[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 71 (Wednesday, April 12, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19675-19686]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9187]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 1, 20, and 43

[CC Docket No. 99-301, FCC 00-114]


Local Competition and Broadband Reporting

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
announces the adoption of a program to collect basic information about 
the status of local telephone service competition and the deployment of 
advanced telecommunications capability, also known as broadband. The 
Commission will use this information to help inform it craft its 
regulations in a manner that encourages development in these markets. 
The Commission further intends that this information will inform other 
policy makers and consumers about these markets. By understating the 
state of local telephony service competition and the deployment of 
broadband services, the Commission will be better able to fulfill its 
statutory obligations.

DATES:  Effective Date: May 12, 2000. Compliance Date: For the first 
filing respondents must submit 1999 year-end data by May 15, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Bergmann or Ellen Burton, 
Industry Analysis Division, Common Carrier Bureau, at (202) 418-0940. 
For additional information concerning the information collections 
contained in the Report and Order (Order) contact Judy Boley at 202-
418-0214, or via the Internet at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order (Order) released March 30, 2000 (FCC 00-114), issued in 
response to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking released by the 
Commission on October 22, 1999 (FCC 99-301). The full text of the Order 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text also may be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Service, Inc. 
(202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037. 
Additionally, the complete item is available on the Commission's 
website at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common__Carrier/Orders/2000/>.
    Outreach Workshops: In an effort to inform respondents and answer 
questions regarding their filings, the Commission will hold two 
workshops in the Commission's Meeting Room at 445 12th Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20554. The workshops will be held on April 17, 2000 and 
May 1, 2000. Details will be provided by Public Notice released by the 
Commission.

Electronic Access and Filing

    You may obtain the latest version of the form (FCC Form 477) from 
the Common Carrier Bureau's website at http://www.fcc.gov/broadband/data>. The form is best accessed using Excel 97. However, other 
comparable spreadsheet software programs may access a version of the 
form that will be located at the same website.

Summary of the Report and Order

    1. In the Order summarized here, we adopt an information collection 
program to collect basic information about the status of local 
telephone service competition and the deployment of advanced 
telecommunications capability, also known as broadband. We conclude 
that we need timely and reliable information about the pace and extent 
of developing local competition in different geographic areas in order 
to

[[Page 19676]]

evaluate the effectiveness of actions that this Commission and the 
states are taking to promote local competition. We also conclude that 
we need timely and reliable information to assess the deployment of 
broadband services, as required by section 706 of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996.
    2. Moreover, we conclude that this information would allow us to 
avoid ``one size fits all'' regulation, and, specifically, to reduce 
regulation wherever we can pursuant to new sections 10 and 11 of the 
Act. 47 U.S.C. 160, 161. The Commission adopts a simple filing that 
should enable it to make better informed decisions, while placing as 
low a burden as possible on reporting entities.
    3. Throughout the Order, we explain our reasons for the conclusions 
we reach. We assessed commenters' proposals for alternative means of 
collecting the needed information. The following text represents a 
brief summary of conclusions adopted in the Order.
    4. Types of Entities that Must Report: In the Order, we discuss the 
types of entities that must report data describing the extent and 
intensity of local competition and the extent of broadband services 
deployment. Based on our determination that we need comprehensive data 
about developing competition for local telephone service, we decide 
that all local exchange carriers (LECs), both incumbent and 
competitive, should complete the applicable portions of Form 477 if 
they meet our defined threshold for deployment of service. We conclude 
that we should require local exchange carriers to complete Parts II and 
V of the form for each state in which they provide 10,000 or more 
voice-grade equivalent lines or wireless channels. Further, we require 
any facilities-based provider of mobile telephony (defined here as, 
real time, two-way switched voice service that is interconnected with 
the public switched network utilizing an in-network switching facility 
that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless 
handoffs of subscriber calls) to complete Part III of the form for each 
state in which it has 10,000 or more subscribers.
    5. We next turn to a consideration of those entities that should 
report data on deployment of broadband services. The Order concludes 
that given our broad statutory mandate under section 706 of the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996, to evaluate the deployment of broadband 
services, regardless of the transmission media or technology employed, 
we should collect data from a wide range of broadband providers. More 
specifically, we require providers of what we term ``one-way 
broadband'' and ``full broadband'' services to complete the applicable 
portions of Form 477, to the extent that they exceed the broadband 
reporting threshold. For purposes of the data collection, ``full 
broadband'' service is defined, consistent with the Advanced 
Telecommunications Report, as having an information carrying capacity 
of over 200 Kilobits per second (Kbps) in each direction, 
simultaneously. An Inquiry Concerning the Deployment of Advanced 
Telecommunications Capabilities to All Americans in a Reasonable and 
Timely Fashion, 14 FCC 2d 2398, paragraphs 20 through 25 (Advanced 
Telecommunications Report). ``One-way broadband'' service is defined as 
having an information carrying capacity of over 200 Kilobits per second 
(Kbps) in only one direction. Actual or potential providers of 
broadband services may include: LECs (incumbent and competitive), cable 
television companies, utilities, MMDS/MDS/''wireless cable'' carriers, 
other fixed wireless providers, mobile wireless carriers (both 
terrestrial and satellite-based), government entities, and others. We 
believe that only by casting our net wide enough to include all such 
entities can we discern progress, or the lack of it, in meeting the 
goals stated in the Advanced Telecommunications Report. We thus 
conclude that any entity that provides at least 250 full or one-way 
broadband service lines (or wireless channels) or has at least 250 full 
or one-way broadband customers in a state should be required to 
complete Parts I and V of Form 477 for that state.
    6. Frequency of Reports: We decide that we can best balance our 
need for timely information with our desire to minimize the reporting 
burden on respondents by requiring providers to report data on a semi-
annual basis. Given our desire to collect data to be used in the second 
Advanced Telecommunications Report, we direct that all respondents 
should file their end-of-year 1999 data on May 15, 2000. Thereafter, 
entities will report end-of-year data on March 1st and data as of June 
30th on September 1st.
    7. Definition of Reporting Area: To minimize the burden the 
reporting requirement places on reporting entities, we conclude that 
information should be reported by state. To aid our understanding of 
developments within a given state, we also require the reporting entity 
to provide the Commission with a list of Zip Codes in which they have 
at least one subscriber.
    8. Confidentiality of Data: We continue to believe that the value 
of this data collection is significantly enhanced by making as much 
information as possible available to the public. At the same time, we 
conclude that we can achieve this goal in a manner that ensures the 
non-disclosure of confidential provider-filed data. We discuss, below, 
our affirmative policies for handling this information and we believe 
that these policies will allay commenter concerns that legitimately 
protectible information would be released to the public. We do not, in 
this Order, make findings about whether the data elements requested in 
the reporting form would satisfy the Commission's articulated standard 
for non-disclosure of competitively sensitive information, but we do 
make clear that our rules for requesting non-disclosure of confidential 
information will be available to all filers of the FCC Form 477. 
Moreover, for purposes of this information collection, we take steps to 
simplify the procedures for requesting confidential treatment of data. 
Our rules for requesting non-disclosure of competitively sensitive 
information afford sufficient protection to providers and appropriately 
balance the concerns of parties submitting information with the 
interests of the public in obtaining access to that information. We 
also make clear that we will not release information that is the 
subject of non-disclosure requests until persons requesting 
confidential treatment are afforded all of the procedural protections 
provided by our confidentiality rules. We expect that these policies 
will allow us to accomplish our goal of making as much information as 
possible available to the public while ensuring that service providers 
can file data with confidence that any information found to be 
competitively sensitive under our rules will not be disclosed.
    9. We note that several commenters express concern over the 
potential for competitive harm that release of the gathered data could 
cause and, in particular, about the ability of competitors to take the 
data submitted and tailor market strategies to quash nascent 
competition, protect areas that are being subjected to increased 
competition, or deploy facilities to defend strongholds. Again, we 
believe that our confidentiality rules afford appropriate protection of 
legitimately protectible information, but we take additional steps to 
clarify our existing rules for treatment of competitively-sensitive 
data because we expect that some of the respondents to this form may be 
less familiar with Commission practices. The Commission's policy on

[[Page 19677]]

confidential treatment of information submitted pursuant to a survey or 
study is to ``allow survey and study respondents to request 
confidential treatment pursuant to Section 0.459 to the extent they can 
show by a preponderance of the evidence a case for non-disclosure 
consistent with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).'' Assessment of 
the confidentiality of the information is made on a case-by-case basis 
and action on confidentiality requests is routinely deferred until a 
request for inspection is made.
    10. We also recognize that there is considerable diversity in the 
way that individual service providers handle the data pertaining to 
their operations. Indeed, it is our understanding that some providers 
release considerable data about the nature of their operations, while 
others more closely safeguard such data, including the type of data 
that we request in the reporting form. We anticipate that providers 
will request confidential treatment for data filed where they deem it 
appropriate. In these cases, and in accordance with the Commission's 
rules, we will honor all parties' requests for confidential treatment 
of information that they identify as competitively sensitive until 
persons requesting confidential treatment are afforded all of the 
procedural protections provided by our confidentiality rules. Moreover, 
in such cases, we agree with those commenters who suggest that we can 
aggregate much of the data--for example, by carrier class and to the 
state level--so that it does not identify the individual provider in 
our regularly published reports.
    11. We also take an additional step to reduce provider concerns 
about the release of information identified as competitively sensitive 
by making it easier for providers to request confidential treatment of 
their data. In particular, we place a check-box on the first page of 
the FCC Form 477 that allows providers to request non-disclosure of all 
or portions of their submitted data without filing at this point in the 
process the detailed confidentiality justification required by our 
rules. Thus, where parties seek confidential treatment, they need only 
check the well-marked box on the first page of the form and provide a 
completed and a redacted version of the form, as explained fully in the 
instructions to the Form 477. If the Commission receives a request for, 
or proposes disclosure of, the information contained in the Form 477, 
the provider will be notified and required to make the full showing 
under our rules. Given the unique nature of this data collection, these 
streamlined procedures for requesting non-disclosure should greatly 
improve the ability of smaller providers and providers that are less 
familiar with the Commission's rules to request confidential treatment 
of their data. We expect that this will lead to a greater level of 
compliance with this information collection and will give providers 
confidence that protectible data will not be published in our regular 
reports.
    12. Part I: Broadband Data. Without making a prospective decision 
about whether these data elements would satisfy the Commission's 
standard for non-disclosure, we state our intention not to publish in 
our publicly-available reports individual provider-filed data for the 
broadband (Part I) portion of the form, even where providers do not 
seek non-disclosure of this data. At this time, we do not have 
sufficient evidence in the record to make a universally applicable 
decision about the competitive sensitivity of all of the Part I 
Broadband information for all providers, but we do agree to aggregate 
this information in a way that does not identify the individual 
provider data in our reports because commenters have made at least an 
initial showing that all or most of the data filed in these sections is 
typically held confidential by providers of these services. Our 
decision not to publish individual provider submissions from the Part I 
Broadband section reflects the particular and limited purposes of this 
data collection and our desire to maximize the level of voluntary 
compliance with the information collection. While this is a mandatory 
collection, we wish to collect as much, and as accurate, information as 
possible about the status of broadband deployment in a short period of 
time. We also, as part of this information collection, encourage 
service providers that are below the reporting thresholds to report 
data on a voluntary basis. Moreover, particularly with respect to the 
Part I broadband data, we conclude that we can achieve substantially 
the same public benefits by releasing this information in an aggregated 
fashion without any potential risk of competitive harm on the part of 
respondents. Given the unique nature of this information collection, we 
believe that this extra step will improve compliance, thus enhancing 
our understanding of the broadband market, without any material 
diminution in value of the information collection. Thus, we agree to 
publish in our regular reports data from Part I of the form only once 
it has been aggregated, for example by provider class, regardless of 
whether parties request confidential treatment on the broadband portion 
of the form.
    13. Parts II and III: Local Competition Data. With respect to the 
data filed in Parts II and III of the form concerning wireline and 
wireless local telephone service, we will also report data in a manner 
that aggregates and does not identify the identity of providers where 
providers have requested non-disclosure of the data. We do not decide 
in advance to publish all of the data filed in Part II of the form in 
an aggregated fashion, however, because it is our experience that 
portions of this data are already made publicly available by the 
individual companies or from other sources. We note, for example, that 
the local competition market is characterized by incumbent firms that 
routinely make available their line count data, similar to that 
reported in Part II of the form. Similarly, competitive LECs in some 
states are required to submit line count data and this information is 
routinely made publicly available. We expect that such providers 
reporting data in Part II of the form will not request non-disclosure 
of data that has already been made publicly available and that the 
Commission will be able to publish this data in our reports. Concerning 
the Part III mobile telephony data, we recognize that mobile telephony 
providers argue that state-by-state subscriber counts are not routinely 
made publicly available. We do not, however, have sufficient evidence 
to make an across-the-board finding at this time. Accordingly, 
providers submitting data concerning these services may check the box 
on Form 477 to request confidential treatment of their data, which will 
afford them the protection of the Commission's confidentiality rules.
    14. We emphasize that apart from publicly available information, 
which we anticipate reporting, we intend to publish the local 
competition data in our local competition reports only to the level of 
detail necessary to provide an understanding of how local competition 
is developing. We therefore agree with those commenters who suggest 
that we can aggregate much of the data--for example, by carrier class 
and to the state level--so that it does not identify the individual 
provider in our regularly published reports. This reporting approach, 
as well as providers' ability to request confidential treatment under 
our rules, should maximize the level of voluntary compliance with the 
information collection.
    15. Part V: Zip Code Data. In the particular case of Zip Code data 
(i.e., the lists of Zip Codes where service is offered), the Commission 
intends to

[[Page 19678]]

report information on Zip Codes served, but it will not release the 
identity of specific providers in a given Zip Code. Public release of 
Zip Code data in this manner is appropriate, we believe, because it 
does not reveal information about the actual subscribership levels for 
any particular provider, but only indicates the presence of one or more 
providers in the given Zip Code. Although we think it unlikely that any 
provider would consider this limited release to reveal competitively 
sensitive information, we do not limit parties' ability to seek non-
disclosure of such data under the Commission's rules.
    16. Sharing data with State Commissions. Finally, because we wish 
to maximize the value of this information collection for states, we 
conclude that the Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau may release the 
information collected under this program to the state commissions, 
subject to certain conditions. A state commission may view all data 
submitted on a carrier specific basis, by entities filing data for that 
commission's state, provided that the state has appropriate protections 
in place (which may include confidentiality agreements or designation 
of information as proprietary under state law) that would preclude 
disclosure of any confidential information. However, where state laws 
afford less protection than federal FOIA laws, the higher federal 
standard will prevail. We are aware that there are two states that have 
``open records'' statutes that may prevent the state from providing 
confidential protection for sensitive provider information. In these 
situations, we will work with these state commissions to enable them to 
obtain access to such information in a manner that addresses the 
state's need for this information and also protects the confidential 
nature of the provider's sensitive information. We anticipate that 
these actions will give state commissions a valuable and unique view 
into the state of local competition and broadband deployment in their 
states. In addition, we hope that this will further our goal of 
reducing the overall reporting burdens placed on entities in these 
markets by minimizing the need for additional information collection 
programs at the state level.
    17. We conclude that these policies, taken as a whole, most 
effectively balance provider concerns with our broader goals for this 
proceeding. As stated in the Notice, by making the information 
available, consumers, investors, and policy makers will be better able 
to make informed decisions on the development of these markets. Such 
information has value because a better-informed marketplace promotes a 
more efficient marketplace. Also, by allowing public release of as much 
of the information as possible, associations, scholars, and others will 
be able to use the information in their independent analyses of 
Commission policies, thereby aiding the Commission in crafting 
regulations that address specific market problems and eliminating those 
regulations that have outlived their usefulness.
    18. Electronic Filing: We adopt the method proposed in the Notice 
for collection of the information through electronic filing except to 
modify the allowable methods of submission. Specifically, the form will 
be made available to reporting entities on the Common Carrier Bureau's 
website at www.fcc.gov/broadband/data> and will utilize Excel 97 
software, as well as other comparable spreadsheet software programs. 
Carriers and other entities that must comply with this requirement may 
submit their completed forms to a specified e-mail address or forward 
to the Commission diskette copies. Regardless of whether the reporting 
entity e-mails its submission or mails diskette copies, an officer of 
the reporting entity must submit a ``Certification Statement'' to the 
Commission attesting to the truthfulness of the data submitted. We 
conclude that this filing system will ensure, for both the reporting 
entities and the Commission, that the burdens of the program are 
minimized and that unnecessary expenditures for compliance are not 
incurred. Also, by allowing diskette submissions, reporting parties 
seeking confidential treatment can further ensure that the information 
submitted is protected.
    19. To ensure that this information collection program does not 
outlive its usefulness, the reporting requirement adopted in the Order 
will terminate in five years, unless the Commission takes affirmative 
steps to preserve it.
    20. Data to be Reported: We describe, in the Order, the specific 
items set out in the data collection form. A brief description of the 
data collection form follows, with greater detail found in the complete 
Order.
    21. Part I of the form collects information about the number of 
broadband lines in service to consumers. This includes information 
about both ``full broadband'' lines, with information carrying capacity 
in excess of 200 Kbps in both directions, simultaneously, and 
asymmetric ``one way broadband'' lines, with information carrying 
capacity in excess of 200 Kbps in one direction but not both.
    22. Part II of the form collects information from incumbent LECs 
and competitive LECs about the number of voice-grade equivalent lines 
and fixed wireless channels in service to provide local exchange or 
exchange access service. We also require respondents to provide 
information about the extent to which they use their own facilities in 
providing these lines or wireless channels, and the extent to which 
they use the facilities or services of other LECs in doing so.
    23. Part III of the form collects information about mobile 
telephony subscribership.

Final Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    24. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Local 
Competition and Broadband Deployment Notice invited the general public 
and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the 
proposed information collection requirements contained in the Notice. 
On December 22, 1999, OMB approved the proposed information collection, 
as submitted to OMB. \1\ In this Order, we adopt the proposed Local 
Competition and Broadband Reporting form, but modify our proposal to 
reflect comments received from OMB and other commenters. The revised 
Local Competition and Broadband Reporting has been approved by OMB. The 
OMB Control Number is 3060-0816.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Letter from Donald R. Arbuckle, Office of Management and 
Budget, to Judy Boley, Federal Communications Commission (Dec. 22, 
1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis

    25. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 603 
(RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
incorporated into the Notice issued in this proceeding, FCC 99-301, 
October 22, 1999. The Commission sought written comment in the Notice, 
including comments on the IRFA. The Commission's Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) in this Order conforms to the RFA, as 
amended by the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA), 
Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996).

(1) Need for, and Objectives of, the Local Competition and Broadband 
Reporting Order

    26. The Commission initiated this proceeding to determine whether 
it should require certain providers of communications services to 
report a limited amount of information about the

[[Page 19679]]

development of local telephone competition and the deployment of 
broadband services as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 
In this Order, we adopt rules to collect basic information about two 
important aspects of communications: the status of local telephone 
service competition and the deployment of ``advanced telecommunications 
capability.'' The 1996 Act--in particular, sections 251 and 271--tasked 
the Commission and the states with important roles in opening local 
telephone markets to competition. Moreover, the Commission needs timely 
and reliable information on broadband deployment given that section 706 
of the 1996 Act requires the Commission to issue periodic reports on 
the state of broadband deployment. The information collected pursuant 
to this program will materially improve our ability to develop, 
evaluate, and revise policy in these critical areas and will provide 
valuable benchmarks not only for this Commission but for other policy 
makers and consumers. Further, the information collection program 
adopted in this Order is the least burdensome means available to 
fulfill these statutory obligations.

(2) Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comment in Response 
to the IRFA

    27. In the IRFA, we stated that we would seek to minimize the 
burden imposed on smaller entities by establishing thresholds for 
reporting that balanced the needs of the Commission to receive data on 
the development of local competition and deployment of broadband 
against the burden such reporting places on smaller entities. In 
response to the Notice, the Commission received comments from 37 
parties and held a series of ex parte meetings with potential 
respondents to the information collection adopted in this Order. Among 
those parties, only the Office of Advocacy, United States Small 
Business Administration (SBA) and the Organization for the Promotion 
and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO), 
commented specifically on the IRFA. We note that many other commenters 
raised issues about the proposed rules and we encourage readers of this 
FRFA to consult the complete text of this Order, which describes in 
detail our analysis of commenter proposals.
    28. In its comments to the IRFA, SBA expresses concern that the 
proposed threshold for reporting broadband data (1,000 broadband lines 
nationwide) may be set too low and, therefore, include a number of 
smaller entities that would be unduly burdened by the reporting 
requirement. As a result, SBA recommends that the Commission raise the 
reporting threshold to at least 5,000 lines nationwide or 
``significantly reduce the burden on the small businesses that would be 
replying.'' OPASTCO, in its comments, commends the Commission for its 
efforts to exempt smaller entities and urges the Commission to adopt an 
existing SBA definition of small companies: those with fewer than 1,500 
employees. We note that other commenters, while not in direct response 
to the IRFA, disagree with SBA and OPASTCO and urge the Commission to 
adopt its proposed reporting threshold.
    29. In an effort to balance the needs of the Commission with the 
costs our data gathering may place on smaller entities, the Commission 
has modified the thresholds for reporting and the frequency of filing 
reports, and other aspects of the requirements. We believe that these 
modifications satisfy SBA's request that we significantly reduce the 
burdens for those small entities that must comply. For example, by 
adopting a state level threshold (250 broadband lines in a given 
state), we ensure that reporting entities have a significant presence 
in a given state, before having to complete the form for that state. 
Moreover, we conclude that this threshold is set to allow the 
Commission to comply with Congress' charge in section 706 of the 1996 
Act to determine whether advanced telecommunications capability, 
commonly known as ``broadband,'' is being deployed to all Americans. In 
order to gain the comprehensive understanding--as called for in section 
706--of the broadband market, particularly in rural and inner-city 
areas and among demographic groups that are traditionally underserved, 
it is necessary to gather data from entities that are most likely to 
serve these areas and groups, which include some smaller entities.
    30. Among the other actions taken to reduce the overall burden on 
small entities, we decouple the broadband and local competition 
reporting thresholds. In the Notice, the Commission tentatively 
concluded that any provider meeting the threshold requirement for the 
broadband part of the form would be required to complete the local 
competition part of the form, whether or not the entity met the 
threshold for that part, if the entity provides services listed in that 
part of the form. We note that the representatives of traditionally 
smaller providers opposed this linkage of reporting thresholds. By 
eliminating this linkage, we reduce reporting burdens on these 
traditionally smaller providers.
    31. To further reduce the potential burden this data gathering 
program may place on smaller entities the Commission, in this Order, 
has also reduced the frequency of reporting from quarterly to semi-
annually. In this regard, we accept the suggestions of many commenters 
that reducing the frequency of reporting is a measurable way to 
decrease the burden placed on reporting entities. We necessarily 
decline SBA's invitation to adopt an annual filing basis, because we 
conclude that the rapidly changing nature of the local competition and 
broadband markets necessitate more regular data collections.
    32. Supporting the proposal in the Notice, SBA further encourages 
the Commission to collect information on a statewide basis. In this 
Order, we adopt our proposal and require providers to report data on a 
state-by-state basis. To supplement this data, we ask providers of 
broadband and local exchange services to provide a list of the Zip 
Codes in which they serve at least one customer. We conclude that 
reporting scheme best balances our need to achieve geographically 
disaggregated information while minimizing burdens on all entities, 
including small entities.
    33. Finally, we note SBA's suggestion that small carriers be 
allowed to file data on a voluntary basis. While the Commission 
concludes that it is necessary to adopt a mandatory reporting 
mechanism, we agree with SBA that smaller, exempted providers should be 
invited to file data on a voluntary basis. Thus, we encourage small 
providers to file the new FCC Form 477 even if they do not meet the 
reporting thresholds for mandatory reporting.
    34. Overall, we believe that our approach (e.g., changing 
thresholds to the state level, decoupling the thresholds for different 
parts of the form, and reducing the reporting frequency to semi-
annually) will result in a program that is not overly burdensome on 
reporting entities, and thus balances the concerns raised by SBA and 
other commenters with the Commission's need to gain a better 
understanding of developments in these markets.

(3) Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which 
Rules Will Apply

    35. In the IRFA, the Commission included a description and estimate 
of the number of small entities to which its proposed rules would 
apply. No commenters addressed the issue. In this

[[Page 19680]]

Order, the Commission decides that local exchange carriers and 
providers of mobile telephony services that serve 10,000 or more voice-
grade equivalent lines or wireless channels (or mobile telephony 
subscribers) in a given state and any entity that provides 250 or more 
full or one-way broadband lines or channels in a given state, must 
report data about those services provided in that state. Based on data 
available to it at present, the Commission estimates that approximately 
200 of the nation's local exchange carriers and between 100-200 mobile 
telephony providers will be required to comply with the requirement. We 
do not have concrete data on which to base a precise estimate of the 
number of broadband providers that may be required to report. We set 
out, however, a detailed description of the types of entities that may 
be required to comply with the reporting requirement and we detail our 
understanding of the number of small entities within each of these 
categories.
    36. To estimate the number of small entities that will be affected 
by the rules, we first consider the statutory definition of ``small 
entity'' under the RFA. The RFA generally defines ``small entity'' as 
having the same meaning as the term ``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, unless the Commission 
has developed one or more definitions that are appropriate to its 
activities. Under the Small Business Act, a ``small business concern'' 
is one that: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not 
dominant in its field of operation; and (3) meets any additional 
criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). The 
SBA has defined a small business for Standard Industrial Classification 
(SIC) categories 4812 (Radiotelephone Communications) and 4813 
(Telephone Communications, Except Radiotelephone) to be small entities 
when they have no more than 1,500 employees. We first discuss the 
number of small telephone companies falling within these SIC 
categories, then attempt to refine further those estimates to 
correspond with the categories of telephone companies that are commonly 
used under our rules.
    37. The most reliable source of information regarding the total 
numbers of common carrier and related providers nationwide, as well as 
the numbers of commercial wireless entities, appears to be data the 
Commission publishes annually in its Carrier Locator report, derived 
from filings made in connection with the Telecommunications Relay 
Service (TRS). According to data in the most recent report, there are 
4,144 interstate carriers. These carriers include, inter alia, local 
exchange carriers, wireline carriers and service providers, 
interexchange carriers, competitive access providers, operator service 
providers, pay telephone operators, providers of telephone toll 
service, providers of telephone exchange service, and resellers.
    38. We have included small incumbent LECs in this present RFA 
analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under the RFA is one 
that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size standard 
(e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or fewer 
employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.'' The 
SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small 
incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of operation because any 
such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. We have therefore included 
small incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis, although we emphasize that 
this RFA action has no effect on FCC analyses and determinations in 
other, non-RFA contexts.
    39. Total Number of Telephone Companies Affected. The United States 
Bureau of the Census (``the Census Bureau'') reports that, at the end 
of 1992, there were 3,497 firms engaged in providing telephone 
services, as defined therein, for at least one year. This number 
contains a variety of different categories of carriers, including local 
exchange carriers, interexchange carriers, competitive access 
providers, cellular carriers, mobile service carriers, operator service 
providers, pay telephone operators, PCS providers, covered SMR 
providers, and resellers. It seems certain that some of those 3,497 
telephone service firms may not qualify as small entities because they 
are not ``independently owned and operated.'' For example, a PCS 
provider that is affiliated with an interexchange carrier having more 
than 1,500 employees would not meet the definition of a small business. 
It seems reasonable to conclude, therefore, that fewer than 3,497 
telephone service firms are small entity telephone service firms that 
may be affected by the decisions and rules in the Order.
    40. Wireline Carriers and Service Providers. SBA has developed a 
definition of small entities for telephone communications companies 
other than radiotelephone companies. The Census Bureau reports that, 
there were 2,321 such telephone companies in operation for at least one 
year at the end of 1992. According to SBA's definition, a small 
business telephone company other than a radiotelephone company is one 
employing no more than 1,500 persons. All but 26 of the 2,321 non-
radiotelephone companies listed by the Census Bureau were reported to 
have fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, even if all 26 of those 
companies had more than 1,500 employees, there would still be 2,295 
non-radiotelephone companies that might qualify as small entities. 
Although it seems certain that some of these carriers are not 
independently owned and operated, we are unable at this time to 
estimate with greater precision the number of wireline carriers and 
service providers that would qualify as small business concerns under 
SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 
2,295 small entity telephone communications companies other than 
radiotelephone companies that may be affected by the decisions and 
rules in the Order.
    41. Local Exchange Carriers, Interexchange Carriers, Competitive 
Access Providers, Operator Service Providers, and Resellers. Neither 
the Commission nor SBA has developed a definition of small local 
exchange carriers (LECs), interexchange carriers (IXCs), competitive 
access providers (CAPs), operator service providers (OSPs), or 
resellers. The closest applicable definition for these carrier-types 
under SBA rules is for telephone communications companies other than 
radiotelephone (wireless) companies. The most reliable source of 
information regarding the number of these carriers nationwide of which 
we are aware appears to be the data that we collect annually in 
connection with the Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS). According 
to our most recent data, there are 1,560 LECs and CAPs, 171 IXCs, 24 
OSPs, and 388 resellers. Although it seems certain that some of these 
carriers are not independently owned and operated, or have more than 
1,500 employees, we are unable at this time to estimate with greater 
precision the number of these carriers that would qualify as small 
business concerns under SBA's definition. Consequently, we estimate 
that there are fewer than 1,410 small entity LECs, 151 IXCs, 129 CAPs, 
32 OSPs, and 351 resellers that may be affected by the decisions and 
rules in the Order.
    42. Wireless (Radiotelephone) Carriers. SBA has developed a 
definition of small entities for radiotelephone (wireless) companies. 
The Census Bureau reports that there were 1,176 such companies in 
operation for at least one year at the end of 1992.

[[Page 19681]]

According to SBA's definition, a small business radiotelephone company 
is one employing no more than 1,500 persons. The Census Bureau also 
reported that 1,164 of those radiotelephone companies had fewer than 
1,000 employees. Thus, even if all of the remaining 12 companies had 
more than 1,500 employees, there would still be 1,164 radiotelephone 
companies that might qualify as small entities if they are 
independently owned are operated. Although it seems certain that some 
of these carriers are not independently owned and operated, we are 
unable at this time to estimate with greater precision the number of 
radiotelephone carriers and service providers that would qualify as 
small business concerns under SBA's definition. Consequently, we 
estimate that there are fewer than 1,164 small entity radiotelephone 
companies that may be affected by the decisions and rules in the Order.
    43. Cellular, PCS, SMR and Other Mobile Service Providers. In an 
effort to further refine our calculation of the number of 
radiotelephone companies that may be affected by the rules adopted 
herein, we consider the data that we collect annually in connection 
with the TRS for the subcategories Wireless Telephony (which includes 
Cellular, PCS, and SMR) and Other Mobile Service Providers. We will 
utilize the closest applicable definition under SBA rules--which, for 
both categories, is for telephone companies other than radiotelephone 
(wireless) companies, however, to the extent that the Commission has 
adopted definitions for small entities providing PCS and SMR services, 
we discuss those definitions. According to our most recent TRS data, 
732 companies reported that they are engaged in the provision of 
Wireless Telephony services and 23 companies reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of Other Mobile Services. Although it seems 
certain that some of these carriers are not independently owned and 
operated, or have more than 1,500 employees, we are unable at this time 
to estimate with greater precision the number of Wireless Telephony 
Providers and Other Mobile Service Providers, except as described 
below, that would qualify as small business concerns under SBA's 
definition. Consequently, we estimate that there are fewer than 732 
small entity Wireless Telephony Providers and fewer than 23 small 
entity Other Mobile Service Providers that may be affected by the 
decisions and rules in the Order.
    44. Broadband PCS Licensees. The broadband PCS spectrum is divided 
into six frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission 
has held auctions for each block. The Commission defined ``small 
entity'' for Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross 
revenues of less than $40 million in the three previous calendar years. 
For Block F, an additional classification 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 regulations defining ``small 
entity'' in the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by 
SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved definition bid 
successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There were 90 winning 
bidders that qualified as small entities in the Block C auctions. A 
total of 93 small and very small business bidders won approximately 40% 
of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. However, licenses for 
Blocks C through F have not been awarded fully, therefore there are 
few, if any, small businesses currently providing PCS services. Based 
on this information, we estimate that the number of small broadband PCS 
licenses will include the 90 winning C Block bidders and the 93 
qualifying bidders in the D, E, and F blocks, for a total of 183 small 
PCS providers as defined by SBA and the Commissioner's auction rules.
    45. SMR Licensees. Pursuant to 47 CFR 90.814(b)(1), the Commission 
has defined ``small entity'' in auctions for geographic area 800 MHz 
and 900 MHz SMR licenses as a firm that had average annual gross 
revenues of less than $15 million in the three previous calendar years. 
The definition of a ``small entity'' in the context of 800 MHz SMR has 
been approved by the SBA, and approval for the 900 MHz SMR definition 
has been sought. The rules may apply to SMR providers in the 800 MHz 
and 900 MHz bands that either hold geographic area licenses or have 
obtained extended implementation authorizations. We do not know how 
many firms provide 800 MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR service 
pursuant to extended implementation authorizations, nor how many of 
these providers have annual revenues of less than $15 million. 
Consequently, we estimate, for purposes of this FRFA, that all of the 
extended implementation authorizations may be held by small entities, 
some of which may be affected by the decisions and rules in the Order.
    46. The Commission recently held auctions for geographic area 
licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. There were 60 winning bidders who 
qualified as small entities in the 900 MHz auction. Based on this 
information, we estimate that the number of geographic area SMR 
licensees that may be affected by the decisions and rules in the Order 
includes these 60 small entities. No auctions have been held for 800 
MHz geographic area SMR licenses. Therefore, no small entities 
currently hold these licenses. A total of 525 licenses will be awarded 
for the upper 200 channels in the 800 MHz geographic area SMR auction. 
The Commission, however, has not yet determined how many licenses will 
be awarded for the lower 230 channels in the 800 MHz geographic area 
SMR auction. There is no basis, moreover, on which to estimate how many 
small entities will win these licenses. Given that nearly all 
radiotelephone companies have fewer than 1,000 employees and that no 
reliable estimate of the number of prospective 800 MHz licensees can be 
made, we conclude, for purposes of this FRFA, that all of the licenses 
may be awarded to small entities, some of which may be affected by the 
decisions and rules in the Order.
    47. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase I Licensees. The 220 MHz service 
has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. 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 definition of small entities specifically applicable to 
such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of 
such licensees that are small businesses, we apply the definition under 
the SBA rules applicable to Radiotelephone Communications companies. 
According to the Bureau of the Census, only 12 radiotelephone firms out 
of a total of 1,178 such firms which operated during 1992 had 1,000 or 
more employees. Therefore, if this general ratio continues to 1999 in 
the context of Phase I 220 MHz licensees, we estimate that nearly all 
such licensees are small businesses under the SBA's definition, some of 
which may be affected by the decisions and rules in the Order.
    48. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase II Licensees. The Phase II 220 MHz 
service is a new service, and is subject to spectrum auctions. In the 
220 MHz Third Report and Order we adopted criteria for defining small 
businesses and very small businesses for purposes of determining their 
eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and 
installment payments. We have defined a small business as an entity 
that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has 
average

[[Page 19682]]

gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. 
Additionally, a very small business is defined as an entity that, 
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average 
gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding 
three years. An auction of Phase II licenses commenced on September 15, 
1998, and closed on October 22, 1998. 908 licenses were auctioned in 3 
different-sized geographic areas: three nationwide licenses, 30 
Regional Economic Area Group Licenses, and 875 Economic Area (EA) 
Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 were sold. Companies 
claiming small business status won: one of the Nationwide licenses, 67% 
of the Regional licenses, and 54% of the EA licenses. As of October 7, 
1999, the Commission had granted 681 of the Phase II 220 MHz licenses 
won at a first auction and an additional 221 Phase II licenses won at a 
second auction.
    49. Narrowband PCS. The Commission has auctioned nationwide and 
regional licenses for narrowband PCS. There are 11 nationwide and 30 
regional licensees for narrowband PCS. The Commission does not have 
sufficient information to determine whether any of these licensees are 
small businesses within the SBA-approved definition for radiotelephone 
companies. At present, there have been no auctions held for the major 
trading area (MTA) and basic trading area (BTA) narrowband PCS 
licenses. The Commission anticipates a total of 561 MTA licenses and 
2,958 BTA licenses will be awarded by auction. Such auctions have not 
yet been scheduled, however. Given that nearly all radiotelephone 
companies have no more than 1,500 employees and that no reliable 
estimate of the number of prospective MTA and BTA narrowband licensees 
can be made, we assume, for purposes of this FRFA, that all of the 
licenses will be awarded to small entities, as that term is defined by 
the SBA.
    50. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not adopted a 
definition of small entity specific to the Rural Radiotelephone 
Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is 
the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio Systems (BETRS). We will use the 
SBA's definition applicable to radiotelephone companies, i.e., an 
entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 
1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and we estimate 
that almost all of them qualify as small entities under the SBA's 
definition.
    51. Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not 
adopted a definition of small entity specific to the Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Service. Accordingly, we will use the SBA's definition 
applicable to radiotelephone companies, i.e., an entity employing no 
more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 100 licensees in the 
Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and we estimate that almost all of 
them qualify as small entities under the SBA definition.
    52. Private Land Mobile Radio (PLMR). PLMR systems serve an 
essential role in a range of industrial, business, land transportation, 
and public safety activities. These radios are used by companies of all 
sizes operating in all U.S. business categories. The Commission has not 
developed a definition of small entity specifically applicable to PLMR 
licensees due to the vast array of PLMR users. For the purpose of 
determining whether a licensee is a small business as defined by the 
SBA, each licensee would need to be evaluated within its own business 
area. The Commission is unable at this time to estimate the number of, 
if any, small businesses that could be impacted by the proposed rules. 
However, the Commission's 1994 Annual Report on PLMRs indicates that at 
the end of fiscal year 1994 there were 1,087,267 licensees operating 
12,481,989 transmitters in the PLMR bands below 512 MHz. Because any 
entity engaged in a commercial activity is eligible to hold a PLMR 
license, the rules in this context could potentially impact every small 
business in the United States. We note, however, that because the vast 
majority of these licensees are end-users, not providers of telephony 
or broadband services, they would not be directly affected by the rules 
adopted in this Order.
    53. Fixed Microwave Services. Microwave services include common 
carrier, private-operational fixed, and broadcast auxiliary radio 
services. At present, there are approximately 22,015 common carrier 
fixed licensees in the microwave services. The Commission has not yet 
defined a small business with respect to microwave services. For 
purposes of this FRFA, we will utilize the SBA's definition applicable 
to radiotelephone companies--i.e., an entity with no more than 1,500 
persons. We estimate, for this purpose, that all of the Fixed Microwave 
licensees (excluding broadcast auxiliary licensees) would qualify as 
small entities under the SBA definition for radiotelephone companies.
    54. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on 
several UHF TV broadcast channels that are not used for TV broadcasting 
in the coastal area of the states bordering the Gulf of Mexico. At 
present, there are approximately 55 licensees in this service. We are 
unable at this time to estimate the number of licensees that would 
qualify as small entities under the SBA's definition for radiotelephone 
communications.
    55. Wireless Communications Services. This service can be used for 
fixed, mobile, radio location 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 Commission auctioned 
geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, there were 
seven winning bidders that qualified as very small business entities, 
and one that qualified as a small business entity. We conclude that the 
number of geographic area WCS licensees that may be affected by the 
decisions and rules adopted in the Order includes these eight entities.
    56. Satellite Services. The Commission has not developed a 
definition of small entities applicable to satellite service licensees. 
Therefore, the applicable definition of small entity is generally the 
definition under the SBA rules applicable to Communications Services, 
Not Elsewhere Classified (NEC). This definition provides that a small 
entity is expressed as one with $11.0 million or less in annual 
receipts. According to the Census Bureau, there were a total of 848 
communications services providers, NEC, in operation in 1992, and a 
total of 775 had annual receipts of less than $9.999 million. The 
Census report does not provide more precise data.
    57. In addition to the estimates provided above, we consider 
certain additional entities that may be affected by the data collection 
from broadband service providers. Because section 706 requires us to 
monitor the deployment of broadband regardless of technology or 
transmission media employed, we anticipate that some broadband service 
providers will not provide telephone service. Accordingly, we describe 
below other types of firms that may provide broadband services, 
including cable companies, MDS providers, and utilities, among others.
    58. Cable services or systems. The SBA has developed a definition 
of small

[[Page 19683]]

entities for cable and other pay television services, which includes 
all such companies generating $11 million or less in revenue annually. 
This definition includes cable systems operators, closed circuit 
television services, direct broadcast satellite services, multipoint 
distribution systems, satellite master antenna systems and subscription 
television services. According to the Census Bureau data from 1992, 
there were 1,788 total cable and other pay television services and 
1,423 had less than $11 million in revenue.
    59. The Commission has developed its own definition of a small 
cable system operator for the purposes of rate regulation. Under the 
Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is one serving fewer than 
400,000 subscribers nationwide. Based on our most recent information, 
we estimate that there were 1,439 cable operators that qualified as 
small cable system operators at the end of 1995. Since then, some of 
those companies may have grown to serve over 400,000 subscribers, and 
others may have been involved in transactions that caused them to be 
combined with other cable operators. Consequently, we estimate that 
there are fewer than 1,439 small entity cable system operators.
    60. The Communications Act also contains a definition of a small 
cable system operator, 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 there are 66,000,000 
subscribers in the United States. Therefore, we found that an operator 
serving fewer than 660,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small 
operator, if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual 
revenues of all of its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the 
aggregate. Based on available data, we find that the number of cable 
operators serving 660,000 subscribers or less totals 1,450. We do not 
request nor do we collect information concerning whether cable system 
operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues 
exceed $250,000,000, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with 
greater precision the number of cable system operators that would 
qualify as small cable operators under the definition in the 
Communications Act. It should be further noted that recent industry 
estimates project that there will be a total of 66,000,000 subscribers, 
and we have based our fee revenue estimates on that figure.
    61. Multipoint Distribution Systems (MDS): The Commission has 
defined ``small entity'' for the auction of MDS as an entity that, 
together with its affiliates, has average gross annual revenues that 
are not more than $40 million for the preceding three calendar years. 
This definition of a small entity in the context of MDS auctions has 
been approved by the SBA. The Commission completed its MDS auction in 
March 1996 for authorizations in 493 basic trading areas (BTAs). Of 67 
winning bidders, 61 qualified as small entities.
    62. MDS is also heavily encumbered with licensees of stations 
authorized prior to the auction. The SBA has developed a definition of 
small entities for pay television services, which includes all such 
companies generating $11 million or less in annual receipts. This 
definition includes multipoint distribution systems, and thus applies 
to MDS licensees and wireless cable operators which did not participate 
in the MDS auction. Information available to us indicates that there 
are 832 of these licensees and operators that do not generate revenue 
in excess of $11 million annually. Therefore, for purposes of this 
FRFA, we find there are approximately 892 small MDS providers as 
defined by the SBA and the Commission's auction rules, some which may 
be affected by the decisions and rules adopted in the Order.
    63. Electric Services (SIC 4911): The SBA has developed a 
definition for small electric utility firms. The Census Bureau reports 
that a total of 1379 electric utilities were in operation for at least 
one year at the end of 1992. According to SBA, a small electric utility 
is an entity whose gross revenues did not exceed five million dollars 
in 1992. The Census Bureau reports that 447 of the 1379 firms listed 
had total revenues below five million dollars.
    64. Electric and Other Services Combined (SIC 4931): The SBA has 
classified this entity as a utility whose business is less than 95% 
electric in combination with some other type of service. The Census 
Bureau reports that a total of 135 such firms were in operation for at 
least one year at the end of 1992. The SBA's definition of a small 
electric and other services combined utility is a firm whose gross 
revenues did not exceed five million dollars in 1992. The Census Bureau 
reported that 45 of the 135 firms listed had total revenues below five 
million dollars.
    65. Combination Utilities, Not Elsewhere Classified (SIC 4939): The 
SBA defines this utility as providing a combination of electric, gas, 
and other services which are not otherwise classified. The Census 
Bureau reports that a total of 79 such utilities were in operation for 
at least one year at the end of 1992. According to SBA's definition, a 
small combination utility is a firm whose gross revenues did not exceed 
five million dollars in 1992. The Census Bureau reported that 63 of the 
79 firms listed had total revenues below five million dollars.

(4) Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other 
Compliance Requirements

    66. The very focus of this proceeding is whether the Commission 
should require certain providers of communications services to report a 
limited amount of information about the development of local telephone 
competition and the deployment of broadband services. The Order 
concludes that the Commission should undertake such a data collection 
and that local exchange carriers and providers of mobile telephony 
services that serve 10,000 or more voice-grade equivalent lines or 
channels statewide, and any entity that provides 250 or more full or 
one-way broadband lines or channels statewide, should report 
specifically targeted information. The Order sets out in detail the 
types of providers that should report, exempting smaller providers, 
frequency of reports, data to be reported, and method of reporting. In 
particular, we conclude in the Order that given the comprehensive data 
to be obtained from large and medium size providers, it can exempt most 
small providers from completing the survey without materially affecting 
its ability to assess the development of local telephone competition 
and the deployment of broadband services.

(5) Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small 
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered

    67. The most significant step taken to minimize the impact of these 
rules on small entities is the adoption of reporting thresholds. For 
example, the Commission makes specific provision to exempt most smaller 
carriers from the requirement to report local telephone competition 
data. The Commission concludes that carriers with fewer than 10,000 
statewide voice-grade equivalent lines or channels (or mobile telephony 
subscribers, in the case of mobile telephony providers) should be 
exempted from the reporting requirement for that state. Based on this 
exemption, the Commission estimates that only approximately 200 of the 
nation's largest local exchange carriers would remain subject to the

[[Page 19684]]

requirement. Similarly, the Commission exempts the smallest broadband 
providers by adopting a broadband reporting threshold. Thus, firms that 
provide fewer than 250 full or one-way broadband lines or wireless 
channels in a given state need not report data for that state.
    68. Among significant alternatives, the Commission considered 
whether it might rely on publicly available data or voluntary surveys, 
in lieu of a mandatory data collection program. The Commission 
concludes other publicly available information sources present less 
than complete pictures of actual conditions and trends in developing 
local service markets and in the deployment of broadband. Further, the 
Commission considered the need for, and size of, its exemptions for 
small entities. The Commission concludes that the thresholds adopted 
will allow it to exempt most smaller carriers from completing the form 
without materially affecting its ability to assess the development of 
local competition and the deployment of broadband services. The 
Commission also accepted other suggestions that will reduce burdens on 
entities, including decoupling reporting thresholds, adopting a less 
frequent reporting schedule, and allowing providers to report on a 
state-by-state basis.
    69. Report to Congress. The Commission will send a copy of the 
Local Competition and Broadband Reporting Report and Order, including 
this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress pursuant to the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, see 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A). In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Local 
Competition and Broadband Reporting Report and Order, including FRFA, 
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. 
A copy of the Local Competition and Broadband Reporting Report and 
Order and FRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the 
Federal Register. See 5 U.S.C. 604(b).

Ordering Clause

    70. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to sections 1-5, 10, 
11, 201-205, 215, 218-220, 251-271, 303(r), 332, 403, 502, and 503 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-155, 160, 
161, 201-205, 215, 218-220, 251-271, 303(r), 332, 403, 502, and 503 and 
pursuant to section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 
U.S.C. 157 nt, this order, with all attachments, is hereby adopted.
    71. That the requirements and regulations established in this Order 
shall become effective May 12, 2000. The Commission shall place a 
notice in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of the 
requirements and regulations adopted herein.
    72. That providers subject to the requirements and regulation 
established in this Order shall complete and file the Local Competition 
and Broadband Reporting Form (FCC Form 477) no later than May 15, 2000 
and semi-annually thereafter.
    73. That the Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference 
Information Center, shall send a copy of this Local Competition and 
Broadband Reporting Order, including the Final Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration in accordance with paragraph 603(a) of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (1981).

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The action contained in this Order summarized here contains a 
modified information collection.
    OMB Approval Number: 3060-0816.
    Title: ``Local Competition and Broadband Reporting, CC Docket No. 
99-301.''
    Form Number: FCC Form 477.
    Type of Review: Revision of Existing Collection.
    Respondents: Business or Not-for-profit institutions, including 
small businesses.
    Burden Estimate: Average burden per respondent--

    Number of Respondents: up to 255.

    Estimated Time Per Response Per State: 11.1.

    Number of Reports Per Year: 2.

    Average States Per Respondents: 5.3.

    Total Annual Burden: Up to 29,924 person-hours.
    Estimated Costs per Respondent: $0.00.
    Needs and Uses: The information collection will be used by the 
Commission to gather information on the state of the development of 
local competition and broadband deployment. Without such information, 
the Commission faces significant difficulty in assessing the 
development of these markets and, therefore, is less able to fulfill 
its statutory responsibilities in accordance with the Communications 
Act of 1934, as amended.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Parts 1 and 43

    Communications common carriers, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Telecommunications, Telephone.

47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carriers.
Federal Communications Commission.

William F. Caton,
Deputy Secretary.

Rule Changes

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR Parts 1, 20 and 43 as follows:

PART 1--PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES

    1. The authority citation for part 1 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 155, 225, and 303(r), 
309.


    2. In part 1, subpart U is added to read as follows:

Subpart U--Implementation of Section 706 of the Telecommunications 
Act of 1996; Commission Collection of Advanced Telecommunications 
Capability Data

Sec.
1.6000   Purpose.
1.6001   Scope and content of filed reports.
1.6002   Frequency of reports.


Sec. 1.6000  Purpose.

    The purpose of this subpart is to set out the terms by which 
certain commercial and government-controlled entities report data to 
the Commission concerning the deployment of advanced telecommunications 
capability, defined pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 157 as ``high-speed, 
switched, broadband telecommunications capability that enables users to 
originate and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video 
telecommunications using any technology,'' and the deployment of 
services that are competitive with advanced telecommunications 
capability.


Sec. 1.6001  Scope and content of filed reports.

    (a) Definitions. Terms used in this subpart have the following 
meanings:
    (1) Facilities-based providers. Those entities that provide 
broadband services over their own facilities or over Unbundled Network 
Elements (UNEs), special access lines, and other leased lines and 
wireless channels that the entity obtains from a communications service 
provider and equips as broadband.
    (2) Full broadband lines or wireless channels. Lines or wireless 
channels

[[Page 19685]]

with information carrying capability in excess of 200 Kbps in both 
directions simultaneously.
    (3) One-way broadband lines or wireless channels. Lines or wireless 
channels with information carrying capability in excess of 200 Kbps in 
at least one direction, but not both.
    (4) Own facilities. Lines and wireless channels the entity actually 
owns and facilities that it obtained the right to use from other 
entities as dark fiber or satellite transponder capacity.
    (b) All commercial and government-controlled entities, including 
but not limited to common carriers and their affiliates (as defined in 
47 U.S.C. 153 (1)), cable television companies, Multichannel Multipoint 
Distribution Service (MMDS/MDS) ``wireless cable'' carriers, other 
fixed wireless providers, terrestrial and satellite mobile wireless 
providers, utilities and others, which are facilities-based providers 
and are providing at least 250 full or one-way broadband lines or 
wireless channels in a given state, or provide full or one-way 
broadband service to at least 250 end-user consumers in a given state, 
shall file with the Commission a completed FCC Form 477, in accordance 
with the Commission's rules and the instructions to the FCC Form 477, 
for each state in which they exceed this threshold.
    (c) Respondents identified in paragraph (b) of this section shall 
file the FCC Form 477 on diskette or via e-mail, as directed in the 
instructions to the FCC Form 477. Upon submission of each report, an 
original certification letter (as contained in the instructions to FCC 
Form 477) signed by the responsible official shall be mailed to the 
Commission.
    (d) Respondents may make requests for Commission non-disclosure of 
provider-specific data contained in FCC Form 477 under Sec. 0.459 of 
this chapter by so indicating on Form 477 at the time that the subject 
data are submitted. The Commission shall make all decisions regarding 
non-disclosure of provider-specific information, except that the Chief 
of the Common Carrier Bureau may release provider-specific information 
to a state commission, provided that the state commission has 
protections in place that would preclude disclosure of any confidential 
information.
    (e) Respondents identified in paragraph (b) of this section shall 
file a revised version of FCC Form 477 if and when they discover a 
significant error in their filed FCC Form 477. For counts, a difference 
amounting to 5 percent of the filed number is considered significant. 
For percentages, a difference of 5 percentage points is considered 
significant.
    (f) Failure to file the FCC Form 477 in accordance with the 
Commission's rules and the instructions to the Form 477 may lead to 
enforcement action pursuant to the Act and any other applicable law.


Sec. 1.6002  Frequency of reports.

    Entities subject to the provisions of Sec. 1.6001 shall file 
reports semi-annually. Reports shall be filed each year on or before 
March 1st (reporting data about the status of their broadband 
deployment as of December 31 of the prior year) and September 1st 
(reporting data about the status of their broadband deployment as of 
June 31 of the current year). Entities becoming subject to the 
provisions of Sec. 1.6001 for the first time within a calendar year 
shall file data for the reporting period in which they become eligible 
and semi-annually thereafter. Entities subject to the provisions of 
Sec. 1.6001 shall make an initial filing of the FCC Form 477 on May 15, 
2000 (reporting data about the status of their broadband deployment as 
of December 31, 1999).

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

    3. The authority citation for part 20 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 251-254, 303, and 332 unless 
otherwise noted.


    4. In Sec. 20.15, paragraph (b)(1) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 20.15  Requirements under Title II of the Communications Act.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) File with the Commission copies of contracts entered into with 
other carriers or comply with other reporting requirements, or with 
Secs. 1.781 through 1.814 and 43.21 of this chapter; except that 
commercial radio service providers that offer broadband service, as 
described in Sec. 1.6001(a) or mobile telephony are required to file 
reports pursuant to Secs. 1.6000 and 43.11 of this chapter to the 
extent that they meet the thresholds as set out in Secs. 1.6001(b) and 
43.11(a) of this chapter. For purposes of this section mobile, 
telephony is defined as real-time, two-way switched voice service that 
is interconnected with the public switched network utilizing an in-
network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse 
frequencies and accomplish seamless handoff of subscriber calls.
* * * * *

PART 43--REPORTS OF COMMUNICATION COMMON CARRIERS AND CERTAIN 
AFFILIATES

    5. The authority citation for part 43 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154; Telecommunications Act of 1996, Public 
Law 104-104, secs. 402(b)(2)(B), (c), 110 Stat. 56 (1996) as amended 
unless otherwise noted. 47 U.S.C. 211, 219, 220 as amended.


    6. In Sec. 43.01, paragraph (b) is revised and paragraph (d) is 
added to read as follows:


Sec. 43.01  Applicability

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, 
carriers becoming subject to the provisions of the several sections of 
this part for the first time, shall, within thirty (30) days of 
becoming subject, file the required data as set forth in the various 
sections of this part.
* * * * *
    (d) Common carriers subject to the provisions of Sec. 43.11 shall 
file data semi-annually. Reports shall be filed each year on or before 
March 1st (reporting data about their deployment of local exchange 
services as of December 31 of the prior year) and September 1st 
(reporting data about their deployment of local exchange services as of 
June 31 of the current year). Common carriers becoming subject to the 
provisions of Sec. 43.11 for the first time within a calendar year 
shall file data for the reporting period in which they become eligible 
and semi-annually thereafter. Common carriers subject to the provisions 
of Sec. 43.11 shall make an initial filing of the FCC Form 477 on May 
15, 2000 (reporting data about their deployment of local exchange 
services as of December 31, 1999).
    7. Section 43.11 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 43.11  Reports of local exchange competition data

    (a) All common carriers and their affiliates (as defined in 47 
U.S.C. 153 (1)) providing telephone exchange or exchange access service 
(as defined in 47 U.S.C. 153 (16) and (47)) or commercial mobile radio 
service (CMRS) providers offering mobile telephony (as defined in 
section 20.15(b)(1) of this chapter), which provide at least 10,000 
voice-grade equivalent lines or wireless channels or have at least 
10,000 end-user consumers in a given state, shall file with the 
Commission a completed FCC Form 477, in accordance with the 
Commission's rules and the instructions

[[Page 19686]]

to the FCC Form 477, for each state in which they exceed this 
threshold.
    (b) Respondents identified in paragraph (a) of this section shall 
file the FCC Form 477 on diskette or via e-mail, as directed in the 
instructions to the FCC Form 477. Upon submission of each report, an 
original certification letter (as contained in the instructions to FCC 
Form 477) signed by the responsible official shall be mailed to the 
Commission.
    (c) Respondents may make requests for Commission non-disclosure of 
provider-specific data contained in the Form 477 under Sec. 0.459 of 
this chapter by so indicating on the Form 477 at the time that the 
subject data are submitted. The Commission shall make all decisions 
regarding non-disclosure of provider-specific information, except that 
the Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau may release provider-specific 
information to a state commission, provided that the state commission 
has protections in place that would preclude disclosure of any 
confidential information.
    (d) Respondents identified in paragraph (b) of this section shall 
file a revised version of FCC Form 477 if and when they discover a 
significant error in their filed FCC Form 477. For counts, a difference 
amounting to 5 percent of the filed number is considered significant. 
For percentages, a difference of 5 percentage points is considered 
significant.
    (e) Failure to file FCC Form 477 in accordance with the 
Commission's rules and the instructions to Form 477 may lead to 
enforcement action pursuant to the Act and any other applicable law.

[FR Doc. 00-9187 Filed 4-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P