Summary

  • The FCC's 1998 electronic-filing rules offered easier submission and online access, while requiring a telephone number on electronically filed comments.
  • After a petition from David B. Popkin, the FCC removed that requirement in October. Telephone contact became optional in the nonpublic submission interface and email template; names and mailing addresses remained required.

Paper had a curious selling point

The FCC wanted people to use the Internet. It offered a route into rulemaking that could save copying, postage and messenger trips. Yet someone who preferred to keep a telephone number private had a reason to reach for an envelope. Paper comments carried no corresponding requirement to supply it.

That little mismatch survived into the agency's new electronic-filing rules in 1998. Modernisation had arrived with an extra request for personal information. A member of the public noticed, filed a petition, and persuaded the regulator to cross it out.

The welcome was otherwise quite practical

The rule published on 1 May 1998 expanded use of the Electronic Comment Filing System, ECFS, for rulemaking-related proceedings. It took effect on 30 June, following earlier use in individually designated proceedings. The agency expected the new route to broaden participation and reduce the effort of filing.

There were concrete conveniences behind that ambition. One official electronic copy generally sufficed. The daily deadline for ECFS submissions moved to midnight, with a timestamp and automatic notice of the official filing time. Paper remained an accepted route. Online records would also let the public inspect what others had submitted.

Submission and public display had separate steps: staff would check essential information, including the docket number, before material became available for viewing. The service had to receive a document, place it in the right proceeding and make the record usable. Opening the Internet door brought a small office workflow with it.

The amended section 1.419(e) also specified personal details. Unrepresented electronic filers had to provide their name, street address and telephone number. Where an attorney represented a party, those details were required for at least one attorney of record. The telephone requirement was written into the rule itself.

A petition asks why the envelope gets a better deal

David B. Popkin challenged the telephone provision. The FCC's October reconsideration records his argument: individuals, including amateur radio operators, might want an unlisted number to remain private. People filing on paper already had that option.

The Commission agreed with the comparison. It acknowledged that a telephone number was not required on nonelectronic rulemaking comments. Someone concerned about disclosure could therefore continue filing on paper—a peculiar incentive for an institution trying to encourage ECFS.

The correction took effect on 21 October 1998. The compulsory telephone number came out of the electronic-comment rule. It would instead be optional on the ECFS interface and email template, which the decision said were outside the public record.

The same decision changed street address to mailing address, accommodating post-office boxes. The revised rule still required a name and mailing address, or those of an attorney for a represented party. The agency had made a precise adjustment to what the new channel asked people to disclose.

The price of one more field

For a service designer, a telephone number can look like a useful way to contact someone. For that person, making it compulsory on a public submission adds a separate decision to the act of commenting. The apparent convenience has two owners, with different interests.

ECFS's 1998 correction is a compact piece of Internet history because the obstacle was so ordinary. More convenient delivery had carried in an additional burden. Comparing the online route with paper exposed it; changing the rule removed it.

An institution's welcome is written partly in the information it demands before accepting a contribution. In this case, one petitioner helped the FCC make its new entrance a little more welcoming. The Internet got the invitation; the telephone number got to stay home.