[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 31 (Thursday, February 14, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8617-8625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-2797]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[PS Docket No. 07-114; CC Docket No. 94-102; WC Docket No. 05-196; FCC 
07-166]


Wireless E911 Location Accuracy Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) amends its rules in order to require wireless Enhanced 911 
(E911) Phase II location accuracy and reliability standards at a 
geographical level defined by the coverage area of a Public Safety 
Answering Point (PSAP). The Commission takes this step in order to 
ensure an appropriate and consistent compliance methodology with 
respect to location accuracy standards.

DATES: The rules in 47 CFR 20.18(h) contain information collection 
requirements that have not been approved by the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB). The Federal Communications Commission will publish a 
document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Simpson, Policy Division, Public 
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-2391.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Report 
and Order (Order) in PS Docket No. 07-114, CC Docket No. 94-102, WC 
Docket No. 05-196, FCC 07-166, adopted September 11, 2007, and released 
November 20, 2007. The complete text of this document is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC 
Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be obtained from the 
Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., in 
person at 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, via 
telephone at (202) 488-5300, via facsimile at (202) 488-5563, or via e-
mail at [email protected]. Alternative formats (computer diskette, large 
print, audio cassette, and Braille) are available to persons with 
disabilities by sending an e-mail to [email protected] or calling the 
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530, TTY (202) 
418-0432. This document is also available on the Commission's Web site 
at http://www.fcc.gov.
    1. On June 1, 2007, we released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM) seeking comment on how to improve 911 location accuracy and 
reliability. We found that although measuring location accuracy at the 
PSAP level may present challenges, the public interest demands that 
carriers and technology providers strive to ensure that when wireless 
callers dial 911, emergency responders are provided location 
information that enables them to reach the site of the emergency as 
quickly as possible. In recognition of the fact that

[[Page 8618]]

many carriers are not currently measuring and testing location accuracy 
at the PSAP service area level, we sought comment on whether we should 
defer enforcement of Sec.  20.18(h) if we adopted our tentative 
conclusion to require compliance at the PSAP level.

Compliance With Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP Level

    2. Consistent with the NPRM, we find that carriers should be 
required to meet the Commission's Phase II accuracy requirements set 
forth in Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level. Use of a PSAP-
based geographic area for compliance purposes is most consistent with 
the purpose of the E911 rules, which, as we stated in the NPRM, is to 
ensure that PSAPs receive accurate, meaningful location information in 
order to dispatch local emergency responders to the correct location. 
Although Sec.  20.18(h) does not explicitly state that accuracy must be 
measured and tested at the PSAP level, it is unreasonable to think that 
the Commission ever envisioned averaging of location accuracy on a 
large geographic basis, such as a carrier's entire national footprint.
    3. As we stated in the NPRM, measuring over large geographic areas 
such as a carrier's entire national footprint could allow a service 
provider to claim compliance with the Commission's accuracy 
requirements even though the carrier cannot meet them in individual 
PSAP areas, or even entire states. In those circumstances, certain 
PSAPs receive either meaningless location information or no location 
information. Even worse, PSAPs may receive location information yet not 
know that the information is not reliable. Any of these results could 
extend the amount of time necessary for a 911 call taker to obtain the 
location of the caller or the site of an emergency--including cases as 
serious as callers attempting to report criminal activity impacting 
homeland security--and thus result in longer dispatch times, and 
perhaps even no response by public safety officials who lack sufficient 
information to locate the caller. In fact, PSAPs often answer calls 
with: ``911. What is the address of your emergency?'' because they 
cannot rely on carriers to meet location accuracy requirements in their 
PSAP service area. A lack of meaningful data regarding a caller's 
location would thus render the purpose of the rule--which is intended 
to ensure that carriers provide meaningful location information to 
emergency responders--a nullity. Measurement of compliance at the PSAP 
level is the most appropriate way to avoid this otherwise absurd result 
consistent with the purpose of the rule.
    4. The record in this proceeding supports our conclusion that 
requiring PSAP-level accuracy is necessary to ensure that the goal of 
providing meaningful location information to emergency responders is 
met. The public safety organizations that filed comments in response to 
the NPRM are nearly unanimous in their support for our tentative 
conclusion. These organizations represent a cross-section of the public 
safety community, ranging from nationwide associations such as APCO and 
NENA, to first responders in densely populated urban areas such as New 
York City, Chicago, and Orlando, to emergency response organizations in 
smaller communities such as Lufkin, Texas and San Juan County, New 
Mexico. The public safety commenters are uniquely qualified to attest 
to the importance of accurate and reliable location information. Their 
comments support our observation in the NPRM that averaging location 
accuracy over large geographic areas is likely to produce inadequate 
and unreliable location information in some parts of a provider's 
service area. The New York City Police Department, for example, 
emphasizes how difficult it is for PSAPs to ensure that the location 
information they receive from carriers is accurate and reliable. And 
Consumer Reports estimates that accurate location information is not 
delivered at the PSAP level in nearly half of the country.
    5. Some commenters support measuring and testing location accuracy 
on a statewide basis, rather than at the PSAP service area level. These 
commenters, however, fail to address how measurement at the state level 
furthers the goals of Sec.  20.18(h). State-level compliance would not 
solve the problem that APCO described in its 2004 request for 
declaratory ruling and that public safety commenters in this proceeding 
have also identified: State-level compliance would still allow service 
providers to average accuracy results over a geographic area large 
enough to render the location information provided to some PSAPs within 
the state ``virtually useless.'' As a result, carriers may achieve 
acceptable levels of location accuracy in urban areas of a given state, 
yet provide location information of limited or no use to first 
responders in rural areas. Indeed, this approach would particularly 
shortchange residents of larger states with a significant number of 
PSAPs as they would be more likely to reside in a PSAP where location 
information of limited or no use would be provided than would residents 
of smaller states. Moreover, if it is possible for carriers to comply 
with location accuracy requirements on a statewide basis in small 
states, this suggests that it would be feasible for carriers to comply 
with location accuracy requirements at the PSAP level across the nation 
were they willing to invest appropriate resources. These commenters 
also provide no persuasive reasons or evidence why the Commission 
should require compliance at any level other than the PSAP level. In 
the absence of any such evidence, we reject this approach.
    6. Commenters also argue that we should not require location 
accuracy compliance at the PSAP level before completing the second 
phase of this rulemaking, or that we should first convene an industry 
forum or advisory council to assess the possibilities for improving 911 
location accuracy. We reject this argument as without merit. The step 
we take today is necessary to ensure first responders receive 
meaningful location accuracy information as soon as possible, and 
should not be delayed while we explore additional issues regarding 
improving location accuracy. By making clear that compliance with Sec.  
20.18(h) must be measured at the PSAP level, we also effectively ``set 
the stage'' for the examination that lies ahead, ensuring that all 
stakeholders are properly discussing location accuracy at the correct 
geographic level.
    7. Our action today, however, does not depend on that examination, 
nor does it preclude a more comprehensive approach to our E911 location 
accuracy rules, as some commenters suggest, or otherwise ``plac[e] the 
cart before the horse.'' Although the NPRM sought comment on whether 
hybrid location technologies can provide even better location accuracy 
results, we do not resolve those questions in the Order. We only 
require service providers to comply with Sec.  20.18(h) at what may be 
a smaller geographic area than they are currently using to measure 
their compliance, with whatever location technology they are now using 
to locate 911 callers. More specifically, we are not mandating any 
specific location technology or approach in the Order, nor are we 
requiring carriers to implement new location technologies. For example, 
carriers that currently employ a network-based location solution need 
not incorporate handset-based location technologies into their networks 
to comply with our ruling in the Order, or vice versa. And, as noted 
above, our determination here will serve to better inform the 
discussion going forward. For these

[[Page 8619]]

reasons, we are not persuaded that the action we take today is 
premature.
    8. We also reject as without merit commenters' assertions that we 
should not move forward because the location technologies that are 
currently available are not capable of satisfying the requirements of 
Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level. In the first instance, 
our decision to allow carriers five years to achieve compliance at the 
PSAP level substantially mitigates these concerns. Furthermore, the 
record indicates that in many cases, PSAP-level compliance is 
technologically feasible today and would require only the investment of 
additional financial resources. In this regard, we note that while it 
is obviously in carriers' financial interests to argue that any 
meaningful requirement will not be possible to meet, carriers too often 
blur the distinction between that which is infeasible and that which 
simply requires the expenditure of additional resources. Finally, even 
though the record indicates that some service providers are not 
currently prepared to meet our current location accuracy requirements 
at the PSAP level, that fact alone should not prevent us from 
establishing the PSAP service areas as the geographic basis for 
compliance with the Sec.  20.18(h) location accuracy requirements. 
Indeed, the Commission has consistently found it appropriate to set 
aggressive benchmarks for carriers and providers when public safety is 
at stake, and it is our judgment based on the record as well as our 
experience regarding the implementation of similar public safety 
mandates that carriers will be able to meet the compliance deadline and 
interim benchmarks set forth in the Order. While we acknowledge that 
meeting the deadline and benchmarks may require the investment of 
significant resources by certain carriers, we believe that such 
expenditures are more than justified by the accompanying public safety 
benefits. Furthermore, we believe that the Order will have a catalyzing 
effect on efforts to improve location accuracy measurement because it 
will create significant incentives for industry.
    9. In short, the public interest demands that we no longer allow 
service providers to nullify our longstanding location accuracy 
requirements by measuring their compliance over unreasonably large 
geographic areas. While deployment of E911 Phase II service continues 
to expand, such service has no significance to local emergency 
responders if the location information so provided does not permit 911 
call takers to locate the caller. In the interests of public safety and 
homeland security, our action today thus closes any ``loopholes'' that 
may allow service providers to avoid providing meaningful location 
accuracy information. It is clear based on the inability to date of 
wireless carriers and technology vendors to provide meaningful PSAP-
level accuracy that it is incumbent on us to clearly establish that 
compliance must be achieved at the PSAP level.

Compliance Deadline and Interim Benchmarks

    10. The record in this proceeding contains encouraging evidence 
that location technology providers have developed and are developing 
technologies that can achieve PSAP-level compliance. The record also 
reflects that the technology exists to test, monitor, and report 
compliance at the PSAP level. Moreover, as noted above, PSAP-level 
compliance is possible in many instances through the deployment of 
existing resources and technologies presently available to carriers. We 
recognize, however, that many service providers are not currently 
measuring and testing location accuracy at the PSAP level, and that 
meeting our location accuracy requirements in every PSAP may take time 
to achieve. We do not intend to penalize carriers that are making good 
faith efforts to comply with our location accuracy requirements at the 
PSAP level. At the same time, we must ensure that carriers begin to 
transition to PSAP-level compliance without delay.
    11. Accordingly, we establish a deadline of September 11, 2012 for 
achieving compliance with Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP level. We find 
that allowing sufficient time for carriers to achieve compliance 
alleviates parties' concerns about the challenges of PSAP-level 
compliance with Sec.  20.18(h), yet still leads to appreciable and 
swift improvements to E911 service that will result from compliance at 
the appropriate geographic level. The record in this proceeding 
supports giving carriers five years to achieve PSAP-level compliance.
    12. In order to ensure that carriers are making progress toward 
compliance with the Commission's location accuracy requirements at the 
PSAP level, we establish a series of interim requirements, which 
carriers must also meet in order to comply with Sec.  20.18(h). These 
benchmarks consist of the following:
     By September 11, 2008--one year from the date of adoption 
of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must satisfy the 
location accuracy requirements of Sec.  20.18(h) within each Economic 
Area (EA) in which that carrier operates.
     By September 11, 2009--two years from the date of adoption 
of this Order--each carrier subject to the rule must file with the 
Commission a report describing the status of its ongoing efforts to 
comply with Sec.  20.18(h).
     By September 11, 2010--three years from the date of 
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must (1) 
satisfy the location accuracy requirements of Sec.  20.18(h) within 
each Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Rural Service Area (RSA) 
in which that carrier operates; (2) demonstrate PSAP-level compliance 
with Sec.  20.18(h) within at least 75% of the PSAPs the carrier 
serves; and (3) demonstrate accuracy in all PSAP service areas within 
at least 50% of the applicable location accuracy standard (in other 
words, a carrier subject to the accuracy standard for handset-based 
technologies in Sec.  20.18(h)(2), which is 50 meters for 67 percent of 
calls, must achieve location accuracy of 75 meters for 67 percent of 
calls in all PSAPs in order to comply with this requirement).
     By September 11, 2011--four years from the date of 
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must file with 
the Commission a report describing the status of its ongoing efforts to 
comply with Sec.  20.18(h).
     By September 11, 2012--five years from the date of 
adoption of the Order--each carrier subject to the rule must be in full 
compliance with Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level.
    In determining their compliance with these benchmarks and preparing 
their reports to the Commission, carriers must include only those PSAPs 
that are capable of receiving Phase II location data.

I. Procedural Matters

A. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    13. This document contains proposed new information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the 
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), we seek specific comment on how we might ``further 
reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns 
with fewer than 25 employees.''

[[Page 8620]]

B. Congressional Review Act

    14. The Commission will send a copy of this Second Report and Order 
in a report to be sent to Congress and the Government Accountability 
Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (``CRA''), see 5 U.S.C. 
801(a)(1)(A).

II. Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    15. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 
included in the NPRM in PS Docket No. 07-114; CC Docket No. 94-102; and 
WC Docket No. 05-196. The Commission sought written public comment on 
the proposals in these dockets, including comment on the IRFA. This 
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Rules

    16. In the NPRM, we sought comment on how to best ensure that 
public safety answering points (PSAPs) receive location information 
that is as accurate as possible for all wireless E911 calls. The 
objective was to ensure that PSAPs receive reliable and accurate 
location information irrespective of the location of the caller or the 
technology that may be used.
    17. The Report and Order requires that Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service (CMRS) carriers comply by September 11, 2012, with Sec.  
20.18(h) of the Commission's rules at the PSAP service area level and 
adopts interim benchmarks in each of the preceding years to achieve 
this level. Section 20.18(h) sets forth the standards for Phase II 
wireless E911 location accuracy and reliability. This action responds 
to a petition for declaratory ruling filed by the Association of 
Public-Safety Communications Officials-International, Inc. (APCO) 
expressing concern that by measuring and testing location accuracy over 
geographic areas larger than PSAP service areas, a wireless carrier can 
assert that it satisfies the requirements of Sec.  20.18(h) even when 
it is not meeting the location accuracy requirements in substantial 
segments of its service area.

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comments in Response to 
the IRFA

    18. There were no comments filed that specifically addressed the 
IRFA.

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

    19. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules. The RFA generally defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).

Telecommunications Service Entities

Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers

    20. Below, for those services subject to auctions, we note that, as 
a general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small 
businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent 
the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the 
Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in 
the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are 
implicated.
    21. Cellular Licensees. The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census category 
``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under this SBA 
category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 
1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this 
total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 
firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this 
category and size standard, the great majority of firms can be 
considered small. Also, according to Commission data, 437 carriers 
reported that they were engaged in the provision of cellular service, 
Personal Communications Service (PCS), or Specialized Mobile Radio 
(SMR) Telephony services, which are placed together in the data. We 
have estimated that 260 of these are small, under the SBA small 
business size standard.
    22. Common Carrier Paging. The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for wireless firms within the broad economic census 
category, ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under 
this SBA category, a wireless business is small if it has 1,500 or 
fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data 
for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or 
fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or 
more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. In the Paging 
Third Report and Order, we developed a small business size standard for 
``small businesses'' and ``very small businesses'' for purposes of 
determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding 
credits and installment payments. A ``small business'' is an entity 
that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has 
average gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding 
three years. Additionally, a ``very small business'' is an entity that, 
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average 
gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding 
three years. The SBA has approved these small business size standards. 
An auction of Metropolitan Economic Area licenses commenced on February 
24, 2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. Of the 985 licenses auctioned, 
440 were sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming small business status 
won. Also, according to Commission data, 375 carriers reported that 
they were engaged in the provision of paging and messaging services. Of 
those, we estimate that 370 are small, under the SBA-approved small 
business size standard.
    23. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, 
personal communications services (PCS), and specialized mobile radio 
(SMR) telephony carriers. As noted earlier, the SBA has developed a 
small business size standard for ``Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications'' services. Under that SBA small business size 
standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
According to Commission data, 445 carriers reported that they were 
engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. We have estimated that 
245 of these are small under the SBA small business size standard.
    24. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband 
Personal Communications Service (PCS) spectrum is divided into six 
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held 
auctions for each block. The Commission defined ``small entity'' for 
Blocks C and F as an entity that has average gross revenues of $40 
million or less in the three previous calendar years. For Block F, an 
additional classification for ``very small business''

[[Page 8621]]

was added and is defined as an entity that, together with its 
affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more than $15 million for 
the preceding three calendar years. These standards defining ``small 
entity'' in the context of broadband PCS auctions have been approved by 
the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved small business 
size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A and B. There 
were 90 winning bidders that qualified as small entities in the Block C 
auctions. A total of 93 small and very small business bidders won 
approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 licenses for Blocks D, E, and F. 
On March 23, 1999, the Commission re-auctioned 347 C, D, E, and F Block 
licenses. There were 48 small business winning bidders. On January 26, 
2001, the Commission completed the auction of 422 C and F broadband PCS 
licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 winning bidders in this auction, 
29 qualified as ``small'' or ``very small'' businesses. Subsequent 
events, concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency 
determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being 
available for grant.
    25. Narrowband Personal Communications Services. To date, two 
auctions of narrowband personal communications services (PCS) licenses 
have been conducted. For purposes of the two auctions that have already 
been held, ``small businesses'' were entities with average gross 
revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less. 
Through these auctions, the Commission has awarded a total of 41 
licenses, out of which 11 were obtained by small businesses. To ensure 
meaningful participation of small business entities in future auctions, 
the Commission has adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in 
the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. A ``small business'' is an 
entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has 
average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than 
$40 million. A ``very small business'' is an entity that, together with 
affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for 
the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. The SBA has 
approved these small business size standards. In the future, the 
Commission will auction 459 licenses to serve Metropolitan Trading 
Areas (MTAs) and 408 response channel licenses. There is also one 
megahertz of narrowband PCS spectrum that has been held in reserve and 
that the Commission has not yet decided to release for licensing. The 
Commission cannot predict accurately the number of licenses that will 
be awarded to small entities in future auctions. However, four of the 
16 winning bidders in the two previous narrowband PCS auctions were 
small businesses, as that term was defined. The Commission assumes, for 
purposes of this analysis, that a large portion of the remaining 
narrowband PCS licenses will be awarded to small entities. The 
Commission also assumes that at least some small businesses will 
acquire narrowband PCS licenses by means of the Commission's 
partitioning and disaggregation rules.
    26. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not adopted a 
size standard for small businesses specific to the Rural Radiotelephone 
Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is 
the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System (BETRS). The Commission uses 
the SBA's small business size standard applicable to ``Cellular and 
Other Wireless Telecommunications,'' i.e., an entity employing no more 
than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 1,000 licensees in the 
Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission estimates that there 
are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone 
Service that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein.
    27. Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not 
adopted a small business size standard specific to the Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Service. We will use SBA's small business size standard 
applicable to ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications,'' i.e., 
an entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 
100 licensees in the Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service, and we estimate 
that almost all of them qualify as small under the SBA small business 
size standard.
    28. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on 
several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for 
television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the 
Gulf of Mexico. There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this 
service. We are unable to estimate at this time the number of licensees 
that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business size 
standard for ``Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications'' 
services. Under that SBA small business size standard, a business is 
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.

Wireline Carriers and Service Providers

    29. The SBA has developed a small business size standard for 
wireline firms within the broad economic census category, ``Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers.'' Under this category, the SBA deems a 
wireline business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 2,432 firms in this 
category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,395 firms 
had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 37 firms had employment 
of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and associated 
small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered 
small.
    30. We have included small incumbent local exchange carriers in 
this present RFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under 
the RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business 
size standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 
or fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.'' 
The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small 
incumbent local exchange carriers are not dominant in their field of 
operation because any such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. We 
have therefore included small incumbent local exchange carriers in this 
RFA analysis, although we emphasize that this RFA action has no effect 
on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
    31. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the 
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard 
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate 
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission 
data, 1,303 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the 
provision of incumbent local exchange services. Of these 1,303 
carriers, an estimated 1,020 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 283 have 
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
most providers of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses 
that may be affected by our action.
    32. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers, Competitive Access 
Providers (CAPs), ``Shared-Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other 
Local Service Providers.'' Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a small business

[[Page 8622]]

size standard specifically for these service providers. The appropriate 
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission 
data, 769 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision 
of either competitive access provider services or competitive local 
exchange carrier services. Of these 769 carriers, an estimated 676 have 
1,500 or fewer employees and 93 have more than 1,500 employees. In 
addition, 12 carriers have reported that they are ``Shared-Tenant 
Service Providers,'' and all 12 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer 
employees. In addition, 39 carriers have reported that they are ``Other 
Local Service Providers.'' Of the 39, an estimated 38 have 1,500 or 
fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, 
the Commission estimates that most providers of competitive local 
exchange service, competitive access providers, ``Shared-Tenant Service 
Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service Providers'' are small entities 
that may be affected by our action.
    33. Local Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that 
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. According to Commission data, 143 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of 
these, an estimated 141 have 1,500 or fewer employees and two have more 
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of local resellers are small entities that may be affected by 
our action.
    34. Toll Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under that 
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. According to Commission data, 770 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of 
these, an estimated 747 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 23 have more 
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of toll resellers are small entities that may be affected by 
our action.
    35. Payphone Service Providers (PSPs). Neither the Commission nor 
the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for 
payphone services providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA 
rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that 
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. According to Commission data, 613 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of payphone services. Of these, 
an estimated 609 have 1,500 or fewer employees and four have more than 
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of payphone service providers are small entities that may be 
affected by our action.
    36. Interexchange Carriers (IXCs). Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for 
providers of interexchange services. The appropriate size standard 
under SBA rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. 
Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or 
fewer employees. According to Commission data, 316 carriers have 
reported that they are engaged in the provision of interexchange 
service. Of these, an estimated 292 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 
24 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission 
estimates that the majority of IXCs are small entities that may be 
affected by our action.
    37. Operator Service Providers (OSPs). Neither the Commission nor 
the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for 
operator service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA 
rules is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that 
size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. According to Commission data, 23 carriers have reported that 
they are engaged in the provision of operator services. Of these, an 
estimated 20 have 1,500 or fewer employees and three have more than 
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of OSPs are small entities that may be affected by our action.
    38. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for 
prepaid calling card providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA 
rules is for the category Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size 
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
According to Commission data, 89 carriers have reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, 88 are 
estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that all or the 
majority of prepaid calling card providers are small entities that may 
be affected by our action.
    39. 800 and 800-Like Service Subscribers. Neither the Commission 
nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically 
for 800 and 800-like service (``toll free'') subscribers. The 
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category 
Telecommunications Resellers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. The most reliable source 
of information regarding the number of these service subscribers 
appears to be data the Commission collects on the 800, 888, and 877 
numbers in use. According to our data, at the end of January 1999, the 
number of 800 numbers assigned was 7,692,955; the number of 888 numbers 
assigned was 7,706,393; and the number of 877 numbers assigned was 
1,946,538. We do not have data specifying the number of these 
subscribers that are not independently owned and operated or have more 
than 1,500 employees, and thus are unable at this time to estimate with 
greater precision the number of toll free subscribers that would 
qualify as small businesses under the SBA size standard. Consequently, 
we estimate that there are 7,692,955 or fewer small entity 800 
subscribers; 7,706,393 or fewer small entity 888 subscribers; and 
1,946,538 or fewer small entity 877 subscribers.

International Service Providers

    40. The Commission has not developed a small business size standard 
specifically for providers of international service. The appropriate 
size standards under SBA rules are for the two broad census categories 
of ``Satellite Telecommunications'' and ``Other Telecommunications.'' 
Under both categories, such a business is small if it has $13.5 million 
or less in average annual receipts.
    41. The first category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing point-to-point 
telecommunications services to other establishments in the 
telecommunications and broadcasting industries by forwarding and 
receiving communications signals via a system of satellites or 
reselling satellite telecommunications.'' For this category, Census 
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 371 firms that 
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 307 firms had annual 
receipts of under $10 million, and 26 firms had receipts of $10 million 
to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the

[[Page 8623]]

majority of Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that 
might be affected by our action.
    42. The second category of Other Telecommunications ``comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in (1) providing specialized 
telecommunications applications, such as satellite tracking, 
communications telemetry, and radar station operations; or (2) 
providing satellite terminal stations and associated facilities 
operationally connected with one or more terrestrial communications 
systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to or receiving 
telecommunications from satellite systems.'' For this category, Census 
Bureau data for 2002 show that there were a total of 332 firms that 
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 303 firms had annual 
receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10 
million to $24,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of 
Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that might be 
affected by our action.

Cable and OVS Operators

    43. Cable and Other Program Distribution. The Census Bureau defines 
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged as third-party distribution systems for broadcast 
programming. The establishments of this industry deliver visual, aural, 
or textual programming received from cable networks, local television 
stations, or radio networks to consumers via cable or direct-to-home 
satellite systems on a subscription or fee basis. These establishments 
do not generally originate programming material.'' The SBA has 
developed a small business size standard for Cable and Other Program 
Distribution, which is: all such firms having $13.5 million or less in 
annual receipts. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a 
total of 1,191 firms in this category that operated for the entire 
year. Of this total, 1,087 firms had annual receipts of under $10 
million, and 43 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less than 
$25 million. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can 
be considered small.
    44. Cable Companies and Systems. The Commission has also developed 
its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate 
regulation. Under the Commission's rules, a ``small cable company'' is 
one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers, nationwide. Industry data 
indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but eleven are 
small under this size standard. In addition, under the Commission's 
rules, a ``small system'' is a cable system serving 15,000 or fewer 
subscribers. Industry data indicate that, of 7,208 systems nationwide, 
6,139 systems have under 10,000 subscribers, and an additional 379 
systems have 10,000-19,999 subscribers. Thus, under this second size 
standard, most cable systems are small.
    45. Cable System Operators. The Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, also contains a size standard for small cable system 
operators, which is ``a cable operator that, directly or through an 
affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all 
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity 
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed 
$250,000,000.'' The Commission has determined that an operator serving 
fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its 
annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of all 
its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Industry 
data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but ten 
are small under this size standard. We note that the Commission neither 
requests nor collects information on whether cable system operators are 
affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 
million, and therefore we are unable to estimate more accurately the 
number of cable system operators that would qualify as small under this 
size standard.
    46. Open Video Services (OVS). In 1996, Congress established the 
open video system (OVS) framework, one of four statutorily recognized 
options for the provision of video programming services by local 
exchange carriers (LECs). The OVS framework provides opportunities for 
the distribution of video programming other than through cable systems. 
Because OVS operators provide subscription services, OVS falls within 
the SBA small business size standard of Cable and Other Program 
Distribution Services, which consists of such entities having $13.5 
million or less in annual receipts. The Commission has certified 25 OVS 
operators, with some now providing service. Broadband service providers 
(BSPs) are currently the only significant holders of OVS certifications 
or local OVS franchises. As of June, 2005, BSPs served approximately 
1.4 million subscribers, representing 1.5 percent of all MVPD 
households. Affiliates of Residential Communications Network, Inc. 
(RCN), which serves about 371,000 subscribers as of June, 2005, is 
currently the largest BSP and 14th largest MVPD. RCN received approval 
to operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, DC and 
other areas. The Commission does not have financial information 
regarding the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not 
yet be operational. We thus believe that at least some of the OVS 
operators may qualify as small entities.

Internet Service Providers

    47. Internet Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for Internet Service Providers (ISPs). ISPs 
``provide clients access to the Internet and generally provide related 
services such as web hosting, web page designing, and hardware or 
software consulting related to Internet connectivity.'' Under the SBA 
size standard, such a business is small if it has average annual 
receipts of $23 million or less. According to Census Bureau data for 
2002, there were 2,529 firms in this category that operated for the 
entire year. Of these, 2,437 firms had annual receipts of under $10 
million, and 47 firms had receipts of $10 million or more but less then 
$25 million. Consequently, we estimate that the majority of these firms 
are small entities that may be affected by our action.
    48. All Other Information Services. ``This industry comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing other information 
services (except new syndicates and libraries and archives).'' The SBA 
has developed a small business size standard for this category; that 
size standard is $6.5 million or less in average annual receipts. 
According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 195 firms in this 
category that operated for the entire year. Of these, 172 had annual 
receipts of under $5 million, and an additional nine firms had receipts 
of between $5 million and $9,999,999. Consequently, we estimate that 
the majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by 
our action.

Equipment Manufacturers

    49. Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing. The Census 
Bureau defines this category as follows: ``This industry comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television 
broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products 
made by these establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, 
cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, 
mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and 
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has

[[Page 8624]]

developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television 
Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which 
is: all such firms having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census 
Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 1,041 establishments in 
this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,010 
had employment of under 500, and an additional 13 had employment of 500 
to 999. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be 
considered small.
    50. Telephone Apparatus Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines 
this category as follows: ``This industry comprises establishments 
primarily engaged in manufacturing wire telephone and data 
communications equipment. These products may be standalone or board-
level components of a larger system. Examples of products made by these 
establishments are central office switching equipment, cordless 
telephones (except cellular), PBX equipment, telephones, telephone 
answering machines, LAN modems, multi-user modems, and other data 
communications equipment, such as bridges, routers, and gateways.'' The 
SBA has developed a small business size standard for Telephone 
Apparatus Manufacturing, which is: all such firms having 1,000 or fewer 
employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total 
of 518 establishments in this category that operated for the entire 
year. Of this total, 511 had employment of under 1,000, and an 
additional 7 had employment of 1,000 to 2,499. Thus, under this size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    51. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. These 
establishments manufacture ``computer storage devices that allow the 
storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, 
or magnetic/optical media.'' The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 
500 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there 
were 1,082 establishments in this category that operated for the entire 
year. Of these, 987 had employment of under 500, and 52 establishments 
had employment of 500 to 999.
    52. Computer Storage Device Manufacturing. These establishments 
manufacture ``computer storage devices that allow the storage and 
retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, or magnetic/
optical media.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 1,000 or 
fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 1997, there were 
209 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. 
Of these, 197 had employment of under 500, and eight establishments had 
employment of 500 to 999.

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

    53. In this Report and Order, we have taken steps to advance our 
public safety mission by establishing a requirement that CMRS carriers 
comply by September 11, 2012, at the PSAP service area level, with 
Sec.  20.18(h) of the Commission's rules. The Order requires carriers 
to submit compliance reports to the Commission at the two-year and 
four-year marks, explaining their progress in achieving compliance with 
Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP level. In addition, some carriers may have 
to revise their internal recordkeeping procedures to comply with the 
Order's requirements, although the Order imposes no specific 
requirements in this regard.

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

    54. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, 
specifically small business alternatives that it has considered in 
reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four 
alternatives (among others): ``(1) The establishment of differing 
compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into 
account the resources available to small entities; (2) the 
clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or 
reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use 
of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) and exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.''
    55. In the Notice, the Commission specifically considered the 
impact of potential revisions to the wireless E911 accuracy rules on 
small entities. The Notice asked whether certain classes of carriers 
and/or rural networks should be held to a uniform standard of accuracy 
if the Commission were to adopt one, and if so, by what date they 
should be required to come into compliance with a more stringent, 
uniform accuracy requirement. In previous rulemakings, the Commission 
has established different compliance deadlines for small wireless 
carriers. The questions posed in the Notice enabled the Commission to 
assess whether similar concessions to small entities were warranted 
with respect to wireless E911 accuracy requirements.
    56. The Commission has determined that the benefits of requiring 
all CMRS carriers to comply with the requirements of Sec.  20.18(h) at 
the PSAP service area level far outweigh any burdens associated with 
implementing these requirements. E-911 represents a significant and 
valuable investment that enables emergency responders to reach the site 
of an emergency as quickly as possible. The public safety comments in 
response to the Notice were nearly unanimous in support of this 
requirement. We acknowledge that compliance with the rule adopted in 
the order may impose cost burdens on small entities. However, given the 
great public interest benefits of the rules, we find that the public 
interest benefits outweigh the economic burdens. Furthermore, the Order 
gives carriers a full five years to come into compliance with Sec.  
20.18(h) at the PSAP level, in large part because we have taken into 
account the specific economic and technological concerns that small 
entities face. In the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, we 
sought comment on these rules and no commenter proposed an alternative 
version that would serve these benefits while lessening the economic 
burdens. Accordingly, we find that we have discharged our duty to 
consider the burdens imposed on small entities.

Report to Congress

    57. The Commission will send a copy of the Report and Order, 
including this FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress and the 
Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review 
Act. In addition, the Commission will send a copy of the Second Report 
and Order, including this FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the SBA. A copy of the Second Report and Order and FRFA (or summaries 
thereof) will also be published in the Federal Register.

III. Ordering Clauses

    58. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), and 
332 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 
154(i), 332, that the Report and Order in PS Docket No. 07-114, CC 
Docket No. 94-102, and WC Docket No. 05-196 is adopted, and that part 
20 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 20, is amended. The Order 
shall become effective April 14, 2008, subject to OMB approval for new 
information collection requirements.

[[Page 8625]]

    59. It is further ordered that the Request for Declaratory Ruling 
filed by APCO is granted to the extent indicated herein.
    60. It is further ordered that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, shall send a 
copy of this Report and Order, including the Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications equipment, Radio.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Final Rules

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal Communications 
Commission amends 47 CFR part 20 to read as follows:

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

0
1. The authority for part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 160, 201, 251-254, 303, and 332 unless 
otherwise noted.


0
2. Section 20.18 paragraph (h) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  20.18  911 Services.

* * * * *
    (h) Phase II accuracy. (1) By September 11, 2012, licensees subject 
to this section shall comply with the following standards for Phase II 
location accuracy and reliability, to be tested and measured at the 
PSAP service area geographic level:
    (i) For network-based technologies: 100 meters for 67 percent of 
calls, 300 meters for 95 percent of calls;
    (ii) For handset-based technologies: 50 meters for 67 percent of 
calls, 150 meters for 95 percent of calls.
    (iii) For the remaining 5 percent of calls, location attempts must 
be made and a location estimate must be provided to the appropriate 
PSAP.
    (2) By the dates specified in this paragraph, carriers must satisfy 
the following requirements:
    (i) By September 11, 2008, carriers must satisfy the location 
accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1) of this section within each 
Economic Area (EA) in which that carrier operates;
    (ii) By September 11, 2009, carriers must file with the Commission 
a report describing the status of their ongoing efforts to comply with 
Sec.  20.18(h);
    (iii) By September 11, 2010, carriers must:
    (A) Satisfy the location accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1) of 
this section within each Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Rural 
Service Area (RSA) in which that carrier operates;
    (B) Demonstrate PSAP-level compliance with the location accuracy 
standards in paragraph (h)(1) of this section within at least 75% of 
the PSAPs the carrier serves; and
    (C) Demonstrate accuracy in all PSAP service areas within at least 
50% of the applicable location accuracy standard (i.e., a carrier 
subject to the location accuracy standards in paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of 
this section must achieve location accuracy of 75 meters for 67 percent 
of calls in all PSAPs).
    (iv) By September 11, 2011, carriers must file with the Commission 
a report describing the status of their ongoing efforts to comply with 
Sec.  20.18(h).
    (v) By September 11, 2012, carriers must be in full compliance with 
Sec.  20.18(h) at the PSAP service area level.
    (3) In assessing their compliance with the requirements of this 
section, carriers must include only those PSAPs that are capable of 
receiving Phase II location data.
* * * * *

 [FR Doc. E8-2797 Filed 2-13-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P