[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55161-55165]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-19564]



[[Page 55161]]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Parts 4, 9, and 20

[WT Docket No. 16-240; FCC 16-95]


Harmonizing and Streamlining Rules Concerning Requirements for 
Licensees to Overcome a CMRS Presumption

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission or FCC) proposes and seeks comment on revising the 
Commission's rules governing commercial mobile radio services. We 
propose to end the presumption contained in the Commission's rules that 
all applicants and licensees in the services identified in that section 
intend to license their facilities as commercial mobile radio service 
(``CMRS'') operations by eliminating that section and making related 
rule changes.

DATES: Submit comments on or before October 17, 2016 and reply comments 
on or before November 16, 2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WT Docket No. 16-240, 
by any of the following methods:
     Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Mail: All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper 
filings for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC 
Headquarters at 445 12th Street SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 
20554. The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries 
must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and 
boxes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial 
overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and 
Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol 
Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and 
Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 
20554.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: 202-418-
0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432.
    For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilbert E. Nixon Jr., 
[email protected], Mobility Division, Wireless Telecommunications 
Bureau, (202) 418-0985, or TTY (202) 418-7233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in WT Docket No. 16-240, FCC 16-95, 
adopted July 27, 2016, and released July 28, 2016. The full text of 
this document is available for inspection and copying during normal 
business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The complete text may be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 
Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, (202) 488-5300, 
facsimile (202) 488-5563, or via email at [email protected]. The full 
text may also be downloaded at: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2016/db0728/FCC-16-95A1.pdf. Alternative 
formats are available to persons with disabilities by sending an email 
to [email protected] or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 
Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).

Comment Filing Instructions

    Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 
CFR 1.415 and 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (``ECFS''). See Electronic Filing of Documents in 
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998.
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy 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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
     All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings 
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 
445 12th Street SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing 
hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held 
together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must 
be disposed of before entering the building.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington DC 20554.
    People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).

Synopsis

I. Introduction

A. Proposal To Revise Part 20 and Make Related Changes

    1. In this document, the Commission proposes amendments to the Part 
20 rules to update, streamline, and modernize them, including 
harmonizing the regulatory treatment of the various mobile radio 
services with regard to how applicants must report the regulatory 
classification of their facilities and easing spectrum acquisition in 
the secondary market consistent with suggestions received as part of 
the Commission's process reform efforts. Specifically, we tentatively 
conclude that eliminating the CMRS presumption for those operators of 
services currently identified in section 20.9 would streamline 
application preparation and processing, and promote comparable 
treatment of wireless applicants and licensees. Under the proposed 
elimination of section 20.9 contained in this NPRM, applicants and 
licensees could simply inform the Commission in initial, modification, 
or assignment applications of their regulatory status. We seek comment 
on our tentative conclusions, as well as the costs and benefits of our 
proposed approach.
    2. This proposed approach would shorten the period for processing 
of a number of applications, as well as eliminate the obligation of 
certain licensees and applicants in the services specified in section 
20.9 to make a showing, even if brief, regarding their intent to 
operate on a non-common carrier or private basis. We tentatively 
conclude that shortening the period for application processing as well 
as lightening the regulatory burden currently imposed on licensees and

[[Page 55162]]

applicants that apply to operate as non-CMRS providers in the services 
listed in section 20.9 will lead to more efficient and timely use of 
the licensed spectrum, without imposing any more regulatory burdens 
than those necessary for the Commission to oversee spectrum usage. We 
seek comment on this tentative conclusion.
    3. In addition, we believe that the proposed elimination of section 
20.9 would help to eliminate uneven and disparate regulation of 
wireless applicants and licensees. As we discussed above, the 
regulatory filing requirements and potential lengthening of the 
application processing period imposed by section 20.9 on licensees and 
applicants desiring to use spectrum identified in this rule section on 
a non-CMRS basis are not imposed uniformly on all spectrum and 
services, particularly when compared with those services for which 
service rules have been adopted in recent years by the Commission. We 
tentatively conclude that the public interest would be served by 
treating similarly situated entities on a more equitable, comparable 
basis.
    4. The Commission, in adopting section 20.9, conducted an extensive 
review of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Public Law 
103-66, Title VI, section 6002(b) (``1993 OBRA''), amending the 
Communications Act of 1934 and codified at 47 U.S.C. 332(c), its 
legislative history, and developments in regulation of wireless 
services. The Commission noted that Congress ``replaced the common 
carrier and private radio definitions that evolved under the prior 
version of Section 332 of the Act with two newly defined categories of 
mobile services: Commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) and private 
mobile radio service (PMRS),'' and ``replaced traditional regulation of 
mobile services with an approach that brings all mobile service 
providers under a comprehensive, consistent regulatory framework and 
gives the Commission flexibility to establish appropriate levels of 
regulation for mobile radio services providers.'' Two Congressional 
objectives appeared to drive these statutory changes: (1) ``To ensure 
that similar [mobile] services would be subject to consistent 
regulatory classification[;]'' and (2) to ``establish[ ] and 
administer[ ] for CMRS providers'' ``an appropriate level of 
regulation.''
    5. The Commission also noted that Congress was concerned with the 
``disparate regulatory treatment'' that had evolved across services, 
observing that Congress's intent that the Commission establish 
consistent regulations was reflected in the statutory requirement that 
any service that amounted to a ``functional equivalent'' of CMRS be 
treated as CMRS even if the service did not fit the strict definition 
of that service. At the same time, the Commission ``anticipat[ed] that 
very few mobile services that do not meet the definition of CMRS will 
be a close substitute for a [CMRS].'' The Commission therefore decided 
to ``presume that a mobile service that does not meet the definition of 
CMRS is a [PMRS].'' To rebut the presumption, a challenger to a PMRS 
claim was required to follow the method and meet the criteria that the 
Commission prescribed for demonstrating that the carrier claiming PMRS 
status was actually providing the functional equivalent of CMRS. 
Section 20.9(a)(14) memorializes this presumption and the criteria for 
the showing that someone challenging the presumption would need to make 
to overcome it (i.e., to demonstrate that an applicant purporting to 
offer PMRS is actually offering services that are the functional 
equivalent of CMRS and thus warrants the corresponding level of 
regulation). This rebuttable presumption has served as a reasonable 
mechanism for classifying a service as PMRS or CMRS for filing 
purposes, consistent with the statutory definitions. It does not, 
however, constitute the only approach for identifying whether a 
provider's proposed or existing service should be classified one way or 
another, and changes may now be warranted based on the development of 
CMRS and PMRS services and our experience with the application of the 
presumption, such as how parties have used it, how often and how 
successfully it has been challenged, and whether it tends to streamline 
the licensing processes or encumber them.
    6. As discussed above, the substantial changes that have occurred 
in the wireless industry since the rule's adoption suggest that it is 
now an appropriate time to reexamine the need for the presumption, and 
this NPRM seeks comment on its continued use and on other possible 
approaches. There has been increasing demand for PMRS use of spectrum 
and other rule changes permitting more flexible uses of spectrum in 
ways that section 20.9 does not encourage (i.e., by requiring the 
filing of a waiver). We observe that the section 20.9 construct, which 
treats certain mobile services differently depending upon where they 
fall in our rules, can result in application processing inefficiencies 
and delays for the affected services. Given changed circumstances since 
the Commission adopted section 20.9, we tentatively conclude that 
eliminating the rule would help to further Congressional intent that 
the Commission avoid ``disparate regulatory treatment'' across mobile 
radio services.
    7. We also observe that section 20.3 of the rules defines 
``commercial mobile radio service'' to include a mobile service that is 
``[t]he functional equivalent of a mobile service described in 
paragraph (a) of this section, including a mobile broadband Internet 
access service as defined in section 8.2 of this chapter.'' We 
therefore believe that section 20.3 of the rules, either in its current 
form or as we propose below to modify it, and in combination with other 
Commission rules and processes, helps ensure that the Commission will 
continue to treat as CMRS any service that amounts to a ``functional 
equivalent'' of CMRS. We anticipate that the combined effect of our 
proposals to eliminate section 20.9 of the rules and rely on the CMRS 
definition in section 20.3 will continue to treat services operating as 
functionally equivalent to CMRS in the same way as we treat CMRS, while 
eliminating minor processing differences across types of wireless 
applications.
    8. We seek comment on these proposals, including other ways to 
overcome the processing inefficiencies discussed above. For example, 
would amending section 20.9 help to address these concerns more 
effectively than eliminating the rule in its entirety? We seek comments 
on such alternatives, if any, as well as their costs and benefits.
    9. We note that the elimination of one subsection of section 20.9 
was recently endorsed by commenters responding to the Wireless 
Telecommunications Bureau's Public Notice regarding the applicability 
of paging and radiotelephone rules and soliciting comment on the need 
for technical flexibility. For example, the Land Mobile Communications 
Council stressed that eliminating section 20.9(a)(6) would be 
consistent with the eligibility standard now reflected in section 22.7 
and ``would eliminate an unnecessary burden on applicants and the FCC 
staff.'' Both the BloostonLaw Licensees and Nebraska Public Power 
District agreed that section 20.9(a)(6) should be eliminated. We 
believe that the reasons used to support arguments in favor of the 
elimination of section 20.9(a)(6) apply to removal of section 20.9 in 
its entirety and seek comment on this view.
    10. Regardless of what action we take regarding our proposal to 
eliminate section 20.9, we tentatively conclude

[[Page 55163]]

that we should make a technical corrective edit to section 9.3 of the 
Commission's rules which includes definitions to be used in connection 
with the provision of interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol 
services. Specifically, section 9.3 defines ``CMRS'' as ``Commercial 
Mobile Radio Service, as defined in section 20.9 of this chapter.'' We 
propose that this definition refer instead to section 20.3, which is 
the definition section for Part 20 and includes a definition of 
``commercial mobile radio service.''
    11. We also find that a corrective edit to section 4.3(f) of our 
rules is appropriate, whether or not we adopt the proposal to eliminate 
section 20.9. Section 4.3(f), which defines ``wireless service 
providers'' subject to outage reporting requirements, includes a cross-
reference to section 20.9 for a definition of ``commercial mobile radio 
service.'' As discussed above with respect to section 9.3, we propose 
instead that the definition in this section refer to the definition of 
``commercial mobile radio service'' in section 20.3.
    12. We also propose to eliminate section 20.7, which includes a 
list of services defined as falling within the definition of ``mobile 
services'' as used in sections 3(n) and 332 of the Communications Act. 
As with section 20.9, in light of the mobile services created since the 
Commission adopted this rule, section 20.7 is under-inclusive insofar 
as it does not include all the services that in fact are ``mobile 
services'' under the statutory language. Eliminating section 20.7 would 
not change the definition of ``mobile service'' contained in section 
20.3, the Definitions section of Part 20. We tentatively conclude that 
section 20.7 no longer appears to serve a useful purpose, and we seek 
comment on that tentative conclusion and our proposal to eliminate this 
section.
    13. As we noted above, section 20.3 defines the term ``commercial 
mobile radio service,'' and includes as part of that definition a 
mobile service that is ``[t]he functional equivalent of a mobile 
service described in paragraph (a) of this section.'' Section 
20.9(a)(14), which would be deleted if we were to eliminate section 
20.9 in its entirety, enumerates some of the factors that the 
Commission may consider in determining whether a mobile service is the 
functional equivalent of a commercial mobile radio service in cases 
where the service otherwise does not meet the definition of CMRS and 
the resulting presumptive classification of the service as PMRS has 
been challenged. In this regard, section 20.9(a)(14) lays out the 
process for making such a challenge--i.e., a challenger may attempt to 
defeat this presumptive classification by filing a petition for 
declaratory ruling challenging a mobile service provider's regulatory 
treatment as a private mobile radio service. We ask interested parties 
to comment on whether retaining section 20.9(a)(14), or any of its 
subsections, would be useful to maintain as a practical and procedural 
set of guidelines for both the providers of mobile services and the 
Commission when applying the definitions of CMRS and PMRS, and whether 
we should move this language to section 20.3, as a subsection under the 
definition of commercial mobile radio service, or to another section in 
part 20.
    14. We tentatively conclude that nothing in the proposed 
elimination of sections 20.7 or 20.9 would affect the definition of 
``commercial mobile radio service'' contained in section 20.3 of our 
rules or the obligations imposed on providers of commercial mobile 
radio services. Indeed, we wish to reiterate that we do not intend to 
change either any substantive CMRS regulatory policies with our 
proposal or other substantive policies pursuant to existing Commission 
rules affecting the licensees in the services that an amended section 
20.3 would address. Rather, our proposal in this rulemaking regarding 
section 20.9 is narrow and we intend for it to eliminate an unnecessary 
burden upon certain licensees and applicants in services named in that 
section. There would be no change in the obligations imposed upon 
entities providing commercial or private mobile radio service. In this 
regard, we observe that we have the necessary authority, independent of 
the requirements of section 20.9, to take enforcement action against a 
licensee that intentionally tries to avoid CMRS regulation by 
misrepresenting that its service is or will be operated on a ``non-
common carrier'' or ``private'' basis (e.g., by selecting such status 
in an application filed with the Commission), when its service offering 
in fact falls within the CMRS definition and warrants being subject to 
the appropriate regulations as a result of that status. We also observe 
that even if we eliminate the section 20.9(a)(14) PMRS presumption for 
providers whose service does not meet the strict CMRS definition, 
potential challengers would continue to have avenues available to 
challenge an applicant's or licensee's designation of its service as 
``non-common carrier'' or ``private,'' (e.g., by filing a pleading 
challenging an application or its grant, based on the charge that the 
applicant's claimed regulatory status was incorrect). Similarly, 
although those that might seek to challenge an application filed under 
section 20.9(b) of the rules might lose the 30-day notice period 
currently afforded by public notice, other avenues to challenge such 
applications would remain available. We request comment on our 
tentative conclusions.
    15. Section 20.9(a)(10) includes certain mobile satellite services 
and section 20.9(a)(13) includes certain FM subcarrier communications 
within the definition of ``commercial mobile radio service.'' At this 
time, we see no reason not to treat these services the same as the 
other services identified in section 20.9, but we seek comment on any 
potential impact.
    16. We request comment on the necessary changes we need to make to 
our forms. For example, at present, Form 603 does not include the 
option for a proposed assignee/transferee to indicate a different 
regulatory status for a license that is the subject of a proposed 
transaction. We believe that, if we adopt revised rules as proposed 
above, we also will need to revise Form 603 to permit a proposed 
assignee or transferee to indicate a change in regulatory status.
    17. In connection with revising our forms consistent with whatever 
action we take in this proceeding, at present, many of our forms 
provide the option of selecting one of the following statuses: ``common 
carrier;'' ``non-common carrier;'' or ``private, internal 
communications.'' The existing terms derive from past usage about 
categories of mobile wireless operations. We seek comment on whether we 
should replace these existing regulatory status terms in the forms to 
reflect the CMRS/PMRS terminology. We note that both CMRS and PMRS are 
defined terms in section 20.3, and are terms consistent with section 
332 of the Communications Act. We tentatively conclude that using the 
existing terms of ``common carrier,'' ``non-common carrier,'' and 
``private, internal communications'' tend to be confusing and that 
usage of the terms ``CMRS'' and ``PMRS'' with accompanying definitions 
in the form instructions would reflect more accurately the rules and 
statutory provisions on which the forms are based and thus be easier to 
understand. We seek comment on this tentative conclusion.

B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    18. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that an agency 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice-

[[Page 55164]]

and-comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that 
``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally defines 
``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 that: (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).
    19. In this NPRM, we seek comment on proposals to streamline and 
harmonize our requirements for wireless licensees and applicants. We 
address a proposal to revise the Commission's Part 20 rules governing 
commercial mobile radio services. We propose to end the presumption 
contained in section 20.9 of the Commission's rules that all applicants 
and licensees in the services identified in that section intend to 
license their facilities as commercial mobile radio service (``CMRS'') 
operations by eliminating that section and making related rule changes. 
In addition, we propose to simplify the process by which an applicant 
or license in the affected services indicates its regulatory status in 
the relevant application forms.
    20. We initiate this proceeding as a part of the Commission's 
process reform initiative and to update and modernize our Part 20 and 
related wireless service rules. These proposed revisions to part 20 are 
intended to eliminate the burden on applicants and licensees--including 
small entities--that desire to operate on a non-CMRS basis of having to 
overcome the presumption that their service offerings are CMRS.
    21. The closest estimate of the number of small businesses that may 
potentially be affected by our proposed rule changes is the SBA's 
``Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite)'' category. 
This industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and 
maintaining switching and transmission facilities to provide 
communications via airwaves. Establishments in this industry have 
spectrum licenses and provide services using spectrum, such as wireless 
phone services, paging services, wireless Internet access, and wireless 
video services--which are the types of services provided by the 
different types of licensees listed in section 20.9 of the Commission's 
rules. For this category, a business is considered small if it has 
1,500 or fewer employees. For this category, census data for 2007 show 
that were 1,383 firms that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 
1,368 firms had 999 or fewer employees and 15 had 1,000 or more. Thus, 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the Commission estimates that the majority of wireless 
telecommunications carriers (except satellite) are small entities that 
may be affected by our proposed action. We note that using this 
category to estimate the number of small entities potentially affected 
by our proposed action likely overstates the number of entities (small 
or otherwise) that in fact might be affected by our proposed rule 
changes since there are some entities falling in the wireless 
telecommunications carriers (except satellite) carrier that have no 
operations potentially affected by any of the changes we propose to 
make to part 20.
    22. We have determined that the impact on the entities affect by 
the proposed rule changes will not be significant. The most significant 
effect of the proposed rule change is to allow the affected entities, 
including small entities, greater flexibility in choosing their 
regulatory status as common carrier/CMRS or non-common carrier/private/
PMRS and to reduce regulatory delays in the processing of applications 
that would implement such choices. We expect the impact of the proposed 
amendments to be a reduction in processing time regarding applications 
related to the entity's preferred regulatory status. We believe that 
this reduction in processing time and also perhaps in paperwork will be 
minimal but beneficial to all affected entities, including small 
businesses.
    23. The Commission therefore certifies, pursuant to the RFA, that 
the proposals in this NPRM, if adopted, will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If 
commenters believe that the proposals discussed in the NPRM require 
additional RFA analysis, they should include a discussion of these 
issues in their comments and additionally label them as RFA comments. 
The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including a copy of this 
initial certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. In 
addition, a copy of the NPRM and this initial certification will be 
published in the Federal Register.

II. Procedural Matters

A. Ex Parte Presentations

    24. Permit-But-Disclose. The proceeding this NPRM initiates shall 
be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with 
the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making presentations must file 
a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral 
presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a 
different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons 
making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda 
summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or 
otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte 
presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and 
arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted 
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already 
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other 
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such 
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other 
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where 
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the 
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex 
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must 
be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 
rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of 
electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda 
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, 
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system (``ECFS'') 
available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format 
(e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this 
proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte 
rules.

B. Filing Requirements

    25. 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 on or before the dates indicated on the first page of this 
document. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in 
Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).

[[Page 55165]]

     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
     Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must 
file an original and one copy 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. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
     All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings 
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 
445 12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 
are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together 
with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be 
disposed of before entering the building.
     Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service 
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton 
Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington DC 20554.
    People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible 
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic 
files, audio format), send an email to [email protected] or call the 
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (tty).

III. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    26. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) requires that an 
agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice and comment 
rulemakings, unless the agency certifies that ``the rule will not, if 
promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.'' Accordingly, we have prepared an Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Certification (``IRFC'') of the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities of the policies and rules 
proposed in this NPRM. The certification is found in the Appendix. We 
request written public comment on the certification. Comments must be 
filed in accordance with the same deadlines as comments filed in 
response to the NPRM, and must have a separate and distinct heading 
designating them as responses to the IRFC. The Commission's Consumer 
and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, will 
send a copy of this NPRM, including the IRFC, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration.

IV. Paperwork Reduction Analysis

    27. This document contains proposed new and modified 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.
    28. Availability of Documents. Comments, reply comments, and ex 
parte submissions will be publically available online via ECFS. These 
documents will also be available for public inspection during regular 
business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, which is 
located in Room CY-A257 at FCC Headquarters, 445 12th Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20554. The Reference Information Center is open to the 
public Monday through Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. and Friday 
from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

List of Subjects

47 CFR Part 4

    Disruptions to communications, Reporting requirements.

47 CFR Part 9

    Interconnected voice over internet protocol services, Definitions.

47 CFR Part 20

    Commercial mobile services, Mobile services and Commercial mobile 
radio services.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission propose to amend 47 CFR parts 4, 9, and 20 as 
follows:

PART 4--DISRUPTIONS TO COMMUNICATIONS

0
1. The authority citation of part 4 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Sec. 5, 48 Stat. 1068, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
155, 201, 251, 307, 316, 615a-1, 1302(a), and 1302(b) unless 
otherwise noted.

0
2. Section 4.3 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
* * * * *
    (f) Wireless service providers include Commercial Mobile Radio 
Service communications providers that use cellular architecture and 
CMRS paging providers. See Sec.  20.3 of this chapter for the 
definition of Commercial Mobile Radio Service. Also included are 
affiliated and non-affiliated entities that maintain or provide 
communications networks or services used by the provider in offering 
such communications.
* * * * *

PART 9--INTERCONNECTED VOICE OVER INTERNET PROTOCOL SERVICES

0
3. The authority citation of part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i)-(j), 251(e), 303(r), and 615a-
1 unless otherwise noted.

0
4. Section 9.3 is amended by revising the definition of ``CMRS'' to 
read as follows:
* * * * *
    CMRS. Commercial Mobile Radio Services, as defined in Sec.  20.3 of 
this chapter.
* * * * *

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE SERVICES

0
5. The authority citation of part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 214, 
222, 251(e), 301, 302, 303, 303(b), 303(r), 307, 307(a), 309, 
309(j)(3), 316, 316(a), 332, 615, 615a, 615b, and 615c unless 
otherwise noted.


Sec. Sec.  20.7 and 20.9  [Removed].

0
6. Remove Sec. Sec.  20.7 and 20.9.

[FR Doc. 2016-19564 Filed 8-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P