[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10827-10852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4393]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 20, and 43

[WCB: WC Docket Nos. 07-38, 09-190, 10-132, 11-10; FCC 11-14]


Modernizing the FCC Form 477 Data Program

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission considers whether and how to 
reform the Form 477 data program, which serves as the Commission's 
primary tool for collecting broadband and local telephone data. The 
Commission

[[Page 10828]]

believes it is time to consider whether modifying the Form 477 will 
improve the Commission's ability to carry out its duties under the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), and is an important 
part of the Commission's larger initiative to modernize and streamline 
how the Commission collects, uses, and disseminates data.

DATES: Comments are due on or before March 30, 2011, and reply comments 
are due on or before April 14, 2011. Written comments on the Paperwork 
Reduction Act proposed or modified information collection requirements 
must be submitted by the public, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 
and other interested parties on or before April 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket No.11-10, 
by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments.
    <bullet> People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8fc9ccccbabfbbcfe9ececa1e8e0f9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="692f2a2a5c595d290f0a0a470e061f">[email protected]</span></a> or phone: (202) 
418-0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.

For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document. In addition to filing comments 
with the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction 
Act information collection requirements contained herein should be 
submitted to the Federal Communications Commission via e-mail to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4b1b190a0b2d2828652c243d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a6f6f4e7e6c0c5c588c1c9d0">[email protected]</span></a> and to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, 
via e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a8e6c1cbc0c7c4c9dbf7e986f7eedac9dbcddae8c7c5ca86cdc7d886cfc7de"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8ac4e3e9e2e5e6ebf9d5cba4d5ccf8ebf9eff8cae5e7e8a4efe5faa4ede5fc">[email protected]</span></a> or via fax at 202-395-
5167.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeremy Miller at (202) 418-1507, 
Wireline Competition Bureau, Industry Analysis and Technology Division. 
For additional information concerning the Paperwork Reduction Act 
information collection requirements contained in this document, send an 
e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c797958687a1a4a4e9a0a8b1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b0e0e2f1f0d6d3d39ed7dfc6">[email protected]</span></a> or contact Judith Boley Herman at 202-418-0214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WC Docket Nos. 07-38, 09-190, 10-132 
and 11-10, adopted and released on February 8, 2011. The complete text 
of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 
12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may 
also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best 
Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, 
Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863-2893, 
facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via the Internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available on the Commission's Web site at 
http://www.fcc.gov.
    Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal Government's eRulemaking 
Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of 
Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998.
    <bullet> Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ 
or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers 
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting 
comments.
    [cir] For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers 
appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one 
electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number 
referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers 
should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, 
and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit 
an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, 
filers should send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9df8fefbeeddfbfefeb3faf2eb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b8dddbdecbf8dedbdb96dfd7ce">[email protected]</span></a>, and include the following 
words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and 
directions will be sent in response.
    [cir] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file 
an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial 
overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service 
mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. 
Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    [cir] The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or 
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing 
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 
disposed of before entering the building.
    [cir] Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    [cir] U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail 
should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8debeeeeb8bdb9cdebeeeea3eae2fb">[email protected]</a> or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice) or 
(202) 418-0432 (TTY). Contact the FCC to request reasonable 
accommodations for filing comments (accessible format documents, sign 
language interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d7b1b4b4e2e7e397b1b4b4f9b0b8a1">[email protected]</a>; phone: 
(202) 418-0530 or (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
    In addition, one copy of each pleading must be sent to each of the 
following:
    [cir] The Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and 
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554; Web site: http://www.bcpiweb.com; phone: 1-800-378-3160; and
    [cir] Jeremy Miller, Competition Policy Division, Industry Analysis 
and Technology Division, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 5-B145, Washington, 
DC 20554; e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#0d47687f6860742340646161687f4d6b6e6e236a627b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c58fa0b7a0a8bceb88aca9a9a0b785a3a6a6eba2aab3">[email protected]</span></a> or telephone number (202) 418-
1507.
    Filings and comments are also available for public inspection and 
copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information 
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC, 
20554. Copies may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating 
contractor, BCPI, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 
20554. Customers may contact BCPI through its Web site:  http://www.bcpiweb.com, by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f6909595b69495869f819394d895999b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d3b5b0b093b1b0a3baa4b6b1fdb0bcbe">[email protected]</span></a>, by telephone at (202) 
488-5300 or (800) 378-3160 (voice), (202) 488-5562 (TTY), or by 
facsimile at (202) 488-5563.

[[Page 10829]]

    Comments and reply comments must include a short and concise 
summary of the substantive arguments raised in the pleading. Comments 
and reply comments must also comply with Sec.  1.49 and all other 
applicable sections of the Commission's rules. We direct all interested 
parties to include the name of the filing party and the date of the 
filing on each page of their comments and reply comments. All parties 
are encouraged to utilize a table of contents, regardless of the length 
of their submission. We also strongly encourage parties to track the 
organization set forth in the NPRM in order to facilitate our internal 
review process.

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    This document proposes new or revised information collection 
requirements. The reporting requirements, if any, that might be adopted 
pursuant to this NPRM are too speculative at this time to request 
comment from the OMB or interested parties under section 3507(d) of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). Therefore, if the 
Commission determines that reporting is required, it will seek comment 
from the OMB and interested parties prior to any such requirements 
taking effect. Nevertheless, interested parties are encouraged to 
comment on whether any new or revised information collection is 
necessary, and if so, how the Commission might minimize the burden of 
any such collection. In addition, pursuant to the Small Business 
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we will seek specific comment on how we 
might ``further reduce the information collection burden for small 
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.'' Nevertheless, 
interested parties are encouraged to comment on whether any new or 
revised information collection is necessary, and if so, how the 
Commission might minimize the burden of any such collection.

Synopsis of the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we seek comment on 
whether and how to reform the Form 477 data program to improve the 
Commission's ability to carry out its statutory duties, while 
streamlining and minimizing the overall costs of the program, including 
the burdens imposed on service providers. This NPRM is an important 
part of our larger Data Innovation Initiative to modernize and 
streamline how we collect, use, and disseminate data, and to ensure 
that all of the data we collect is useful for supporting informed 
policymaking, promoting competition, and protecting consumers. We are 
focused on giving careful consideration to the benefits and burdens of 
our data collections, and eliminating unnecessary collections where 
possible. For example, the Initiative already has identified over 
twenty data collections across the entire Commission that may be 
outdated and ripe for elimination, as well as a number of statutory 
reporting obligations that may have outlived their usefulness. 
Similarly, for each type of data discussed in this NPRM, we will 
consider the burdens and benefits of any proposed changes. Our goal is 
to ensure that the Commission has the data it needs, while minimizing 
the overall burdens of data collection.
    2. Established in 2000, Form 477 is the Commission's primary tool 
for collecting data about broadband and local telephone networks and 
services. The form requires providers of broadband service, local 
telephone service, interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) 
service, and mobile telephone service to report the number of 
subscribers they have in their respective service areas. But the 
Commission has in the past noted shortcomings of the data collected 
using Form 477, and after more than a decade of rapid innovation in the 
market for broadband and telephone services, and consistent with the 
Government Accountability Office's (GAO) recent finding that the 
Commission's broadband data collection fails to collect key data 
required to inform policy decisions and generally needs improvement, we 
believe it may be time to modify Form 477 to better serve the needs of 
the Commission, Congress, service providers, and consumers. In fact, 
since the last modification of Form 477, Congress directed the FCC to 
collect additional information to supplement its analysis of broadband 
deployment and availability. As we have noted before, Form 477 collects 
data that are ``a critical precursor'' to the Commission's ability to 
fulfill its statutory duties, and provides the Commission with ``a set 
of data of uniform quality and reliability'' superior to other publicly 
available information sources. Form 477 also enables us to fulfill our 
obligation to reduce government regulation wherever possible, by 
providing ``a factual basis to evaluate the nature and impact of our 
existing regulation and, in particular, to identify areas where 
competition has developed sufficiently to justify deregulation.''

II. Background

A. Form 477 Data Program

    3. Development of FCC Form 477. The Commission initiated the Form 
477 data program in May 2000 to ``materially improve its ability to 
develop, evaluate, and revise policy'' for broadband and telephone 
services, and ``to provide valuable benchmarks for Congress, the 
Commission, other policy makers, and consumers.'' The Commission 
designed the program as a standardized collection, with separate 
sections on subscriptions to broadband services, local telephone 
service competition, and mobile telephony services.
    4. In establishing the Form 477 framework for broadband data, the 
Commission anticipated that a ``regular and consistent survey of 
broadband deployment'' would substantially assist it in fulfilling its 
statutory duty under Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act to 
report to Congress on broadband deployment and availability, and to 
encourage the deployment of broadband to all Americans. To that end, 
the initial Form 477 collected broadband subscribership data. 
Specifically, the form collected data from facilities-based providers 
on the numbers of connections to the Internet in service to consumers 
in each State, and whether such connections used the provider's own 
facilities, unbundled network elements (UNEs), special-access lines or 
other leased lines, or wireless channels. The Commission established 
200 kilobits per second (kbps) as the minimum transfer-speed threshold 
for the connections it would track, and required providers to identify 
the technology used to provide the connections, the percentage of 
connections offered to residential customers and small businesses, and 
each ZIP code in which the providers had at least one connection in 
service.
    5. The initial Form 477 likewise collected subscribership data for 
local telephone service, including data from incumbent local exchange 
carriers (LECs) and competitive LECs on the number of voice-grade 
equivalent lines and fixed wireless channels in service for the 
provision of local exchange or exchange access service to end-user 
customers and for resale. The original Form 477 required LECs to report 
the five-digit ZIP codes in which customers served, by reported lines 
and wireless channels. Mobile telephony providers were required to 
report their total subscribers by State, and the percentage

[[Page 10830]]

of customers billed directly by the reporting provider.
    6. The initial Form 477 program did not require small providers to 
file reports. Specifically, broadband service providers with fewer than 
250 connections in service in a State were not required to file the 
form. LECs with fewer than 10,000 voice-grade equivalent lines or 
wireless channels in service, and mobile telephony providers with fewer 
than 10,000 subscribers were similarly not required to file.
    7. Revisions to Form 477. The Commission has twice modified Form 
477. First, in 2004, the Commission revised the Form 477 program to 
require submissions from all facilities-based providers of broadband 
connections, in order to capture a more comprehensive picture of 
broadband deployment in rural areas. Further, the Commission required 
filers to report the percentage of their connections that fell into 
five speed tiers. The Commission also required all wired and fixed 
wireless providers to report the technologies used to provide service 
in the ZIP codes in which at least one connection was in service. The 
Commission acknowledged that mobile broadband service differs in some 
respects from fixed broadband service, and required filers reporting 
mobile wireless broadband subscribers to list the ZIP codes that ``best 
represent the filers' mobile wireless broadband coverage areas.''
    8. The Commission next refined the Form 477 data program in 2008, 
establishing the framework that is currently in place. The Commission 
decided to collect more granular subscription and speed data, and to 
improve the quality of data on mobile wireless broadband services. All 
wireline and terrestrial-fixed wireless broadband service providers 
must now report the numbers of subscribers at the census-tract level, 
broken down by technology and more disaggregated speed tiers; and the 
percentage of subscribers that are residential. Incumbent LECs must 
continue to report the percentage of their service areas where DSL 
connections are available to residential premises, and cable system 
operators must do the same with regard to cable modem service 
availability. Providers of terrestrial mobile wireless broadband 
services must continue to submit their broadband subscriber totals on a 
State-by-State basis, rather than at the census-tract level, and must 
report on the census tracts that ``best represent'' their broadband 
service footprint for each speed tier in which they offer service.
    9. The 2008 Broadband Data Gathering Order and Further NPRM, 73 FR 
37911, July 2, 2008, also required providers of interconnected VoIP 
services to report the number of subscribers in each State, the number 
of subscribers who purchase the service in conjunction with the 
purchase of a broadband connection and, of those, the types of 
connections purchased. Interconnected VoIP providers also must report 
the percentage of subscribers who can use the service over any 
broadband connection.
    10. 2008 Further NPRM. The Commission sought comment in 2008 on 
further revisions to Form 477, including whether and how to institute a 
national broadband availability mapping program. The Commission 
tentatively concluded that it ``should collect information that 
providers use to respond to prospective customers to determine on an 
address-by-address basis whether service is available.'' The Commission 
sought comment on standardized collection formats; whether it should 
collect information on pricing and actual speeds of broadband services; 
how generally to maintain the confidentiality of broadband data; 
whether the Commission should conduct and publish periodic consumer 
surveys on broadband services; and whether it should require LECs and 
interconnected VoIP providers to report the number of subscribers in 
geographic units below the State level, either by ZIP code or census 
tract.

B. Other Developments Relating to Data Collection

    11. Since the adoption of the 2008 Broadband Data Gathering Order 
and Further NPRM, 73 FR 37911, July 2, 2008, a number of legislative 
and regulatory developments have affected the obligations of the 
Commission and other government agencies to collect data related to 
telephone and broadband services.
1. Broadband Data Improvement Act
    12. On October 10, 2008, Congress enacted the Broadband Data 
Improvement Act (BDIA), expressly finding that ``[i]mproving Federal 
data on the deployment and adoption of broadband service will assist in 
the development of broadband technology across all regions of the 
nation.'' The BDIA imposed several new obligations on the Commission 
and other Federal agencies.
a. Revisions to Section 706 Reporting Requirements
    13. The BDIA amended Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 
1996 to improve the quality and quantity of data the Commission 
collects on the deployment and adoption of broadband services. First, 
the BDIA requires the Commission to publish its Section 706 reports 
``annually'' instead of ``regularly,'' as previously required. Second, 
the BDIA requires the Commission to compile ``demographic information 
for unserved areas'' as part of the annual Section 706 inquiry. 
Specifically, the BDIA requires that the Commission ``compile a list of 
geographical areas not served by any provider of advanced 
telecommunications capability.'' If Census Bureau data are available, 
the Commission must ``determine, for each such unserved area--(1) The 
population; (2) the population density; and (3) the average per capita 
income.''
    14. The BDIA also requires the Commission to perform an 
international comparison in its annual broadband deployment report 
conducted pursuant to Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act. 
Specifically, Section 1303 of Title 47 now requires the Commission to 
``include information comparing the extent of broadband service 
capability (including data transmission speeds and price for broadband 
service capability) in a total of 75 communities in at least 25 
countries abroad for each of the data rate benchmarks for broadband 
service utilized by the Commission to reflect different speed tiers.''
b. The GAO's Report on Broadband Metrics and Standards
    15. In addition, the BDIA required the GAO's Comptroller General to 
conduct a study and issue a report on broadband metrics and standards 
by October 10, 2009. That report evaluated the ``broadband metrics that 
may be used by industry and the Federal Government [including the 
Commission] to provide users with more accurate information about the 
cost and capability of their broadband connection[s], and to better 
compare the deployment and penetration of broadband in the United 
States with other countries.''
    16. The GAO found that current measures of broadband performance 
``have limitations,'' that ``views were mixed on potential 
alternatives, and ongoing [broadband data collection] efforts need 
improvement.'' Further, stakeholders reported to the GAO that the data 
collected by the FCC Form 477 ``[do] not include information on 
availability, price, or actual delivered speeds, which limits the 
ability to make comparisons across the country and inform policy or 
investment decisions.''
2. Recovery Act
    17. In February 2009, Congress enacted the American Recovery and

[[Page 10831]]

Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which directed the Commission to develop a 
national broadband plan to ensure that all people of the United States 
have access to broadband. The ARRA also directed the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to develop and 
maintain a comprehensive nationwide and publicly available map of 
broadband service capability and availability.
a. National Broadband Plan
    18. Section 6001(k) of the ARRA instructed the Commission to submit 
to Congress a national broadband plan that would analyze mechanisms for 
ensuring broadband access by all people of the United States, provide a 
detailed strategy for achieving affordability and maximum usage, and 
include a plan for use of broadband to advance national purposes such 
as education, health care, energy, and public safety. The resulting 
National Broadband Plan, published on March 16, 2010, noted the 
necessity for ``continuous collection and analysis of detailed data on 
competitive behavior,'' and stressed the need for the Commission to 
conduct ``more thorough data collection to monitor and benchmark 
competitive behavior.'' In particular, recommendation 4.2 of the Plan 
suggested that the Commission ``revise Form 477 to collect data 
relevant to broadband availability, adoption and competition.''
b. NTIA's Broadband Inventory Map
    19. In order to comply with requirements under the BDIA and the 
ARRA, NTIA in July 2009 established a State Broadband Data and 
Development Grant Program (SBDD). Through this program, NTIA has 
awarded grants, funded through 2015, to certain State-designated 
entities to fund the collection of data from broadband providers. The 
data collected by NTIA as part of the SBDD program will help populate a 
national broadband inventory map, which will be made public in February 
of this year. In accordance with the ARRA, this map will allow 
consumers to determine broadband ``availability'' through a Web site 
that is ``interactive and searchable.''
3. The Commission's Data Innovation Initiative
    20. On June 29, 2010, the Commission launched the Data Innovation 
Initiative, designed to modernize and streamline how the Commission 
collects, uses, and disseminates data. As part of the Initiative, the 
Wireline Competition, Wireless Telecommunications, and Media Bureaus 
released public notices seeking input on which existing data 
collections should be eliminated or improved, and which new ones should 
be added. Review of the resulting record, along with staff work in the 
three Bureaus, has identified over twenty data collections that may be 
outdated and ripe for elimination, as well as a number of statutory 
reporting obligations that may have outlived their usefulness. We will 
initiate proceedings to consider elimination of those data collections 
that are completely within our purview. Recognizing that data 
collection is essential to fulfill the Commission's central statutory 
obligations, including advancing universal service, protecting 
consumers, promoting competition, and ensuring public safety, we also 
look forward to working with Congress to eliminate any outdated 
statutory reporting obligations that they choose to relieve us of.
4. 2010 Biennial Review
    21. The Commission also is conducting its 2010 biennial review of 
telecommunications regulations, pursuant to Section 11 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, as amended. This section requires the 
Commission (1) to review biennially its regulations ``that apply to the 
operations or activities of any provider of telecommunications 
service,'' and (2) to ``determine whether any such regulation is no 
longer necessary in the public interest as the result of meaningful 
economic competition between providers of such service.'' The 
Commission is directed to repeal or modify any regulations that it 
finds are no longer in the public interest.

III. Purposes for Which the Commission Must Obtain Data

    22. The Commission must collect timely and reliable information to 
carry out its statutory duties. In the eleven years that have passed 
since the Commission established the Form 477 data program, commenters 
in a number of proceedings have suggested that the broadband and 
telephone subscription data we currently collect are insufficient to 
allow the Commission to fulfill its statutory responsibilities. 
Telecommunications markets are now in a period of transition to a world 
in which fixed and mobile broadband networks give consumers access to 
not only voice communications capability but a myriad of other 
applications and services. Commission data shows that there are now 
more than 274 million mobile telephony subscriptions in the United 
States, and interconnected VoIP subscriptions increased by more than 
20% during 2009 while traditional PSTN switched access lines decreased 
by 6%.
    23. The National Broadband Plan recommended that the Commission 
closely observe this transition from legacy circuit-switched networks 
to all IP, broadband networks to ensure that legacy regulations and 
services do not impede the transition to a modern and efficient use of 
resources, that businesses can plan for and adjust to new standards, 
and, perhaps most importantly, that consumers do not lose access to 
statutorily required ``adequate facilities at reasonable charges.'' 
Commenters in the National Broadband Plan suggested that the Commission 
collect data, or seek comment on the need to collect data, on a variety 
of issues related to this transition, including public safety, service 
quality, customer satisfaction, and price. Below, we identify a number 
of important purposes for which the Commission and commenters have 
noted that we may require more robust data, and seek comment on the 
data needed to fulfill those purposes.

A. Ensuring Universal Service

    24. Section 254 of the Act, which governs administration of 
universal service programs, requires the Commission to base its 
universal service policies on certain principles, including that 
``[q]uality services'' be ``available at just, reasonable, and 
affordable rates,'' and that ``[c]onsumers in all regions of the 
Nation, including low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and 
high cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and 
information services * * * that are reasonably comparable to those 
services provided in urban areas and that are available at rates that 
are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in 
urban areas.'' A key goal set forth in the National Broadband Plan is 
to reform the Universal Service Fund (USF) to ``accelerate the 
deployment of broadband to unserved areas,'' and the Commission's 
unanimously adopted Joint Statement on Broadband calls for the USF to 
be reformed ``to increase accountability and efficiency, encourage 
targeted investment in broadband infrastructure, and emphasize the 
importance of broadband to the future of these programs.''
    25. We seek comment on the data needed to ensure universal service. 
Numerous stakeholders have asserted that the Commission must collect 
deployment, price, and service quality data to effectively fulfill its 
obligations under Section 254 and to modernize the USF to focus on 
broadband. For example, Verizon has stated that the

[[Page 10832]]

Commission must have reliable data to identify areas that are truly 
unserved by broadband to implement USF reform. The National Broadband 
Plan noted that ``[a]cross the four USF programs, there is a lack of 
adequate data to make critical policy decisions regarding how to better 
utilize funding to promote universal service objectives.'' The 
Commission itself has noted the importance of having reliable data to 
measure the performance of the USF and to protect against waste, fraud, 
and abuse. Would data on deployment, price, service quality, and 
subscription be required to assess whether the performance goals 
proposed for the USF high-cost program and Connect America Fund in the 
NPRM released today are being achieved? Would voice and broadband 
pricing data be necessary to develop possible rate benchmarks for voice 
and/or broadband service in order to determine if services are 
``affordable'' and ``reasonably comparable to rates in urban areas''? 
Would determining whether particular areas of the country--including 
rural, insular, and high-cost areas--should be exempt from aspects of 
the USF reform program or afforded different treatment require 
deployment, subscription, price and service quality data?

B. Ensuring Public Safety

    26. The Communications Act charges the Commission with ensuring 
that ``wire and radio communications service with adequate facilities 
at reasonable charges'' are available for the purpose of, inter alia, 
``promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and 
radio communications.'' Congress has further tasked the Commission with 
a key role in guaranteeing that Americans have access to emergency 
services via 911. The Commission must be able to monitor the 
performance of both legacy circuit-switched networks and broadband 
networks to ensure that consumers can access emergency services as 
service providers transition from one technology to the other. As noted 
in the National Broadband Plan, ``[a] more reliable [broadband] network 
would also benefit homeland security, public safety, businesses and 
consumers, who are increasingly dependent on their broadband 
communications, including their mobile phones.''
    27. We seek comment on what data the Commission needs to fulfill 
these goals. Would mobile service deployment data, for example, allow 
the Commission to identify areas where consumers lack access to 911 
service, such as rural highways or remote worksites? Would service 
quality data enable the Commission to identify networks that limit 
consumers' access to emergency services as a result of excessive 
downtime? Could customer complaint data likewise serve as an indicator 
that networks are insufficiently reliable to ensure that consumers can 
depend on them in an emergency?

C. Promoting Telephone and Broadband Competition

    28. Promoting competition is a core purpose of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, and as the National 
Broadband Plan noted, ``[c]ompetition is crucial for promoting consumer 
welfare and spurring innovation and investment in broadband access 
networks,'' and ``provides consumers the benefits of choice, better 
service and lower prices.'' Others have noted the importance of 
competition to consumer welfare. In addition, vibrant competition in a 
market can reduce or eliminate the need for regulation. For example, 
competition, properly demonstrated, can be the basis for forbearance 
from regulations under Section 10 of the Act. As the Commission 
previously has found in the context of its Section 10 analysis, 
``competition is the most effective means of ensuring that * * * 
charges, practices, classifications, and regulations * * * are just and 
reasonable, and not unjustly or unreasonably discriminatory.'' The 
Commission also is required to annually present its findings regarding 
the state of competition in the mobile services marketplace pursuant to 
Congress's instruction in Section 332(c)(1)(C) of the Act.
    29. Despite the importance of assessing competition in order to 
fulfill the Commission's statutory responsibilities, the Commission 
does not always have sufficient information about voice and broadband 
services sufficient to assess competition accurately. For example, the 
Commission has recognized that a lack of comprehensive data on 
telephone and broadband services has, in certain situations, 
compromised the rigor of its analysis in proceedings seeking the 
transfer of Title III licenses and Section 214 authorizations. 
Similarly, in a decision regarding whether to grant forbearance from 
network unbundling and other regulations pursuant to Section 10 of the 
Act, the Commission was unable to make a definitive finding regarding 
market share in the telephony market when the primary cable operator 
did not voluntarily file reliable data.
    30. The National Broadband Plan also noted that statements from a 
number of commenters--including officials from the Department of 
Justice and the Federal Trade Commission--demonstrate that ``additional 
data are needed to more rigorously evaluate broadband competition.'' 
The Plan concluded that to ensure that the right policies are put in 
place so that the broadband ecosystem benefits from meaningful 
competition as it evolves, it is ``important to have an ongoing, data-
driven evaluation of the state of competition.'' The National Broadband 
Plan therefore recommended that the Commission ``revise Form 477 to 
collect data relevant to broadband availability, adoption and 
competition.'' Numerous commenters have made similar observations and 
recommendations.
    31. It is important to note that although more robust deployment 
and subscription data may give the Commission a view of the potential 
for competition in an area, the National Broadband Plan and a number of 
commenters have explained that such data alone would not necessarily 
reveal the actual extent of competition or the level of benefit that 
consumers enjoy from any competition that exists, and that price and 
service quality data could fill these gaps. We seek comment on the need 
for price and service quality data as well as deployment and 
subscription data to satisfy relevant statutory goals.

D. Promoting Broadband Deployment and Availability

    32. As discussed above, Section 706(b) of the Telecommunications 
Act of 1996, as amended, directs the Commission to annually ``initiate 
a notice of inquiry concerning the availability of advanced 
telecommunications capability to all Americans'' and ``determine 
whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all 
Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.'' The Commission has 
noted that information about broadband deployment and availability 
throughout the nation is essential to fulfill its obligations under 
Section 706, including the requirement to compile information about 
demographic information for unserved areas.
    33. We seek comment on whether the Commission has data sufficient 
to effectively fulfill this purpose. The Commission has observed that 
the data it has collected to date have allowed only limited assessments 
of broadband deployment and availability. For example, the Commission 
has used information about the existence of at least one subscriber in 
a ZIP code or census tract as a proxy for both deployment and 
availability. But the

[[Page 10833]]

Commission and commenters have noted that subscription data, 
particularly when collected above the household level, is an imperfect 
proxy for network deployment or capability. For example, deployment is 
overstated when households subscribe in one part of an area (such as a 
census tract) but service is not offered to households in other parts 
of the same area, while deployment is understated if no household in an 
area has chosen to subscribe to any service offering provided by a 
network, and capability is understated if no household has opted for 
the highest speed offering.
    34. We also note that the Commission has long identified broadband 
availability as a broader concept than broadband deployment. A number 
of commenters have suggested that the Commission collect other types of 
data beyond the Form 477 subscribership data to fulfill its obligations 
under Section 706, including information on where infrastructure has 
been deployed, the price of broadband services, and service quality. 
Would the use of such data sources in conjunction with subscription 
data provide additional insights into broadband adoption in the United 
States? If infrastructure data were collected, how could the Commission 
ensure that sensitive information on critical infrastructure is 
appropriately shielded and protected?

E. Other Statutory Obligations

    35. We seek comment on other statutory obligations and Commission 
efforts that may require the Commission to reform the 477 data program. 
In addition, we seek comment on whether the subscription data currently 
collected via Form 477 and the Commission's other data collection 
programs are sufficient for such obligations, or whether the Commission 
should collect additional types of data. Commenters who advocate the 
collection of additional data should explain how collecting specific 
types of data would result in concrete benefits for consumers, service 
providers, and other stakeholders, and explain whether the benefits 
would outweigh the burdens.

IV. Revisions to the FCC Form 477 Data Program

    36. In the preceding section, we discussed specific statutory 
obligations of the Commission that, to be performed effectively, may 
require the collection of better data. We turn now to discussion of 
what specific data may be necessary to discharge these statutory 
responsibilities, and whether and (where relevant) how we should 
collect each type of data using Form 477. After reviewing input from 
outside parties, we believe that there are five categories of data that 
may be necessary to meet the Congressional mandates described in the 
prior section: deployment, pricing, and service quality and customer 
satisfaction data, which provide measures of supply; subscription data, 
which provides a measure of consumer demand; and ownership and contact 
information, which serves multiple statutory purposes. While collecting 
other categories of data, such as the location of last- and middle-mile 
infrastructure, could prove useful to the Commission, Form 477 may not 
be the most appropriate tool for collecting such data. We seek comment 
on whether there are other types of data necessary for the Commission 
to complete its mandates that should be collected using Form 477.
    37. We recognize that data collections place burdens--and 
potentially significant burdens--on those required to file, and we 
actively seek to balance the benefits of data collected against those 
burdens. We seek comment on whether each of the types of data noted 
below is necessary for the Commission to fulfill its statutory 
mandates. Those who suggest that the Commission does not need 
particular data should specify how the Commission can meet its 
obligations without such data. For data that the Commission should 
collect, we seek comment on whether the Commission should gather the 
data through an OMB-approved data collection or whether there are other 
sources. For example, are there commercial data sources that would 
allow the Commission to meet its obligations? Alternatively, would it 
be practical for Commission staff to collect data from public sources 
(e.g., from service providers' Web sites)? Those advocating the use of 
commercial or publicly available data should discuss any limitations 
associated with such sources, the resources the Commission would need 
to devote to the collection method proposed (e.g., direct costs, staff 
time), and the impact such a collection method would have on other 
Commission efforts. Where a data collection is necessary, we seek 
comment on ways that the Commission can minimize the burden for filers, 
for example, in the design of the collection or in tools the Commission 
can provide. Commenters who cite the burden of an OMB-approved 
collection should quantify the burden they expect and explain their 
quantification methodology. We seek comment on issues specific to 
reducing the burden of each collection as they are discussed in the 
following sections.

A. General Considerations

1. Streamlining Collection
    38. To reduce production burdens, commenters urge the Commission to 
ensure that the FCC Form 477 collection process is as ``streamlined as 
possible,'' and we agree that streamlining the process where 
appropriate must be a top priority for the Commission. For example, 
providers request that the Form 477 interface be redesigned to allow 
parties to file data on multiple States as a single file. We seek 
comment on these proposals, and on other steps the Commission can take 
to streamline the Form 477 data program.
    39. Reporting entities already maintain subscriber databases that 
include address-level information; thus, providing subscribership 
information at the address level could simplify reporting. At the same 
time, collection of address-level deployment and availability 
information would allow the Commission to make policy decisions based 
on a more granular and accurate understanding of the marketplace. We 
note that some providers have explicitly requested that they be allowed 
to submit subscribership data at the address level to reduce their 
reporting burden. We seek comment whether it would be less burdensome 
for providers to submit address-level data with respect to the 
deployment and availability of services. We also seek comment on other 
ways that the Commission can ease the burden on small- and medium-sized 
providers.
    40. In addition, we seek comment on the extent to which 
technological tools can reduce the burden of producing information. For 
example, the Commission now makes available a Census Block Conversions 
application programming interface (API) that returns a U.S. Census 
Bureau Census Block number given a passed latitude and longitude. The 
API also returns the State and county name associated with a block. 
Among other benefits, we expect that this API will assist providers in 
assigning subscribers to census-defined geographic areas. What other 
tools are available to reduce the burdens providers face in complying 
with our data reporting programs? Are there other tools that the 
Commission itself should develop?
2. Use of Third-Party and Publicly Available Data
    41. We seek comment on whether and how the Commission can obtain 
reliable data from third parties and publicly

[[Page 10834]]

available sources. The Commission in 2007 sought comment on the 
``availability of commercial sources of broadband deployment data or 
data-processing programs that could augment or otherwise add value to 
our use of Form 477 data, or reduce the associated costs and other 
burdens imposed on reporting providers.'' The Commission declined to 
use any such sources in the 2008 Broadband Data Gathering Order and 
Further NPRM, 73 FR 37911, July 2, 2008. We note that the Commission 
currently relies on some third-party data that may be considered 
authoritative, and seek comment on what other data could be obtained by 
the Commission from third parties. We also seek comment on whether 
there are new sources of data that could serve Commission goals.
    42. We note that there are limitations associated with third-party 
data sources. Commercial data sources rarely rely on a census of all 
data sources of a particular type and more often rely on sampling. The 
bias associated with sampling, or the use of proprietary methods to 
create or extrapolate from a sample, could limit the applicability of 
commercial data. Further, commercial data often include restrictions to 
data rights that could limit the Commission's ability to publish 
underlying data or resulting analysis. We seek comment on these 
potential shortcomings of commercial data, whether there are ways to 
mitigate them, and the balance between these limitations and the burden 
that could be avoided by the use of commercial data. The Commission 
could also cull some information from public sources, such as company 
Web sites. We note that such data may be unreliable or insufficiently 
detailed, and seek comment on the extent to which the Commission can 
base policy on such data. To the extent commenters advocate for the use 
of commercial or third-party data for a specific collection, we ask 
that they quantify the resources the Commission would have to devote to 
procure or process those data. How should the Commission balance the 
costs of purchasing data or collecting data itself from public sources 
against the burdens that Form 477 data collection may impose on service 
providers?
3. Who Must Report
    43. Four classes of entities currently file FCC Form 477: 
facilities-based providers of broadband connections to end user 
locations; providers of wired or fixed wireless local exchange 
telephone service; providers of interconnected VoIP service; and 
providers of mobile telephony services. Some entities may fill out only 
certain portions of the form.
    44. Some of the proposals identified below would have the 
Commission collect from all providers of voice and broadband services 
data that may have in the past been collected only from a subset of 
providers. For example, some of the service quality data some have 
suggested we should collect from all broadband providers formerly were 
collected only from price cap carriers. We seek comment on whether 
there are classes of providers that should be exempted from reporting 
elements of any proposed data collection. For example, small broadband 
providers may find it relatively more burdensome to comply with certain 
data reporting obligations than larger carriers. Any proposals to 
exempt certain providers should include the legal and policy grounds 
and the policy implications for such an exemption.
    45. We also seek comment on whether additional classes of entities 
should be required to file FCC Form 477. For example, should we revise 
our definition of ``interconnected VoIP'' for the purposes of this 
collection to include services that permit users to receive calls that 
originate on the public switched telephone network or to terminate 
calls to the public switched telephone network? Proposals to require 
additional classes of entities to file should discuss the Commission's 
authority to do so.
4. Frequency of Reporting
    46. The Commission previously has decided that it can best balance 
its need for timely information with its desire to minimize the 
reporting burden on respondents by requiring providers to report data 
on a semi-annual basis. One commenter has asked the Commission to 
require quarterly collections ``to keep pace with rapidly evolving 
Internet technology and allow regulators to plan and adjust policies.'' 
Another commenter asks that the Commission synchronize the filing 
deadlines for FCC Form 477 with those for the NTIA's SBDD. We seek 
comment on whether FCC Form 477 should be filed more or less 
frequently.

B. Specific Categories of Data

    47. Commenters have identified five categories of data that may 
help the Commission more effectively carry out its statutory 
obligations: deployment, price, subscription, service quality and 
customer satisfaction, and ownership and contact information. We seek 
comment on whether and how the Commission should collect such data, and 
the Commission's authority to do so.
    48. Those commenting on how to collect data should be as specific 
as possible. Establishing detailed data reporting requirements is an 
inherently difficult task. Particular elements of a dataset may be 
simple to describe conceptually, but difficult to specify as a 
practical matter. Conversely, a data element may be easily specified, 
but difficult to explain in plain language. To the extent commenters 
propose that we collect specific data elements, we ask that commenters 
both discuss the concept and provide an actual specification of each 
data element. To the extent particular proposals are offered, are there 
different data elements that might better achieve our goals, including 
minimizing production burdens on filers and processing burdens on the 
Commission?
1. Deployment
    49. As discussed above, numerous stakeholders have urged the 
Commission to obtain data that would allow it to understand where 
providers have deployed networks capable of delivering a given service. 
We seek comment on whether deployment data are necessary to fulfill 
several of the purposes discussed above: ensuring universal service by 
tracking the expansion of broadband networks, identifying areas that 
lack access to fixed or mobile broadband and assisting the Commission 
in targeting support to areas that most need it; monitoring telephone 
and broadband competition by providing insight into the service areas 
of potential competitors regardless of the technology used; and 
promoting broadband deployment and availability by providing reliable 
information about broadband deployment nationwide. In this section, we 
seek comment on how the Commission might obtain deployment data for 
voice and broadband services.
a. Voice Network Deployment
(i) Fixed
    50. The Commission currently does not collect data on fixed voice 
network deployment. And although the national telephone subscription 
rate has remained high over the last decade, a number of commenters 
have informed the Commission that residents in some areas of the 
country--particularly rural, insular, high-cost, and Tribal areas--do 
not have access to basic fixed telephone service. Other commenters 
assert that State carrier of last resort obligations are sufficient to 
ensure that fixed voice networks are ubiquitously deployed. We

[[Page 10835]]

seek comment on whether the Commission should collect fixed voice 
network deployment data. If such a collection is warranted, should it 
be limited to areas in which network deployment has historically been a 
concern, such as rural, insular, high-cost, and Tribal areas? What 
geographic area (e.g., census block or address-level) would be 
appropriate for reporting such data?
(ii) Mobile
    51. The Commission currently licenses a dataset from a commercial 
source, American Roamer, for data on mobile network deployment. 
American Roamer provides coverage boundary maps for mobile voice and 
broadband networks based on information provided to them by mobile 
wireless network operators. The Commission previously has noted that 
analysis based on this data ``likely overstates the coverage actually 
experienced by consumers, because American Roamer reports advertised 
coverage as reported to it by many mobile wireless service providers, 
each of which uses a different definition of coverage. The data do not 
expressly account for factors such as signal strength, bit rate, or in-
building coverage, and they may convey a false sense of consistency 
across geographic areas and service providers. Nonetheless, the 
analysis is useful because it provides a quantitative baseline that can 
be compared across network types, technologies, and carriers, over 
time.''
    52. We seek comment on whether it is appropriate to continue 
relying on American Roamer's mobile telephony deployment data. Are 
alternative datasets available, and if so, how do they compare to the 
data available to and currently purchased by the Commission? Are such 
datasets available only as off-the-shelf products, or would it be 
possible to acquire datasets tailored to the Commission's 
specifications? For such datasets, what are the likely costs, and how 
timely is the data? Should the Commission require carriers to submit 
mobile telephony deployment data, notwithstanding the availability of 
some data from third parties? If so, what data submissions should be 
required? Should the Commission collect data that are based on a 
standardized definition of coverage or a range of signal strengths that 
would reflect a likely consumer experience? We also seek comment on 
whether the Commission should collect data on the spectrum bands used 
for mobile voice network deployment in specific geographic areas, which 
would help the Commission to fulfill its spectrum management 
responsibilities under Title III of the Act. How burdensome would the 
collection of mobile telephony deployment data be for providers? What 
are the benefits of obtaining such information?
b. Broadband Network Deployment
(i) SBDD Data
    53. The national broadband inventory map under development by the 
NTIA is an important step toward collecting more robust data about 
broadband deployment and availability. The GAO's report noted that 
stakeholders ``generally agreed'' that this national broadband map 
``would address some gaps and provide detailed data on availability, 
subscribership, and actual delivered speeds,'' but there were concerns 
that the data collection mechanism used--which depends on voluntary 
reporting by providers to State entities whose methods may vary from 
State to State--could ``result in inconsistent data and limit the 
effectiveness of the effort.''
    54. Broadband deployment data collected via Form 477 could address 
these consistency concerns and provide an ongoing source of data at the 
conclusion of the SBDD program. Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, and NCTA 
suggest that the Commission consider the extent to which it is 
necessary to collect broadband deployment data through Form 477 once 
NTIA's national broadband inventory map is online and the data become 
available to the Commission. We seek comment on this suggestion. On 
what data would the Commission rely at the conclusion of the SBDD 
program, and how would the Commission reliably analyze trends in 
broadband deployment if there are gaps in data collected by the SBDD 
program?
(ii) Data Collection by the Commission
    55. We seek comment on a number of issues raised by commenters who 
recommend that the Commission collect data on broadband network 
deployment.
    56. Geographic Area. Parties have proposed varying levels of 
geographic specificity the Commission should require when collecting 
deployment information. Currently, the Commission collects subscription 
data--which it uses as a proxy for deployment--for fixed broadband 
providers at the census tract level. In the 2008 Broadband Data 
Gathering Order and Further NPRM, 73 FR 37911, July 2, 2008, the 
Commission tentatively concluded that it should measure deployment on 
an address-by-address basis, which would provide the most granular and 
accurate information. A number of commenters in prior proceedings, 
particularly State regulatory agencies, have expressed support for 
collection of broadband deployment data at the address level. These 
commenters note that address-by-address data would yield the most 
useful data for the Commission about where broadband is deployed. Some 
smaller providers also state that reporting at the subscriber address 
level would ease the burden of reporting. Other commenters, however, 
have suggested that reporting address-level deployment information 
would be unduly burdensome for providers, particularly for small- and 
medium-sized providers that do not maintain such data. We seek comment 
on the benefits and burdens of requiring address-level deployment data. 
In addition, we seek comment on how to account for areas where networks 
are deployed, but there are no homes or businesses with addresses 
(e.g., uninhabited highways with mobile network coverage). At least one 
State (California) already requires address-level reporting for the 
construction of its broadband map. We seek comment on this and similar 
State agency initiatives and request any empirical evidence of the 
burdens and impact of compliance.
    57. Some commenters in prior proceedings have suggested that the 
Commission collect deployment data at the census block level. The 
California Public Utility Commission (PUC) notes that reporting by 
census block would yield an average of 22 households, whereas a census 
tract yields an average of 1,628 households. Census block-level 
reporting could provide a balance between being more granular than 
census tract-level reporting and avoiding any privacy issues associated 
with address-by-address reporting. Commenters have also noted that the 
utilization of a Census geography facilitates the application and 
analysis of Census demographic data, such as income, race, age, and 
household size and composition. We seek comment on whether the burdens 
imposed by collecting census block-level data are significantly greater 
than those associated with collecting census tract-level data. Would 
the burdens imposed by collecting census block-level data be 
substantially greater than requiring address-level reporting? Are there 
particular benefits to using census-block level reporting? What were 
the costs and benefits of initiatives that have used census block-level 
reporting? What alternative reporting methods could the Commission use 
to ease the burden on carriers that might find census block-level data 
to be unduly burdensome,

[[Page 10836]]

while still collecting comparable and useful data?
    58. NTIA's broadband mapping effort sought deployment data for a 
smaller geographic area than a census block for census blocks larger 
than two square miles. We seek comment on the benefits and costs of 
this approach. What unit of measurement should the Commission utilize 
for larger census blocks if the Commission does not use address-by-
address reporting?
    59. Speed. The National Broadband Plan noted the importance of 
speed data to consumers and policymakers, and stakeholders generally 
acknowledge its usefulness. The Commission currently collects 
information about advertised broadband speeds in its Form 477 
collection. The National Broadband Plan noted, however, that consumers 
and policymakers would benefit from data on actual speeds. The 
Commission has sought information about how best to measure actual 
broadband speeds. Recognizing the difficulty of measuring actual 
speeds, a number of stakeholders have nonetheless urged the Commission 
to require providers to report actual speeds. Some have suggested that 
the Commission require providers to report a statistical sampling of 
average speeds. Others have suggested requiring providers to report 
data contention ratios (the ratio of the potential maximum demand to 
the actual bandwidth available). Broadband providers and their industry 
associations have argued that actual speeds are affected by a wide 
variety of factors, many beyond the providers' control, and that 
measuring speed will be ``almost impossible.'' We seek comment on 
whether the Commission should collect data on contention ratios or some 
other measure of network congestion. We further seek comment on whether 
the Commission should continue to collect data only on advertised 
speeds, or whether, for example, providers should provide information 
about actual speeds by geographic area, or speeds that extend beyond 
the access network (e.g., end-to-end speeds that reflect an end user's 
typical Internet performance). We also seek comment on how to best 
measure the actual speeds of services that can be provided over a 
network. The Commission has undertaken a program to measure such speeds 
directly for a sample of end users of fixed broadband, and is 
considering a similar program for mobile broadband. We seek comment on 
whether an approach like this one, a similar approach with more 
measurements, or some other method is appropriate. Comments on 
measurements of actual speed should identify the part or parts of the 
network where speed should be measured. What starting and ending points 
are most relevant for consumers, providers, and the Commission?
    60. The Commission currently collects speed data in eight tiers of 
advertised download speeds and nine tiers of advertised upload speeds, 
leading to 72 possible combinations. The SBDD established nine tiers of 
advertised download speeds and 11 tiers of advertised upload speeds, 
for 99 possible combinations. We seek comment on whether the FCC and 
NTIA should conform their speed tiers. Further, while there is value in 
having speed data broken out at a granular level, relevant speeds are 
likely to evolve over time, and having 72 or 99 speed-tier combinations 
may be unnecessarily complex. However, we note that there are benefits 
to maintaining some continuity in this area to enable tracking data on 
particular speed-tier combinations over time. Further, measuring the 
same speed tiers for both business and residential customers may not be 
appropriate, as they often have different needs for speed. When 
collecting speed data, should the Commission reduce the number of speed 
tiers reported by providers? Should we add a tier specifically tied to 
any speed benchmark that may be required to receive USF or Connect 
America Fund (CAF) funding? Should any future increase in that 
potential benchmark result in the addition of a speed tier for that new 
speed? An alternative approach would be to define tiers by pairs of 
upstream and downstream speeds. Such an approach would greatly reduce 
the number of tiers but would lock-in pairings of downstream and 
upstream speeds. We seek comment on these approaches, including comment 
on the number of speed tiers and breakpoints.
    61. Mobile Issues. Mobile broadband presents additional challenges 
with respect to geography. We seek comment on whether a mobile service 
should be treated differently from a fixed service for reporting 
purposes. For mobile service, a billing address can provide a 
subscriber's home location but does not reflect the entire coverage 
area where a mobile broadband network is available; nor would a billing 
address necessarily be reflective of the primary usage area of the 
subscriber, particularly in the case of family plans and for 
businesses. As discussed above, American Roamer produces mobile voice 
and broadband coverage maps, which the Commission has used to estimate 
mobile broadband deployment at the census block level. However, these 
coverage maps have certain drawbacks, including that the data do not 
account for factors such as signal strength variations. Should the 
Commission collect some measure of signal strength beyond a simple 
``signal/no signal'' flag? For example, would a ``good/better/best'' 
measure for each geographic area be appropriate, or would reported 
advertised speeds accurately reflect the impact of signal strength? How 
should reporting account for the variability of signal strength and 
capacity in a network that includes mobile users? We seek comment on 
whether billing address, census blocks, or another geographic area 
should be used to collect data on mobile broadband network coverage 
areas, separate from the maps obtained from American Roamer. In 
addition, Sprint has stated it has maps that would allow for the 
identification of service availability at the street address level, and 
has suggested that the Commission request such data on a trial basis 
from providers that currently produce such maps. We seek comment on 
conducting such a trial.
    62. One carrier argues that mobile wireless providers should not be 
required to report speed data because of the difficulty of measuring 
factors that can affect mobile data transfer rates. We seek comment on 
whether we should collect data on mobile connection speed, and whether 
fixed and mobile services should be treated differently when reporting 
speed data. In addition we seek comment on the extent to which data 
from the Commission's mobile broadband speed test could be meaningful 
in evaluating mobile data transfer rates.
    63. Spectrum Issues. We seek comment throughout this NPRM on 
several issues concerning spectrum usage data, which would help the 
Commission to fulfill its spectrum management responsibilities under 
Title III of the Act. How can the Commission best collect such 
information? Possible methods include requiring providers to indicate 
the band, radio service code, or call sign used to provide service.
    64. Satellite Issues. We seek comment on how best to collect 
deployment data about satellite-based services. At least one satellite 
provider has pointed out the near-ubiquity of satellite signals. Should 
the Commission exempt satellite broadband providers from reporting 
deployment information, or require only that satellite providers report 
areas where terrain or other impediments are likely to block line of 
sight to the satellite?
    65. Anchor Institutions. Anchor institutions such as schools, 
libraries, or

[[Page 10837]]

hospitals often require broadband offerings with quality of service 
guarantees not required by at least some retail customers, and Section 
254 of the Act places particular emphasis on educational providers, 
libraries, and health care providers for rural areas. We seek comment 
on whether to treat anchor institutions like other businesses or 
whether they should be treated as a different category for the purposes 
of measuring deployment.
2. Price
    66. We seek comment on whether price data are necessary to fulfill 
several of the purposes discussed above, including ensuring universal 
service by determining whether rural consumers are paying affordable 
and reasonably comparable rates to those in urban areas; monitoring 
telephone and broadband competition (e.g., in forbearance proceedings) 
by providing data regarding the effect, if any, of competition on 
pricing or by determining whether nominally competitive providers in 
fact have comparable offerings in the market; reporting a comparison of 
U.S. and international prices for broadband service capability; and 
promoting broadband deployment and availability.
    67. The Commission previously has considered whether to use Form 
477 to collect price information. In the 1999 First Section 706 Report, 
for example, the Commission sought suggestions on how to measure market 
demand through ``indicia [such] as prices [and] willingness to pay.'' 
In the 2008 Broadband Data Gathering Order and Further NPRM, 73 FR 
37911, July 2, 2008, the Commission sought comment on whether to 
require providers to report the monthly price charged for stand-alone 
broadband service.
    68. Some commenters have argued that broadband providers should not 
be required to submit price information because prices are competitive; 
bundled offerings, temporary discounts, different pricing plans, and 
other service attributes make comparing pricing complex; the production 
of pricing data is too burdensome; and requiring the production of 
price data would impose Title II burdens on broadband providers.
    69. Others, however, have urged the Commission to require broadband 
and voice providers to report price information to assess competition, 
determine whether prices are reasonably comparable in different 
demographic areas, inform our USF distribution mechanism, and to assess 
why consumers may not be purchasing broadband where it is available. 
Such commenters have emphasized the need for the Commission to collect 
the actual price of broadband services to, for example, allow consumers 
to compare service prices. Proposals on how to collect price data have 
varied widely, however, in substance and level of detail. For example, 
some State regulators have urged the Commission to collect price 
information for stand-alone and bundled services, and not to consider 
promotional prices or short term deals. Some have urged the Commission 
to collect a measure of ``price per megabit per second.'' Others have 
urged the Commission to collect ``information from commercial carriers 
regarding their tier pricing, credit and deposit requirements across 
various communities.'' Commenters also have proposed a variety of 
geographic areas for reporting price, and a variety of reporting 
periods.
    70. We seek comment on the Commission's legal authority to collect 
price data, whether we should use Form 477 to collect price data, and 
if so, how we should collect and analyze such data. We acknowledge that 
there are a number of challenges associated with any approach to 
collecting price information. We therefore seek detailed comment on the 
strengths and weaknesses of the approaches we describe below, and on 
other possible approaches.
    71. Price data can be collected in many different ways. For 
example, the Commission could collect retail prices charged by 
providers for basic voice and broadband offerings. Given the complexity 
and variety of bundles and discounts, the Commission could instead 
define a basket of services and collect, or require providers to post 
publicly, the price of that basket. Alternatively, the Commission could 
collect information about all available prices and packages, or seek to 
determine effective prices that end users pay.
    72. Another approach would be to have providers report the total 
revenue associated with all offerings (including voice, video (i.e., 
pay television), and broadband Internet access services), and identify 
the attributes associated with that revenue, such as the types of 
services provided (e.g., voice, video, and broadband) and key 
descriptors of those services (e.g., basic video, extended video, very 
high speed Internet access). The Commission could then determine the 
average effective price for each attribute in a given area by 
performing statistical analysis on aggregate revenue and attribute data 
across areas large enough to generate a significant number of 
measurements. We seek comment on whether such an approach would yield 
meaningful results for the purposes outlined above. We also seek 
comment on how this approach might be specified. For example, how many 
and what attributes would be needed to support a useful analysis? Given 
that resolving the price for more attributes will require more 
measurements of total revenue, how should the number and selection of 
attributes be balanced against the geographic size of the measurement, 
given that a sufficiently large sample size for a larger number of 
attributes will require more measurements and a larger geographic area? 
Should revenue be inclusive or exclusive of taxes and fees? Should 
revenue be reported separately for business and residential customers?
    73. We note that the Commission has sought comment on the need for 
price data to set benchmarks in the context of our intercarrier 
compensation and universal service proceedings. Would any of these 
approaches provide data suitable for the establishment of such 
benchmarks, or are more appropriate data available from other sources?
    74. If the Commission collects price data, over what geographic 
area should prices be collected? As discussed in Section V.C below, 
ECPA may limit the Commission's ability to require providers to report 
price data from service providers at the household or address level. 
Should the Commission collect price data at the census block level? 
Could the Commission collect data using, for example, street segments 
as the collection geographic area? If so, would it need to guard 
against collecting single home street segments? How could it do so? 
What impact would different geographic-level collections have on the 
value of the data produced? Would collecting data at a more granular 
level that is consistent with the restrictions imposed by ECPA (e.g., 
at the street-segment level) materially improve the quality of the 
analysis and justify the added complexity of the collection?
    75. Were we to collect pricing data for mobile services, how should 
prices for mobile services be assigned to a geographic area? Assigning 
a fixed service subscriber to a single census block is a relatively 
simple process that providers currently use to provide subscribership 
data at the census-tract level. Assigning price data for mobile 
services to a geographic area, however, is less straightforward, 
particularly in light of the billing address issues related to mobile 
addressed above. Should providers of mobile services use the billing 
address as the customer's location, and report data for that customer 
in the corresponding census

[[Page 10838]]

block? For those that suggest mobile services do not have any inherent 
location, how should the Commission evaluate substitution of fixed 
service by mobile? How should the Commission account for various types 
of pre-paid and family plans that are common in mobile services?
    76. The impact of a given price will be very different for 
consumers, businesses, and anchor institutions. The impact of those 
prices could vary significantly within those groups as well. For 
example, schools and libraries may seek a broadband service similar to 
a community hospital, but may have less funding. Should the Commission 
specify narrower customer classes (e.g., small, medium, and large 
business) when collecting price data? How would any such customer 
classes be defined?
3. Subscription
    77. We seek comment on whether subscription data, which the 
Commission currently collects, are necessary to fulfill several of the 
purposes discussed above: monitoring telephone and broadband 
competition by providing a measure of competition's outcome: how many 
customers subscribe to different providers' services in each area; 
promoting broadband deployment and availability; ensuring public safety 
by providing a measure of what networks and providers are relied on by 
how many customers in each area; monitoring the effects of PSTN-to-IP 
conversion by providing insight into how many customers are reliant on 
each type of network technology in each area; and ensuring that 
affordable voice and broadband services are available to all Americans.
    78. No commenter has asked the Commission to cease collecting 
subscription data for wireline services. Are there types of 
subscription data the Commission need not continue to collect? For 
example, should the Commission continue to require providers to report 
the percentage of their local exchange telephone service lines for 
which they are the presubscribed interstate long distance carrier or 
that are provided over UNE-Platform? One provider has urged the 
Commission to cease collecting subscription data from wireless service 
providers, and instead to ``seek broadband and telephony data based on 
coverage areas'' like those provided by American Roamer, because 
coverage areas more accurately indicate where mobile subscribers have 
access to wireless service than do subscriber billing addresses or area 
codes. We seek comment on this proposal. Would data collected by 
coverage area be sufficient to achieve the outcomes discussed in 
Section III above?
a. Issues Applicable to Both Voice and Broadband Subscription
    79. Mobile issues. Should the Commission modify its data collection 
practices with respect to mobile voice or mobile broadband subscribers? 
For example, if most providers treat each line, telephone number, or 
device as a separate subscription, to what extent does over-counting 
result from individuals owning or using more than one device? We also 
ask that providers comment on the way in which family plans are 
counted. Is one family plan a subscription, or is each line within the 
plan counted as a separate subscriber? In addition, certain challenges 
can arise in collecting data on prepaid subscribers, particularly 
subscribers to traditional pay-as-you-go prepaid plans. For instance, 
the address or location of such subscribers is typically unknown, and 
these subscribers may frequently stop using one device and start using 
another without the first device being counted as a disconnect. We seek 
comment on the best way to account for pre-paid plan subscribers given 
these challenges. In addition, should we collect data on the number of 
mobile voice and mobile broadband subscriptions by spectrum band, by 
customer class (i.e., residential and business), and by technology? 
Should we require that mobile voice and mobile broadband providers 
distinguish which subscribers are voice-only, broadband-only, or both 
voice and broadband? How should we account for mobile data services for 
non-traditional devices, such as data-only e-readers, machine-to-
machine communications, telemetry systems, and others? Are there other 
ways for the Commission to access this information? How would any 
proposed changes help us to produce our annual report on mobile 
wireless competition?
    80. Geographic Area. Form 477 currently collects voice telephony 
subscription data at the State level and broadband subscription data at 
the census tract level. We seek comment on whether voice and broadband 
subscription data should be collected at the same level of geographic 
specificity. Are there differences in the need for such data that would 
justify continuing to use different levels of specificity? We also seek 
comment on whether the Commission should require entities to report 
deployment and subscription levels at the same level of geographic 
specificity.
    81. As discussed above, commenters in prior proceedings have 
advocated more granular subscribership data for broadband services. 
Commenters have also suggested that policymakers need more granular 
data about voice services, particularly in order to address competition 
issues. Should voice and broadband subscription data be reported at the 
address level, the census block level or some other level? Is it 
important for voice and broadband subscription data to be reported at 
the same geographic level, regardless of which one? As discussed below, 
the Electronic Communications Privacy Act may be implicated should the 
Commission collect address-level subscription data from service 
providers. However, some smaller providers have specifically requested 
that the Commission allow them to provide address-level data because 
that ``would reduce reporting burdens on small businesses serving high-
cost rural areas.'' Therefore, we seek comment on the propriety of 
allowing production of such data at the request of a provider, the 
benefits and drawbacks to having some, but not all subscribership data 
at that level of granularity, and whether such collections would 
violate ECPA.
    82. Data on mobile wireless broadband subscribers are currently 
collected at the State level, while mobile broadband availability is 
reported at the census tract level. We seek comment on whether we 
should treat fixed and mobile services differently. How should we 
account for users of resold or prepaid mobile broadband services, where 
the address of the end user may be unknown?
    83. Residential and Business Subscription Breakdown. Form 477 
currently requires that providers report subscriptions separately for 
residential and business customers. We recognize that this distinction 
may be imprecise, particularly for mobile plans where lines used 
primarily for business may be paid for by an individual, or vice versa. 
We seek comment on whether there are better ways to distinguish 
residential and business customer classes, for data and voice services. 
For example, should we require providers to treat all fixed broadband 
connections with a service-level agreement as ``business'' and all 
those without one as ``residential?''
b. Voice Subscription Data
    84. To the extent the Commission continues to collect subscription 
data, we seek comment on whether we should modify the way in which we 
collect that data.
    85. Fixed. Should the Commission modify its data collection 
practices with respect to fixed voice services? For example, should the 
Commission distinguish among services sold as

[[Page 10839]]

stand-alone offerings and services that are bundled with a subscription 
to broadband, video, or mobile services? The Commission currently 
collects data on the proportion of subscribers that have the filing 
carrier as their presubscribed interexchange carrier (PIC). Should the 
Commission collect information on what type of interexchange service 
plans these subscribers purchase (e.g., per minute, bundles of minutes, 
or unlimited local and long distance)?
    86. Form 477 currently collects limited data on the extent of 
facilities-based competition for fixed voice services. Should the 
Commission distinguish among the types of loops provided under 
unbundled network element (UNE) arrangements? For example, should the 
Commission collect data on the number of DS0, DS1, and DS3 loops 
provided to unaffiliated telecommunications carriers under a UNE loop 
arrangement? The Commission does not currently collect information for 
voice services that are provided using special access or other high 
capacity services/facilities that have not been channelized. Should the 
Commission collect information on voice services provided in this 
manner?
    87. Interconnected VoIP. Should the Commission modify its 
requirements concerning interconnected VoIP? For example, should the 
Commission distinguish among stand-alone, facilities-based 
interconnected VoIP; stand-alone over-the-top interconnected VoIP; and 
interconnected VoIP that is bundled with a broadband subscription? 
Should Form 477 distinguish ``nomadic'' from ``fixed'' interconnected 
VoIP (i.e., distinguish whether an interconnected VoIP service can be 
used from one or multiple fixed locations)? Should the Commission begin 
collecting data on VoIP services that do not meet the definition of 
interconnected VoIP (e.g., services that can make calls to or receive 
calls from the PSTN)?
c. Broadband Subscription Data
    88. Currently, Form 477 collects data on broadband subscribership 
at 72 speed tiers for each census tract in the nation. As with 
deployment data, we seek comment on whether we should reduce the number 
of speed tiers at which providers report. Should the speed tiers used 
for deployment and subscription data be the same? Should providers of 
fixed and mobile broadband services provide the number of subscribers 
by technology? We also seek comment on whether wireless broadband 
providers should include information about the spectrum band(s) they 
use to provide service.
4. Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction
    89. We seek comment on whether service quality and customer 
satisfaction data are necessary to fulfill several of the purposes 
discussed above: reducing waste, fraud, and abuse and increasing 
accountability in our universal service programs by ensuring that 
recipients of government support provide services to their customers 
that are reliable and of comparable quality to those not provided with 
government support; ensuring public safety by ensuring that networks 
remain a reliable means of contacting public safety organizations; 
monitoring telephone and broadband competition by ensuring that service 
providers with overlapping footprints provide comparable levels of 
service; promoting broadband deployment and availability; protecting 
consumers by ensuring that end users have information about network 
performance; and tracking the effects of the conversion from PSTN to IP 
services by providing insight into the performance levels of both 
networks.
a. Issues Applicable to Both Voice and Broadband
    90. Who Should Report. The Commission previously has collected 
voice service quality and customer satisfaction data from a small 
subset of the total number of carriers. We seek comment on whether and 
how such data should be collected from a larger universe of voice and 
broadband providers.
    91. What Data Should Be Collected. If we do collect such data, we 
seek comment on what aspects of service quality and customer 
satisfaction are relevant to the purposes described above or otherwise 
identified by commenters. The Commission could collect, for example, 
data regarding the number of trouble reports or complaints that 
customers make regarding network performance or degradation; complaints 
regarding service provider customer care and billing; installation and 
repair intervals; and general customer satisfaction. The Commission has 
conducted surveys that include questions on customer satisfaction. To 
what extent could data from these surveys and others like it be used to 
address concerns about service quality, particularly with respect to 
individual carriers in particular geographic areas? In addition, the 
Commission could collect direct measures of network performance, such 
as network downtime and number of customers affected; call blocking; 
prevalence of dropped calls; and speed, latency, and jitter.
    92. To what extent should the Commission specify common metrics for 
voice and broadband services. For example, should the Commission 
collect data on gross churn as a measure of customer dissatisfaction? 
Should the Commission collect data from all providers on the number of 
complaints made to providers and to State public utility commissions? 
Should data for residential customers include the time interval for 
installation and service commitments, the percent of time those 
commitments are met, and the out-of-service repair interval? How could 
the Commission ensure that such metrics were comparable for all 
reporting entities?
    93. Geographic Area. We seek comment on over what geographic areas 
would be appropriate to collect service quality and customer 
satisfaction data. Given the role States play in regulating some voice 
services, we seek comment on whether collecting data by provider by 
State is appropriate. However, some provider networks may cross State 
boundaries, suggesting that market- or carrier-level information would 
be more appropriate. It may also be the case that different aspects of 
the proposed service quality collection will be most meaningful when 
measured in different geographic areas (e.g., wireline voice by State; 
but cable information by system), which suggests that the collection 
should be made over a smaller geographic area to allow for different 
levels of aggregation. To the extent commenters suggest the Commission 
collect data, we ask that they specify the appropriate geographic area 
for these data, and the relative burden that reporting for different 
geographic areas might impose.
b. Voice
    94. The Commission in 1990 established ARMIS Reports 43-05 and 43-
06 in order to monitor whether the implementation of price caps would 
lead to carriers lowering service quality. In 2008, the Commission 
granted certain incumbent LECs conditional forbearance from ``the 
current partial and uneven'' collection of those reports. The 
Commission noted, however, ``the possibility that service quality and 
customer satisfaction data * * * might be useful to consumers to help 
them make informed choices in a competitive market, but only if 
available from the entire relevant industry,'' and tentatively 
concluded that the Commission should collect this type of information 
from ``facilities-based providers of broadband and/or 
telecommunications.'' Some urge

[[Page 10840]]

the Commission to adopt this tentative conclusion, while others object, 
arguing that forbearance was justified and the metrics set forth in 
those reports are irrelevant and outdated.
    95. CWA proposes that the Commission require all providers of voice 
telecommunications services to file all of the data previously 
submitted on ARMIS Reports 43-05 and 43-06, and to expand service 
quality measurements to include answer times for live representatives 
responding to customer inquiries. We note, however, that all parts of 
the ARMIS 43-05 and 43-06 collections may not be helpful to fulfillment 
of the policy objectives discussed in Section III. For example, the 
California PUC offers a more limited proposal, that the Commission 
collect data formerly reported on four of the six tables of ARMIS 
Report 43-05.
    96. We seek comment on whether the Commission should use Form 477 
to collect service quality and customer satisfaction data for voice 
networks. Should the Commission collect some or all of the service 
quality metrics formerly collected through ARMIS, or other measures of 
voice quality? Should we collect metrics from switched and 
interconnected VoIP providers, over both fixed and mobile networks? Are 
there other metrics for service quality and customer satisfaction that 
would be more appropriate and less burdensome for reporting entities? 
Should metrics vary depending on the technology over which service is 
provided?
c. Broadband
    97. Several commenters have suggested that the Commission collect 
service quality and customer service data from broadband providers. In 
contrast, most broadband providers that commented objected to adopting 
any service quality data requirements. We seek comment on whether Form 
477 should be revised to collect service quality and customer 
satisfaction data from broadband providers, and the authority under 
which such a collection would be conducted.
    98. The metrics set forth in ARMIS Reports 43-05 and 43-06 were not 
designed with broadband networks in mind, and therefore might not be 
the best tools for collecting relevant data. To the extent that the 
Commission decides to extend customer service measurement to broadband 
services, we seek comment on what metrics should be used to assess 
broadband network service quality and customer satisfaction. How would 
the Commission measure network downtime? Should downtime reports 
include specific locations of outages and the number of customer-hours 
relating to the outage? Should the Commission collect packet loss, 
latency, and jitter data? How can it do so in a meaningful way; and 
over what geographic area would such a collection have meaning? Should 
the Commission collect data on mobile and fixed traffic volume and 
network congestion, and if so, how should those metrics be specified? 
Over what geographic area is such a collection meaningful, and what 
measure of traffic is most meaningful?
    99. We note that the recently adopted Open Internet Order requires 
broadband providers to publicly disclose the network management 
practices and performance characteristics of their broadband Internet 
access services. Are these disclosures adequate to satisfy any need the 
Commission may have for service quality data? If Form 477 were used to 
collect information regarding network management practices or 
performance characteristics, would the benefits outweigh the burdens?
5. Ownership and Contact Information
    100. We seek comment on whether ownership and contact information 
are necessary to fulfill one or more of the purposes discussed above, 
including reducing waste, fraud, and abuse and increasing 
accountability in our universal service programs by simplifying the 
process of determining the total amount of public support received by 
each recipient regardless of corporate structure; ensuring public 
safety by providing a means for Commission staff to contact network 
operations centers rapidly in the event of an emergency; and monitoring 
telephone and broadband competition by revealing whether service 
providers with overlapping service footprints are in fact under common 
ownership or control.
    101. Currently, we permit Form 477 filers to consolidate data for 
multiple operations within a State on a single submission. We also 
permit filers to determine the organizational level at which they 
submit their filings. For example, a parent or holding company may file 
on behalf of its subsidiaries or the subsidiaries may file their own 
Form 477. This provides filers with significant flexibility in how they 
submit data on Form 477, but may not provide the Commission with a 
sufficiently detailed picture of the markets for which data are 
reported.
    102. We seek comment on whether we should revise the Form 477 to 
collect additional ownership information and related data. Would 
additional ownership information help inform the Commission's overall 
understanding of the broadband ecosystem? In particular, would 
additional or different ownership data help us understand the 
interrelationships among the data on services and thereby improve our 
ability to evaluate markets and report to the public? Given the 
importance of broadband competition, would the benefit to the 
Commission of understanding the relationships between companies that 
appear to be providing competitive services in a particular area 
outweigh any burden of producing such information?
    103. We also seek comment on the most effective and least 
burdensome means of collecting additional ownership data. One option 
could be to require filers to report data such as that collected on FCC 
Form 602 for wireless carriers, which collects all of a filer's 
``disclosable interest holders.'' Would such an approach be necessary 
to enable us to evaluate ultimate ownership of, and common control 
among, filers, or would a more limited dataset be sufficient? Should we 
require the submission of data on any branding used in the marketing or 
provision of service? If we require the submission of additional 
ownership information, should we also collect other reporting 
identifiers the filers use in making submissions to the Commission, 
such as the Physical System ID (PSID) used by the Media Bureau for 
cable systems? These and other measures might allow the Commission more 
easily to evaluate the actual number of providers offering services in 
a given area and to report non-confidential information about carriers 
by the names by which most consumers know them. Are there are ancillary 
data that would be helpful to include on consumer-facing resources, 
such as the national broadband inventory map? Would it be useful, for 
example, to make available a provider's Web site address and other non-
confidential data? Should entities that file report their FCC 
Registration Number (FRN) and Universal Service Administrative Company 
Study Area Code (SAC)?
    104. We also seek comment on revising Form 477 to collect contact 
information for use in emergency situations. The Commission maintains a 
voluntary reporting system, the Disaster Information Reporting System 
(DIRS) that facilitates contact with carriers in emergencies. The 
Commission also maintains a number of databases that include contact 
information for other purposes. There is, however, no structured, 
mandatory collection of contact information in place specifically for 
use in emergencies affecting telephone or broadband networks. As a

[[Page 10841]]

mandatory, recurring filing by providers of telephone and broadband 
service, Form 477 may be a particularly effective vehicle for 
collecting emergency-contacts data that are comprehensive and current, 
with a relatively small burden on filers. We seek comment on whether we 
should revise Form 477 to collect data of this type and, if so, what 
data would best facilitate emergency communications with providers. 
Would a telephone number and e-mail address for each provider's Network 
Operations Center or equivalent be sufficient? Would the current six-
month cycle for filing Form 477 be frequent enough to ensure that 
information was current? Are there any additional steps the Commission 
should take to collect data of this type?
6. Other Data
    105. Stakeholders have periodically suggested that the Commission 
collect other types of data via Form 477. MMTC, for example, suggests 
that the Commission collect via Form 477 ``socioeconomic data,'' 
``social metrics,'' data to assess socially and economically 
disadvantaged businesses and minority or woman-owned business entities, 
and data on hardware and software availability in underserved areas. 
What other data should the Commission collect via Form 477 in support 
of the purposes identified in Section III above? Commenters should 
explain the purpose for which the Commission would collect such data, 
the legal authority for the collection, and the extent to which the 
benefits outweigh the burdens of collecting it.
    106. We also note that there are some alternate geographic areas 
relevant to Commission analysis that cannot be re-created by 
aggregating even the smallest census geographies. Such alternate areas 
include, for example, wire centers or study areas. Information about 
what alternate areas are associated with each reported geography (i.e., 
the geography reported with one or more of the possible collections 
described above) would assist in any analysis related to those areas. 
We seek comment on the burden to provide information about these 
alternate geographic areas on those reporting data.

V. Legal Issues

A. Authority

    107. The Commission has previously noted it must collect data on 
the provision of voice and broadband services to fulfill numerous 
statutory obligations. For example, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 
required the Commission to open all telecommunications markets to 
competition, and to assess the availability of broadband services. The 
Form 477 program collects data that are ``a critical precursor'' to the 
Commission's ability to fulfill these directives. Form 477 also enables 
us to fulfill our obligation to reduce government regulation wherever 
possible, by providing ``a factual basis to evaluate the nature and 
impact of our existing regulation and, in particular, to identify areas 
where competition has developed sufficiently to justify deregulation.'' 
Many other statutory obligations cannot be implemented without the 
collection of data about the deployment and adoption of communications 
technologies and the state of relevant marketplaces. For example, the 
BDIA requires the Commission to collect comparative data reflecting the 
extent of broadband service capability in other countries, and data for 
the United States, to inform its annual consideration of whether 
broadband is being deployed to all Americans on a reasonable and timely 
basis. We believe our authority to collect the proposed additional data 
derives from these statutory obligations, as well as additional grants 
of authority in the Act, including those in Sections 4(i), 4(k), 218 
and 403. We invite comment on this conclusion.

B. Disclosure

    108. The Commission has always recognized that the Form 477 
broadband and local telephone service data it collects can be of 
significant value not only to the Commission, but also to the States 
and to the public. In establishing and administering the Form 477 
collection, however, the Commission has also been cognizant of the 
potential sensitivity of the data collected and has limited their 
disclosure.
    109. We note that the Commission is reviewing its data 
dissemination practices in connection with the Data Innovation 
Initiative. How can we best provide stakeholders with useful data while 
protecting filers' legitimate confidentiality interests? Should the 
Commission retain the simple check box on the FCC Form 477 that filers 
can use to request confidential treatment for all data submitted on 
that form? Are there classes of information that should always be 
considered public, and, therefore, not be granted confidential 
treatment? For example, given that SBDD data will be public, are there 
any reasons to accord confidential treatment to deployment data 
collected by the Commission? Are there circumstances where data 
submitted to the Commission should be held confidential, but 
aggregations of those data be made public, as is currently the case 
with subscription information? Once deemed confidential, should data 
always be confidential, or does the passage of time diminish the 
commercial sensitivity of certain types of data? When data are given 
confidential treatment, should the Commission establish a program to 
allow researchers access to those data under certain conditions? How 
would such a program be administered?

C. Privacy

    110. We seek comment on any privacy concerns that may arise from 
the reporting of address-level data. We note that the privacy-based 
limitations on the government's access to customer information in Title 
II of ECPA, and the privacy provisions of the Cable Act, may be 
implicated by collection of address-level subscribership data. We 
therefore seek comment on ways the Commission could alleviate any 
privacy concerns while complying with all applicable laws.
    111. We also seek comment on whether the Commission could establish 
a registry or database through which consumers could themselves share 
data with the Commission or choose to have their providers share data 
with the Commission. What would be the benefits and drawbacks of such a 
registry, and how could it be set up both to get useful data and to 
minimize the burden on consumers and reporting entities? Should 
consumers provide information directly to the Commission, or through 
reporting entities that must gain consumer consent? If the latter, what 
steps could the Commission take to ensure that consumers have provided 
consent? How could the Commission address any other privacy issues, and 
any other legal impediments to the creation and maintenance of such a 
registry?
    112. We note that the presence or absence of a network at a 
particular address does not provide any subscriber-specific 
information. We seek comment, however, on whether any privacy concerns 
would arise if providers were required to report deployment data at the 
address level.

VI. Other Issues

A. Tribal Lands

    113. The National Broadband Plan identifies the importance of 
improving data on Tribal lands, and recommends that the Commission 
``identify methods for collecting and reporting broadband information 
that is specific to Tribal lands, working with Tribes to ensure

[[Page 10842]]

that any information collected is accurate and useful.'' The 
Commission's rules identify Federally recognized Tribal lands and 
define them for particular purposes, such as the eligibility and 
delivery requirements for universal service support programs. The 
Commission's definition of Tribal lands identifies the boundaries of 
land holdings of Federally recognized American Indian Tribal and Alaska 
Native Village government entities. We acknowledge that American Indian 
and Alaska Native areas defined as ``Native Home Lands'' by the U.S. 
Census Bureau for census taking purposes encompass areas both within 
and beyond areas defined as Tribal Lands in the Commission's rules. 
Tribal leaders have asked that we consider disaggregating our analysis 
of the Census Bureau's ``Native Home Land'' areas, in part to allow for 
a more accurate assessment of broadband deployment in the Tribal Lands 
areas defined under the Commission's rules. In the Seventh Broadband 
Deployment NOI, we sought comment on how to more accurately report data 
concerning the lands of Federally recognized American Indians Tribes 
and Alaska Native Villages, as well as Native Hawaiian Home Lands. 
Native Hawaiian Home Lands may also be able to be more accurately 
analyzed, as they are located exclusively within the State of Hawaii.
    114. We seek comment on our analysis of broadband deployment and 
availability on Federally recognized Tribal lands and how we could 
improve and refine this analysis. We also seek comment on analysis of 
broadband deployment and availability on Native Hawaiian Home Lands. We 
note that sources of such data may presently exist within the U.S. 
Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of the Interior, and from 
Tribal Government entities. We seek comment on whether there are other 
sources of data that would help the Commission better understand and 
analyze the nature of broadband deployment and availability on Tribal 
Lands and Native Hawaiian Home Lands.

B. International Data

    115. As discussed above, the BDIA requires the Commission to 
include an international comparison in its annual broadband deployment 
report. The International Bureau has released its first International 
Broadband Data Report, which presented data and information on 
international broadband service capability, advertised prices or 
broadband services, community-level data, and information about the 
broadband market and broadband regulations in various nations.
    116. To conduct a rigorous comparison of the factors that affect 
broadband deployment in the U.S. and abroad, it is necessary to have 
comparable, detailed, and geographically disaggregated data. We 
therefore seek comment on how and whether revisions to the Form 477 
program would facilitate comparing the U.S. broadband market to other 
countries. To what extent would revisions facilitate comparisons 
between the U.S. and other countries on the basis of a population's 
income (and variations in income), education (and variations in 
education), computer literacy, residential computer ownership, 
household size, and other factors? Should the Form 477 program be 
modified to collect data on the costs of deploying broadband, including 
as a function of population density at a geographically disaggregated 
level? Should the program be modified to collect data on alternative 
broadband technologies more prevalent in other countries? Should the 
program allow for or enable an assessment of the number of providers 
that offer alternative forms of broadband and the advertised and actual 
speeds that providers offer in local geographic areas? Are there 
modifications to the subscription data we currently collect that would 
make those data more suitable for international comparisons? Where U.S. 
providers offer multiple service packages, should the Commission 
collect data about the speeds and other service characteristics of 
these packages? Would information on actual data usage be useful, as 
well as data on the applications that residential consumers use, such 
as VoIP services? Finally, would the collection of pricing data 
facilitate comparisons with offerings in other countries?

VII. Procedural Matters

A. Ex Parte Presentations

    117. This proceeding shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' 
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentations must contain summaries of the substance 
of the presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects 
discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and 
arguments presented is generally required. Other requirements 
pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Sec.  
1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules.

B. Comment Filing Procedures

    118. Pursuant to Sec. Sec.  1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's 
rules, interested parties may file comments and reply comments 
regarding the NPRM on or before the dates indicated on the first page 
of this document. All filings should refer to WC Docket No. 10-191. 
Comments may be filed using: (1) The Commission's Electronic Comment 
Filing System (ECFS); (2) the Federal Government's e-Rulemaking Portal; 
or (3) by filing paper copies.
    119. Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using 
the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/ or 
the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
    120. Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an 
original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or 
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers 
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or 
rulemaking number.
    121. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by 
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. 
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's 
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    122. Effective December 28, 2009, all hand-delivered or messenger-
delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary must be 
delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th St., SW., Room TW-A325, 
Washington, DC 20554. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before 
entering the building. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. 
Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 
East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service 
first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    123. People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection" class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7a1c19194f4a4e3a1c1919541d150c">[email protected]</a> or call the 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).
    124. For further information about this rulemaking proceeding, 
please contact Jeremy Miller, Industry Analysis and Technology 
Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-0940.
    125. Documents in WC Docket No. 11-10 will be available for public

[[Page 10843]]

inspection and copying during business hours at the FCC Reference 
Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW, Room CY-A257, 
Washington, DC 20554. The documents may also be purchased from BCPI, 
telephone (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-5563, TTY (202) 488-5562, 
e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#55333636153736253c2230377b363a38"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f2949191b29091829b859790dc919d9f">[email protected]</span></a>.

VIII. Ordering Clauses

    126. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to Sections 1-5, 10, 
11, 201-205, 211, 214, 215, 218-220, 251-271, 301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 
316, 332, 403, 409, 502, and 503 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 161, 201-205, 211, 214, 215, 218-220, 251-
271, 301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 316, 332, 403, 409, 502, and 503, Section 
706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302, 
and Section 102 of the Broadband Data Improvement Act, 47 U.S.C. 1303, 
this Notice, with all attachments, is adopted.
    127. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this NPRM, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    128. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities from the policies and rules 
proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). The Commission 
requests written public comment on this IRFA. Comments must be 
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines 
for comments on the NPRM provided on the first page of the NPRM. The 
Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the 
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). 
In addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published 
in the Federal Register.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    129. In the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission considers 
whether and how to reform the Form 477 data program, which serves as 
the Commission's primary tool for collecting broadband and local 
telephone data. After more than a decade of rapid innovation in the 
market for broadband and telephone services, the Commission believes it 
is time to consider whether modifying Form 477 will better serve the 
current and future needs of the Commission, Congress, consumers, and 
other stakeholders. Such reform seeks to improve the Commission's 
ability to carry out its duties under the Communications Act of 1934, 
as amended (the Act), and is an important part of the Commission's 
larger initiative to modernize and streamline how the Commission 
collects, uses, and disseminates data. Specifically, the Commission 
seeks comment on five categories of data that may be necessary to 
collect: (1) Deployment, (2) subscription, (3) price, (4) service 
quality, and (5) ownership and contact information. The Commission also 
seeks comment on whether there are other types of data necessary for 
the Commission to complete its mandates.
    130. For these categories of data, the Commission identifies the 
purposes for which data may be needed, and seeks comment on the 
specifics of certain approaches to collecting data. For example, the 
Commission seeks comment on whether the Commission should use Form 477 
to collect price data, which could help accomplish several purposes, 
including modernizing the universal service program to support 
broadband.
    131. In addition, the Commission also seeks comment on whether 
service quality and customer satisfaction data may be necessary for 
several purposes, including increasing accountability in the 
Commission's universal service programs, ensuring public safety, 
promoting broadband deployment, and protecting consumers. The 
Commission then identifies certain metrics that could be collected, 
such as data regarding the number of trouble reports that customers 
make regarding network performance, and seeks comment.
    132. The Commission also seeks comment on collecting ownership and 
contact information in order to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in 
universal service programs and for other purposes.
    133. The Commission also seeks comment on the extent to which 
technological tools and use of commercial and publicly available data 
can reduce the burden of producing information. The Commission also 
seeks comment on how to streamline the process in collecting the data 
it needs to inform its policymaking processes while minimizing the 
production burden on providers and the processing burden on the 
Commission.

B. Legal Basis

    134. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to 
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is contained in Sections 1-5, 10, 11, 
201-205, 211, 214, 215, 218-220, 251-271, 301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 316, 
332, 403, 409, 502, and 503 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 161, 201-205, 211, 214, 215, 218-220, 251-
271, 301, 303, 304, 307, 309, 316, 332, 403, 409, 502, and 503, Section 
706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 1302, 
and Section 102 of the Broadband Data Improvement Act, 47 U.S.C. 1303.

C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
the Rules Will Apply

    135. 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 rules adopted herein. 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).
1. Wireline Providers
    136. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent 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. Census Bureau data for 
2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there 
were 3,188 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of 
this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 44 firms had had 
employment of 1,000 or more. According to Commission data, 1,307 
carriers reported that they were incumbent local exchange service 
providers. Of these 1,307 carriers, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or 
fewer employees and 301 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, 
the Commission estimates that most providers of local exchange service 
are

[[Page 10844]]

small entities that may be affected by the rules and policies proposed 
in the NPRM. Thus under this category and the associated small business 
size standard, the majority of these incumbent local exchange service 
providers can be considered small providers.
    137. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs), 
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers, 
and Other Local Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA 
has developed a small business 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. 
Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 
Census, show that there were 3,188 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 
fewer, and 44 firms had had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of these Competitive LECs, CAPs, Shared-Tenant Service 
Providers, and Other Local Service Providers can be considered small 
entities. According to Commission data, 1,442 carriers reported that 
they were engaged in the provision of either competitive local exchange 
services or competitive access provider services. Of these 1,442 
carriers, an estimated 1,256 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 186 have 
more than 1,500 employees. In addition, 17 carriers have reported that 
they are Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and all 17 are estimated to 
have 1,500 or fewer employees. In addition, 72 carriers have reported 
that they are Other Local Service Providers. Of the 72, seventy have 
1,500 or fewer employees and two have 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 rules adopted pursuant to the 
NPRM.
    138. Interexchange Carriers. 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. 
Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 
Census, show that there were 3,188 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 
fewer, and 44 firms had had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of these Interexchange carriers can be considered small 
entities. According to Commission data, 359 companies reported that 
their primary telecommunications service activity was the provision of 
interexchange services. Of these 359 companies, an estimated 317 have 
1,500 or fewer employees and 42 have more than 1,500 employees. 
Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of 
interexchange service providers are small entities that may be affected 
by rules adopted pursuant to the NPRM.
    139. 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. Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 
1,500 or fewer employees a Census Bureau data for 2007, which now 
supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there were 3,188 firms 
in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 
3,144 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 44 firms had had employment 
of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under this category and the associated 
small business size standard, the majority of these Interexchange 
carriers can be considered small entities. According to Commission 
data, 33 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision 
of operator services. Of these, an estimated 31 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees and 2 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of OSPs are small entities that 
may be affected by our proposed action.
    140. 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. Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale 
services during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer 
than 1,000 employees and one operated with more than 1,000. Thus under 
this category and the associated small business size standard, the 
majority of these local resellers can be considered small entities. 
According to Commission data, 213 carriers have reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of these, an 
estimated 211 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 
rules adopted pursuant to the Notice.
    141. 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. Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale 
services during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer 
than 1,000 employees and one operated with more than 1,000. Thus under 
this category and the associated small business size standard, the 
majority of these resellers can be considered small entities. According 
to Commission data, 881 carriers have reported that they are engaged in 
the provision of toll resale services. Of these, an estimated 857 have 
1,500 or fewer employees and 24 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.
    142. 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. Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from 
the 2002 Census, show that there were 3,188 firms in this category that 
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 3,144 had employment of 
999 or fewer, and 44 firms had had employment of 1,000 employees or 
more. Thus under this category and the associated small business size 
standard, the majority of these PSPs can be considered small entities. 
According to Commission data, 657 carriers have reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of payphone services. Of these, an estimated 
653 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

[[Page 10845]]

are small entities that may be affected by our action.
    143. 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. 
Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 firms provided resale services 
during that year. Of that number, 1,522 operated with fewer than 1,000 
employees and one operated with more than 1,000. Thus under this 
category and the associated small business size standard, the majority 
of these prepaid calling card providers can be considered small 
entities. According to Commission data, 193 carriers have reported that 
they are engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, 
an estimated all 193 have 1,500 or fewer employees and none have more 
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may 
be affected by rules adopted pursuant to the Notice.
    144. 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. Census data for 2007 show 
that 1,523 firms provided resale services during that year. Of that 
number, 1,522 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees and one operated 
with more than 1,000. Thus under this category and the associated small 
business size standard, the majority of resellers in this 
classification can be considered small entities. To focus specifically 
on the number of subscribers than on those firms which make 
subscription service available, the most reliable source of information 
regarding the number of these service subscribers appears to be data 
the Commission collects on the 800, 888, 877, and 866 numbers in use. 
According to our data, at of September 2009, the number of 800 numbers 
assigned was 7,860,000; the number of 888 numbers assigned was 
5,888,687; the number of 877 numbers assigned was 4,721,866; and the 
number of 866 numbers assigned was 7,867,736. The Commission does 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, the Commission estimates 
that there are 7,860.000 or fewer small entity 800 subscribers; 
5,888,687 or fewer small entity 888 subscribers; 4,721,866 or fewer 
small entity 877 subscribers; and 7,867,736 or fewer small entity 866 
subscribers.
2. Wireless Carriers and Service Providers
    145. Below, for those services subject to auctions, the Commission 
notes 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.
    146. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since 
2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms within this new, 
broad, economic census category. Prior to that time, such firms were 
within the now-superseded categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and 
Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under the present and prior 
categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if it 
has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the category of Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), Census data for 2007, 
which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 
1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer 
than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of firms can be considered small. Similarly, according to 
Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, Personal 
Communications Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) 
Telephony services. Of these, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees and 152 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that approximately half or more of these firms can 
be considered small. Thus, using available data, we estimate that the 
majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
    147. Wireless Communications Services. This service can be used for 
fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite 
uses. The Commission defined ``small business'' for the wireless 
communications services (WCS) auction as an entity with average gross 
revenues of $40 million for each of the three preceding years, and a 
``very small business'' as an entity with average gross revenues of $15 
million for each of the three preceding years. The SBA has approved 
these definitions. The Commission auctioned geographic area licenses in 
the WCS service. In the auction, which commenced on April 15, 1997 and 
closed on April 25, 1997, seven bidders won 31 licenses that qualified 
as very small business entities, and one bidder won one license that 
qualified as a small business entity.
    148. Common Carrier Paging. The SBA considers paging to be a 
wireless telecommunications service and classifies it under the 
industry classification Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
satellite). Under that classification, the applicable size standard is 
that a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the 
general category of Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite), Census data for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 
2002 Census, show that there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. 
Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had 
more than 100 employees. Thus under this category and the associated 
small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered 
small. The 2007 census also contains data for the specific category of 
``Paging'' ``that is classified under the seven-number NAICs code 
5172101. According to Commission data, 291 carriers have reported that 
they are engaged in Paging or Messaging Service. Of these, an estimated 
289 have 1,500 or fewer employees, and 2 have more than 1,500 
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of 
paging providers are small entities that may be affected by our action. 
In addition, in the Paging Third Report and Order, the Commission 
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

[[Page 10846]]

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.
    149. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, 
personal communications services, and specialized mobile radio 
telephony carriers. As noted, the SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite). Under the SBA small business size standard, a business is 
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2007, which 
supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 1,383 
firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 
employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus under this 
category and the associated small business size standard, the majority 
of firms can be considered small According to Trends in Telephone 
Service data, 434 carriers reported that they were engaged in wireless 
telephony. Of these, an estimated 222 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 
212 have more than 1,500 employees. Therefore, approximately half of 
these entities can be considered small. Similarly, according to 
Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in the 
provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, Personal 
Communications Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) 
Telephony services. Of these, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees and 152 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that approximately half or more of these firms can 
be considered small. Thus, using available data, we estimate that the 
majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
    150. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband 
personal communications services (PCS) spectrum is divided into six 
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held 
auctions for each block. The Commission initially defined a ``small 
business'' for C- and F-Block licenses as an entity that has average 
gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar 
years. For F-Block licenses, an additional small business size standard 
for ``very small business'' 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 small 
business size standards, 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 claimed small business status 
in the first two C-Block auctions. A total of 93 bidders that claimed 
small business status won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 
licenses in the first auction for the D, E, and F Blocks. On April 15, 
1999, the Commission completed the reauction of 347 C-, D-, E-, and F-
Block licenses in Auction No. 22. Of the 57 winning bidders in that 
auction, 48 claimed small business status and won 277 licenses.
    151. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 
422 C and F Block Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 
winning bidders in that auction, 29 claimed small business status. 
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. On February 15, 2005, the Commission completed an 
auction of 242 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block licenses in Auction No. 58. Of 
the 24 winning bidders in that auction, 16 claimed small business 
status and won 156 licenses. On May 21, 2007, the Commission completed 
an auction of 33 licenses in the A, C, and F Blocks in Auction No. 71. 
Of the 12 winning bidders in that auction, five claimed small business 
status and won 18 licenses. On August 20, 2008, the Commission 
completed the auction of 20 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block Broadband PCS 
licenses in Auction No. 78. Of the eight winning bidders for Broadband 
PCS licenses in that auction, six claimed small business status and won 
14 licenses.
    152. 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.
    153. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase I Licensees. The 220 MHz service 
has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I licensing was conducted 
by lotteries in 1992 and 1993. There are approximately 1,515 such non-
nationwide licensees and four nationwide licensees currently authorized 
to operate in the 220 MHz band. The Commission has not developed a 
small business size standard for small entities specifically applicable 
to such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of 
such licensees that are small businesses, the Commission applies the 
small business size standard under the SBA rules applicable. The SBA 
has deemed a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. For this service, the SBA uses the category of Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Census data for 2007, 
which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 
1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer 
than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of firms can be considered small.
    154. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase II Licensees. The 220 MHz service 
has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II 220 MHz service is 
a new service, and is subject to spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz 
Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a small business size 
standard for ``small'' and ``very small'' businesses for purposes of 
determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding 
credits and installment payments. This small business size standard 
indicates that 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. A ``very small 
business'' is an entity that, together with its affiliates and 
controlling principals, has average gross revenues that do not exceed 
$3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA has approved these 
small business size standards.

[[Page 10847]]

Auctions of Phase II licenses commenced on September 15, 1998, and 
closed on October 22, 1998. In the first auction, 908 licenses were 
auctioned in three different-sized geographic areas: Three nationwide 
licenses, 30 Regional Economic Area Group (EAG) Licenses, and 875 
Economic Area (EA) Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 were 
sold. Thirty-nine small businesses won licenses in the first 220 MHz 
auction. The second auction included 225 licenses: 216 EA licenses and 
9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies claiming small business status won 
158 licenses.
    155. 800 MHz and 900 MHz Specialized Mobile Radio Licenses. The 
Commission awards small business bidding credits in auctions for 
Specialized Mobile Radio (``SMR'') geographic area licenses in the 800 
MHz and 900 MHz bands to entities that had revenues of no more than $15 
million in each of the three previous calendar years. The Commission 
awards very small business bidding credits to entities that had 
revenues of no more than $3 million in each of the three previous 
calendar years. The SBA has approved these small business size 
standards for the 800 MHz and 900 MHz SMR Services. The Commission has 
held auctions for geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz 
bands. The 900 MHz SMR auction was completed in 1996. Sixty bidders 
claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million 
size standard won 263 geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. 
The 800 MHz SMR auction for the upper 200 channels was conducted in 
1997. Ten bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses 
under the $15 million size standard won 38 geographic area licenses for 
the upper 200 channels in the 800 MHz SMR band. A second auction for 
the 800 MHz band was conducted in 2002 and included 23 BEA licenses. 
One bidder claiming small business status won five licenses.
    156. The auction of the 1,053 800 MHz SMR geographic area licenses 
for the General Category channels was conducted in 2000. Eleven bidders 
won 108 geographic area licenses for the General Category channels in 
the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small businesses under the $15 
million size standard. In an auction completed in 2000, a total of 
2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz 
SMR service were awarded. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19 claimed small 
business status and won 129 licenses. Thus, combining all three 
auctions, 40 winning bidders for geographic licenses in the 800 MHz SMR 
band claimed status as small business.
    157. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR 
licensees and licensees with extended implementation authorizations in 
the 800 and 900 MHz bands. We do not know how many firms provide 800 
MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation 
authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of 
no more than $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues. In 
addition, we do not know how many of these firms have 1,500 or fewer 
employees. We assume, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the 
remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by 
small entities, as that small business size standard is approved by the 
SBA.
    158. 700 MHz Guard Band Licensees. In 2000, in the 700 MHz Guard 
Band Order, the Commission adopted size standards 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 in this service is an entity 
that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has 
average gross revenues not exceeding $40 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 $15 million for the preceding 
three years. SBA approval of these definitions is not required. An 
auction of 52 Major Economic Area licenses commenced on September 6, 
2000, and closed on September 21, 2000. Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 
96 licenses were sold to nine bidders. Five of these bidders were small 
businesses that won a total of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz 
Guard Band licenses commenced on February 13, 2001, and closed on 
February 21, 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were sold to 
three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that won a 
total of two licenses.
    159. Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has 
previously used the SBA's small business size standard applicable to 
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), i.e., an 
entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 
100 licensees in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and under that 
definition, the Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as 
small entities under the SBA definition. For purposes of assigning Air-
Ground Radiotelephone Service licenses through competitive bidding, the 
Commission has defined ``small business'' as an entity that, together 
with controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross 
revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 million. A 
``very small business'' is defined as an entity that, together with 
controlling interests and affiliates, has average annual gross revenues 
for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. These 
definitions were approved by the SBA. In May 2006, the Commission 
completed an auction of nationwide commercial Air-Ground Radiotelephone 
Service licenses in the 800 MHz band (Auction No. 65). On June 2, 2006, 
the auction closed with two winning bidders winning two Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Services licenses. Neither of the winning bidders 
claimed small business status.
    160. 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.
    161. Aviation and Marine Radio Services. Small businesses in the 
aviation and marine radio services use a very high frequency (VHF) 
marine or aircraft radio and, as appropriate, an emergency position-
indicating radio beacon (and/or radar) or an emergency locator 
transmitter. The Commission has not developed a small business size 
standard specifically applicable to these small businesses. For 
purposes of this analysis, the Commission uses the SBA small business 
size standard for the category Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except satellite),'' which is 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data 
for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that 
there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 
had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. 
Thus under this category and the associated small business size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. Additionally, 
the Commission notes that most applicants for recreational licenses

[[Page 10848]]

in this category of wireless service are individuals. Approximately 
581,000 ship station licensees and 131,000 aircraft station licensees 
operate domestically and are not subject to the radio carriage 
requirements of any statute or treaty. For purposes of our evaluations 
in this analysis, the Commission estimates that there are up to 
approximately 712,000 licensees that are small businesses (or 
individuals) under the SBA standard. In addition, between December 3, 
1998 and December 14, 1998, the Commission held an auction of 42 VHF 
Public Coast licenses in the 157.1875-157.4500 MHz (ship transmit) and 
161.775-162.0125 MHz (coast transmit) bands. For purposes of the 
auction, the Commission defined a ``small'' business as an entity that, 
together with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross 
revenues for the preceding three years not to exceed $15 million 
dollars. In addition, a ``very small'' business is one that, together 
with controlling interests and affiliates, has average gross revenues 
for the preceding three years not to exceed $3 million dollars. There 
are approximately 10,672 licensees in the Marine Coast Service, and the 
Commission estimates that almost all of them qualify as ``small'' 
businesses under the above special small business size standards.
    162. Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave services include common 
carrier, private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio 
services. They also include the Local Multipoint Distribution Service 
(LMDS), the Digital Electronic Message Service (DEMS), and the 24 GHz 
Service, where licensees can choose between common carrier and non-
common carrier status. The Commission has not yet defined a small 
business with respect to microwave services. For purposes of the IRFA, 
the Commission will use the SBA's definition applicable to Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except satellite)--i.e., an entity with no 
more than 1,500 persons is considered small. For the category of 
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), Census data 
for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that 
there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 
had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. 
Thus under this category and the associated small business size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. The Commission 
notes that the number of firms does not necessarily track the number of 
licensees. The Commission estimates that virtually all of the Fixed 
Microwave licensees (excluding broadcast auxiliary licensees) would 
qualify as small entities under the SBA definition.
    163. 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. The Commission is unable to estimate at this time the number 
of licensees that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business 
size standard for the category of Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except Satellite). Under that standard. Under that SBA small business 
size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Census data for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 2002 
Census, show that there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. Of 
those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more 
than 100 employees. Thus under this category and the associated small 
business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    164. 32.39 GHz Service. The Commission created a special small 
business size standard for 39 GHz licenses--an entity that has average 
gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar 
years. An additional size standard for ``very small business'' is: an 
entity that, together with affiliates, has average gross revenues of 
not more than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. The 
SBA has approved these small business size standards. The auction of 
the 2,173 39 GHz licenses began on April 12, 2000 and closed on May 8, 
2000. The 18 bidders who claimed small business status won 849 
licenses. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 18 or fewer 39 
GHz licensees are small entities that may be affected by our action.
    165. Wireless Cable Systems. Broadband Radio Service and 
Educational Broadband Service. Broadband Radio Service systems, 
previously referred to as Multipoint Distribution Service (MDS) and 
Multichannel Multipoint Distribution Service (MMDS) systems, and 
``wireless cable,'' transmit video programming to subscribers and 
provide two-way high speed data operations using the microwave 
frequencies of the Broadband Radio Service (BRS) and Educational 
Broadband Service (EBS) (previously referred to as the Instructional 
Television Fixed Service (ITFS)). In connection with the 1996 BRS 
auction, the Commission established a small business size standard as 
an entity that had annual average gross revenues of no more than $40 
million in the previous three calendar years. The BRS auctions resulted 
in 67 successful bidders obtaining licensing opportunities for 493 
Basic Trading Areas (BTAs). Of the 67 auction winners, 61 met the 
definition of a small business. BRS also includes licensees of stations 
authorized prior to the auction. At this time, we estimate that of the 
61 small business BRS auction winners, 48 remain small business 
licensees. In addition to the 48 small businesses that hold BTA 
authorizations, there are approximately 392 incumbent BRS licensees 
that are considered small entities. After adding the number of small 
business auction licensees to the number of incumbent licensees not 
already counted, we find that there are currently approximately 440 BRS 
licensees that are defined as small businesses under either the SBA or 
the Commission's rules. In 2009, the Commission conducted Auction 86, 
the sale of 78 licenses in the BRS areas. The Commission offered three 
levels of bidding credits: (i) A bidder with attributed average annual 
gross revenues that exceed $15 million and do not exceed $40 million 
for the preceding three years (small business) will receive a 15 
percent discount on its winning bid; (ii) a bidder with attributed 
average annual gross revenues that exceed $3 million and do not exceed 
$15 million for the preceding three years (very small business) will 
receive a 25 percent discount on its winning bid; and (iii) a bidder 
with attributed average annual gross revenues that do not exceed $3 
million for the preceding three years (entrepreneur) will receive a 35 
percent discount on its winning bid. Auction 86 concluded in 2009 with 
the sale of 61 licenses. Of the ten winning bidders, two bidders that 
claimed small business status won 4 licenses; one bidder that claimed 
very small business status won three licenses; and two bidders that 
claimed entrepreneur status won six licenses.
    166. In addition, the SBA's Cable Television Distribution Services 
small business size standard is applicable to EBS. There are presently 
2,032 EBS licensees. All but 100 of these licenses are held by 
educational institutions. Educational institutions are included in this 
analysis as small entities. Thus, we estimate that at least 1,932 
licensees are small businesses. Since 2007, Cable Television 
Distribution Services have been defined within the broad economic 
census category of Wired

[[Page 10849]]

Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows: 
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies.'' For these services, the Commission uses the SBA small 
business size standard for the category ``Wireless Telecommunications 
Carriers (except satellite),'' which is 1,500 or fewer employees. To 
gauge small business prevalence for these cable services we must, 
however, use the most current census data. Census data for 2007, which 
supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 1,383 
firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 
employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus under this 
category and the associated small business size standard, the majority 
of firms can be considered small. The Commission notes that the Census' 
use the classifications ``firms'' does not track the number of 
``licenses.''
    167. In the 1998 and 1999 LMDS auctions, the Commission defined a 
small business as an entity that has annual average gross revenues of 
less than $40 million in the previous three calendar years. Moreover, 
the Commission added an additional classification for a ``very small 
business,'' which was defined as an entity that had annual average 
gross revenues of less than $15 million in the previous three calendar 
years. These definitions of ``small business'' and ``very small 
business'' in the context of the LMDS auctions have been approved by 
the SBA. In the first LMDS auction, 104 bidders won 864 licenses. Of 
the 104 auction winners, 93 claimed status as small or very small 
businesses. In the LMDS re-auction, 40 bidders won 161 licenses. Based 
on this information, the Commission believes that the number of small 
LMDS licenses will include the 93 winning bidders in the first auction 
and the 40 winning bidders in the re-auction, for a total of 133 small 
entity LMDS providers as defined by the SBA and the Commission's 
auction rules.
    168. 218-219 MHz Service. The first auction of 218-219 MHz spectrum 
resulted in 170 entities winning licenses for 594 Metropolitan 
Statistical Area (MSA) licenses. Of the 594 licenses, 557 were won by 
entities qualifying as a small business. For that auction, the small 
business size standard was an entity that, together with its 
affiliates, has no more than a $6 million net worth and, after Federal 
income taxes (excluding any carry over losses), has no more than $2 
million in annual profits each year for the previous two years. In the 
218-219 MHz Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order, the 
Commission established a small business size standard for a ``small 
business'' as an entity that, together with its affiliates and persons 
or entities that hold interests in such an entity and their affiliates, 
has average annual gross revenues not to exceed $15 million for the 
preceding three years. A ``very small business'' is defined as an 
entity that, together with its affiliates and persons or entities that 
hold interests in such an entity and its affiliates, has average annual 
gross revenues not to exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. 
These size standards will be used in future auctions of 218-219 MHz 
spectrum.
    169. 24 GHz--Incumbent Licensees. This analysis may affect 
incumbent licensees who were relocated to the 24 GHz band from the 18 
GHz band, and applicants who wish to provide services in the 24 GHz 
band. For this service, the Commission uses the SBA small business size 
standard for the category ``Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except satellite),'' which is 1,500 or fewer employees. To gauge small 
business prevalence for these cable services we must, however, use the 
most current census data. Census data for 2007, which supersede data 
contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 1,383 firms that 
operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 employees, 
and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus under this category and 
the associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can 
be considered small. The Commission notes that the Census' use of the 
classifications'' firms'' does not track the number of ``licenses''. 
The Commission believes that there are only two licensees in the 24 GHz 
band that were relocated from the 18 GHz band, Teligent and TRW, Inc. 
It is our understanding that Teligent and its related companies have 
less than 1,500 employees, though this may change in the future. TRW is 
not a small entity. Thus, only one incumbent licensee in the 24 GHz 
band is a small business entity.
    170. 24 GHz--Future Licensees. With respect to new applicants in 
the 24 GHz band, the small business size standard for ``small 
business'' is an entity that, together with controlling interests and 
affiliates, has average annual gross revenues for the three preceding 
years not in excess of $15 million. ``Very small business'' in the 24 
GHz band is an entity that, together with controlling interests and 
affiliates, has average gross revenues not exceeding $3 million for the 
preceding three years. The SBA has approved these small business size 
standards. These size standards will apply to the future auction, if 
held.
3. Satellite Service Providers
    171. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. Two economic census 
categories address the satellite industry. The first category has a 
small business size standard of $15 million or less in average annual 
receipts, under SBA rules. The second has a size standard of $25 
million or less in annual receipts.
    172. The category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing 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.'' Census Bureau data for 2007 show that 512 
Satellite Telecommunications firms that operated for that entire year. 
Of this total, 464 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 
18 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications 
firms are small entities that might be affected by our action.
    173. The second category, i.e. ``All Other Telecommunications'' 
comprises ``establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized 
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications 
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes 
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal 
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing Internet services or voice over Internet 
protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry.'' For this category, 
Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there were a total of 2,383 firms 
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,347 firms had 
annual receipts of under $25 million and 12 firms had annual receipts 
of $25 million to $49,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of All Other Telecommunications firms are small

[[Page 10850]]

entities that might be affected by our action.
4. Cable and OVS Operators
    174. Because Section 706 requires us to monitor the deployment of 
broadband regardless of technology or transmission media employed, the 
Commission anticipates that some broadband service providers may not 
provide telephone service. Accordingly, the Commission describes below 
other types of firms that may provide broadband services, including 
cable companies, MDS providers, and utilities, among others.
    175. Cable and Other Program Distributors. Since 2007, these 
services have been defined within the broad economic census category of 
Wired Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows: 
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category, which is: All such firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees. Census data for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 
2002 Census, show that there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. 
Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had 
more than 100 employees. Thus under this category and the associated 
small business size standard, the majority of such firms can be 
considered small.
    176. 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.
    177. 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.
    178. Open Video Services. Open Video Service (OVS) systems provide 
subscription services. The open video system (``OVS'') framework was 
established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily recognized options 
for the provision of video programming services by local exchange 
carriers. 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 covering cable services, which is ``Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers.'' The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for this category, which is: all such firms having 1,500 
or fewer employees. To gauge small business prevalence for the OVS 
service, the Commission relies on data currently available from the 
U.S. Census for the year 2007. According to that source, there were 
3,188 firms that in 2007 were Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Of 
these, 3,144 operated with less than 1,000 employees, and 44 operated 
with more than 1,000 employees. However, as to the latter 44 there is 
no data available that shows how many operated with more than 1,500 
employees. Based on this data, the majority of these firms can be 
considered small. In addition, we note that the Commission has 
certified some OVS operators, with some now providing service. 
Broadband service providers (``BSPs'') are currently the only 
significant holders of OVS certifications or local OVS franchises. The 
Commission does not have financial or employment information regarding 
the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be 
operational. Thus, at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as 
small entities. The Commission further notes that it has certified 
approximately 45 OVS operators to serve 75 areas, and some of these are 
currently providing service. Affiliates of Residential Communications 
Network, Inc. (RCN) received approval to operate OVS systems in New 
York City, Boston, Washington, DC, and other areas. RCN has sufficient 
revenues to assure that they do not qualify as a small business entity. 
Little financial information is available for the other entities that 
are authorized to provide OVS and are not yet operational. Given that 
some entities authorized to provide OVS service have not yet begun to 
generate revenues, the Commission concludes that up to 44 OVS operators 
(those remaining) might qualify as small businesses that may be 
affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
5. Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution
    179. Electric Power Generators, Transmitters, and Distributors. The 
Census Bureau defines an industry group comprised of ``establishments, 
primarily engaged in generating, transmitting, and/or distributing 
electric power. Establishments in this industry group may perform one 
or more of the following activities: (1) Operate generation facilities 
that produce electric energy; (2) operate transmission systems that 
convey the electricity from the generation facility to the distribution 
system; and (3) operate distribution systems that convey electric power 
received from the generation facility or the transmission system to the 
final consumer.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for firms in this category: ``A firm is small if, including its 
affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, transmission, 
and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric 
output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 million megawatt 
hours.'' According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were 1,525 
firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Census data 
do not track electric output and we have not determined how many of 
these firms fit the SBA size standard for small, with no more than 4 
million megawatt hours of electric output. Consequently, we estimate 
that 1,525 or fewer firms may be considered small under the SBA small 
business size standard.

[[Page 10851]]

6. Internet Service Providers, Web Portals and Other Information 
Services
    180. In 2007, the SBA recognized two new small business, economic 
census categories. They are (1) Internet Publishing and Broadcasting 
and Web Search Portals, and (2) All Other Information Services.
    181. Internet Service Providers. The 2007 Economic Census places 
these firms, whose services might include voice over Internet protocol 
(VoIP), in either of two categories, depending on whether the service 
is provided over the provider's own telecommunications facilities 
(e.g., cable and DSL ISPs), or over client-supplied telecommunications 
connections (e.g., dial-up ISPs). The former are within the category of 
Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which has an SBA small business size 
standard of 1,500 or fewer employees. These are also labeled 
``broadband.'' The latter are within the category of All Other 
Telecommunications, which has a size standard of annual receipts of $25 
million or less. These are labeled non-broadband.
    182. The most current Economic Census data for all such firms are 
2007 data, which are detailed specifically for ISPs within the 
categories above. For the first category, the data show that 396 firms 
operated for the entire year, of which 159 had nine or fewer employees. 
For the second category, the data show that 1,682 firms operated for 
the entire year. Of those, 1,675 had annual receipts below $25 million 
per year, and an additional two had receipts of between $25 million and 
$49,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of ISP firms 
are small entities.
    183. Internet Publishing and Broadcasting and Web Search Portals. 
This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in (1) 
publishing and/or broadcasting content on the Internet exclusively or 
(2) operating Web sites that use a search engine to generate and 
maintain extensive databases of Internet addresses and content in an 
easily searchable format (and known as Web search portals). The 
publishing and broadcasting establishments in this industry do not 
provide traditional (non-Internet) versions of the content that they 
publish or broadcast. They provide textual, audio, and/or video content 
of general or specific interest on the Internet exclusively. 
Establishments known as Web search portals often provide additional 
Internet services, such as e-mail, connections to other Web sites, 
auctions, news, and other limited content, and serve as a home base for 
Internet users. The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category; that size standard is 500 employees. Less than 500 
employees is considered small. According to Census Bureau data for 
2007, there were 2,705 firms that provided one or more of these 
services for that entire year. Of these, 2,682 operated with less than 
500 employees and 13 operated with 500 to 999 employees. Consequently, 
we estimate that the majority of these firms are small entities that 
may be affected by our action.
    184. Data Processing, Hosting, and Related Services. This industry 
comprises establishments primarily engaged in providing infrastructure 
for hosting or data processing services. These establishments may 
provide specialized hosting activities, such as Web hosting, streaming 
services or application hosting; provide application service 
provisioning; or may provide general time-share mainframe facilities to 
clients. Data processing establishments provide complete processing and 
specialized reports from data supplied by clients or provide automated 
data processing and data entry services. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for this category; that size standard is $25 
million or less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau 
data for 2007, there were 8,060 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of these, 6,726 had annual receipts of under $25 
million, and 155 had receipts between $25 million and $49,999,999 
million. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of these firms are 
small entities that may be affected by our action.
    185. All Other Information Services. ``This industry comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing other information 
services (except new syndicates and libraries and archives).'' Our 
action pertains to interconnected VoIP services, which could be 
provided by entities that provide other services such as e-mail, online 
gaming, Web browsing, video conferencing, instant messaging, and other, 
similar IP-enabled services. The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for this category; that size standard is $7.0 million or 
less in average annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 
2007, there were 367 firms in this category that operated for the 
entire year. Of these, 334 had annual receipts of under $5 million, and 
an additional 11 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.

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

    186. In the Notice, the Commission proposes additional or modified 
information collections that would impose further reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements on current Form 477 filers, including small 
entities. Specifically, the NPRM invites comment on whether and how the 
Commission could collect data on the following additional or modified 
categories of data: (1) Deployment, (2) subscription, (3) price, (4) 
service quality, and (5) ownership and contact information. The 
Commission also seeks comment on whether to collect ``other data'' such 
as socioeconomic and social metrics data to assess socially and 
economically disadvantaged parties. The Commission seeks further 
comment on the extent to which technological tools and use of 
commercial and publicly available data can reduce the burden of 
producing information. The Commission also seeks comment on how to 
streamline the process in collecting the data the Commission needs to 
inform its policymaking processes while minimizing the production 
burden on providers and the processing burden on the Commission. The 
Commission invites comments on the merits and methodologies of such 
data collections to include suggestions and discussions of other 
alternatives not specifically discussed in the NPRM that would meet the 
objectives of the NPRM but would impose lesser burdens on smaller 
entities.
    187. Based on these questions, the Commission anticipates that a 
record will be developed concerning actual burden and alternative ways 
in which the Commission could lessen the burden on small entities of 
obtaining improved data about broadband deployment and availability 
throughout the nation.

E. Steps Taken To Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    188. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include (among others) the following four alternatives: (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

[[Page 10852]]

use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    189. In particular, the Commission seeks comment on whether it 
would be less burdensome for providers to submit address-level data 
with respect to the deployment and availability of services. The 
Commission also seeks comment on other ways that the Commission can 
ease the burden on small- and medium-sized providers.
    190. Based on these questions, and the alternatives the Commission 
has discussed, the Commission anticipates that the record will be 
developed concerning alternative ways in which the Commission could 
lessen the burden on small entities of obtaining improved data about 
broadband. The Commission welcomes proposals of alternatives from any 
of the approaches as described in Section A, supra.

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the 
Proposed Rules

    191. None.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4393 Filed 2-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>