[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 35 (Thursday, February 21, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9507-9515]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-3129]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 52

[WCB: WC Docket Nos. 07-243, 07-244; FCC 07-188]


Telephone Number Requirements for IP-Enabled Services Providers; 
Local Number Portability Porting Interval and Validation Requirements

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission (Commission) adopted a 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on whether the Commission 
should extend local number portability (LNP) requirements and numbering 
related rules, including compliance with N11 code assignments, to 
interconnected voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers, and 
whether the Commission should adopt rules specifying the length of 
porting intervals or other details of the porting process.

DATES: Comments are due on or before March 24, 2008, and reply comments 
are due on or before April 21, 2008

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket Nos. 07-243 
and 07-244, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected], and include the following words in 
the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample form and directions 
will be sent in response. Include the docket number(s) in the subject 
line of the message.
     Mail: Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: 236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE., 
Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by e-mail: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
    All submissions received must include the agency name and docket 
number for this rulemaking, WC Docket Nos. 07-243 and 07-244. All 
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Kirkel, Wireline Competition 
Bureau, (202) 418-1580.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) in WC Docket Nos. 07-243 and 07-244, 
FCC 07-188, adopted October 31, 2007, and released November 8, 2007. 
The complete text of this document is available for inspection and 
copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information 
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 
20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's 
duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, 
SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or 
(202) 863-2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via e-mail at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also available on the Commission's Web site at  
http://www.fcc.gov.

Public Participation

    Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 
CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments regarding the Notice on or before the dates indicated on the 
first page of this document. All filings related to this Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking should refer to WC Docket No. 07-243 or WC Docket 
No. 07-244. All filings made in response to the Notice section on 
interconnected VoIP provider numbering obligations should be filed in 
WC Docket No. 07-243. All filings made in response to the Notice 
sections on port request validation and porting intervals should be 
filed in WC Docket No. 07-244. Comments may be filed using: (1) The 
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), (2) the Federal 
Government's eRulemaking Portal, or (3) by filing paper copies. See 
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 
(1998).

[[Page 9508]]

     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/ 
or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Filers 
should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting 
comments.
     ECFS filers must transmit one electronic copy of the 
comments for WC Docket Nos. 07-243 and 07-244. In completing the 
transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal 
Service mailing address, and the applicable docket number. Parties may 
also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing 
instructions, filers should send an e-mail to [email protected], and include 
the following words in the body of the message, ``get form.'' A sample 
form and directions will be sent in response.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and four copies of each filing. Filings can be sent by 
hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by 
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue 
to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All 
filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. 
Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 
12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
     The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or 
messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 
Massachusetts Avenue, NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing 
hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be 
held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be 
disposed of before entering the building.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554.
    Parties should send a copy of their filings to the Competition 
Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, Federal Communications 
Commission, Room 5-C140, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or 
by e-mail to [email protected]. Parties shall also serve one copy with 
the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), 
Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, 
(202) 488-5300, or via e-mail to [email protected].
    Documents in WC Docket Nos. 07-243, and 07-244 will be available 
for public inspection and copying during business hours at the FCC 
Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 
CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The documents may also be purchased from 
BCPI, telephone (202) 488-5300, facsimile (202) 488-5563, TTY (202) 
488-5562, e-mail [email protected].

Synopsis of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    1. Through this Notice, the Commission considers whether there are 
additional number administration requirements that the Commission 
should adopt to benefit customers of telecommunications and 
interconnected VoIP services. First, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether it should act to extend other numbering-related obligations to 
interconnected VoIP providers. Second, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether it should adopt specific rules regarding the LNP validation 
process and porting interval lengths.

A. Interconnected VoIP Provider Numbering Obligations

    2. The Commission seeks comment on issues associated with the 
implementation of LNP for users of interconnected VoIP services. The 
Commission also seeks comment on whether any of its numbering 
requirements, in addition to LNP, should be extended to interconnected 
VoIP providers. For example, the Commission seeks comment on whether it 
should require interconnected VoIP providers to comply with N11 code 
assignments. The Commission already requires interconnected VoIP 
providers to supply 911 emergency calling capabilities to their 
customers whose service connects with the PSTN and to offer 711 
abbreviated dialing for access to telephone relay services. Commenters 
should provide information on the technical feasibility of a 
requirement to comply with the other N11 code assignments. The 
Commission also seeks comment on the benefits and burdens, including 
the burdens on small entities, of requiring interconnected VoIP 
providers to comply with N11 code assignments or other numbering 
requirements.

B. LNP Process Requirements

    3. As the Commission has found, it is critical that customers be 
able to port their telephone numbers in an efficient manner in order 
for LNP to fulfill its promise of giving ``customers flexibility in the 
quality, price, and variety of telecommunications services.'' Although 
customers have had the option to port numbers between their telephone 
service providers for a number of years, the length of time for ports 
to occur and other difficulties with the porting process may hinder 
such options. Therefore, the Commission seeks comment on whether it 
should take steps to mandate or modify certain elements of the porting 
process to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of LNP for U.S. 
telephone consumers.
    4. The Commission finds this to be a significant concern both 
because of the statutory requirement to ensure ``the ability of users 
of telecommunications services to retain, at the same location, 
existing telecommunications numbers without impairment of quality, 
reliability, or convenience when switching from one telecommunications 
carrier to another,'' as well as the important role intermodal 
providers play in telecommunications competition. Indeed, incumbent 
local exchange carriers (LECs) have sought to rely on the presence of 
telephone competition from wireless providers and cable operators when 
seeking relief from regulatory obligations. To help enable such 
intermodal competition, and the deregulation that can result from such 
competition, it thus is important for the Commission to ensure the 
efficiency and effectiveness of LNP, which ``eliminates one major 
disincentive to switch carriers'' and thus facilitates ``the successful 
entrance of new service providers.'' However, the Commission does not 
limit its inquiry specifically to intermodal LNP but seeks comment on 
the need for Commission requirements on LNP processes in other contexts 
as well.
    5. The Commission's conclusion that carriers can require no more 
than four fields for validation of a simple port, and what information 
those fields should contain, addresses the consideration of the 
appropriate amount and type of information necessary to effectuate a 
port. The Commission seeks comments on how the information required for 
validation fields adopted by the Commission affects the validation 
process, including any other ways that those validation fields could 
minimize the error rates or further reduce the amount of information 
that a porting-in entity must request from the porting-out entity prior 
to submitting the simple port request. Further, the Commission seeks 
comment on any other considerations that it should evaluate in the 
simple port validation process.
    6. The evidence in the record also shows that delays in the porting 
process can arise when the porting-out carrier

[[Page 9509]]

fails to identify all errors in a Local Service Request (LSR) at once. 
If a provider identifies errors one at a time, this necessitates 
multiple resubmissions of the LSR, and delays the porting process. The 
Commission agrees with commenters such as AT&T that it may not be 
possible for providers to identify all errors at once, although the 
porting process will proceed most efficiently if providers identify as 
many errors as possible at a given time. The Commission seeks comment 
on whether it should adopt a requirement that carriers identify all 
errors possible in a given LSR and describe the basis for rejection 
when rejecting a port request.
    7. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on the benefits and 
burdens, including the burdens on small entities, of the specific 
requirements on the validation process proposed above, and any other 
such requirements.
    8. Porting Intervals. The Commission tentatively concludes that it 
should adopt rules reducing the porting interval for simple port 
requests. The Commission seeks comment on that tentative conclusion, 
and on it should establish time limits on the porting process for all 
types of simple port requests (i.e., wireline-to-wireline ports, 
wireless-to-wireless ports, and intermodal ports) or just certain types 
of ports. The wireless industry has established a voluntary standard of 
two and one-half hours for wireless-to-wireless ports. The Commission 
seeks comment on whether it should adopt a rule codifying this 
standard.
    9. The Commission also tentatively concludes that it should adopt 
rules reducing the porting interval for wireline-to-wireline and 
intermodal simple port requests, specifically, to a 48-hour porting 
interval. As noted above, the wireless industry has been successful in 
streamlining the validation process for wireless-to-wireless porting, 
and the Commission encourages the industry to evaluate whether similar 
streamlining measures would work for intermodal or wireline-to-wireline 
porting. The Commission notes, moreover, that pending resolution of 
this rulemaking proceeding, providers remain free to seek enforcement 
action against a porting-out carrier that requests validation 
information that appears to obstruct or delay the porting process.
    10. For wireline-to-wireline simple ports, the Commission adopted 
the NANC's 1997 recommendation of a four business day porting interval. 
This four-day interval also applies to wireline-to-wireless intermodal 
simple ports. It has been over ten years since the Commission 
reassessed the porting interval for wireline-to-wireline ports, and 
commenters suggest that advances in technology allow for the four-day 
porting interval to be reduced. For intermodal porting intervals, the 
Commission has twice sought comment on whether the porting interval 
could be reduced. Most recently, the Commission specifically sought 
comment on detailed NANC proposals for shortening the intermodal 
porting interval, which included specific timelines for the porting 
process.
    11. While some commenters advocate retaining the current porting 
intervals, other providers assert that shorter intervals are possible. 
For example, Comcast asserts that a ``next day'' standard for wireline 
ports that, in most cases, would not exceed 36 hours is more 
appropriate in light of technological advancements and recent 
competitive developments. Other commenters recommend refreshing the 
record in the Intermodal Number Portability FNPRM (68 FR 68831, Dec. 
10, 2003) and considering the NANC's proposal that would effectively 
reduce the porting interval to 53 hours. Commenters seeking shorter 
intervals point out the benefits to consumers and competition arising 
when ports can occur more quickly.
    12. Given that the industry has been unable to reach consensus on 
an updated industry standard for wireline-to-wireline and intermodal 
simple ports, the Commission tentatively concludes that it should adopt 
rules regarding a reduced porting interval and allow the industry to 
work through the actual implications of such a timeline. In particular, 
the Commission tentatively concludes that it should adopt a 48-hour 
porting interval, as it falls between the range of proposed shorter 
intervals. In setting this interval, the Commission hopes to encourage 
industry discussion and consensus. The Commission seeks comment on its 
tentative conclusions, and whether there are any technical impediments 
or advances that affect the overall length of the porting interval such 
that it should adopt different porting intervals for particular types 
of simple ports (e.g., wireline-to-wireline, wireline-to-wireless, 
wireless-to-wireline). Further, the Commission seeks comment on how it 
should define the various porting interval timelines in terms of 
operating hours.
    13. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on the benefits and 
burdens, including the burdens on small entities, of adopting rules 
regarding porting intervals for all types of simple port requests.
    14. The Commission encourages interested parties to take into 
account the fact that as technologies and business practices evolve, it 
expects that the porting interval would decrease in order to provide 
consumers as quick and efficient a porting process as possible. The 
Commission looks forward to a complete record on the appropriate 
porting interval consistent with the shortest reasonable time period.
    15. Other LNP Process Issues. Commenters identify a number of other 
concerns regarding the LNP process that they assert are hindering the 
ability of consumers to take advantage of LNP. For example, Charter 
comments that certain carriers' processes result in cancellation of a 
subscriber dial tone for port requests that are delayed for operational 
reasons. Charter also argues that carriers should be: (1) Required to 
provide the basis for rejecting a port request at the time of that 
rejection; (2) required to provide affirmative notice of all changes to 
their porting requirements and process; and (3) prohibited from making 
ad hoc changes to their procedures. Charter also argues that the 
Commission should declare that interconnection agreements are not a 
necessary precondition to effectuating wireline-to-wireline ports. The 
Commission seeks comment on these and any other concerns regarding the 
LNP process more generally, including the port validation process and 
porting intervals for non-simple ports.

C. New Dockets

    16. In this Notice, the Commission opens two new dockets--WC Docket 
No. 07-243 and WC Docket No. 07-244. All filings made in response to 
the Notice section on interconnected VoIP provider numbering 
obligations should be filed in WC Docket No. 07-243. All filings made 
in response to the Notice sections on port request validation and 
porting intervals should be filed in WC Docket No. 07-244.

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared the present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact on small entities that might result from this Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (Notice). Written public comments are requested on 
this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and 
must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the Notice provided 
above. The Commission will send a copy of the Notice, including this 
IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration. In

[[Page 9510]]

addition, the Notice and the IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be 
published in the Federal Register.

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

    2. In this Notice, the Commission considers whether there are 
additional numbering-related requirements the Commission should adopt 
to benefit customers of telecommunications and interconnected VoIP 
services. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on whether it 
should extend other LNP requirements and numbering-related rules, 
including compliance with N11 code assignments, to interconnected VoIP 
providers. The Commission also seeks comment on whether it should adopt 
rules specifying the length of the porting intervals or other changes 
to the LNP validation process, or other details of the porting process. 
Among other things, the Commission tentatively concludes that it should 
adopt rules reducing the porting interval for wireline-to-wireline and 
intermodal simple port requests, specifically, to a 48-hour porting 
interval. The Commission seeks comment on its tentative conclusions and 
issues related to its tentative conclusions. For each of these issues, 
the Commission also seeks comment on the burdens, including those 
placed on small carriers, associated with corresponding Commission 
rules related to each issue.

B. Legal Basis

    3. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to 
this Notice is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 251 and 303(r) of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i) 
through (j), 251, 303(r).

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

    4. 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).
    5. Small Businesses. Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 
22.4 million small businesses, according to SBA data.
    6. Small Organizations. Nationwide, there are approximately 1.6 
million small organizations.
    7. Small Governmental Jurisdictions. The term ``small governmental 
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, 
townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a 
population of less than fifty thousand.'' Census Bureau data for 2002 
indicate that there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the 
United States. The Commission estimates that, of this total, 84,377 
entities were ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, the 
Commission estimates that most governmental jurisdictions are small.
1. Telecommunications Service Entities
a. Wireline Carriers and Service Providers
    8. The Commission has included small incumbent local exchange 
carriers (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. The 
Commission has therefore included small incumbent LECs in this RFA 
analysis, although the Commission emphasizes that this RFA action has 
no effect on Commission analyses and determinations in other, non-RFA 
contexts.
    9. Incumbent LECs. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed 
a small business size standard specifically for incumbent local 
exchange services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for 
the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size 
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
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 the Commission's action.
    10. Competitive LECs, Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), 
``Shared-Tenant Service Providers,'' and ``Other Local Service 
Providers.'' Neither the Commission nor the SBA has developed a small 
business size standard specifically for these service providers. The 
appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Commission 
data, 859 carriers have reported that they are engaged in the provision 
of either competitive access provider services or competitive LEC 
services. Of these 859 carriers, an estimated 741 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees and 118 have more than 1,500 employees. In addition, 16 
carriers have reported that they are ``Shared-Tenant Service 
Providers,'' and all 16 are estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees. 
In addition, 44 carriers have reported that they are ``Other Local 
Service Providers.'' Of the 44, an estimated 43 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.
    11. 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, 184 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of local resale services. Of 
these, an estimated 181 have 1,500 or fewer employees and three have 
more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of local resellers are small entities that may be affected 
by the Commission's action.
    12. 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, 881 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of 
these, an estimated 853 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 28 have more 
than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of toll resellers are small entities that may be affected by 
the Commission's action.
    13. Payphone Service Providers (PSPs). Neither the Commission nor 
the

[[Page 9511]]

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, 657 carriers have reported 
that they are engaged in the provision of payphone services. Of these, 
an estimated 653 have 1,500 or fewer employees and four have more than 
1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of payphone service providers are small entities that may be 
affected by the Commission's action.
    14. 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, 330 carriers have 
reported that they are engaged in the provision of interexchange 
service. Of these, an estimated 309 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 
21 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission 
estimates that the majority of IXCs are small entities that may be 
affected by the Commission's action.
    15. 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 22 have 1,500 or fewer employees and one has more than 1,500 
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of 
OSPs are small entities that may be affected by the Commission's 
action.
    16. 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, 104 carriers have reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, 102 are 
estimated to have 1,500 or fewer employees and two have 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 the Commission's action.
    17. 800 and 800-Like Service Subscribers. These toll-free services 
fall within the broad economic census category of Telecommunications 
Resellers. This category ``comprises establishments engaged in 
purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of 
telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless 
telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and 
households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; 
they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure.'' The 
SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, 
which is: all such firms having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census Bureau 
data for 2002 show that there were 1,646 firms in this category that 
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,642 firms had employment 
of 999 or fewer employees, and four firms had employment of 1,000 
employees or more. Thus, the majority of these firms can be considered 
small. Additionally, it may be helpful to know the total numbers of 
telephone numbers assigned in these services. Commission data show 
that, as of June 2006, the total number of 800 numbers assigned was 
7,647,941, the total number of 888 numbers assigned was 5,318,667, the 
total number of 877 numbers assigned was 4,431,162, and the total 
number of 866 numbers assigned was 6,008,976.
b. International Service Providers
    18. 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.
    19. 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, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of Satellite Telecommunications firms are small entities that 
might be affected by the Commission's action.
    20. 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, 259 firms had annual 
receipts of under $10 million and 15 firms had annual receipts of $10 
million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of Other Telecommunications firms are small entities that 
might be affected by the Commission's action.
c. Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers
    21. Below, for those services subject to auctions, the Commission 
notes that, as a general matter, the number of winning bidders that 
qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction does not 
necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently in 
service. Also, the Commission does not generally track subsequent 
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers, 
unjust enrichment issues are implicated.
    22. Wireless Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic 
census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications.'' Under both SBA categories, 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

[[Page 9512]]

firms can be considered small. 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 second category and size standard, the majority of 
firms can, again, be considered small.
    23. 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 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. The 
Commission has estimated that 260 of these are small under the SBA 
small business size standard.
    24. Paging. The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for the broad economic census category of ``Paging.'' Under this 
category, the SBA deems a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 
or fewer employees. 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. In addition, according 
to Commission data, 365 carriers have reported that they are engaged in 
the provision of ``Paging and Messaging Service.'' Of this total, the 
Commission estimates that 360 have 1,500 or fewer employees, and five 
have more than 1,500 employees. Thus, in this category the majority of 
firms can be considered small.
    25. The Commission also notes that, in the Paging Second Report and 
Order (62 FR 11616, Mar. 12, 1997), the Commission adopted a size 
standard for ``small businesses'' for purposes of determining their 
eligibility for special provisions such as bidding credits and 
installment payments. In this context, 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. The SBA has approved this definition. An auction of 
Metropolitan Economic Area (MEA) licenses commenced on February 24, 
2000, and closed on March 2, 2000. Of the 2,499 licenses auctioned, 985 
were sold. Fifty-seven companies claiming small business status won 440 
licenses. An auction of MEA and Economic Area (EA) licenses commenced 
on October 30, 2001, and closed on December 5, 2001. Of the 15,514 
licenses auctioned, 5,323 were sold. One hundred thirty-two companies 
claiming small business status purchased 3,724 licenses. A third 
auction, consisting of 8,874 licenses in each of 175 EAs and 1,328 
licenses in all but three of the 51 MEAs commenced on May 13, 2003, and 
closed on May 28, 2003. Seventy-seven bidders claiming small or very 
small business status won 2,093 licenses. The Commission also notes 
that, currently, there are approximately 74,000 Common Carrier Paging 
licenses.
    26. 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, 432 carriers reported that they were 
engaged in the provision of wireless telephony. The Commission has 
estimated that 221 of these are small under the SBA small business size 
standard.
    27. 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'' 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.
    28. Narrowband Personal Communications Services. The Commission 
held an auction for Narrowband PCS licenses that commenced on July 25, 
1994, and closed on July 29, 1994. A second auction commenced on 
October 26, 1994 and closed on November 8, 1994. For purposes of the 
first two Narrowband PCS auctions, ``small businesses'' were entities 
with average gross revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 
million or less. Through these auctions, the Commission awarded a total 
of 41 licenses, 11 of which were obtained by four small businesses. To 
ensure meaningful participation by small business entities in future 
auctions, the Commission adopted a two-tiered small business size 
standard in the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order (65 FR 35875, 
Jun. 6, 2000). 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. A third auction commenced on October 3, 2001 and closed 
on October 16, 2001. Here, five bidders won 317 (Metropolitan Trading 
Areas and nationwide) licenses. Three of these claimed status as a 
small or very small entity and won 311 licenses.
    29. 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

[[Page 9513]]

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.
    30. Air-Ground Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not 
adopted a small business size standard specific to the Air-Ground 
Radiotelephone Service. The Commission 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 the Commission estimates that almost all of 
them qualify as small under the SBA small business size standard.
    31. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on 
several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for 
television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the 
Gulf of Mexico. There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this 
service. The Commission is unable to estimate at this time the number 
of licensees that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business 
size standard for ``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.
2. Cable and OVS Operators
    32. Cable Television Distribution Services. Since 2007, these 
services have been defined within the broad economic census category of 
Wired Telecommunications Carriers; that category is defined as follows: 
``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in operating 
and/or providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure 
that they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, 
sound, and video using wired telecommunications networks. Transmission 
facilities may be based on a single technology or a combination of 
technologies.'' The SBA has developed a small business size standard 
for this category, which is: All such firms having 1,500 or fewer 
employees. To gauge small business prevalence for these cable services 
the Commission must, however, use current census data that are based on 
the previous category of Cable and Other Program Distribution and its 
associated size standard; that size standard was: 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 previous 
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, the majority of 
these firms can be considered small.
    33. 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.
    34. 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. The Commission notes that it 
neither requests nor collects information on whether cable system 
operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues 
exceed $250 million, and therefore it is unable to estimate more 
accurately the number of cable system operators that would qualify as 
small under this size standard.
    35. Open Video Systems (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. The Commission thus believes that at least some of 
the OVS operators may qualify as small entities.
3. Internet Service Providers
    36. 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 an additional 47 firms had receipts of between $10 million 
and $24,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the 
majority of these firms are small entities that may be affected by the 
Commission's action.
    37. 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

[[Page 9514]]

data for 2002, there were 155 firms in this category that operated for 
the entire year. Of these, 138 had annual receipts of under $5 million, 
and an additional four firms had receipts of between $5 million and 
$9,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority of 
these firms are small entities that may be affected by the Commission's 
action.
4. Equipment Manufacturers
    38. SBA small business size standards are given in terms of 
``firms.'' Census Bureau data concerning computer manufacturers, on the 
other hand, are given in terms of ``establishments.'' The Commission 
notes that the number of ``establishments'' is a less helpful indicator 
of small business prevalence in this context than would be the number 
of ``firms'' or ``companies,'' because the latter take into account the 
concept of common ownership or control. Any single physical location 
for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be 
owned by a different establishment. Thus, the census numbers provided 
below may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in the given category, 
including the numbers of small businesses.
    39. Radio and Television Broadcasting and 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 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.
    40. 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.
    41. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. Examples of 
manufactured devices in this category include ``integrated circuits, 
memory chips, microprocessors, diodes, transistors, solar cells and 
other optoelectronic devices.'' 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, there were 
1,032 establishments in this category that operated with payroll during 
2002. Of these, 950 had employment of under 500, and 42 establishments 
had employment of 500 to 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of these establishments are small entities.
    42. 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, there were 170 
establishments in this category that operated with payroll during 2002. 
Of these, 164 had employment of under 500, and five establishments had 
employment of 500 to 999. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of these establishments are small entities.

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

    43. Should the Commission decide to adopt any further numbering 
requirements to benefit customers of telecommunications and 
interconnected VoIP service, the associated rules potentially could 
modify the reporting and recordkeeping requirements of certain 
telecommunications providers and interconnected VoIP service providers. 
For example, the Commission seeks comment on whether it should require 
interconnected VoIP providers to comply with N11 code assignments. 
Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on whether it should adopt a 
requirement that carriers identify all errors possible in a given LSR 
and describe the basis for rejection when rejecting a port request. The 
Commission also tentatively concludes that it should adopt rules 
reducing the porting interval for wireline-to-wireline and intermodal 
simple port requests, specifically to a 48-hour porting interval, and 
seeks comment on whether the Commission should establish time limits on 
the porting process for all types of simple port requests or just 
certain types of ports. Further, the Commission seeks comment on 
whether there are any technical impediments or advances that affect the 
overall length of the porting interval such that it should adopt 
different porting intervals for particular types of simple ports. These 
proposals may impose additional reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements on entities. Also, the Commission seeks comment on whether 
any of these proposals place burdens on small entities, and whether 
alternatives might lessen such burdens while still achieving the goals 
of this proceeding. Entities, especially small businesses, are 
encouraged to quantify the costs and benefits or any reporting 
requirement that may be established in this proceeding.

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

    44. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include (among others) the following four alternatives: (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the

[[Page 9515]]

use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption 
from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
    45. The Commission's primary objective is to ensure that that 
consumers benefit from LNP. The Commission seeks comment on the 
burdens, including those placed on small carriers, associated with 
related Commission rules and whether the Commission should adopt 
different requirements for small businesses. Specifically, the 
Commission seeks comment on the benefits and burdens, including the 
burdens on small entities, of requiring interconnected VoIP providers 
to comply with N11 code assignments and other numbering requirements. 
The Commission also seeks comment on the benefits and burdens, 
including the burdens on small entities, of the specific requirements 
on the validation process proposed in the Notice and any other such 
requirements. Further, the Commission seeks comment on the benefits and 
burdens, including the burdens on small entities, of adopting rules 
regarding porting intervals for all types of simple port requests.

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

    46. None.

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    47. This document does not contain proposed information collection 
requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 
104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any proposed 
information collection burden ``for small business concerns with fewer 
than 25 employees,'' pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief 
Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

Ordering Clauses

    It is ordered that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 
1, 4(i), 4(j), 251, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i)-(j), 251, 303(r), the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking in WC Docket Nos. 07-243 and 07-244 is adopted.
    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, Declaratory Ruling, Order on Remand, and 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the two Final Regulatory 
Flexibility Analyses and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, 
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

Federal Communications Commission.

Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-3129 Filed 2-20-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P