[Federal Register: February 14, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 31)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 8617-8625]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14fe08-16]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 20
[PS Docket No. 07-114; CC Docket No. 94-102; WC Docket No. 05-196; FCC
07-166]
Wireless E911 Location Accuracy Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) amends its rules in order to require wireless Enhanced 911
(E911) Phase II location accuracy and reliability standards at a
geographical level defined by the coverage area of a Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP). The Commission takes this step in order to
ensure an appropriate and consistent compliance methodology with
respect to location accuracy standards.
DATES: The rules in 47 CFR 20.18(h) contain information collection
requirements that have not been approved by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). The Federal Communications Commission will publish a
document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Simpson, Policy Division, Public
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-2391.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report
and Order (Order) in PS Docket No. 07-114, CC Docket No. 94-102, WC
Docket No. 05-196, FCC 07-166, adopted September 11, 2007, and released
November 20, 2007. The complete text of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC
Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be obtained from the
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in
person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, via
telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-5563, or via e-
mail at FCC@BCPIWEB.COM. Alternative formats (computer diskette, large
print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to persons with
disabilities by sending an e-mail to FCC504@fcc.gov or calling the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530, TTY (202)
418-0432. This document is also available on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.fcc.gov.
1. On June 1, 2007, we released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM) seeking comment on how to improve 911 location accuracy and
reliability. We found that although measuring location accuracy at the
PSAP level may present challenges, the public interest demands that
carriers and technology providers strive to ensure that when wireless
callers dial 911, emergency responders are provided location
information that enables them to reach the site of the emergency as
quickly as possible. In recognition of the fact that
[[Page 8618]]
many carriers are not currently measuring and testing location accuracy
at the PSAP service area level, we sought comment on whether we should
defer enforcement of Sec. 20.18(h) if we adopted our tentative
conclusion to require compliance at the PSAP level.
Compliance With Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP Level
2. Consistent with the NPRM, we find that carriers should be
required to meet the Commission's Phase II accuracy requirements set
forth in Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level. Use of a PSAP-
based geographic area for compliance purposes is most consistent with
the purpose of the E911 rules, which, as we stated in the NPRM, is to
ensure that PSAPs receive accurate, meaningful location information in
order to dispatch local emergency responders to the correct location.
Although Sec. 20.18(h) does not explicitly state that accuracy must be
measured and tested at the PSAP level, it is unreasonable to think that
the Commission ever envisioned averaging of location accuracy on a
large geographic basis, such as a carrier's entire national footprint.
3. As we stated in the NPRM, measuring over large geographic areas
such as a carrier's entire national footprint could allow a service
provider to claim compliance with the Commission's accuracy
requirements even though the carrier cannot meet them in individual
PSAP areas, or even entire states. In those circumstances, certain
PSAPs receive either meaningless location information or no location
information. Even worse, PSAPs may receive location information yet not
know that the information is not reliable. Any of these results could
extend the amount of time necessary for a 911 call taker to obtain the
location of the caller or the site of an emergency--including cases as
serious as callers attempting to report criminal activity impacting
homeland security--and thus result in longer dispatch times, and
perhaps even no response by public safety officials who lack sufficient
information to locate the caller. In fact, PSAPs often answer calls
with: ``911. What is the address of your emergency?'' because they
cannot rely on carriers to meet location accuracy requirements in their
PSAP service area. A lack of meaningful data regarding a caller's
location would thus render the purpose of the rule--which is intended
to ensure that carriers provide meaningful location information to
emergency responders--a nullity. Measurement of compliance at the PSAP
level is the most appropriate way to avoid this otherwise absurd result
consistent with the purpose of the rule.
4. The record in this proceeding supports our conclusion that
requiring PSAP-level accuracy is necessary to ensure that the goal of
providing meaningful location information to emergency responders is
met. The public safety organizations that filed comments in response to
the NPRM are nearly unanimous in their support for our tentative
conclusion. These organizations represent a cross-section of the public
safety community, ranging from nationwide associations such as APCO and
NENA, to first responders in densely populated urban areas such as New
York City, Chicago, and Orlando, to emergency response organizations in
smaller communities such as Lufkin, Texas and San Juan County, New
Mexico. The public safety commenters are uniquely qualified to attest
to the importance of accurate and reliable location information. Their
comments support our observation in the NPRM that averaging location
accuracy over large geographic areas is likely to produce inadequate
and unreliable location information in some parts of a provider's
service area. The New York City Police Department, for example,
emphasizes how difficult it is for PSAPs to ensure that the location
information they receive from carriers is accurate and reliable. And
Consumer Reports estimates that accurate location information is not
delivered at the PSAP level in nearly half of the country.
5. Some commenters support measuring and testing location accuracy
on a statewide basis, rather than at the PSAP service area level. These
commenters, however, fail to address how measurement at the state level
furthers the goals of Sec. 20.18(h). State-level compliance would not
solve the problem that APCO described in its 2004 request for
declaratory ruling and that public safety commenters in this proceeding
have also identified: State-level compliance would still allow service
providers to average accuracy results over a geographic area large
enough to render the location information provided to some PSAPs within
the state ``virtually useless.'' As a result, carriers may achieve
acceptable levels of location accuracy in urban areas of a given state,
yet provide location information of limited or no use to first
responders in rural areas. Indeed, this approach would particularly
shortchange residents of larger states with a significant number of
PSAPs as they would be more likely to reside in a PSAP where location
information of limited or no use would be provided than would residents
of smaller states. Moreover, if it is possible for carriers to comply
with location accuracy requirements on a statewide basis in small
states, this suggests that it would be feasible for carriers to comply
with location accuracy requirements at the PSAP level across the nation
were they willing to invest appropriate resources. These commenters
also provide no persuasive reasons or evidence why the Commission
should require compliance at any level other than the PSAP level. In
the absence of any such evidence, we reject this approach.
6. Commenters also argue that we should not require location
accuracy compliance at the PSAP level before completing the second
phase of this rulemaking, or that we should first convene an industry
forum or advisory council to assess the possibilities for improving 911
location accuracy. We reject this argument as without merit. The step
we take today is necessary to ensure first responders receive
meaningful location accuracy information as soon as possible, and
should not be delayed while we explore additional issues regarding
improving location accuracy. By making clear that compliance with Sec.
20.18(h) must be measured at the PSAP level, we also effectively ``set
the stage'' for the examination that lies ahead, ensuring that all
stakeholders are properly discussing location accuracy at the correct
geographic level.
7. Our action today, however, does not depend on that examination,
nor does it preclude a more comprehensive approach to our E911 location
accuracy rules, as some commenters suggest, or otherwise ``plac[e] the
cart before the horse.'' Although the NPRM sought comment on whether
hybrid location technologies can provide even better location accuracy
results, we do not resolve those questions in the Order. We only
require service providers to comply with Sec. 20.18(h) at what may be
a smaller geographic area than they are currently using to measure
their compliance, with whatever location technology they are now using
to locate 911 callers. More specifically, we are not mandating any
specific location technology or approach in the Order, nor are we
requiring carriers to implement new location technologies. For example,
carriers that currently employ a network-based location solution need
not incorporate handset-based location technologies into their networks
to comply with our ruling in the Order, or vice versa. And, as noted
above, our determination here will serve to better inform the
discussion going forward. For these
[[Page 8619]]
reasons, we are not persuaded that the action we take today is
premature.
8. We also reject as without merit commenters' assertions that we
should not move forward because the location technologies that are
currently available are not capable of satisfying the requirements of
Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level. In the first instance,
our decision to allow carriers five years to achieve compliance at the
PSAP level substantially mitigates these concerns. Furthermore, the
record indicates that in many cases, PSAP-level compliance is
technologically feasible today and would require only the investment of
additional financial resources. In this regard, we note that while it
is obviously in carriers' financial interests to argue that any
meaningful requirement will not be possible to meet, carriers too often
blur the distinction between that which is infeasible and that which
simply requires the expenditure of additional resources. Finally, even
though the record indicates that some service providers are not
currently prepared to meet our current location accuracy requirements
at the PSAP level, that fact alone should not prevent us from
establishing the PSAP service areas as the geographic basis for
compliance with the Sec. 20.18(h) location accuracy requirements.
Indeed, the Commission has consistently found it appropriate to set
aggressive benchmarks for carriers and providers when public safety is
at stake, and it is our judgment based on the record as well as our
experience regarding the implementation of similar public safety
mandates that carriers will be able to meet the compliance deadline and
interim benchmarks set forth in the Order. While we acknowledge that
meeting the deadline and benchmarks may require the investment of
significant resources by certain carriers, we believe that such
expenditures are more than justified by the accompanying public safety
benefits. Furthermore, we believe that the Order will have a catalyzing
effect on efforts to improve location accuracy measurement because it
will create significant incentives for industry.
9. In short, the public interest demands that we no longer allow
service providers to nullify our longstanding location accuracy
requirements by measuring their compliance over unreasonably large
geographic areas. While deployment of E911 Phase II service continues
to expand, such service has no significance to local emergency
responders if the location information so provided does not permit 911
call takers to locate the caller. In the interests of public safety and
homeland security, our action today thus closes any ``loopholes'' that
may allow service providers to avoid providing meaningful location
accuracy information. It is clear based on the inability to date of
wireless carriers and technology vendors to provide meaningful PSAP-
level accuracy that it is incumbent on us to clearly establish that
compliance must be achieved at the PSAP level.
Compliance Deadline and Interim Benchmarks
10. The record in this proceeding contains encouraging evidence
that location technology providers have developed and are developing
technologies that can achieve PSAP-level compliance. The record also
reflects that the technology exists to test, monitor, and report
compliance at the PSAP level. Moreover, as noted above, PSAP-level
compliance is possible in many instances through the deployment of
existing resources and technologies presently available to carriers. We
recognize, however, that many service providers are not currently
measuring and testing location accuracy at the PSAP level, and that
meeting our location accuracy requirements in every PSAP may take time
to achieve. We do not intend to penalize carriers that are making good
faith efforts to comply with our location accuracy requirements at the
PSAP level. At the same time, we must ensure that carriers begin to
transition to PSAP-level compliance without delay.
11. Accordingly, we establish a deadline of September 11, 2012 for
achieving compliance with Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP level. We find
that allowing sufficient time for carriers to achieve compliance
alleviates parties' concerns about the challenges of PSAP-level
compliance with Sec. 20.18(h), yet still leads to appreciable and
swift improvements to E911 service that will result from compliance at
the appropriate geographic level. The record in this proceeding
supports giving carriers five years to achieve PSAP-level compliance.
12. In order to ensure that carriers are making progress toward
compliance with the Commission's location accuracy requirements at the
PSAP level, we establish a series of interim requirements, which
carriers must also meet in order to comply with Sec. 20.18(h). These
benchmarks consist of the following:
By September 11, 2008--one year from the date of adoption
of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must satisfy the
location accuracy requirements of Sec. 20.18(h) within each Economic
Area (EA) in which that carrier operates.
By September 11, 2009--two years from the date of adoption
of this Order--each carrier subject to the rule must file with the
Commission a report describing the status of its ongoing efforts to
comply with Sec. 20.18(h).
By September 11, 2010--three years from the date of
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must (1)
satisfy the location accuracy requirements of Sec. 20.18(h) within
each Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Rural Service Area (RSA)
in which that carrier operates; (2) demonstrate PSAP-level compliance
with Sec. 20.18(h) within at least 75% of the PSAPs the carrier
serves; and (3) demonstrate accuracy in all PSAP service areas within
at least 50% of the applicable location accuracy standard (in other
words, a carrier subject to the accuracy standard for handset-based
technologies in Sec. 20.18(h)(2), which is 50 meters for 67 percent of
calls, must achieve location accuracy of 75 meters for 67 percent of
calls in all PSAPs in order to comply with this requirement).
By September 11, 2011--four years from the date of
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must file with
the Commission a report describing the status of its ongoing efforts to
comply with Sec. 20.18(h).
By September 11, 2012--five years from the date of
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must be in full
compliance with Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level.
In determining their compliance with these benchmarks and preparing
their reports to the Commission, carriers must include only those PSAPs
that are capable of receiving Phase II location data.
I. Procedural Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
13. This document contains proposed new information collection
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on how we might ``further
reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns
with fewer than 25 employees.''
[[Page 8620]]
B. Congressional Review Act
14. The Commission will send a copy of this Second Report and Order
in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (``CRA''), see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
II. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
15. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was
included in the NPRM in PS Docket No. 07-114; CC Docket No. 94-102; and
WC Docket No. 05-196. The Commission sought written public comment on
the proposals in these dockets, including comment on the IRFA. This
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.
Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules
16. In the NPRM, we sought comment on how to best ensure that
public safety answering points (PSAPs) receive location information
that is as accurate as possible for all wireless E911 calls. The
objective was to ensure that PSAPs receive reliable and accurate
location information irrespective of the location of the caller or the
technology that may be used.
17. The Report and Order requires that Commercial Mobile Radio
Service (CMRS) carriers comply by September 11, 2012, with Sec.
20.18(h) of the Commission's rules at the PSAP service area level and
adopts interim benchmarks in each of the preceding years to achieve
this level. Section 20.18(h) sets forth the standards for Phase II
wireless E911 location accuracy and reliability. This action responds
to a petition for declaratory ruling filed by the Association of
Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO)
expressing concern that by measuring and testing location accuracy over
geographic areas larger than PSAP service areas, a wireless carrier can
assert that it satisfies the requirements of Sec. 20.18(h) even when
it is not meeting the location accuracy requirements in substantial
segments of its service area.
Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to
the IRFA
18. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the
IRFA.
Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the
Proposed Rules Will Apply
19. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules. 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. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
Telecommunications Service Entities
Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers
20. Below, for those services subject to auctions, we note that, as
a general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small
businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent
the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the
Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in
the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are
implicated.
21. Cellular Licensees. The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census category
``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under this SBA
category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were
1,397 firms in this category 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, under this
category and size standard, the great majority of firms can be
considered small. Also, according to Commission data, 437 carriers
reported that they were engaged in the provision of cellular service,
Personal Communications Service (PCS), or Specialized Mobile Radio
(SMR) Telephony services, which are placed together in the data. We
have estimated that 260 of these are small, under the SBA small
business size standard.
22. Common Carrier Paging. The SBA has developed a small business
size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census
category, ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under
this SBA category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data
for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category 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. Thus, under this category and associated small business size
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. In the Paging
Third Report and Order, we developed a small business size standard for
``small businesses'' and ``very small businesses'' for purposes of
determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding
credits and installment payments. A ``small business'' is an entity
that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has
average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding
three years. Additionally, a ``very small business'' is an entity that,
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average
gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding
three years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards.
An auction of Metropolitan Economic Area licenses commenced on February
24, 2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. Of the 985 licenses auctioned,
440 were sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming small business status
won. Also, according to Commission data, 375 carriers reported that
they were engaged in the provision of paging and messaging services. Of
those, we estimate that 370 are small, under the SBA-approved small
business size standard.
23. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular,
personal communications services (PCS), and specialized mobile radio
(SMR) telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the SBA has developed a
small business size standard for ``Cellular and Other Wireless
Telecommunications'' services. Under that SBA small business size
standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Commission data, 445 carriers reported that they were
engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. We have estimated that
245 of these are small under the SBA small business size standard.
24. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband
Personal Communications Service (PCS) spectrum is divided into six
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held
auctions for each block. The Commission defined ``small entity'' for
Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of $40
million or less in the three previous calendar years. For Block F, an
additional classification for ``very small business''
[[Page 8621]]
was added and is defined as an entity that, together with its
affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for
the preceding three calendar years. These standards defining ``small
entity'' in the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by
the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved small business
size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There
were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the Block C
auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won
approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F.
On March 23, 1999, the Commission re-auctioned 347 C, D, E, and F Block
licenses. There were 48 small business winning bidders. On January 26,
2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F broadband PCS
licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction,
29 qualified as ``small'' or ``very small'' businesses. Subsequent
events, concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency
determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being
available for grant.
25. Narrowband Personal Communications Services. To date, two
auctions of narrowband personal communications services (PCS) licenses
have been conducted. For purposes of the two auctions that have already
been held, ``small businesses'' were entities with average gross
revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less.
Through these auctions, the Commission has awarded a total of 41
licenses, out of which 11 were obtained by small businesses. To ensure
meaningful participation of small business entities in future auctions,
the Commission has adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in
the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. A ``small business'' is an
entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has
average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than
$40 million. A ``very small business'' is an entity that, together with
affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for
the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. The SBA has
approved these small business size standards. In the future, the
Commission will auction 459 licenses to serve Metropolitan Trading
Areas (MTAs) and 408 response channel licenses. There is also one
megahertz of narrowband PCS spectrum that has been held in reserve and
that the Commission has not yet decided to release for licensing. The
Commission cannot predict accurately the number of licenses that will
be awarded to small entities in future auctions. However, four of the
16 winning bidders in the two previous narrowband PCS auctions were
small businesses, as that term was defined. The Commission assumes, for
purposes of this analysis, that a large portion of the remaining
narrowband PCS licenses will be awarded to small entities. The
Commission also assumes that at least some small businesses will
acquire narrowband PCS licenses by means of the Commission's
partitioning and disaggregation rules.
26. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not adopted a
size standard for small businesses specific to the Rural Radiotelephone
Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is
the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System (BETRS). The Commission uses
the SBA's small business size standard applicable to ``Cellular and
Other Wireless Telecommunications,'' i.e., an entity employing no more
than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the
Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that there
are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone
Service that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
27. Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not
adopted a small business size standard specific to the Air-Ground
Radiotelephone Service. We will use SBA's small business size standard
applicable to ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,'' i.e.,
an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately
100 licensees in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and we estimate
that almost all of them qualify as small under the SBA small business
size standard.
28. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on
several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for
television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the
Gulf of Mexico. There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this
service. We are unable to estimate at this time the number of licensees
that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business size
standard for ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications''
services. Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
Wireline Carriers and Service Providers
29. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for
wireline firms within the broad economic census category, ``Wired
Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under this category, the SBA deems a
wireline business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 2,432 firms in this
category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,395 firms
had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 37 firms had employment
of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and associated
small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered
small.
30. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in
this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under
the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business
size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500
or fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.''
The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small
incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of
operation because any such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. We
have therefore included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this
RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect
on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
31. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission
data, 1,303 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the
provision of incumbent local exchange services. Of these 1,303
carriers, an estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 283 have
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that
most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses
that may be affected by our action.
32. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, Competitive Access
Providers (CAPs), ``Shared-Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other
Local Service Providers.'' Neither the Commission nor the SBA has
developed a small business
[[Page 8622]]
size standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission
data, 769 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision
of either competitive access provider services or competitive local
exchange carrier services. Of these 769 carriers, an estimated 676 have
1,500 or fewer employees and 93 have more than 1,500 employees. In
addition, 12 carriers have reported that they are ``Shared-Tenant
Service Providers,'' and all 12 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer
employees. In addition, 39 carriers have reported that they are ``Other
Local Service Providers.'' Of the 39, an estimated 38 have 1,500 or
fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently,
the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local
exchange service, competitive access providers, ``Shared-Tenant Service
Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers'' are small entities
that may be affected by our action.
33. Local Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission data, 143 carriers have reported
that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of
these, an estimated 141 have 1,500 or fewer employees and two have more
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the
majority of local resellers are small entities that may be affected by
our action.
34. Toll Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size
standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission data, 770 carriers have reported
that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of
these, an estimated 747 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 23 have more
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the
majority of toll resellers are small entities that may be affected by
our action.
35. Payphone Service Providers (PSPs). Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for
payphone services providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA
rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission data, 613 carriers have reported
that they are engaged in the provision of payphone services. Of these,
an estimated 609 have 1,500 or fewer employees and four have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the
majority of payphone service providers are small entities that may be
affected by our action.
36. Interexchange Carriers (IXCs). Neither the Commission nor the
SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for
providers of interexchange services. The appropriate size standard
under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers.
Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. According to Commission data, 316 carriers have
reported that they are engaged in the provision of interexchange
service. Of these, an estimated 292 have 1,500 or fewer employees and
24 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that the majority of IXCs are small entities that may be
affected by our action.
37. Operator Service Providers (OSPs). Neither the Commission nor
the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for
operator service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA
rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer
employees. According to Commission data, 23 carriers have reported that
they are engaged in the provision of operator services. Of these, an
estimated 20 have 1,500 or fewer employees and three have more than
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the
majority of OSPs are small entities that may be affected by our action.
38. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. Neither the Commission nor the
SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for
prepaid calling card providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA
rules is for the category Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Commission data, 89 carriers have reported that they are
engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, 88 are
estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than 1,500
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that all or the
majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may
be affected by our action.
39. 800 and 800-Like Service Subscribers. Neither the Commission
nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically
for 800 and 800-like service (``toll free'') subscribers. The
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category
Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. The most reliable source
of information regarding the number of these service subscribers
appears to be data the Commission collects on the 800, 888, and 877
numbers in use. According to our data, at the end of January 1999, the
number of 800 numbers assigned was 7,692,955; the number of 888 numbers
assigned was 7,706,393; and the number of 877 numbers assigned was
1,946,538. We do not have data specifying the number of these
subscribers that are not independently owned and operated or have more
than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with
greater precision the number of toll free subscribers that would
qualify as small businesses under the SBA size standard. Consequently,
we estimate that there are 7,692,955 or fewer small entity 800
subscribers; 7,706,393 or fewer small entity 888 subscribers; and
1,946,538 or fewer small entity 877 subscribers.
International Service Providers
40. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard
specifically for providers of international service. The appropriate
size standards under SBA rules are for the two broad census categories
of ``Satellite Telecommunications'' and ``Other Telecommunications.''
Under both categories, such a business is small if it has $13.5 million
or less in average annual receipts.
41. The first category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in providing point-to-point
telecommunications services to other establishments in the
telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and
receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or
reselling satellite telecommunications.'' For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 371 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 307 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million, and 26 firms had receipts of $10 million
to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the
[[Page 8623]]
majority of Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that
might be affected by our action.
42. The second category of Other Telecommunications ``comprises
establishments primarily engaged in (1) providing specialized
telecommunications applications, such as satellite tracking,
communications telemetry, and radar station operations; or (2)
providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities
operationally connected with one or more terrestrial communications
systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to or receiving
telecommunications from satellite systems.'' For this category, Census
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 332 firms that
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 303 firms had annual
receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10
million to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of
Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be
affected by our action.
Cable and OVS Operators
43. Cable and Other Program Distribution. The Census Bureau defines
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged as third-party distribution systems for broadcast
programming. The establishments of this industry deliver visual, aural,
or textual programming received from cable networks, local television
stations, or radio networks to consumers via cable or direct-to-home
satellite systems on a subscription or fee basis. These establishments
do not generally originate programming material.'' The SBA has
developed a small business size standard for Cable and Other Program
Distribution, which is: all such firms having $13.5 million or less in
annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a
total of 1,191 firms in this category that operated for the entire
year. Of this total, 1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less than
$25 million. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can
be considered small.
44. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has also developed
its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate
regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is
one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers, nationwide. Industry data
indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but eleven are
small under this size standard. In addition, under the Commission's
rules, a ``small system'' is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer
subscribers. Industry data indicate that, of 7,208 systems nationwide,
6,139 systems have under 10,000 subscribers, and an additional 379
systems have 10,000-19,999 subscribers. Thus, under this second size
standard, most cable systems are small.
45. Cable System Operators. The Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system
operators, which is ``a cable operator that, directly or through an
affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed
$250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that an operator serving
fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its
annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all
its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Industry
data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but ten
are small under this size standard. We note that the Commission neither
requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are
affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250
million, and therefore we are unable to estimate more accurately the
number of cable system operators that would qualify as small under this
size standard.
46. Open Video Services (OVS). In 1996, Congress established the
open video system (OVS) framework, one of four statutorily recognized
options for the provision of video programming services by local
exchange carriers (LECs). The OVS framework provides opportunities for
the distribution of video programming other than through cable systems.
Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within
the SBA small business size standard of Cable and Other Program
Distribution Services, which consists of such entities having $13.5
million or less in annual receipts. The Commission has certified 25 OVS
operators, with some now providing service. Broadband service providers
(BSPs) are currently the only significant holders of OVS certifications
or local OVS franchises. As of June, 2005, BSPs served approximately
1.4 million subscribers, representing 1.5 percent of all MVPD
households. Affiliates of Residential Communications Network, Inc.
(RCN), which serves about 371,000 subscribers as of June, 2005, is
currently the largest BSP and 14th largest MVPD. RCN received approval
to operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, DC and
other areas. The Commission does not have financial information
regarding the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not
yet be operational. We thus believe that at least some of the OVS
operators may qualify as small entities.
Internet Service Providers
47. Internet Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small
business size standard for Internet Service Providers (ISPs). ISPs
``provide clients access to the Internet and generally provide related
services such as web hosting, web page designing, and hardware or
software consulting related to Internet connectivity.'' Under the SBA
size standard, such a business is small if it has average annual
receipts of $23 million or less. According to Census Bureau data for
2002, there were 2,529 firms in this category that operated for the
entire year. Of these, 2,437 firms had annual receipts of under $10
million, and 47 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less then
$25 million. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of these firms
are small entities that may be affected by our action.
48. All Other Information Services. ``This industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in providing other information
services (except new syndicates and libraries and archives).'' The SBA
has developed a small business size standard for this category; that
size standard is $6.5 million or less in average annual receipts.
According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 195 firms in this
category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 172 had annual
receipts of under $5 million, and an additional nine firms had receipts
of between $5 million and $9,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that
the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by
our action.
Equipment Manufacturers
49. Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Census
Bureau defines this category as follows: ``This industry comprises
establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television
broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products
made by these establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas,
cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones,
mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has
[[Page 8624]]
developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television
Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which
is: all such firms having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census
Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 1,041 establishments in
this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,010
had employment of under 500, and an additional 13 had employment of 500
to 999. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be
considered small.
50. Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in manufacturing wire telephone and data
communications equipment. These products may be standalone or board-
level components of a larger system. Examples of products made by these
establishments are central office switching equipment, cordless
telephones (except cellular), PBX equipment, telephones, telephone
answering machines, LAN modems, multi-user modems, and other data
communications equipment, such as bridges, routers, and gateways.'' The
SBA has developed a small business size standard for Telephone
Apparatus Manufacturing, which is: all such firms having 1,000 or fewer
employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total
of 518 establishments in this category that operated for the entire
year. Of this total, 511 had employment of under 1,000, and an
additional 7 had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Thus, under this size
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
51. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. These
establishments manufacture ``computer storage devices that allow the
storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical,
or magnetic/optical media.'' The SBA has developed a small business
size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is
500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there
were 1,082 establishments in this category that operated for the entire
year. Of these, 987 had employment of under 500, and 52 establishments
had employment of 500 to 999.
52. Computer Storage Device Manufacturing. These establishments
manufacture ``computer storage devices that allow the storage and
retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, or magnetic/
optical media.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard
for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or
fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were
209 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year.
Of these, 197 had employment of under 500, and eight establishments had
employment of 500 to 999.
Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements for Small Entities
53. In this Report and Order, we have taken steps to advance our
public safety mission by establishing a requirement that CMRS carriers
comply by September 11, 2012, at the PSAP service area level, with
Sec. 20.18(h) of the Commission's rules. The Order requires carriers
to submit compliance reports to the Commission at the two-year and
four-year marks, explaining their progress in achieving compliance with
Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP level. In addition, some carriers may have
to revise their internal recordkeeping procedures to comply with the
Order's requirements, although the Order imposes no specific
requirements in this regard.
Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities,
and Significant Alternatives Considered
54. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant,
specifically small business 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) and exemption
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
55. In the Notice, the Commission specifically considered the
impact of potential revisions to the wireless E911 accuracy rules on
small entities. The Notice asked whether certain classes of carriers
and/or rural networks should be held to a uniform standard of accuracy
if the Commission were to adopt one, and if so, by what date they
should be required to come into compliance with a more stringent,
uniform accuracy requirement. In previous rulemakings, the Commission
has established different compliance deadlines for small wireless
carriers. The questions posed in the Notice enabled the Commission to
assess whether similar concessions to small entities were warranted
with respect to wireless E911 accuracy requirements.
56. The Commission has determined that the benefits of requiring
all CMRS carriers to comply with the requirements of Sec. 20.18(h) at
the PSAP service area level far outweigh any burdens associated with
implementing these requirements. E-911 represents a significant and
valuable investment that enables emergency responders to reach the site
of an emergency as quickly as possible. The public safety comments in
response to the Notice were nearly unanimous in support of this
requirement. We acknowledge that compliance with the rule adopted in
the order may impose cost burdens on small entities. However, given the
great public interest benefits of the rules, we find that the public
interest benefits outweigh the economic burdens. Furthermore, the Order
gives carriers a full five years to come into compliance with Sec.
20.18(h) at the PSAP level, in large part because we have taken into
account the specific economic and technological concerns that small
entities face. In the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, we
sought comment on these rules and no commenter proposed an alternative
version that would serve these benefits while lessening the economic
burdens. Accordingly, we find that we have discharged our duty to
consider the burdens imposed on small entities.
Report to Congress
57. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order,
including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress and the
Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Second Report
and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of
the SBA. A copy of the Second Report and Order and FRFA (or summaries
thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.
III. Ordering Clauses
58. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), and
332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151,
154(i), 332, that the Report and Order in PS Docket No. 07-114, CC
Docket No. 94-102, and WC Docket No. 05-196 is adopted, and that part
20 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 20, is amended. The Order
shall become effective April 14, 2008, subject to OMB approval for new
information collection requirements.
[[Page 8625]]
59. It is further ordered that the Request for Declaratory Ruling
filed by APCO is granted to the extent indicated herein.
60. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20
Communications equipment, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 20 to read as follows:
PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES
0
1. The authority for part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 201, 251-254, 303, and 332 unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Section 20.18 paragraph (h) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 20.18 911 Services.
* * * * *
(h) Phase II accuracy. (1) By September 11, 2012, licensees subject
to this section shall comply with the following standards for Phase II
location accuracy and reliability, to be tested and measured at the
PSAP service area geographic level:
(i) For network-based technologies: 100 meters for 67 percent of
calls, 300 meters for 95 percent of calls;
(ii) For handset-based technologies: 50 meters for 67 percent of
calls, 150 meters for 95 percent of calls.
(iii) For the remaining 5 percent of calls, location attempts must
be made and a location estimate must be provided to the appropriate
PSAP.
(2) By the dates specified in this paragraph, carriers must satisfy
the following requirements:
(i) By September 11, 2008, carriers must satisfy the location
accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1) of this section within each
Economic Area (EA) in which that carrier operates;
(ii) By September 11, 2009, carriers must file with the Commission
a report describing the status of their ongoing efforts to comply with
Sec. 20.18(h);
(iii) By September 11, 2010, carriers must:
(A) Satisfy the location accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1) of
this section within each Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Rural
Service Area (RSA) in which that carrier operates;
(B) Demonstrate PSAP-level compliance with the location accuracy
standards in paragraph (h)(1) of this section within at least 75% of
the PSAPs the carrier serves; and
(C) Demonstrate accuracy in all PSAP service areas within at least
50% of the applicable location accuracy standard (i.e., a carrier
subject to the location accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of
this section must achieve location accuracy of 75 meters for 67 percent
of calls in all PSAPs).
(iv) By September 11, 2011, carriers must file with the Commission
a report describing the status of their ongoing efforts to comply with
Sec. 20.18(h).
(v) By September 11, 2012, carriers must be in full compliance with
Sec. 20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level.
(3) In assessing their compliance with the requirements of this
section, carriers must include only those PSAPs that are capable of
receiving Phase II location data.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-2797 Filed 2-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P