[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37402-37405]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15222]
[[Page 37402]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
[WC Docket Nos. 10-90 and 05-337; DA 12-868]
Data Specifications for Collecting Study Area Boundaries
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Notice; solicitation of comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Wireline Competition Bureau proposes
data specifications for collecting study area boundaries for purposes
of implementing various reforms adopted as part of the USF/ICC
Transformation Order and seeks comment on this proposal.
DATES: Comments are due on or before July 2, 2012. Reply comments are
due on or before July 17, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file comments on or before July 17,
2012. All pleadings are to reference WC Docket Nos. 10-90 and 05-337.
Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS) or by filing paper copies, by any of the following
methods:
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 four copies of each filing. If more than one
docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding,
filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
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).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katie King, Wireline Competition
Bureau at (202) 418-7491 or TTY (202) 418-0484. For detailed
instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Wireline
Competition Bureau's Public Notice in WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 05-337; DA
12-868, released June 1, 2012. The complete text of this document is
available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may also be purchased
from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing,
Inc., 445 12th Street SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554,
telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863-2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898,
or via the Internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com.
I. Synopsis of Public Notice
1. In this Public Notice, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau)
proposes data specifications for collecting study area boundaries for
purposes of implementing various reforms adopted as part of the USF/ICC
Transformation Order, 76 FR 73830, November 29, 2011, and seeks comment
on this proposal. In the USF/ICC Transformation Order, the Commission
comprehensively reformed universal service funding for high-cost, rural
areas, adopting fiscally responsible, accountable, incentive-based
policies to preserve and advance voice and broadband service. As
discussed below, confirming the relevant geographic boundaries is
important for implementing several components of those reforms,
including: the Commission's benchmarking rule; the Connect America Fund
(CAF) Phase II cost model; and the elimination of support where an
unsubsidized competitor offers voice and broadband service that
overlaps an incumbent carrier's study area. The Bureau proposes to
collect boundary data from all incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs)
using the same data specifications and seeks comment on this proposal.
After receiving input from the public and interested parties and
approval from the Office of Management and Budget, the Bureau will
issue a data request so that it will have a complete and accurate set
of study area boundaries.
2. Benchmarking Rule. In the USF/ICC Transformation Order, the
Commission adopted a benchmarking rule intended to moderate the
expenses of rate-of-return carriers with very high costs compared to
their similarly situated peers, while encouraging other rate-of-return
carriers to advance broadband deployment. On April 25, 2012, the Bureau
adopted the methodology for implementing this rule, which establishes
limits on recovery of capital costs and operating expenses for high-
cost loop support (HCLS). The methodology uses quantile regression
analyses to generate a capital expense limit and an operating expense
limit for each rate-of-return cost company study area. The geographic
independent variables used in the regressions were rolled up to the
study area using Tele Atlas wire center boundaries, which is a widely-
used commercially available comprehensive source for this information.
To address parties' concerns about the accuracy of this data set in the
near term, the Bureau provided a streamlined, expedited waiver process
for carriers affected by the benchmarks to correct any errors in their
study area boundaries. The Bureau also stated it would issue a Public
Notice to initiate the process of collecting study area boundaries
directly from all rate-of-return carriers to correct any remaining
inaccuracies. Through this Public Notice, the Bureau is now initiating
that process.
3. CAF Phase II Model. In the USF/ICC Transformation Order, the
Commission adopted a framework for providing ongoing support in areas
served by price cap carriers using a combination of competitive bidding
and a new forward-looking cost model. A model will be used to
``identify at a granular level the areas where support will be
available'' and to determine the amount annual support available to
each price cap carrier that accepts a ``commitment to offer voice
across its service territory within a state and broadband service to
supported locations within that service territory.'' Support will be
awarded through a competitive bidding mechanism in territories for
which price cap LECs declines to make that commitment. The model also
will be used to identify areas ``that should receive funding
specifically set aside for remote and extremely high-cost areas.''
Accurate service area boundaries will be necessary in order to
implement these CAF II reforms.
4. Overlap by Unsubsidized Competitors. In the USF/ICC
Transformation Order, the Commission adopted a rule to phase out
universal service support where an unsubsidized competitor--or a
combination of unsubsidized competitors--offers voice and broadband
service throughout 100 percent of an incumbent's study area. In the
USF/ICC Transformation FNPRM, 76 FR 78384, December 16, 2011, the
Commission sought comment on a process to reduce support where such an
unsubsidized competitor offers voice and broadband service to a
substantial majority, but not 100 percent of the study area.
5. Accurate study area and exchange boundaries are important for
implementing each of these reforms. As the Commission previously
explained, Tele Atlas data may not represent the actual LEC footprint
in all instances. In
[[Page 37403]]
particular, some rate-of-return carriers have argued that the Tele
Atlas boundaries used in the benchmark methodology misstate the size of
their study areas, and, as discussed above, the Bureau provided an
expedited waiver process for carriers affected by the HCLS benchmarks
to correct errors on an ad hoc basis. Relying on individual carriers to
identify inaccurate boundaries in particular instances provides only an
interim solution, however. Accordingly, we now seek comment on a
systematic way to confirm the service territories of all incumbent
LECs.
6. We propose to collect study area and exchange boundaries from
all incumbent LECs and seek comment on the specifications for
submitting boundary information (below) in a manner and format that
Bureau staff can readily evaluate and process. These specifications are
based on the template for filing study area maps that the Bureau
provided for use by rate-of-return carriers seeking expedited waivers
related to HCLS benchmarks. Although we permitted petitioners seeking
expedited waivers of the new benchmark rule to choose to submit
boundary information in other formats, we now propose requiring all
incumbent LECs to submit study area maps in esri compatible shapefile
format as set forth below. As the Bureau previously explained,
information submitted in other formats may require additional
processing that could introduce new errors and/or delay. For example,
if carriers file hard-copy maps, those would need to be rectified
(stretched) to have a spatial reference, and this could cause spatial
errors. Moreover, Bureau staff would need to digitize such maps. On
screen digitizing is done by ``tracing'' which can lead to errors in
accuracy (undershoots and overshoots). In addition, digitized data
needs to be post-processed by adding attribute data manually. These
errors can compound. That is, errors in the original map that are
magnified during rectification may lead to further digitizing errors.
Finally, digitizing is labor intensive. It could take Bureau staff
substantially longer to digitize hard copy maps than to process
shapefiles. We seek comment on our proposal to require all incumbent
LECs to submit study area maps in esri compatible shapefile format.
Commenters proposing that we permit alternative formats should address
the data processing issues discussed above.
7. After the Bureau receives boundaries, we propose to incorporate
the data filed into one nationwide map and, in the process of doing so,
identify any overlaps and voids. We propose to adopt a process to
resolve any overlap issues to accurately reflect each study area's
boundaries. We seek comment on comparing the submitted data to state
maps where available (whether developed by the state public utility
commission, state carrier association, or other sources). To the extent
there are apparent conflicts in various data sources, we propose in the
first instance to seek input from the relevant state public utility
commission regarding the location of the relevant boundary. To the
extent a state commission does not provide any input, are there other
entities, such as state telecommunications associations and state
geographic information systems (GIS) agencies, that could also provide
valuable assistance in resolving any boundary issues? We propose to
determine which void areas are populated using Census data and to
determine which carrier, if any, serves these areas. We propose to
publish our determinations in this regard, and provide a period of
public comment for the relevant carriers to challenge any boundary
decisions. We seek comment on this proposal.
8. We also seek comment on a voluntary process for state
commissions to resolve overlap claims or otherwise assist carriers in
their states in submitting boundaries for all carriers in the state.
State commissions are likely to have access to information that could
resolve conflicting boundary claims between adjoining companies. State
commissions generally are the entities that establish incumbent LECs'
service areas. Many state commissions and/or state telecommunications
associations have published maps showing the boundaries. Some states
already may have digitized maps of service territories. State
involvement could substantially reduce the burden to both the industry
and the Commission. If a state commission assists incumbent carriers in
their state by collecting mapping data and resolving conflicts, could
it certify the accuracy of the resulting boundaries to the Commission
in addition to carrier certifications? If we were to establish such a
voluntary process, how many states would be interested in performing
this function? Should we establish a deadline by which any state
commission would notify the Commission of its intention to do so, and
if so, what should that deadline be? What time frame would be
reasonable for states to process the requisite information and resolve
any conflicts? Would it be beneficial for the state to certify to this
Commission that boundaries submitted by the incumbent LECs within its
jurisdiction are accurate, to supplement any certification from the
individual submitting carriers? We encourage input from state
commissions on these issues, and on how we could develop a workable
process. To the extent parties suggest alternative mechanisms for
resolving any overlap issues, to the extent reported information
conflicts, they should provide a detailed explanation of how such a
process would be implemented.
9. Filing Requirements. Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of
the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may
file comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on
the first page of this document. Comments may be filed using the
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1,
1998.
[ssquf] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
[ssquf] Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file
an original and one copy of each filing. If more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers
must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number.
[ssquf] 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.
[ssquf] 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.
[ssquf] 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.
[ssquf] 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),
[[Page 37404]]
send an email to [email protected] or call the Consumer & Governmental
Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty).
10. The proceeding this Notice initiates shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules. Persons making ex parte 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 Sec. 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed
by rule Sec. 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
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.
11. Paperwork Reduction Act. This Public Notice contains proposed
new information collection requirements. The Commission, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general
public and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the
information collection requirements contained in this document, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13.PRA.
In addition, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
2002, we seek specific comment on how we might ``further reduce the
information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer
than 25 employees.''
12. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. As required by the
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission
has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the
possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities by the policies and rules proposed in this Public Notice.
Written 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 Public Notice. The Commission will send a copy of
the Public Notice, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the
Public Notice and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the
Federal Register.
13. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules. The Public
Notice proposes data specifications for collecting study area
boundaries for purposes of implementing various reforms adopted as part
of the USF/ICC Transformation Order and seeks comment on this proposal.
In the USF/ICC Transformation Order, the Commission comprehensively
reformed universal service funding for high-cost, rural areas, adopting
fiscally responsible, accountable, incentive-based policies to preserve
and advance voice and broadband service. As discussed in the Public
Notice, confirming the relevant geographic boundaries is important for
implementing several components of those reforms, including: the
Commission's benchmarking rule; the Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II
cost model; and the elimination of support where an unsubsidized
competitor offers voice and broadband service that overlaps an
incumbent carrier's study area. Accurate study area and exchange
boundaries are important for implementing each of these reforms.
14. Legal Basis. The legal basis for any action that may be taken
pursuant to the Public Notice is contained in sections 1, 2, 4(i), 201-
205, 214, 218-220, 254, 256, 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 201-205, 214, 218-220,
251, 252, 254, 256, 303(r), and 403, and Sec. Sec. 0.91, 0l.201(d),
0.291, 1.3 and 1.427 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0l.201(d),
0.291, 1.3 and 1.4271.
15. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to
which the Proposed Rules will Apply. 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, if
adopted. 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 SBA.
16. Small Businesses. Nationwide, there are a total of
approximately 27.5 million small businesses, according to the SBA.
17. Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The SBA has developed a
small business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers,
which consists of all such companies having 1,500 or fewer employees.
According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there were 3,188 firms in
this category, total, that operated for the entire year. Of this total,
3,144 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 44 firms had
employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this size standard,
the majority of firms can be considered small.
18. Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the Commission nor the
SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses specifically
applicable to local exchange services. The closest applicable size
standard under SBA rules is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers.
Under that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. According to Commission data, 1,307 carriers reported
that they were incumbent local exchange service providers. Of these
1,307 carriers, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or fewer employees and
301 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that most providers of local exchange service are small
entities that may be affected by the rules and policies proposed in the
Public Notice.
19. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (incumbent LECs). Neither the
Commission nor the SBA has developed a size standard for small
businesses specifically applicable to incumbent local exchange
services. The closest applicable size standard under SBA rules is for
Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a
business is small if it has 1,500 or
[[Page 37405]]
fewer employees. According to Commission data, 1,307 carriers reported
that they were incumbent local exchange service providers. Of these
1,307 carriers, an estimated 1,006 have 1,500 or fewer employees and
301 have more than 1,500 employees. Consequently, the Commission
estimates that most providers of incumbent local exchange service are
small businesses that may be affected by rules adopted pursuant to the
Public Notice.
20. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeing, and other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities. In the Public Notice, the
Bureau proposes to collect study area and exchange boundaries from all
incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) and seeks comment on data
specifications for submitting boundary information in a manner and
format that Bureau staff can readily evaluate and process.
Specifically, the Bureau proposes requiring all incumbent LECs to
submit study area maps in esri compatible shapefile format as set forth
in Appendix A of the Public Notice. This requirement would affect all
incumbent LECs, including small entities, and may include new
administrative processes. We seek comment on the reporting,
recordkeeping and compliance requirements that may apply to all
incumbent LECs, including small entities. We seek comment on any costs
and burdens on small entities associated with the proposed rules
including data quantifying the extent of those costs or burdens.
21. Steps taken to Minimize the Significant Economic Impact on
Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered. The RFA
requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small
business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed
approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among
others): ``(1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources
available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or
simplification of compliance and reporting requirements under the rules
for such small entities; (3) the use of performance rather than design
standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part
thereof, for such small entities.''
22. The Public Notice seeks comment from all interested parties.
The Commission is aware that the proposals under consideration may
impact small entities. Small entities are encouraged to bring to the
Commission's attention any specific concerns they may have with the
proposals outlined in the Public Notice.
23. The Commission expects to consider the economic impact on small
entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the Public
Notice, in reaching its final conclusions and taking action in this
proceeding. The reporting, recordkeeping, and other compliance
requirements in the Public Notice could have an impact on both small
and large entities. The Commission believes that any impact of such
requirements is outweighed by the accompanying public benefits.
Further, these requirements are necessary to ensure that the statutory
goals of section 254 of the Act are met without waste, fraud, or abuse.
24. In the Public Notice, the Bureau seeks comment on a voluntary
process for state commissions to assist carriers in their states in
submitting boundaries for all carriers in the state. State commissions
generally are the entities that establish incumbent LECs' service
areas. Many state commissions and/or state telecommunications
associations have published maps showing the boundaries. Some states
already may have digitized maps of service territories. Although data
is requested from the industry generally, small carriers may be
differently affected by the proposed data collection. State involvement
could substantially reduce the burden to both the industry and the
Commission.
25. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict with the
Proposed Rules. None.
II. Specification for Study Area Boundary Submission
26. General. Incumbent local exchange carriers (LECs) must submit
study area and wire center boundaries. Boundaries must be submitted in
esri compatible shapefile format such that each shapefile represents a
single study area. The shapefile must contain one data record for each
exchange that constitutes the study area. Each exchange should be
represented as a closed, non-overlapping polygon with the associated
feature attributes described below. Submitted boundaries must be
accompanied by metadata or a plain text ``readme'' file containing the
information listed below.
27. Since shapefiles typically consist of 3 to 9 individual files,
the shapefile for the study area should be submitted as a single,
zipped file containing all the component files. The shapefile and
encapsulating zip file names must contain the company name and the 6-
digit study area code. Shapefile templates are available at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/rate-return-resources.
Note that submitted boundaries are public data and may be used in
published FCC documents and Web pages.
28. Shapefile. A shapefile template is available at http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/rate-return-resources. Submitted shapefiles
must:
A. Contain one closed, non-overlapping polygon for each exchange in
the study area that represents the area served from that exchange.
B. Have associated with each exchange polygon the following
identifying feature attributes:
1. OCN--NECA-assigned operating company number as in the LERG.
2. Company Name.
3. Exchange Name.
4. Acquired Exchange subject to Sec. 54.305 of the Commission's
rules.
5. CLLI Code(s) associated with the exchange.
6. Study Area Code.
7. State.
8. FRN (please use the FRN used for the 477 filing in the state).
C. Have an assigned projection w/accompanying .prj file.
D. Use unprojected (geographic) WGS84 geographic coordinate system.
E. Have a minimum horizontal accuracy of +/- 40 feet or less,
conforming to 1:24K national mapping standards.
F. Be submitted as a WinZip archive with a name containing the
company name and study area code (e.g., CompanyName--123456.zip).
29. Cover Page Information. In addition to the shapefile data
described above, we also will collect electronically the following
information:
A. Contact person name.
B. Contact person address.
C. Contact person phone number.
D. Contact person email address.
E. Date created/revised.
F. Methodology--process steps to create the data.
G. Certifying official name.
H. Certifying official address.
I. Certifying official phone number.
J. Certifying official email address.
Federal Communications Commission.
Trent B. Harkrader,
Division Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline
Competition Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2012-15222 Filed 6-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P