ministerial change to section 63.137 as proposed in our April 19, 2011 order is carried forward to the final rule as set forth in Annex A to this order.
The changes to section 63.137 reflected in Annex A of this order shall be effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), on September 28, 2010, the Commission submitted a copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking, published at 40 Pa.B. 5819, to IRRC and the Chairpersons of the House Committee on Consumer Affairs and the Senate Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure for review and comment.
Under section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC and the House and Senate Committees were provided with copies of the comments received during the public comment period, as well as other documents when requested. In preparing the final-form rulemaking, the Commission has considered all comments from IRRC, the House and Senate Committees and the public.
Under section 5.1(j.2) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(j.2)), on May 16, 2012, the final-form rulemaking was deemed approved by the House and Senate Committees. Under section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC met on May 17, 2012, and approved the final-form rulemaking.
Conclusion
Accordingly, pursuant to sections 501, 504, 2203(12), 2205, and 2208 of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 501, 504, 2203(12), 2205, and 2208; sections 201 and 202 of the Act of July 31, 1968, P. L. 769 No. 240, 45 P. S. §§ 1201—1202, and the regulations promulgated there- under at 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1, 7.2, and 7.5; section 204(b) of the Commonwealth Attorneys Act, 71 P. S. § 732.204(b); sections 745.5 and 745.7 of the Regulatory Review Act, 71 P. S. §§ 745.5 and 745.7; and section 612 of the Administrative Code of 1929, 71 P. S. § 232, and the regulations promulgated thereunder at 4 Pa. Code §§ 7.231—7.234, we are adopting the final regulations set forth in Annex A; Therefore,
It Is Ordered That:
1. The regulations of the Commission, 52 Pa. Code Chapter 63, are amended by amending § 63.137 to read as set forth in Annex A.
2. The Secretary shall submit this order and Annex A to the Office of Attorney General for review as to form and legality and to the Governor's Budget Office for review for fiscal impact.
3. The Secretary shall submit this order and Annex A for review by the Legislative Standing Committees and for review and approval by IRRC.
4. The Secretary shall certify this order and Annex A and deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau to be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
5. The regulations in Annex A become effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Thereafter, an order shall be issued at Docket No. M-2008-2074891 rescinding the terms of the blanket waiver.
6. A copy of this order and Annex A shall be served on the Pennsylvania Telephone Association, the Office of Consumer Advocate, the Office of Small Business Advocate, and the Office of Trial Staff and a copy of this Order and Annex A shall be posted on the Commission's web site.
7. The contact persons for this matter are Sheila Brown, Bureau of Consumer Services, sheibrown@pa.gov; Melissa Derr, Bureau of Technical Utility Services, mderr@pa.gov; and Louise Fink Smith, Law Bureau, finksmith@pa.gov. Alternate formats of this document are available to persons with disabilities and may be obtained by contacting Sherri Delbiondo, Regulatory Coordinator, Law Bureau, (717) 772-4597, sdelbiondo@pa.gov.
ROSEMARY CHIAVETTA,
Secretary(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission relating to this document, see 42 Pa.B. 3182 (June 2, 2012).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 57-278 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulation.
Annex A
TITLE 52. PUBLIC UTILITIES
PART I. PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
Subpart C. FIXED SERVICE UTILITIES
CHAPTER 63. TELEPHONE SERVICE
Subchapter J. CONFIDENTIALITY OF CUSTOMER COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION § 63.137. Service monitoring and related matters.
This section sets forth procedures for service evaluation and monitoring; use of pen registers and trap and trace devices; and responses to government requests for assistance in conducting wiretap, pen register, trap and trace and other types of investigations.
(1) Compliance with State and Federal laws. The telephone company shall comply with State and Federal laws regulating the recording, interception, disclosure or use of customer communications and the use of pen registers and trap and trace devices. Other recording of conversations is prohibited.
(2) Service evaluation and monitoring. The telephone company may evaluate and monitor those aspects of its operations, including customer communications, necessary for the provision of service to its customers.
(i) Service evaluation. A telephone company may engage in the sampling of customer communications by telephone company employees or automated equipment to measure service quality. This sampling of customer communications shall be kept to the minimum needed to measure service quality. Service evaluation facilities may not have monitoring access points outside official evaluation quarters. Entry to evaluation quarters shall be strictly controlled. During periods when evaluation quarters are not in use or when otherwise considered appropriate, the quarters shall be securely locked or the equipment rendered inoperative or accessible only by authorized personnel. Access to service evaluation documents that contain individual employee-customer contact information shall be closely guarded to protect the customer's privacy.
(ii) Maintenance monitoring. A telephone company may engage in the monitoring of telephone company facilities by an employee entering the circuit to listen and carry out tests to determine whether noise, ''cross-talk,'' improper amplification, reproduction or other problems may exist. This includes the mandatory routines covered by equipment test lists, tracing of circuits for corrective action and other similar activities. The monitoring may not interfere with the voice or data information being carried.
(iii) Administrative monitoring. A telephone company may engage in the monitoring of telephone company employee contacts with customers and with other employees which have a direct bearing on the quality of service provided to customers. The monitoring equipment shall be secure at all times and only used by authorized persons. The monitoring may be performed from a remote location. When the equipment is in a remote location and is not in use, it shall be secured or made inoperative or accessible only by authorized personnel.
(3) Security department monitoring. To the extent permitted by applicable State and Federal law, the security department may conduct monitoring, including recording of conversations, in conjunction with the investigation of toll fraud or other unlawful uses of the telephone network. The security department shall maintain complete records of monitoring performed. At a minimum, the records shall include the date and times between which the monitoring was conducted, the name, address and telephone number of the person from whose service the communication was placed and by whose service it was received, the name of the person making the communication, the duration of the communication and information derived from the monitoring. The records shall be retained for the period of time required by telephone company document retention guidelines.
(4) Use of pen registers and trap and trace devices.
(i) Pen register and trap and trace devices may be used by telephone company employees in accordance with applicable State and Federal law.
(ii) In each instance in which pen register or trap and trace devices are used for a purpose other than for the operation, maintenance or testing of the network, for billing purposes or for the provision of service, a record shall be made showing the dates and times between which the pen register or trap and trace device was used, the names of the persons by whom the use was authorized, directed to be performed and conducted, and the name, address and telephone number of the person whose service was subject to use of the pen register or trap and trace device. The record shall be retained for the time required by applicable telephone company document retention guidelines.
(5) Employee authorization. An employee may not perform service evaluation, maintenance monitoring or administrative monitoring or direct that these activities be performed unless the employee is authorized and has a need to do so as part of the employee's work duties. An employee may not use pen register or trap and trace facilities or direct that such a device or facilities be used unless the employee is authorized and has a need to do so as part of regular work duties.
(6) Government orders. Orders from courts and other lawful process requiring the telephone company to assist in the performance of pen register searches, trap and trace searches, wiretap searches and other types of investigations shall be handled in accordance with applicable State and Federal law. The telephone company shall maintain a record of each investigation conducted under this subsection. The record shall be retained for the time required by applicable telephone company document retention guidelines.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 12-1197. Filed for public inspection June 29, 2012, 9:00 a.m.] _______
1 The term ''telephone company'' as defined at 52 Pa Code § 63.132 incorporates all jurisdictional telephone companies: Telephone company—A public utility which provides regulated telecommunication services subject to Commission jurisdiction.
2 The provisions of section 63.137(2) were issued pursuant to 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 501 & 1501 and were adopted July 24, 1992, effective September 23, 1992, 22 Pa.B. 3892.
3 The eight petitioning LECS are: Verizon Pennsylvania Inc. and Verizon North Inc., (Verizon LECs) Docket No. P-00072333 (December 20, 2007); Full Service Computing Co. and Full Service Network LP (Full Service LECs), Docket No. P-2008-2020446 (May 5, 2008); and Buffalo Valley Telephone Company, Conestoga Telephone and Telegraph Company, Denver and Ephrata Telephone and Telegraph Company, and D&E Systems, Inc., Docket No. P-2008-2051138 (September 23, 2008).
4 As previously noted, in addition to asking for and being granted a individual waiver of section 63.137(2), the Verizon LECs requested and was granted a further specific waiver from its individual waiver and the Blanket Waiver Order. This second Verizon waiver goes to the Verizon LECs' use of the Nexidia program. The Nexidia program:
[M]echanically scans the contents of a random sample of recorded calls (approximately six (6) calls per call-taker per day) and looks for key words and other ''clues'' related to quality of service and customer's satisfaction. Nexidia software then analyzes this data and produces reports and recommendations regarding effective and efficient communication. Calls will not be linked to individual call-takers [or callers]. Verizon supervisors will not listen to recorded customer calls, although a person with the requisite authorization may listen to calls. Program data and analytics will be managed by Verizon, and access will be limited to dedicated quality subject matter experts within the particular areas that are identified for remedial action.
The Nexidia process does not result in recorded calls that would be routinely listened to by Verizon LEC personnel. The Verizon Nexidia order was limited in its application to programs such as Nexidia which are mechanical word search programs; the Verizon Nexidia order was not applicable to routine call recording for service quality and training purposes contemplated in the Blanket Waiver Order.
Verizon Pet. at ¶¶ 4 and 9-10 in Pet. of Verizon, et al., P-2010-2196242 (October 21, 2010) (Verizon Nexidia).
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
