Petitions of Vonage Holdings Corp. and TeleCommunications Systems, Inc. for Limited Waiver Regarding Access to Numbering Resources, 36679-36683 [2013-13704]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Even with respect to conventional
licenses, the Commission finds it
prudent to permit license transfers only
in certain circumstances, such as where
the experimentation cannot be fruitfully
continued by the licensee; accordingly,
such transfers are not permitted without
written Commission approval.
7. Finally, the Commission notes that
there are practical options to ensure the
continuation of an experiment being
conducted under a program, medical
testing, or compliance testing license in
the event of a change in ownership or
control of the licensee. First, an
experimenter may obtain a conventional
license for the particular experiment.
Or, with advance planning, the new
owner, assuming it is duly qualified,
may apply for and obtain one of the new
licenses and complete the advance
registration requirement prior to taking
over the experimentation (either before
or after the change in ownership or
control of the licensee). And, as
indicated, if the Commission were to
allow assignments or transfers of these
new forms of experimental license, the
detail of the submissions and level of
scrutiny that would be required—due to
the nature of the operations conducted
under such licenses—would not differ
significantly from that which is required
for obtaining an initial license. Thus,
the Commission believes that modifying
the rule to explicitly prohibit transfer of
program, medical testing, and
compliance testing licenses will result
in no harm to any qualified license
applicant or licensee.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
8. The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA) 1 requires that agencies prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis for noticeand-comment rulemaking proceedings,
unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.’’ 2 The Commission hereby
certify that this rule revision will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
for the following two reasons: (1) The
action maintains the status quo for
conventional experimental licensees,
and (2) The Commission finds that
prohibiting the assignment or transfer of
program, medical testing, and
compliance testing licenses will have, at
most, a de minimis effect on small
entities, in light of the comparable
1 See
5 U.S.C. 604. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601 et
seq., has been amended by the Contract With
America Advancement Act of 1996, Public Law
104–121, 110 Stat. 847 (1996) (CWAAA). Title II of
the CWAAA is the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
2 See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jun 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
alternatives available, as described in
paragraph 7 of the Order on
Reconsideration.
9. Indeed, no party provided any
comments indicating either that a bar on
such transactions would have any
adverse effects or that permitting such
transfers would provide any benefits.
The Commission will send a copy of
this Order, including this certification,
to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration.
Congressional Review Act
10. The Commission will send a copy
of this Order on Reconsideration in a
report to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
Ordering Clauses
11. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 301, and
303 of the Communications Act of 1934,
as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 301, and
303, and §§ 1.1 and 1.108 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1 and
1.108, this Order on Reconsideration is
adopted.
12. Section 5.79 of the Commission’s
rules, 47 CFR is amended as set forth
below in the rule changes. Section 5.79
contains a modified information
collection requirement that requires
approval by the Office of Management
and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act, and will become
effective after the Commission publishes
a notice in the Federal Register
announcing such approval and the
relevant effective date.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 5
Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Federal Communications Commission.
Gloria J. Miles,
Federal Register Liaison.
Rule Changes
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 5 as
follows:
PART 5—EXPERIMENTAL RADIO
SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 5
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 4, 302, 303, 307, 336 48
Stat. 1066, 1082, as amended; 47 U.S.C. 154,
302, 303, 307, 336. Interpret or apply sec.
301, 48 Stat. 1081, as amended; 47 U.S.C.
301.
2. Section 5.79 is revised to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36679
§ 5.79 Transfer and assignment of station
authorization for conventional, program,
medical testing, and compliance testing
experimental radio licenses.
(a) A station authorization for a
conventional experimental radio
license, the frequencies authorized to be
used by the grantee of such
authorization, and the rights therein
granted by such authorization shall not
be transferred, assigned, or in any
manner either voluntarily or
involuntarily disposed of, unless the
Commission decides that such a transfer
is in the public interest and gives its
consent in writing.
(b) A station authorization for a
program, medical testing, or compliance
testing experimental radio license, the
frequencies authorized to be used by the
grantees of such authorizations, and the
rights therein granted by such
authorizations shall not be transferred,
assigned, or in any manner either
voluntarily or involuntarily disposed of.
[FR Doc. 2013–13675 Filed 6–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 52
[WC Docket Nos. 13–97, 04–36, 07–243, 10–
90; CC Docket Nos. 95–116, 01–92, 99–200;
FCC 13–51]
Petitions of Vonage Holdings Corp.
and TeleCommunications Systems,
Inc. for Limited Waiver Regarding
Access to Numbering Resources
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) establishes a limited
technical trial of direct access to
numbers. Specifically, it grants Vonage
Holdings Corporation (Vonage) and
other interconnected VoIP providers
that have pending petitions for waiver
of the Commission’s rules and that meet
the terms and conditions outlined a
limited, conditional waiver to obtain a
small pool of telephone numbers
directly from the NANPA and/or the PA
for use in providing interconnected
VoIP services. We tailor this waiver to
test whether giving interconnected VoIP
providers direct access to numbers will
raise issues relating to number exhaust,
number porting, VoIP interconnection,
or intercarrier compensation, and if so,
how those issues may be efficiently
addressed. The trial, and the public
comment, will improve the
E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM
19JNR1
36680
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Commission’s ability to adopt wellcrafted rules in this proceeding. In
addition, we grant a narrow waiver of
our rules to allow TeleCommunication
Systems, Inc. (TCS) direct access to
pseudo Automatic Number
Identification (p-ANI) codes for the
purpose of providing 911 and Enhanced
911 (E911) service. As discussed below,
this limited waiver will allow TCS,
which provides VoIP Positioning Center
service, to better ensure that emergency
calls are properly routed to trained
responders at public safety answering
points, or PSAPs.
DATES: Effective June 19, 2013, and is
applicable beginning April 18, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marilyn Jones, Wireline Competition
Bureau, Competition Policy Division,
(202) 418–1580, or send an email to
marilyn.jones@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order in
WC Docket Nos. 13–97, 04–36, 07–243,
10–90 and CC Docket Nos. 95–116, 01–
92, 99–200, FCC 13–51, adopted and
released April 18, 2013. The full text of
this document is available for public
inspection during regular 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
https://www.bcpiweb.com. It is available
on the Commission’s Web site at
https://www.fcc.gov.
I. Order
1. In the Order, the Commission
establish a limited trial of direct access
to numbers. We grant Vonage and other
interconnected VoIP providers that have
pending petitions for waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission’s
rules, and that meet the terms and
conditions outlined below, a timelimited waiver, subject to a number of
conditions and limitations, to obtain a
small pool of telephone numbers
directly from the administrators for use
in providing IP services, including VoIP
services, on a commercial basis to
residential and business customers.
2. We grant this waiver to permit us
to conduct a trial to help inform our
decision on whether, and if so how, the
Commission should amend the rules to
allow interconnected VoIP providers to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jun 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
obtain telephone numbers directly.
During the trial, Vonage and other
participants will be subject to monthly
reporting requirements that will be
made public to provide an opportunity
for the state commissions, industry and
general public to comment. Moreover,
we make clear that providers
participating in the trial may be
required to return numbers to a LEC
partner if problems arise. With these
safeguards, and subject to the conditions
described below, we expect that the
narrowly tailored trial will provide
valuable technical insight for the
Commission to assess whether
amending our rules to provide direct
access to numbers routinely will raise
issues relating to number exhaust,
number porting, VoIP interconnection,
and intercarrier compensation, and if so,
how those issues may be efficiently
addressed. Within 45 days of
completion of the trial, the Bureau will
report to the Commission on the results
of the trial. The report will be placed in
the record and state commissions, the
industry and general public will have 30
days to provide comments on the report.
3. We limit this trial to VoIP providers
that have already sought waivers to
obtain direct access to numbers. With
the exception of Vonage, those
providers have not specifically
committed to comply with the terms or
conditions set forth below. The waiver
we grant is not a blanket waiver, as
Vonage and other VoIP providers
requested. Rather, it is circumscribed in
a variety of ways described herein. We
expect that we could obtain useful
information from a trial involving
additional VoIP providers, however. For
example, different providers might
highlight unique problems or develop
solutions to problems that would assist
us in crafting final rules. Therefore,
other interconnected VoIP providers
that have pending petitions for waiver
of § 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission’s
rules may participate on the same terms
and conditions and proportionate scale
as Vonage so long as they file a proposal
with the Wireline Competition Bureau
and proceed on the same schedule as
Vonage does. There are a substantial
number of pending waiver requests,
which will give us adequate opportunity
to trial a variety of factual scenarios.
Because these petitions have been
pending for months or years, we believe
that all potentially interested providers
have had ample time to request a
waiver. We therefore limit this grant to
pending petitioners. Moreover, the
Commission has provided and received
comment on those waiver petitions.
Thus interested parties have had an
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
opportunity to comment about specific
petitioners. The Bureau may reject any
proposal from a provider that is ‘‘redlighted’’ by the Commission, is out of
compliance with any Commission
obligation to which it is subject, or is
otherwise determined to pose a risk to
consumers that is not outweighed by the
benefits of permitting the VoIP provider
to participate in the trial.
4. In the Order, we also grant TCS, a
provider of VPC service, a narrow
waiver to allow it to obtain p-ANI codes
directly from the RNA for the purpose
of providing 911 and E911 service, in
states where TCS is unable to obtain
certification because TCS has either
been denied certification or can
demonstrate that a state does not certify
VPC providers.
A. Access to Numbers Trial
1. Background
5. On March 5, 2005, Vonage filed a
petition requesting a waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission’s
rules so that it may obtain from the
numbering administrator telephone
numbers to use in deploying IP-enabled
services, including VoIP services, on a
commercial basis to residential and
business customers. Vonage requested a
waiver until the Commission adopts
final numbering rules in the IP-Enabled
Services proceeding and stated that it
would comply with the conditions the
Commission set forth in the SBCIS
Waiver Order. The Commission granted
the SBCIS waiver request subject to
compliance with (1) the Commission’s
number utilization and optimization
requirements, (2) numbering authority
delegated to the states, and (3) industry
guidelines and practices, including
filing NRUF Reports. The Commission
also required SBCIS to file requests for
numbers with the Commission and the
relevant state commission at least 30
days prior to requesting numbers from
the Administrators. Finally, the
Commission required SBCIS to comply
with the requirement in 47 CFR
52.15(g)(2)(ii) that it be capable of
providing service within 60 days of
activating the numbers it requests.
6. Vonage renewed its request on
March 8, 2011, noting that the
opportunities to provide consumers
with advanced features and services
continue to grow and maintaining that
its request is consistent with the
Commission’s approach to numbering
and porting obligations for
interconnected VoIP providers. On
November 11, 2011, Vonage
supplemented its request and offered to
satisfy additional conditions. See Letter
from Brita D. Strandberg, Counsel to
E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM
19JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Vonage Holdings Corp. to Marlene H.
Dortch, Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission (filed
Nov. 11, 2011) (Vonage Supplement).
Namely, it offered to maintain at least a
65 percent number utilization rate
across its telephone number inventory;
to offer IP interconnection to other
carriers and providers; to comply with
the Commission’s number
administration requirements and ensure
appropriate telephone number
management; and to provide the
Commission with a migration plan for
its transition to direct access to numbers
within 90 days of commencing the
migration, and every 90 days thereafter
for 18 months. On December 27, 2011,
the Bureau released a Public Notice
seeking to refresh the record on
Vonage’s petition and on pending
petitions for limited waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(ii) filed by other parties.
Vonage filed several ex parte letters
explaining why it believes that granting
its petition would serve the public
interest and responding to commenters’
concerns about, inter alia, number
porting, interconnection, and
intercarrier compensation.
2. Discussion
7. We find that good cause exists to
grant Vonage and other interconnected
VoIP providers with pending petitions a
limited, conditional waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) to permit them to obtain
telephone numbers directly from the
number administrator, subject to the
conditions set forth in the SBCIS Waiver
Order and various commitments
detailed below. The Commission
emphasizes that it is not deciding in this
Order whether VoIP is an information
service or a telecommunications service.
8. Several competitive LECs including
Bandwidth.Com, Voice Services, and
Level 3 Communications, LLC (‘‘CLEC
Participants’’) urge the Commission not
to grant a waiver or conduct a trial
concurrent with the rulemaking. They
assert that it is inappropriate to conduct
such a trial before the Commission has
made a finding that ‘‘it is good policy
to provide numbers to non-carriers’’ or
has established rules that will protect
consumers and other companies. We
disagree. The record on access to
numbers contains questions on a host of
technical issues, and the trial we
establish here will provide critical
information as we consider the
questions raised in this Notice. Delaying
the trial until after the NPRM has been
completed would needlessly delay
resolution of these issues.
9. We tailor the trial to provide a
circumscribed and informative test case
that will allow the Commission to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jun 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
identify any problems and create
industry-wide rules to address such
issues. We therefore limit the duration
and geographic scope of the trial. We
also impose on Vonage (and other
interconnected providers with pending
petitions) a number of conditions that
are similar to conditions we are
exploring in the rulemaking. These
conditions are thus designed not only to
protect the public interest but to
maximize the probative value of the trial
and help us identify the terms and
conditions under which we might
expand direct access to numbers.
10. Scope of Trial. We limit the scope
of the trial in several ways. We describe
below the limits as they apply to
Vonage. As described above, however,
other interconnected VoIP providers
with pending petitions may also
participate in the trial, provided they
comply with the terms below, including
filing proposal with the Wireline
Competition Bureau and proceeding on
the same schedule as Vonage does. The
Bureau may reject any proposal from a
provider that is ‘‘red-lighted’’ by the
Commission, is out of compliance with
any Commission obligation to which it
is subject, or is otherwise determined to
pose a risk that is not outweighed by the
benefits of permitting the VoIP provider
to participate in the trial.
11. First, under the trial, Vonage may
obtain up to (1) twenty 1,000-blocks of
new numbers in pooling rate centers or
LATAs, or (2) nineteen 1,000-blocks in
pooling rate centers or LATAs and one
10,000-block in a non-pooling rate
center or LATA. Vonage can use these
blocks of new numbers to sign up a new
customer that is changing providers or
to give a number to a customer does not
yet have a number. In addition, up to
125,000 numbers may be reassigned
from Vonage’s CLEC partners directly to
Vonage. This will enable Vonage to test
porting processes for existing and new
customers, as well as trial the process
for assigning numbers to non-ported
customers. By design, these numerical
limits will also limit the geographic
scope of the trial for Vonage. Other
providers interested in participating in
the trial may obtain a quantity of
numbers proportionate to their overall
scale. Trial participants other than
Vonage may obtain direct access to
numbers to port up to five percent of
their interconnected VoIP service
customers as of the date of the release
of this order. The limits we impose on
Vonage represent less than 5 percent of
its existing numbers, and approximately
5 percent of its total subscribers. See
Vonage Holding Corp. Reports Fourth
Quarter and Full Year 2012 Results,
https://pr.vonage.com/
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
36681
releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=739997
(last visited April 18, 2013); Letter from
Brita D. Strandberg, Counsel to Vonage
Holdings Corp., to Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission, CC Docket No. 99–200, at
5–6 (filed Nov. 11, 2011) (noting that
Vonage maintains at least 65%
utilization across its telephone number
inventory). All such providers may
obtain one 1,000- or 10,000-block of
numbers in one rate center (pooling or
non-pooling, respectively), and an
additional 1,000 block in a pooling rate
center for every 6,500 numbers that can
be ported (rounded down). That is, a
provider that may port in 5,000 numbers
may also obtain new numbers in one
rate center; a provider that may port in
10,000 numbers may obtain new
numbers in two rate centers; and a
provider that may port in 15,000
numbers may obtain new numbers in
three rate centers.
12. Second, Vonage must submit to
the Wireline Competition Bureau and
each relevant state commission a
numbering proposal within 30 days of
the release of this order. That proposal
must (1) Include a certification that
Vonage will comply with the terms and
conditions of this waiver, (2) identify
the rate centers or LATAs in which it
wishes to have numbers directly
assigned to it, and note how many
numbers in each rate center or LATA it
proposes to receive as new numbers and
how many it proposes to port in from
existing or new customers, and (3)
describe the phase-in process to
implement the trial. See Vonage
Supplement at 5–6; Vonage July 31 Ex
Parte Letter at 4–6 (committing, in
connection with its waiver request, to
provide a transition plan for migrating
customers to its own numbers within 90
days of commencing that migration and
every 90 days thereafter for 18 months).
The plans, as well as the reports, will be
available for public comment. Even if
the plans and reports contain
confidential information, interested
parties may review the information
pursuant to a Protective Order. The
proposal will be approved 30 days after
filing unless the Bureau finds that the
proposal does not comply with the
requirements of this Order. Vonage may
not request or obtain direct access to
numbers until its proposal is approved.
13. Third, the trial will remain in
effect for six months from the date when
Vonage receives Bureau approval of its
proposal to the Bureau. At the end of
that time, the trial will expire and
Vonage may not obtain direct access to
additional numbers under this timelimited waiver. We note that the
expiration of the waiver alone does not
E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM
19JNR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
36682
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
require Vonage to return the numbers it
has received under the waiver. But the
Commission reserves the right to order
the return of such numbers.
14. Fourth, to permit states, the
public, and the Commission to monitor
the impact of the trial, Vonage must file
monthly reports beginning 60 days after
Vonage requests direct access to
numbers from a numbering
administrator. These reports must
include: (1) the total of new numbers
placed in service by Vonage; (2)
Vonage’s total number of port-in
requests (including existing Vonage
customers as well as newly won
customers), and the percentage of
successful ports-in; (3) the number of
requests to port out from Vonage a
number that it holds directly rather than
through a CLEC partner, and the
percentage of successful ports-out; (4)
the total number of routing failures,
along with the causes of those failures;
and (5) a description of any billing or
compensation disputes. These reports
will be public, and entered into the
record of the attached NPRM to provide
an opportunity for public comment.
15. We find that these limitations
appropriately balance our goal of
obtaining useful, real-world data
without prejudging the questions raised
above regarding industry-wide changes.
Finally, we establish safeguards in the
event the Commission has concerns that
Vonage’s actions during this trial are
inconsistent with our rules, policies, or
the conditions set forth herein.
Specifically, under such circumstances,
immediately upon a directive from the
Commission (or the Wireline
Competition Bureau) Vonage must make
arrangements to port to a carrier
numbering partner any numbers already
in use by customers, promptly and in a
manner that does not disrupt service to
consumers or other providers and to
return to the number administrators any
numbers not yet in use by customers.
For numbers already assigned to end
users, we require Vonage to port those
numbers to a carrier that can obtain
numbers directly from the
administrators.
16. Conditions of Trial. Vonage has
committed to comply with the
conditions the Commission set forth in
the SBCIS Waiver Order and to comply
with a number of additional
requirements intended to address
commenters’ concerns. The Commission
granted the SBCIS waiver request
subject to compliance with (1) the
Commission’s number utilization and
optimization requirements; (2)
numbering authority delegated to the
states; and (3) industry guidelines and
practices, including filing NRUF
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jun 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
Reports. The Commission also requires
SBCIS to file requests for numbers with
the Commission and the relevant state
commission at least 30 days prior to
requesting numbers from the
Administrators. Finally, the
Commission requires SBCIS to comply
with the requirement in 47 CFR
52.15(g)(2)(ii) that it be capable of
providing service within 60 days of
activating the numbers it requests. We
agree that these conditions will ensure
that the public interest is protected, and
will help test possible terms and
conditions that might attach to a rule
change. We therefore condition our trial
waiver of § 52.15(g)(2)(i) on Vonage’s
compliance with the following
requirements. Vonage must satisfy the
Commission’s number utilization and
optimization requirements and industry
guidelines and practices, including
abiding by the numbering authority
delegated to state commissions and
filing NRUF Reports. See 47 CFR Part
52. See 47 CFR 52.15(f)(6) (requiring
carriers to file NRUF reports). Requiring
Vonage to comply with numbering
requirements will help alleviate
concerns with numbering exhaust. For
example, the NRUF reporting
requirement will allow the Commission
to better monitor Vonage’s number
utilization. Most VoIP providers’
utilization information is embedded in
the NRUF data of the LEC from whom
it purchases a Primary Rate Interface
(PRI) line.
17. In addition to committing to
comply with the requirements of the
SBCIS Waiver Order, Vonage committed
to maintain at least 65 percent number
utilization across its telephone number
inventory; offer IP interconnection to
other carriers and providers; work to
ensure that its carrier partners comply
with applicable law, including
intercarrier compensation obligations;
and comply with the Commission’s
numbering requirements. We condition
Vonage’s limited waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) on its adherence to these
commitments. This will help us assess
their benefit and efficacy as permanent
rules.
18. In addition to the above
conditions proposed by Vonage, some
state commissions recommended
additional conditions to ensure efficient
use of telephone numbers. We agree that
many of those conditions will help
protect the efficient use of valuable, and
limited, numbers, and will help our
assessment of whether and how to
modify our rules governing access to
numbers. Accordingly, we require
Vonage to comply with the following
conditions: (1) Provide the relevant
State commission with regulatory and
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
numbering contacts when it requests
numbers in that State; (2) consolidate
and report all numbers under its own
unique Operating Company Number
(OCN); (3) provide customers with the
ability to access all N11 numbers in use
in a State; and (4) maintain the original
rate center designation of all numbers in
its inventory. Maintaining the original
rate center designation is important in
order to facilitate number porting
requests. As noted above, Vonage is
required to comply with specific
reporting requirements regarding the
progress of the trial. In addition, we
invite parties to submit information
regarding the trial. We are particularly
interested in the experiences of
customers and service providers that are
directly affected by Vonage receiving
direct access to numbers. Commenters
should address any benefits or concerns
with the trial as well as the effectiveness
of the conditions. Upon completion of
the trial, the Bureau will report to the
Commission on the results of the trial.
The report will be placed in the record
and state commissions, the industry and
general public may comment on the
report. We will consider those
comments when we evaluate the trial
and develop rules with respect to
expanding access to numbers.
19. Pursuant to the parameters and
the conditions set forth herein, we find
that good cause exists to grant Vonage
a waiver of § 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the
Commission’s rules in order to conduct
a limited technical trial.
B. TCS Waiver Request
1. Background
20. On February 20, 2007, TCS filed
a petition requesting that the
Commission waive § 52.15(g)(2)(i) of our
rules and find that TCS, as a provider
of VPC service, is an eligible user of pANI codes without having to
demonstrate that it is certified in all 50
states. See Petition of
TeleCommunicatons Systems, Inc. and
HBF Group, Inc. for Waiver of Part 52
of the Commission Rules, CC Docket No.
99–200 (filed Feb. 20, 2007) (TCS
Waiver). Although TCS filed jointly
with HBF, Intrado, Inc. acquired HBF in
April 2008. Therefore, we only address
the petition as it applies to TCS. On
April 21, 2008, TCS filed reply
comments, arguing that, although states
have an interest in p-ANI utilization,
state certification is not necessary to
protect those interests. Moreover, TCS
argues that if state CLEC certification is
required, then obtaining one state
certification should be adequate to
access p-ANI codes throughout the
country. TCS also argues that if some
E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM
19JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
form of certification is required, it
should come from the Commission or a
national public safety organization.
21. In 2012, TCS refreshed the record
in this proceeding and announced that
it was certified as a competitive local
exchange carrier in 42 states and could
obtain p-ANI codes directly for use in
those states. However, TCS states that it
cannot obtain p-ANI codes in all states
due to state certification issues. TCS
lacks certification in Idaho, Colorado,
Wyoming, South Dakota, South
Carolina, West Virginia, Alaska, and the
District of Columbia, and has an open
application in Maine. TCS encountered
certification questions in Iowa, Illinois,
Ohio, and Arizona that directly related
to the inapplicability of CLEC
certification to VoIP Positioning
Services. Moreover, TCS notes that it
had to relinquish its inventory of p-ANI
codes to Neustar as part of the
Commission’s move to a permanent pANI administrator. TCS thus cannot
obtain p-ANI codes in certain states, and
TCS asserts that this may result in
disruptions to E911 and homeland
security. It notes in particular that its
difficulty obtaining codes in South
Carolina ‘‘is currently causing a 911
routing disruption’’ in that state. TCS
states that, ‘‘because it is not [a] CLEC
certified in South Carolina and there is
not ‘central 911 authority’ in South
Carolina from which to secure a waiver,
[TCS] has been denied access to p-ANI
in this area. This places TCS’s
customers, and their end users, in
jeopardy.’’ TCS requests that the
Commission grant a waiver so that TCS
may obtain p-ANIs in states where TCS
is not certified.
2. Discussion
22. We grant TCS a limited waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission’s
rules so that it may obtain p-ANI codes
from the RNA in South Carolina and
other states where it cannot obtain
certification. TCS may show that it
cannot obtain state certification by
demonstrating that the state does not
certify VPC providers (it has already
done so in South Carolina). We grant
this limited waiver while the
Commission considers whether
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) should be modified to
allow all providers of VPC service to
directly access p-ANI codes.
23. This waiver is limited in duration
and scope. It lasts only until the
Commission addresses whether to
modify § 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the rules to
allow all VPC providers direct access to
numbers, specifically p-ANI codes, for
the purpose of providing 911 and E911
service. The waiver applies only with
respect to states where TCS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:08 Jun 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
36683
demonstrates that it cannot obtain pANI codes because it cannot obtain state
certification. For example, TCS could
provide the Commission with a denial
from a state commission with the reason
for denial being that the state does not
certify VPC providers, or a statement
from the state commission or its general
counsel that it does not certify VPC
providers. Upon such a showing, the
Bureau will notify the RNA that TCS
may directly access p-ANI codes in a
particular state. We will consider
broader relief, including options that
TCS proposed, in the rulemaking.
During the pendency of the rulemaking,
we find good cause to grant TCS a
limited waiver of § 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the
Commission’s rules so that it may obtain
p-ANIs in those states where it cannot
obtain certification.
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.
II. Procedural Matters
C. Congressional Review Act
26. The Commission will not send a
copy of this Order pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A), because the adopted rules
are rules of particular applicability.
A. Ex Parte Rules—Permit-but-Disclose
24. The proceeding this Notice
initiates shall be treated as a ‘‘permitbut-disclose’’ proceeding in accordance
with the Commission’s ex parte rules.
See 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. 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
§ 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by
§ 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
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Paperwork Reduction Analysis
25. 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).
III. Ordering Clauses
27. It is ordered that, pursuant to the
authority contained in sections 1, 3, 4,
201–205, 251, and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 153, 154, 201–
205, 251, 303(r), the Petition of Vonage
Holdings Corp. for Limited Waiver of
§ 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission’s
rules Regarding Access to Numbering
Resources; and the Petition of
TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. and
HBF Group, Inc. for Waiver of Part 52
of the Commission’s Rules are granted
to the extent set forth herein, and this
Order shall be effective upon release.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–13704 Filed 6–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[MB Docket No. 12–84; RM–11627; DA 13–
1121]
Radio Broadcasting Services; Summit,
Mississippi
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this document, the Audio
Division, at the request of Bowen
Broadcasting, allots FM Channel 228A
E:\FR\FM\19JNR1.SGM
19JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 118 (Wednesday, June 19, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 36679-36683]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13704]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 52
[WC Docket Nos. 13-97, 04-36, 07-243, 10-90; CC Docket Nos. 95-116, 01-
92, 99-200; FCC 13-51]
Petitions of Vonage Holdings Corp. and TeleCommunications
Systems, Inc. for Limited Waiver Regarding Access to Numbering
Resources
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) establishes a limited technical trial of direct access to
numbers. Specifically, it grants Vonage Holdings Corporation (Vonage)
and other interconnected VoIP providers that have pending petitions for
waiver of the Commission's rules and that meet the terms and conditions
outlined a limited, conditional waiver to obtain a small pool of
telephone numbers directly from the NANPA and/or the PA for use in
providing interconnected VoIP services. We tailor this waiver to test
whether giving interconnected VoIP providers direct access to numbers
will raise issues relating to number exhaust, number porting, VoIP
interconnection, or intercarrier compensation, and if so, how those
issues may be efficiently addressed. The trial, and the public comment,
will improve the
[[Page 36680]]
Commission's ability to adopt well-crafted rules in this proceeding. In
addition, we grant a narrow waiver of our rules to allow
TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. (TCS) direct access to pseudo Automatic
Number Identification (p-ANI) codes for the purpose of providing 911
and Enhanced 911 (E911) service. As discussed below, this limited
waiver will allow TCS, which provides VoIP Positioning Center service,
to better ensure that emergency calls are properly routed to trained
responders at public safety answering points, or PSAPs.
DATES: Effective June 19, 2013, and is applicable beginning April 18,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Jones, Wireline Competition
Bureau, Competition Policy Division, (202) 418-1580, or send an email
to marilyn.jones@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order
in WC Docket Nos. 13-97, 04-36, 07-243, 10-90 and CC Docket Nos. 95-
116, 01-92, 99-200, FCC 13-51, adopted and released April 18, 2013. The
full text of this document is available for public inspection during
regular 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 https://www.bcpiweb.com. It is available on the Commission's Web site at https://www.fcc.gov.
I. Order
1. In the Order, the Commission establish a limited trial of direct
access to numbers. We grant Vonage and other interconnected VoIP
providers that have pending petitions for waiver of Sec.
52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules, and that meet the terms and
conditions outlined below, a time-limited waiver, subject to a number
of conditions and limitations, to obtain a small pool of telephone
numbers directly from the administrators for use in providing IP
services, including VoIP services, on a commercial basis to residential
and business customers.
2. We grant this waiver to permit us to conduct a trial to help
inform our decision on whether, and if so how, the Commission should
amend the rules to allow interconnected VoIP providers to obtain
telephone numbers directly. During the trial, Vonage and other
participants will be subject to monthly reporting requirements that
will be made public to provide an opportunity for the state
commissions, industry and general public to comment. Moreover, we make
clear that providers participating in the trial may be required to
return numbers to a LEC partner if problems arise. With these
safeguards, and subject to the conditions described below, we expect
that the narrowly tailored trial will provide valuable technical
insight for the Commission to assess whether amending our rules to
provide direct access to numbers routinely will raise issues relating
to number exhaust, number porting, VoIP interconnection, and
intercarrier compensation, and if so, how those issues may be
efficiently addressed. Within 45 days of completion of the trial, the
Bureau will report to the Commission on the results of the trial. The
report will be placed in the record and state commissions, the industry
and general public will have 30 days to provide comments on the report.
3. We limit this trial to VoIP providers that have already sought
waivers to obtain direct access to numbers. With the exception of
Vonage, those providers have not specifically committed to comply with
the terms or conditions set forth below. The waiver we grant is not a
blanket waiver, as Vonage and other VoIP providers requested. Rather,
it is circumscribed in a variety of ways described herein. We expect
that we could obtain useful information from a trial involving
additional VoIP providers, however. For example, different providers
might highlight unique problems or develop solutions to problems that
would assist us in crafting final rules. Therefore, other
interconnected VoIP providers that have pending petitions for waiver of
Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules may participate on the
same terms and conditions and proportionate scale as Vonage so long as
they file a proposal with the Wireline Competition Bureau and proceed
on the same schedule as Vonage does. There are a substantial number of
pending waiver requests, which will give us adequate opportunity to
trial a variety of factual scenarios. Because these petitions have been
pending for months or years, we believe that all potentially interested
providers have had ample time to request a waiver. We therefore limit
this grant to pending petitioners. Moreover, the Commission has
provided and received comment on those waiver petitions. Thus
interested parties have had an opportunity to comment about specific
petitioners. The Bureau may reject any proposal from a provider that is
``red-lighted'' by the Commission, is out of compliance with any
Commission obligation to which it is subject, or is otherwise
determined to pose a risk to consumers that is not outweighed by the
benefits of permitting the VoIP provider to participate in the trial.
4. In the Order, we also grant TCS, a provider of VPC service, a
narrow waiver to allow it to obtain p-ANI codes directly from the RNA
for the purpose of providing 911 and E911 service, in states where TCS
is unable to obtain certification because TCS has either been denied
certification or can demonstrate that a state does not certify VPC
providers.
A. Access to Numbers Trial
1. Background
5. On March 5, 2005, Vonage filed a petition requesting a waiver of
Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules so that it may obtain
from the numbering administrator telephone numbers to use in deploying
IP-enabled services, including VoIP services, on a commercial basis to
residential and business customers. Vonage requested a waiver until the
Commission adopts final numbering rules in the IP-Enabled Services
proceeding and stated that it would comply with the conditions the
Commission set forth in the SBCIS Waiver Order. The Commission granted
the SBCIS waiver request subject to compliance with (1) the
Commission's number utilization and optimization requirements, (2)
numbering authority delegated to the states, and (3) industry
guidelines and practices, including filing NRUF Reports. The Commission
also required SBCIS to file requests for numbers with the Commission
and the relevant state commission at least 30 days prior to requesting
numbers from the Administrators. Finally, the Commission required SBCIS
to comply with the requirement in 47 CFR 52.15(g)(2)(ii) that it be
capable of providing service within 60 days of activating the numbers
it requests.
6. Vonage renewed its request on March 8, 2011, noting that the
opportunities to provide consumers with advanced features and services
continue to grow and maintaining that its request is consistent with
the Commission's approach to numbering and porting obligations for
interconnected VoIP providers. On November 11, 2011, Vonage
supplemented its request and offered to satisfy additional conditions.
See Letter from Brita D. Strandberg, Counsel to
[[Page 36681]]
Vonage Holdings Corp. to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal
Communications Commission (filed Nov. 11, 2011) (Vonage Supplement).
Namely, it offered to maintain at least a 65 percent number utilization
rate across its telephone number inventory; to offer IP interconnection
to other carriers and providers; to comply with the Commission's number
administration requirements and ensure appropriate telephone number
management; and to provide the Commission with a migration plan for its
transition to direct access to numbers within 90 days of commencing the
migration, and every 90 days thereafter for 18 months. On December 27,
2011, the Bureau released a Public Notice seeking to refresh the record
on Vonage's petition and on pending petitions for limited waiver of
Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(ii) filed by other parties. Vonage filed several ex
parte letters explaining why it believes that granting its petition
would serve the public interest and responding to commenters' concerns
about, inter alia, number porting, interconnection, and intercarrier
compensation.
2. Discussion
7. We find that good cause exists to grant Vonage and other
interconnected VoIP providers with pending petitions a limited,
conditional waiver of Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) to permit them to obtain
telephone numbers directly from the number administrator, subject to
the conditions set forth in the SBCIS Waiver Order and various
commitments detailed below. The Commission emphasizes that it is not
deciding in this Order whether VoIP is an information service or a
telecommunications service.
8. Several competitive LECs including Bandwidth.Com, Voice
Services, and Level 3 Communications, LLC (``CLEC Participants'') urge
the Commission not to grant a waiver or conduct a trial concurrent with
the rulemaking. They assert that it is inappropriate to conduct such a
trial before the Commission has made a finding that ``it is good policy
to provide numbers to non-carriers'' or has established rules that will
protect consumers and other companies. We disagree. The record on
access to numbers contains questions on a host of technical issues, and
the trial we establish here will provide critical information as we
consider the questions raised in this Notice. Delaying the trial until
after the NPRM has been completed would needlessly delay resolution of
these issues.
9. We tailor the trial to provide a circumscribed and informative
test case that will allow the Commission to identify any problems and
create industry-wide rules to address such issues. We therefore limit
the duration and geographic scope of the trial. We also impose on
Vonage (and other interconnected providers with pending petitions) a
number of conditions that are similar to conditions we are exploring in
the rulemaking. These conditions are thus designed not only to protect
the public interest but to maximize the probative value of the trial
and help us identify the terms and conditions under which we might
expand direct access to numbers.
10. Scope of Trial. We limit the scope of the trial in several
ways. We describe below the limits as they apply to Vonage. As
described above, however, other interconnected VoIP providers with
pending petitions may also participate in the trial, provided they
comply with the terms below, including filing proposal with the
Wireline Competition Bureau and proceeding on the same schedule as
Vonage does. The Bureau may reject any proposal from a provider that is
``red-lighted'' by the Commission, is out of compliance with any
Commission obligation to which it is subject, or is otherwise
determined to pose a risk that is not outweighed by the benefits of
permitting the VoIP provider to participate in the trial.
11. First, under the trial, Vonage may obtain up to (1) twenty
1,000-blocks of new numbers in pooling rate centers or LATAs, or (2)
nineteen 1,000-blocks in pooling rate centers or LATAs and one 10,000-
block in a non-pooling rate center or LATA. Vonage can use these blocks
of new numbers to sign up a new customer that is changing providers or
to give a number to a customer does not yet have a number. In addition,
up to 125,000 numbers may be reassigned from Vonage's CLEC partners
directly to Vonage. This will enable Vonage to test porting processes
for existing and new customers, as well as trial the process for
assigning numbers to non-ported customers. By design, these numerical
limits will also limit the geographic scope of the trial for Vonage.
Other providers interested in participating in the trial may obtain a
quantity of numbers proportionate to their overall scale. Trial
participants other than Vonage may obtain direct access to numbers to
port up to five percent of their interconnected VoIP service customers
as of the date of the release of this order. The limits we impose on
Vonage represent less than 5 percent of its existing numbers, and
approximately 5 percent of its total subscribers. See Vonage Holding
Corp. Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2012 Results, https://pr.vonage.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=739997 (last visited April
18, 2013); Letter from Brita D. Strandberg, Counsel to Vonage Holdings
Corp., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission, CC Docket No. 99-200, at 5-6 (filed Nov. 11, 2011) (noting
that Vonage maintains at least 65% utilization across its telephone
number inventory). All such providers may obtain one 1,000- or 10,000-
block of numbers in one rate center (pooling or non-pooling,
respectively), and an additional 1,000 block in a pooling rate center
for every 6,500 numbers that can be ported (rounded down). That is, a
provider that may port in 5,000 numbers may also obtain new numbers in
one rate center; a provider that may port in 10,000 numbers may obtain
new numbers in two rate centers; and a provider that may port in 15,000
numbers may obtain new numbers in three rate centers.
12. Second, Vonage must submit to the Wireline Competition Bureau
and each relevant state commission a numbering proposal within 30 days
of the release of this order. That proposal must (1) Include a
certification that Vonage will comply with the terms and conditions of
this waiver, (2) identify the rate centers or LATAs in which it wishes
to have numbers directly assigned to it, and note how many numbers in
each rate center or LATA it proposes to receive as new numbers and how
many it proposes to port in from existing or new customers, and (3)
describe the phase-in process to implement the trial. See Vonage
Supplement at 5-6; Vonage July 31 Ex Parte Letter at 4-6 (committing,
in connection with its waiver request, to provide a transition plan for
migrating customers to its own numbers within 90 days of commencing
that migration and every 90 days thereafter for 18 months). The plans,
as well as the reports, will be available for public comment. Even if
the plans and reports contain confidential information, interested
parties may review the information pursuant to a Protective Order. The
proposal will be approved 30 days after filing unless the Bureau finds
that the proposal does not comply with the requirements of this Order.
Vonage may not request or obtain direct access to numbers until its
proposal is approved.
13. Third, the trial will remain in effect for six months from the
date when Vonage receives Bureau approval of its proposal to the
Bureau. At the end of that time, the trial will expire and Vonage may
not obtain direct access to additional numbers under this time-limited
waiver. We note that the expiration of the waiver alone does not
[[Page 36682]]
require Vonage to return the numbers it has received under the waiver.
But the Commission reserves the right to order the return of such
numbers.
14. Fourth, to permit states, the public, and the Commission to
monitor the impact of the trial, Vonage must file monthly reports
beginning 60 days after Vonage requests direct access to numbers from a
numbering administrator. These reports must include: (1) the total of
new numbers placed in service by Vonage; (2) Vonage's total number of
port-in requests (including existing Vonage customers as well as newly
won customers), and the percentage of successful ports-in; (3) the
number of requests to port out from Vonage a number that it holds
directly rather than through a CLEC partner, and the percentage of
successful ports-out; (4) the total number of routing failures, along
with the causes of those failures; and (5) a description of any billing
or compensation disputes. These reports will be public, and entered
into the record of the attached NPRM to provide an opportunity for
public comment.
15. We find that these limitations appropriately balance our goal
of obtaining useful, real-world data without prejudging the questions
raised above regarding industry-wide changes. Finally, we establish
safeguards in the event the Commission has concerns that Vonage's
actions during this trial are inconsistent with our rules, policies, or
the conditions set forth herein. Specifically, under such
circumstances, immediately upon a directive from the Commission (or the
Wireline Competition Bureau) Vonage must make arrangements to port to a
carrier numbering partner any numbers already in use by customers,
promptly and in a manner that does not disrupt service to consumers or
other providers and to return to the number administrators any numbers
not yet in use by customers. For numbers already assigned to end users,
we require Vonage to port those numbers to a carrier that can obtain
numbers directly from the administrators.
16. Conditions of Trial. Vonage has committed to comply with the
conditions the Commission set forth in the SBCIS Waiver Order and to
comply with a number of additional requirements intended to address
commenters' concerns. The Commission granted the SBCIS waiver request
subject to compliance with (1) the Commission's number utilization and
optimization requirements; (2) numbering authority delegated to the
states; and (3) industry guidelines and practices, including filing
NRUF Reports. The Commission also requires SBCIS to file requests for
numbers with the Commission and the relevant state commission at least
30 days prior to requesting numbers from the Administrators. Finally,
the Commission requires SBCIS to comply with the requirement in 47 CFR
52.15(g)(2)(ii) that it be capable of providing service within 60 days
of activating the numbers it requests. We agree that these conditions
will ensure that the public interest is protected, and will help test
possible terms and conditions that might attach to a rule change. We
therefore condition our trial waiver of Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) on
Vonage's compliance with the following requirements. Vonage must
satisfy the Commission's number utilization and optimization
requirements and industry guidelines and practices, including abiding
by the numbering authority delegated to state commissions and filing
NRUF Reports. See 47 CFR Part 52. See 47 CFR 52.15(f)(6) (requiring
carriers to file NRUF reports). Requiring Vonage to comply with
numbering requirements will help alleviate concerns with numbering
exhaust. For example, the NRUF reporting requirement will allow the
Commission to better monitor Vonage's number utilization. Most VoIP
providers' utilization information is embedded in the NRUF data of the
LEC from whom it purchases a Primary Rate Interface (PRI) line.
17. In addition to committing to comply with the requirements of
the SBCIS Waiver Order, Vonage committed to maintain at least 65
percent number utilization across its telephone number inventory; offer
IP interconnection to other carriers and providers; work to ensure that
its carrier partners comply with applicable law, including intercarrier
compensation obligations; and comply with the Commission's numbering
requirements. We condition Vonage's limited waiver of Sec.
52.15(g)(2)(i) on its adherence to these commitments. This will help us
assess their benefit and efficacy as permanent rules.
18. In addition to the above conditions proposed by Vonage, some
state commissions recommended additional conditions to ensure efficient
use of telephone numbers. We agree that many of those conditions will
help protect the efficient use of valuable, and limited, numbers, and
will help our assessment of whether and how to modify our rules
governing access to numbers. Accordingly, we require Vonage to comply
with the following conditions: (1) Provide the relevant State
commission with regulatory and numbering contacts when it requests
numbers in that State; (2) consolidate and report all numbers under its
own unique Operating Company Number (OCN); (3) provide customers with
the ability to access all N11 numbers in use in a State; and (4)
maintain the original rate center designation of all numbers in its
inventory. Maintaining the original rate center designation is
important in order to facilitate number porting requests. As noted
above, Vonage is required to comply with specific reporting
requirements regarding the progress of the trial. In addition, we
invite parties to submit information regarding the trial. We are
particularly interested in the experiences of customers and service
providers that are directly affected by Vonage receiving direct access
to numbers. Commenters should address any benefits or concerns with the
trial as well as the effectiveness of the conditions. Upon completion
of the trial, the Bureau will report to the Commission on the results
of the trial. The report will be placed in the record and state
commissions, the industry and general public may comment on the report.
We will consider those comments when we evaluate the trial and develop
rules with respect to expanding access to numbers.
19. Pursuant to the parameters and the conditions set forth herein,
we find that good cause exists to grant Vonage a waiver of Sec.
52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules in order to conduct a limited
technical trial.
B. TCS Waiver Request
1. Background
20. On February 20, 2007, TCS filed a petition requesting that the
Commission waive Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) of our rules and find that TCS,
as a provider of VPC service, is an eligible user of p-ANI codes
without having to demonstrate that it is certified in all 50 states.
See Petition of TeleCommunicatons Systems, Inc. and HBF Group, Inc. for
Waiver of Part 52 of the Commission Rules, CC Docket No. 99-200 (filed
Feb. 20, 2007) (TCS Waiver). Although TCS filed jointly with HBF,
Intrado, Inc. acquired HBF in April 2008. Therefore, we only address
the petition as it applies to TCS. On April 21, 2008, TCS filed reply
comments, arguing that, although states have an interest in p-ANI
utilization, state certification is not necessary to protect those
interests. Moreover, TCS argues that if state CLEC certification is
required, then obtaining one state certification should be adequate to
access p-ANI codes throughout the country. TCS also argues that if some
[[Page 36683]]
form of certification is required, it should come from the Commission
or a national public safety organization.
21. In 2012, TCS refreshed the record in this proceeding and
announced that it was certified as a competitive local exchange carrier
in 42 states and could obtain p-ANI codes directly for use in those
states. However, TCS states that it cannot obtain p-ANI codes in all
states due to state certification issues. TCS lacks certification in
Idaho, Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, South Carolina, West Virginia,
Alaska, and the District of Columbia, and has an open application in
Maine. TCS encountered certification questions in Iowa, Illinois, Ohio,
and Arizona that directly related to the inapplicability of CLEC
certification to VoIP Positioning Services. Moreover, TCS notes that it
had to relinquish its inventory of p-ANI codes to Neustar as part of
the Commission's move to a permanent p-ANI administrator. TCS thus
cannot obtain p-ANI codes in certain states, and TCS asserts that this
may result in disruptions to E911 and homeland security. It notes in
particular that its difficulty obtaining codes in South Carolina ``is
currently causing a 911 routing disruption'' in that state. TCS states
that, ``because it is not [a] CLEC certified in South Carolina and
there is not `central 911 authority' in South Carolina from which to
secure a waiver, [TCS] has been denied access to p-ANI in this area.
This places TCS's customers, and their end users, in jeopardy.'' TCS
requests that the Commission grant a waiver so that TCS may obtain p-
ANIs in states where TCS is not certified.
2. Discussion
22. We grant TCS a limited waiver of Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the
Commission's rules so that it may obtain p-ANI codes from the RNA in
South Carolina and other states where it cannot obtain certification.
TCS may show that it cannot obtain state certification by demonstrating
that the state does not certify VPC providers (it has already done so
in South Carolina). We grant this limited waiver while the Commission
considers whether Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) should be modified to allow all
providers of VPC service to directly access p-ANI codes.
23. This waiver is limited in duration and scope. It lasts only
until the Commission addresses whether to modify Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i)
of the rules to allow all VPC providers direct access to numbers,
specifically p-ANI codes, for the purpose of providing 911 and E911
service. The waiver applies only with respect to states where TCS
demonstrates that it cannot obtain p-ANI codes because it cannot obtain
state certification. For example, TCS could provide the Commission with
a denial from a state commission with the reason for denial being that
the state does not certify VPC providers, or a statement from the state
commission or its general counsel that it does not certify VPC
providers. Upon such a showing, the Bureau will notify the RNA that TCS
may directly access p-ANI codes in a particular state. We will consider
broader relief, including options that TCS proposed, in the rulemaking.
During the pendency of the rulemaking, we find good cause to grant TCS
a limited waiver of Sec. 52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules so
that it may obtain p-ANIs in those states where it cannot obtain
certification.
II. Procedural Matters
A. Ex Parte Rules--Permit-but-Disclose
24. The proceeding this Notice initiates shall be treated as a
``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
ex parte rules. See 47 CFR 1.1200 et seq. 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 Sec. 1.1206(b).
In proceedings governed by 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.
B. Paperwork Reduction Analysis
25. 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).
C. Congressional Review Act
26. The Commission will not send a copy of this Order pursuant to
the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), because the
adopted rules are rules of particular applicability.
III. Ordering Clauses
27. It is ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in
sections 1, 3, 4, 201-205, 251, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 153, 154, 201-205, 251, 303(r), the
Petition of Vonage Holdings Corp. for Limited Waiver of Sec.
52.15(g)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules Regarding Access to Numbering
Resources; and the Petition of TeleCommunication Systems, Inc. and HBF
Group, Inc. for Waiver of Part 52 of the Commission's Rules are granted
to the extent set forth herein, and this Order shall be effective upon
release.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-13704 Filed 6-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P