[Federal Register: February 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 40)]
[Notices]
[Page 10769-10773]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28fe08-69]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the
Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested
February 20, 2008.
SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC), as
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden, invites the
general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on the following information collection, as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any
penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject
to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) that does not display a valid
control number. Comments are requested concerning (a) whether the
proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
Commission's burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including
the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
DATES: Written Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) comments should be
submitted on or before April 28, 2008. If you anticipate that you will
be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the
period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contacts
listed below as soon as possible.
ADDRESSES: You may submit all PRA comments by e-mail or U.S. mail. To
submit your comments by e-mail, send them to PRA@fcc.gov. To submit
your comments by U.S. mail, send them to Jerry Cowden, Federal
Communications Commission, Room 1-B135, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the
information collection(s) contact Jerry Cowden via e-mail at
PRA@fcc.gov or at 202-418-0447.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control Number: None.
Title: Information Collection Regarding Redundancy, Resiliency and
Reliability of 911 and E911 Networks and/or Systems as set forth in the
Commission's Rules (47 CFR 12.3).
Form No.: Not applicable.
Type of Review: New collection.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit.
Number of Respondents and Responses: 74 respondents; 74 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 105.3 hours (120 hours for local
exchange carriers, 72 hours for commercial mobile radio service
providers, and 40 hours for interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol
service providers).
Frequency of Response: One-time reporting.
Obligation to Respond: Mandatory (47 CFR 12.3).
Total Annual Burden: 7,792 hours.
Total Annual Cost: None.
Privacy Act Impact Assessment: This information collection does not
affect individuals or households, and therefore a privacy impact
assessment is not required.
Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: These reports will contain
sensitive data and, for reasons of national security and the prevention
of competitive injury to reporting entities, Section 12.3 of the
Commission's rules specifically states that all reports will be
afforded confidential treatment. Data in these reports will be
considered confidential information that is exempt from routine public
disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Exemption 4. See
47 CFR 0.457 and 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4); see also Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 7, Part 10. These reports will be shared
pursuant to a protective order with only the following three entities,
if the entities file a request for the information: The National
Emergency Number Association, The Association of Public Safety
Communications Officials, and The National Association of State 9-1-1
Administrators. All other access to these reports must be sought
pursuant to procedures set forth in 47 CFR 0.461. Notice of any
requests for inspection of these reports will be provided to the filers
of the reports pursuant to 47 CFR 0.461(d)(3).
[[Page 10770]]
Needs and Uses: The Commission, in order to help fulfill its
statutory obligation to make wire and radio communications services
available to all people in the United States for the purpose of the
national defense and promoting safety of life and property, released an
Order (FCC 07-107) that adopted a rule requiring analysis of 911 and
E911 networks and/or systems and reports to the Commission on the
redundancy, resiliency and reliability of those networks and/or systems
(47 CFR 12.3). It is critical that Americans have access to a resilient
and reliable 911 system irrespective of the technology used to provide
the service. These analyses and reports on the redundancy, resiliency,
and dependability of 911 and E911 networks and systems will further
this goal. This requirement will serve the public interest and further
the Commission's statutory mandate to promote the safety of life and
property through the use of wire and radio communication. See 47 U.S.C.
151. This rule obligates local exchange carriers (LECs), commercial
mobile radio service (CMRS) providers that are required to comply with
the wireless 911 rules set forth in Section 20.18 of the Commission's
rules, and interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) service
providers to analyze their 911 and E911 networks and/or systems and
file a detailed report to the Commission on the redundancy, resiliency
and reliability of those networks and/or systems. LECs that meet the
definition of a Class B company set forth in Section 32.11(b)(2) of the
Commission's rules, non-nationwide commercial mobile radio service
providers with no more than 500,000 subscribers at the end of 2001, and
interconnected VoIP service providers with annual revenues below the
revenue threshold established pursuant to Section 32.11 of the
Commission's rules are exempt from this rule. The reports are due 120
days from the date that the Commission or its staff announces
activation of the 911/E911 network and system reporting process.
Description of Information Collection: The Commission delegated
authority to the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (Bureau) to
implement and activate a process through which these reports will be
submitted. The Bureau will collect these reports via a web-based
database that will have a separate table for each entity type subject
to Section 12.3 of the Commission's rules (LECs, CMRS providers
required to comply with the wireless 911 rules set forth in Section
20.18 of the Commission's rules, and interconnected VoIP service
providers). This data collection system will carefully restrict access
to the data. Users will be able to input and see data for their company
but will not be able to see or input data for another company. The
system will also allow users to input other information they may wish
to provide about the redundancy, resiliency and dependability of their
911 and E911 networks and systems.
The Commission also delegated authority to the Bureau to establish
the specific data that will be required. The following is the
information that the Bureau will require from LECs, CMRS providers and
interconnected VoIP service providers pursuant to Section 12.3.
LECs (including incumbent LECs and competitive LECs). Each LEC will
be asked to provide the FCC Registration Number(s) of the responding
carrier and the OCN (LERG assigned service provider number) Number(s)
of the responding carrier. For each state in which LECs provide
service, they will be asked to provide the following information on a
state-by-state basis.
LECs will be required to provide information about switches to
Selective Routers, specifically, information about those switches that
they own or operate. LECs must report the percent of switches that they
own or operate in the network from which 911 calls originate. With
respect to those switches, LECs must identify the percent of switches
with logically diverse paths to their primary Selective Routers.
Logical diversity is achieved when redundant circuits are assigned
between the source node and the destination node. For switches for
which they have not provided or made arrangements for a logically
diverse path, LECs must discuss the circumstances, including why
logically diverse paths are not provisioned, and any plans to provide
logically diverse paths in the future. With respect to those switches
that a LEC owns or operates in the network from which 911 calls
originate, LECs must also report the percent of switches with
physically diverse connections to their primary Selective Routers.
Physical diversity is achieved when geographically separated redundant
facilities are assigned between the source node and the destination
node. For those switches for which LECs have not provided or made
arrangements for physically diverse connections, they must discuss the
circumstances including why physically diverse paths are not
provisioned and any plans to provide physically diverse connections in
the future. Finally, with respect to those switches that a LEC owns or
operates in the network from which 911 calls originate, LECs must
report the percent of switches with mostly physically diverse
connections to their primary Selective Routers. Mostly physically
diverse connectivity means that facilities are diverse for at least 95%
of the length (but not for the entire length). For example the
facilities could be physically diverse except for a bridge crossing or
passing through the same Digital Cross Connect System. For those
switches for which LECs have not provided or made arrangements for
mostly physically diverse connections, they must discuss the
circumstances including why mostly physically diverse connections are
not provisioned and any plans to provide mostly physically diverse
connections in the future.
LECs must also provide information if they own or operate Selective
Routers. They must provide the percent of Selective Routers with at
least one alternate Selective Router for at least 50% of the 911
traffic. If they have not provided or made arrangements for alternate
selective routers for at least 50% of 911 traffic, they must discuss
the circumstances including why an alternate selective router for at
least 50% of 911 traffic is not provisioned and any plans to provide an
alternate selective router in the future.
With respect to Selective Routers to public safety answering points
(PSAPs), LECs must provide the following information if they own or
operate Selective Routers but only for the PSAPs supported by those
Selective Routers. LECs must state the number of PSAPs supported by
their Selective Routers and the percent of PSAPs with an alternate
(back-up) Selective Router in addition to the primary Selective Router.
For those PSAPs for which a LEC has not provided or made arrangements
for an alternate (back-up) Selective Router in addition to the primary
Selective Router, the LEC needs to discuss the circumstances including
why an alternative (back-up) selective router is not provisioned and
any plans to provide an alternate (back-up) selective router in the
future. LECs must also identify the percent of PSAPs with logically
diverse paths to their primary Selective Router. For those PSAPs for
which a LEC has not provided or made arrangements for logically diverse
paths to the primary Selective Router, they must discuss the
circumstances including why logically diverse paths are not
provisioned, and any plans to provide logically diverse paths in the
future. LECs must also report the percent of PSAPs with physically
[[Page 10771]]
diverse connections to their primary Selective Router. For those PSAPs
for which they have not provided or made arrangements for physically
diverse connections to the primary Selective Router, LECs must discuss
the circumstances including why physically diverse paths are not
provisioned and any plans to provide physically diverse paths in the
future.
Further, LECs must report the percent of PSAPs with logically
diverse paths to their primary Selective Router in which the
interoffice portion of the connections to the primary Selective Router
is physically diverse. The interoffice network consists of facilities
and transmission equipment that interconnects switching offices in a
telecommunications inter-exchange network. For those PSAPs with
logically diverse paths to the primary Selective Router for which they
have not provided or made arrangements for physical diversity in the
interoffice portion of the connections to the primary Selective
Routers, LECs must discuss the circumstances including why such
physical diversity is not provisioned and any plans to provide such
logical diversity in the future. LECs will also need to provide the
percent of PSAPs where the connection between the PSAP and the primary
Selective Router is physically diverse from the connection between the
PSAP and the alternate Selective Router. For those PSAPs for which the
connection between the PSAP and the primary Selective Router is not
physically diverse from the connection between the PSAP and the
alternate Selective Router, LECs must discuss the circumstances
including why such physically diverse connections are not provisioned
and any plans to provide such physically diverse connections in the
future. Finally, LECs must provide the percent of PSAPs where the
interoffice portion of the connection from the PSAP to the primary
Selective Router is physically diverse from the interoffice portion of
the connection from the PSAP to the alternate Selective Router. For
those PSAPs where the interoffice portion of the connection from the
PSAP to the Selective Router is not physically diverse from the
interoffice portion of the connection from the PSAP to the alternate
Selective Router, LECs must discuss the circumstances including why
such physical diversity is not provisioned and any plans to provide
physical diversity in the future.
Additionally, LECs that own or operate Selective Routers must
provide information about alternate PSAPs, but only for the PSAPs
supported by those Selective Routers. These LECs will be required to
provide the percent of PSAPs for which traffic is automatically
rerouted to another PSAP if the PSAP is unavailable. For those PSAPs
without automatic re-routing, they need to discuss the circumstances
including why automatic re-routing to another PSAP is not provisioned
and any plans to provide such automatic re-routing in the future.
LECs will also be required to provide specific information if they
own or operate Automatic Location Information (ALI) databases. LECs
must provide the number of ALI Database pairs (redundant). An ALI
database pair is a configuration of two ALI databases that will operate
seamlessly even if one of the two databases fails. LECs that own or
operate ALI databases will also be required to state the percent of
PSAPs supported by ALI database pairs in which the connections from the
ALI databases to the PSAP are physically diverse. For those PSAPs
supported by ALI database pairs in which the connections from the ALI
databases to the PSAP are not physically diverse, LECs must discuss the
circumstances including why physically diverse connections are not
provisioned and any plans to provide physically diverse connections in
the future. LECs that own or operate ALI databases must also provide
the percent of PSAPs supported by ALI database pairs in which the
interoffice portion of the connections from the ALI databases to the
PSAP are physically diverse. For those PSAPs supported by ALI database
pairs in which the interoffice portion of the connections from the ALI
databases to the PSAP are not physically diverse, they must discuss the
circumstances including why such physical diversity is not provisioned
and any plans to provide such physical diversity in the future.
CMRS Providers. Each CMRS provider will be asked to provide the FRN
Number or Numbers of the responding provider and the OCN Number or
Numbers of the responding provider. CMRS providers must provide
information for each area in which the CMRS provider serves.
Regarding Mobile Switching Centers (MSCs) to Selective Routers,
CMRS providers must provide information for the MSCs that they own or
operate. This information includes the: (1) Percent of MSCs in network
that have Phase I E911 capability; (2) percent of MSCs in network that
have Phase II E911 capability; and (3) percent of MSCs with logically
diverse paths to primary Selective Routers. For those MSCs for which
CMRS providers have not provided or made arrangements for logically
diverse paths, they are required to discuss the circumstances including
why logically diverse paths are not provisioned and any plans to
provide logically diverse paths in the future. CMRS providers must also
report the percent of MSCs with physically diverse connections to their
primary Selective Routers. For those MSCs for which they have not
provided or made arrangements for physically diverse connections, CMRS
providers must discuss the circumstances including why physically
diverse connections are not provisioned and any plans to provide
physically diverse connections in the future. Further, CMRS providers
will be required to provide the percent of MSCs with mostly physically
diverse connections to their primary Selective Routers. For those MSCs
for which they have not provided or made arrangements for mostly
physically diverse connections, CMRS providers must discuss the
circumstances including why mostly physically diverse connections are
not provisioned and any plans to provide mostly physically diverse
connections in the future.
CMRS providers must also provide information about MSCs to Mobile
Positioning Centers (MPCs) or Gateway Mobile Location Centers (GMLCs).
They must report the percent of MSCs connected to a pair of MPCs/GMLCs.
MSCs can be connected to a pair of MPCs/GMLCs for redundancy. In
configurations like this, the MSC will continue to provide positioning
information even if one of the MPCs/GMLCs suffers an outage. CMRS
providers must also state the percent of MSCs with logically diverse
paths to their primary MPCs/GMLCs. For MSCs for which they have not
provided or made arrangements for logically diverse paths to the
primary MPCs/GMLCs, CMRS providers must discuss the circumstances,
including why logically diverse paths are not provisioned and any plans
to provide logically diverse paths in the future. They must also
provide the percent of MSCs with physically diverse connections to
their primary MPCs/GMLCs. For those MSCs for which CMRS providers have
not provided or made arrangements for physically diverse connections,
they must discuss the circumstances including why physically diverse
connections are not provisioned and any plans to provide physically
diverse connections in the future. Additionally, CMRS providers will be
required to report the percent of MSCs with mostly physically diverse
connections to their
[[Page 10772]]
primary MPCs/GMLCs. For those MSCs for which they have not provided or
made arrangements for mostly physically diverse connections, CMRS
providers must discuss the circumstances including why mostly
physically diverse connections are not provisioned and any plans to
provide mostly physically diverse connections in the future.
Further, CMRS providers must report the percent of MSCs where the
connection from the MSC to the primary MPC/GMLC is physically diverse
from the connection to the alternate MPC/GMLC. For those MSCs where the
connection from the MSC to the primary MPC/GMLC is not physically
diverse from the connection to the alternate MPC/GMLC, providers must
discuss the circumstances including why physically diverse connections
are not provisioned and any plans to provide physically diverse
connections in the future. CMRS providers will be required to provide
the percent of MSCs where the connection from the MSC to the primary
MPC/GMLC is mostly physically diverse from the connection to the
alternate MPC/GMLC. For those MSCs where the connection from the MSC to
the primary MPC/GMLC is not mostly physically diverse from the
connection to the alternate MPC/GMLC, they must discuss the
circumstances including why mostly physically diverse connections are
not provisioned and any plans to provide mostly physically diverse
connections in the future.
CMRS providers that own or operate MPCs/GMLCs must report
additional information, including the percent of MPCs/GMLCs for which
there is an alternate MPC/GMLC. This question is concerned with the
percentage of MPCs/GMLCs that are backed up. An earlier question asked
about the percentage of MSCs that are served by a pair of MPCs/GMLCs.
Both questions address the redundancy of MPCs/GMLCs but this one
addresses MPC/GMLC pairing while the previous one addressed redundant
access from MSCs to MPC/GMLC pairs. For those MPCs/GMLCs that do not
have alternates, CMRS providers must discuss the circumstances
including why alternate MPCs/GMLCs are not provisioned and any plans to
provide alternate MPCs/GMLCs in the future. CMRS providers must also
state whether they are able to pass location information from more than
one MPC/GMLC. For those cases in which they are not able to do so, they
must discuss the circumstances including why the capability to pass
location information from more than one MPC/GMLC is not provisioned and
any plans to provide this capability in the future.
CMRS providers that own or operate MPCs/GMLCs must also report
whether there are logically diverse paths from each MPC/GMLC to either
the primary ALI database or the back-up ALI database. For those cases
where they have not provided or made arrangements for logically diverse
paths, CMRS providers must discuss the circumstances including why
logically diverse paths are not provisioned and any plans to provide
logically diverse paths in the future. Additionally, CMRS providers
that own or operate MPCs/GMLCs must state whether there are physically
diverse connections from each MPC/GMLC to either the primary ALI
database or the back-up ALI database. For those cases where they have
not provided or made arrangements for physically diverse connections,
they must discuss the circumstances including why physically diverse
connections are not provisioned and any plans to provide physically
diverse connections in the future. Finally, CMRS providers that own or
operate MPCs/GMLCs will have to report whether there are mostly
physically diverse connections from each MPC/GMLC to either the primary
ALI database or the back-up ALI database. For those cases in which they
have not provided or made arrangements for mostly physically diverse
connections, CMRS providers must discuss the circumstances including
why mostly physically diverse connections are not provisioned and any
plans to provide mostly physically diverse connections in the future.
Interconnected VoIP Service Providers. Each responding
interconnected VoIP service provider will be asked to report their FRN
Number or Numbers, if any, and OCN Number or Numbers, if any.
Interconnected VoIP providers will have to provide information about
interconnection to Selective Routers and third-party providers. They
must report the percent of switches wherein 911 service is provided by
the interconnected VoIP provider; where the VoIP provider has a direct
connection to Selective Routers. Additionally, interconnected VoIP
service providers will be required to report the percent of switches
wherein 911 service is provided by a third party; where another company
is utilized to route 911 calls.
Interconnected VoIP service providers that have direct connections
to Selective Routers must report the percent of switches with logically
diverse paths to their primary Selective Routers--for cases when the
VoIP provider has direct connections to Selective Routers. For switches
for which they have not provided or made arrangements for logically
diverse paths, they must discuss the circumstances, including why
logically diverse connections are not provisioned and any plans to
provide logically diverse paths in the future. Interconnected VoIP
service providers that have direct connections to Selective Routers
must also report the percent of switches with physically diverse
connections to their primary Selective Routers. For those switches for
which they have not provided or made arrangements for physically
diverse connections, they must discuss the circumstances including why
physically diverse connections are not provisioned and any plans to
provide physically diverse connections in the future. Finally,
Interconnected VoIP service providers that have direct connections to
Selective Routers will be required to provide the percent of switches
with mostly physically diverse connections to their primary Selective
Routers. For those switches for which they have not provided or made
arrangements for mostly physically diverse connections, they must
discuss the circumstances including why mostly physically diverse
connections are not provisioned and any plans to provide mostly
physically diverse connections in the future.
Interconnected VoIP service providers that use a third party to
provide connections to Selective Routers must report the percent of
switches with logically diverse paths to their primary access points--
for cases when the VoIP provider uses a third party. For switches for
which they have not provided or made arrangements for logically diverse
paths to their primary access points, they must discuss the
circumstances including why logically diverse paths are not provisioned
and any plans to provide logically diverse paths in the future.
Interconnected VoIP service providers that use a third party to provide
connections to Selective Routers are also required to report the
percent of switches with physically diverse connections to their
primary access points. For those switches for which they have not
provided or made arrangements for physically diverse connections to
their primary access points, they must describe the circumstances
including why physically diverse connections are not provisioned and
any plans to provide physically diverse connections in the future.
Finally, interconnected VoIP service providers that use a third party
to provide connections to Selective
[[Page 10773]]
Routers are required to report the percent of switches with mostly
physically diverse connections to their primary access points. For
those switches for which they have not provided or made arrangements
for mostly physically diverse connections to their primary access
points, they must discuss the circumstances including why mostly
physically diverse connections are not provisioned and any plans to
provide mostly physically diverse connections in the future.
Responding LECs, CMRS providers and interconnected VoIP service
providers must also provide information regarding disaster planning for
the resiliency and reliability of 911 architecture. All respondents
must state whether they have a contingency plan that addresses the
maintenance and restoration of 911/E911 service during and following
disasters. If the answer is ``yes,'' the respondent will be asked to
describe its contingency plan including those elements that address the
maintenance and restoration of 911/E911 service. If the answer is
``no,'' the respondent will be asked to discuss the circumstances
including why it does not have a contingency plan that addresses 911/
E911 maintenance and restoration and any plans to develop such a
contingency plan in the future.
Respondents that do have a contingency plan that addresses the
maintenance and restoration of 911/E911 service must state whether they
regularly test their plan. If respondents answer ``yes'' to this
question, they must describe the program for testing their contingency
plan, including the extent to which they periodically test to ensure
that the critical components (e.g., automatic re-routes, PSAP Make Busy
Key) included in contingency plans work as designed and the extent they
involve PSAPs in tests of their contingency plan. Respondents that
answer ``no'' will be asked to discuss the circumstances including why
they do not test their contingency plan and any plans to test their
plan in the future.
All respondents must state whether they have a routing plan so
that, in the case of a lost connection of dedicated transport
facilities between the originating switch/MSC and the Selective Router,
911 calls are routed over alternate transport facilities. Respondents
that answer ``yes'' must describe their routing plan. Respondents that
answer no must discuss the circumstances and any plans to develop such
a plan in the future.
All responding LECs, CMRS providers and interconnected VoIP service
providers must state whether, in cases where 911 service is disrupted,
they make test calls to assess the impact as part of the restoration
process. If the answer is ``no,'' respondents must discuss the
circumstances including why they do not make test calls as part of the
restoration process and any plans to do so in the future. Respondents
must also state whether their company makes additional test calls when
service is restored and, if not, they must discuss why they do not make
additional test calls.
All respondents must describe any current plans they have to
migrate to next generation 911 (NG911) architecture once a standard for
NG911 has been developed. Finally, respondents are asked to provide any
additional relevant information regarding steps they have taken to
ensure redundancy, resiliency and reliability of their 911/E911
facilities.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-3702 Filed 2-27-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P