911 Call-Forwarding Requirements for Non-Service-Initialized Phones, 25977-25989 [2015-10472]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 87 (Wednesday, May 6, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25977-25989]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10472]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 20

[PS Docket No. 08-51; FCC 15-43]


911 Call-Forwarding Requirements for Non-Service-Initialized 
Phones

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission seeks comment on whether the obligation to 
transmit 911 calls from non-service-initialized (NSI) devices still 
serves an important public safety objective. Because the cumbersome 
call validation methods extant when the rules were adopted in the late 
1990s are no longer in use, and because of the current ubiquity of low-
cost options for wireless services, the Commission proposes to sunset 
the obligation to transmit 911 calls from an NSI device within six 
month, accompanied by consumer outreach and education. Public safety 
representatives have indicated that NSI devices are frequently used to 
make fraudulent or otherwise non-emergency calls, causing a significant 
waste of limited public safety resources.

DATES: Submit comments on or before June 5, 2015 and reply comments by 
July 6, 2015. Written comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act proposed 
information collection requirements must be submitted by the public, 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and other interested parties on 
or before July 6, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission, 
445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. Comments may be submitted 
electronically through the Federal Communications Commission's Web 
site: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//. In addition to filing comments with 
the Secretary, a copy of any comments on the Paperwork Reduction Act 
information collection requirements contained herein should be 
submitted to the Federal Communications Commission via email to 
PRA@fcc.gov. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the

[[Page 25978]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael E. Connelly, Attorney Advisor, 
Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418-0132 or 
michael.connelly@fcc.gov. For additional information concerning the 
Paperwork Reduction Act information collection requirements contained 
in this document, contact Nicole Ongele, (202) 418-2991, or send an 
email to PRA@fcc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking in PS Docket No. 08-51, released on April 1, 
2015. The full text of this document is available for public inspection 
during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-
A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, or online at https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-seeks-comment-911-call-forwarding-requirements-nsi-phones. Parties may file comments and reply comments 
in response to this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 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).
    Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the 
Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs//.
    Paper Filers: Parties that 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. 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 paper filings must be addressed to the 
Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications 
Commission. All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for 
the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 
12th St. SW., Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours are 
8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of 
before entering the building.
    Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express 
Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, 
Capitol Heights, MD 20743.
    U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be 
addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554.

Summary of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

    1. The Commission has a longstanding commitment to ensuring access 
to 911 for the American public. In support of this objective, the 
Commission's rules require commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) 
providers subject to the 911 rules to transmit all wireless 911 calls 
without respect to their call validation process. Thus, the rule 
requires providers to transmit both 911 calls originating from 
customers that have contracts with CMRS providers and calls originating 
from ``non-service-initialized'' (NSI) devices to Public Safety 
Answering Points (PSAPs). An NSI device is a mobile device for which 
there is no valid service contract with any CMRS provider. As such, NSI 
devices have no associated subscriber name and address, and do not 
provide Automatic Number Identification (ANI) or call-back features. As 
a result, when a caller uses a NSI device to call 911, the PSAP 
typically cannot identify the caller.
    2. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), the Commission 
seeks comment on whether the obligation to transmit 911 calls from NSI 
devices continues to serve an important public safety objective. A 
primary rationale for the initial adoption of the Commission's rule in 
the late 1990s was to expedite wireless calls to 911 that would 
otherwise have been delayed due to lengthy call validation processes 
for unidentified callers that were commonly used at the time. In the 
nearly two decades since the rule was adopted, however, the call 
validation methods of concern to the Commission are no longer in use. 
Moreover, the availability of low-cost options for wireless services 
has increased. These trends suggest that the NSI component of the 
requirement is no longer necessary to ensure that wireless callers have 
continued access to emergency services. Further, the inability to 
identify the caller creates considerable difficulty for PSAPs when a 
caller uses an NSI device to place fraudulent calls. Public safety 
representatives have indicated that NSI devices are frequently used to 
make such calls, causing a significant waste of limited public safety 
resources. For these reasons, the Commission proposes to sunset the NSI 
component of the rule after a six-month transition period that will 
allow for public outreach and education. The Commission also seeks 
comment on alternative approaches to addressing the issue of fraudulent 
calls from NSI devices.

II. Background

A. Adoption of the NSI Device Requirement

    3. In 1996, the Commission issued its E911 First Report and Order, 
which required covered carriers (now defined as CMRS providers) to 
transmit all 911 calls from wireless mobile handsets that transmit a 
code identification, without requiring any user or call validation or 
similar procedure. The Commission noted that user validation 
procedures, such as requiring a caller to provide credit card 
information, could be long and cumbersome, and that applying these 
procedures in emergencies could thus cause a dangerous delay or 
interruption of the 911 assistance process and, effectively, the denial 
of assistance in some cases. The Commission also required covered 
carriers to comply with PSAP requests for transmission of 911 calls 
made without code identification. Even at the time of adoption of the 
NSI requirement, however, the Commission recognized that there were 
disadvantages associated with requiring all 911 calls to be processed 
without regard to evidence that a call is emanating from an authorized 
user of some CMRS provider. The Commission acknowledged that placing 
911 calls from handsets without a code identification has significant 
drawbacks, including the fact that ANI and call back features may not 
be usable, and hoax and false alarm calls may be facilitated. The 
Commission concluded, however, that public safety organizations are in 
the best position to determine whether acceptance of calls without code 
identification would help or hinder their efforts.
    4. In response to several petitions for reconsideration of the E911 
First Report and Order, the Commission issued a stay of its rules and 
sought additional comment. On the basis of the updated record on 
reconsideration, in 1997 the Commission released its E911 First 
Memorandum Opinion and Order. In that order, the Commission determined 
that without applying validation procedures, then-present technology 
could not distinguish between code-identified and non-code-identified 
handsets. Accordingly, the E911 First Memorandum Opinion and Order 
required carriers to forward all 911 calls whether or not they transmit 
a code identification. The Commission also found that PSAPs should be 
able to screen out or identify many types of fraudulent calls or those 
where call back

[[Page 25979]]

is not possible and also expressed the hope that PSAPs could implement 
call back technology for NSI devices.
    5. Since the adoption of the NSI requirement, the Commission has 
been aware of the continuing concern regarding fraudulent calls and the 
lack of call-back capabilities associated with NSI devices, and has 
taken various measures to address this issue. In 2002, the Commission 
required NSI handsets donated through carrier-sponsored programs, as 
well as newly manufactured ``911-only'' devices, to be programmed with 
the number 123-456-7890 as the ``telephone number,'' in order to alert 
PSAPs that call-back features were unavailable. The Commission also 
required that carriers complete any network programming necessary to 
deliver this programmed number to PSAPs. Later that year, the 
Commission clarified that its rules requiring carriers to forward all 
911 calls to PSAPs did not preclude carriers from blocking fraudulent 
911 calls from non-service initialized phones pursuant to applicable 
state and local law enforcement procedures. The Commission added that 
where a PSAP has identified a handset that is transmitting fraudulent 
911 calls and makes a request to a wireless carrier to block 911 calls 
from that handset in accordance with applicable state and local law 
enforcement procedures, the carrier's compliance does not constitute a 
violation of Section 20.18(b).
    6. In its subsequent E911 Second Memorandum Opinion and Order, the 
Commission modified its rules to require that carrier-donated handsets 
and newly manufactured 911-only devices be programmed with the number 
``911,'' followed by seven digits from the handset's unique identifier, 
such as the Electronic Serial Number (ESN) or International Mobile 
Station Equipment Identity (IMEI) (911+ESN/IMEI). The Commission took 
this action to facilitate identification of individual NSI devices used 
to make fraudulent or harassing calls, finding it ``highly probable'' 
that this form of identification would enable a PSAP to identify a 
suspected device and work with carriers and law enforcement to trace it 
and block further harassing calls from the device. The Commission 
further stated that it would continue monitoring the nature and extent 
of problems associated with 911 service for NSI devices.

B. Notice of Inquiry

    7. In February 2008, a coalition of nine public safety 
organizations, including the National Emergency Number Association 
(NENA) and the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials 
(APCO), and a software development firm (Petitioners), filed a petition 
for notice of inquiry (Petition) to address the problem of non-
emergency calls placed to 911 by NSI devices. The Petition contended 
that while the E911 Second Memorandum Opinion and Order achieved the 
goal of helping PSAPs identify when 911 calls are from NSI devices, 
such calls continue to create severe problems for PSAPs. The Petition 
asserted that only a very small minority of the 911 calls from NSI 
devices were made to report actual emergencies, and that non-emergency 
NSI calls waste the limited and precious resources of the PSAPs and 
interfere with PSAPs' ability to answer emergency calls, as do 
subsequent efforts to locate or prosecute the callers.
    8. The Petition also asserted that when PSAPs and other authorities 
requested that CMRS providers block harassing 911 calls from NSI 
devices, the providers had declined, citing technical and legal 
concerns related to complying with such requests. Accordingly, the 
Petition requested that the Commission provide further clarification 
and guidance on this blocking option to stop harassing and fraudulent 
911 calls from NSI devices. The Petition also asked the Commission to 
consider other options to address fraudulent calls from NSI devices, 
including identifying further call-back capabilities for NSI devices, 
the elimination of call-forwarding requirements for NSI devices, and/or 
requiring CMRS providers' donation programs to provide service-
initialized devices. In the alternative, the Petition asked the 
Commission to seek comment on other solutions.
    9. On April 2008, the Commission granted the Petition and issued a 
Notice of Inquiry to enhance its understanding of the problems created 
by non-emergency 911 calls made from NSI devices and to explore 
potential solutions. In the Notice of Inquiry, the Commission requested 
comment on three specific areas: (1) The nature and extent of 
fraudulent 911 calls made from NSI devices; (2) concerns with blocking 
NSI devices used to make fraudulent 911 calls, and suggestions for 
making this a more viable option for CMRS providers; and (3) other 
possible solutions to the problem of fraudulent 911 calls from NSI 
devices. In response to the Notice of Inquiry, the Commission received 
comments from public safety representatives at state, county, and local 
government levels in twenty-one states, as well as comments from CMRS 
providers, third-party vendors, and others.

C. 2013 Public Notice

    10. In their comments to the Notice of Inquiry, the Petitioners, 
including NENA, argued in favor of retaining the NSI call-forwarding 
requirement on the grounds that the public relied on the fact that NSI 
devices are 911-capable and that a significant number of calls to 911 
from NSI devices are legitimate. However, in an ex parte filing 
submitted in 2013, NENA revised its view, stating that it now supported 
eliminating the 911 call-forwarding requirement, and that there was now 
a ``consensus view'' that requiring 911 call forwarding from NSI 
devices does more harm than good. In light of NENA's revised view on 
the necessity of retaining the 911 call-forwarding requirement, as well 
as the passage of time since the filing of comments in response to the 
Notice of Inquiry, in March 2013 the Commission released a public 
notice seeking to refresh the record on the foregoing issues (2013 PN). 
In response to the 2013 PN, the Commission received six comments from 
public safety entities and one from a CMRS provider.

III. Discussion of Proposed Sunsetting of the Requirement To Transmit 
911 Calls From NSI Devices

    11. The record received in response to the Notice of Inquiry and 
2013 PN has helped to further define and document the problem of 
fraudulent 911 calls placed by users of NSI devices. As discussed 
below, the problem remains acute. At the same time, the evolution of 
the record and changes in wireless service offerings, including the 
expanded availability of low-cost wireless services, suggest there is 
now significantly less need for the NSI rule then when it was adopted 
in 1996. Accordingly, in this NPRM we propose to sunset the NSI rule 
after a six-month transition and outreach period. During the transition 
period, we would partner with industry and public interest 
organizations to educate consumers about the transition and the 
availability of alternative means to call 911. We seek comment on this 
proposal in the discussion below. We also seek comment on the relative 
costs and benefits of other potential approaches and solutions to the 
problem, including blocking calls from NSI devices.

[[Page 25980]]

A. Public Policy Analysis and Comparative Benefits

1. The Extent of Fraudulent 911 Calls From NSI Devices and Associated 
Costs to Public Safety
    12. The record to date shows that fraudulent 911 calls from NSI 
devices continue to pose a major problem for PSAPs, imposing 
substantial costs while reducing their ability to respond to legitimate 
911 calls. In the Notice of Inquiry in 2008, the Commission cited data 
from the Petitioners, generated in late 2006 from jurisdictions in four 
states, showing that between 3.5% and less than 1% of 911 calls placed 
by NSI devices were legitimate calls relating to actual emergencies. 
The Notice of Inquiry asked commenters to provide more recent and 
expansive data from the same and other jurisdictions, and also welcomed 
further evidence illustrating the extent of the problem, such as 
statements from knowledgeable parties and media reports. In response, 
public safety commenters provided additional evidence that the vast 
majority of 911 calls from NSI devices were not actual calls for help, 
and that these calls both wasted the limited resources of PSAPs and 
interfered with their ability to respond to legitimate emergency calls. 
For example, Indiana estimated that over 90% of all NSI calls received 
were not legitimate, while North Carolina similarly reported that 
between May 15, 2008 and June 15, 2008, PSAPs across the state received 
159,129 calls from NSI devices, of which 132,885, or 83.51%, were non-
emergency calls, and an additional 11,395, or 7.16%, were ``malicious'' 
non-emergency calls. Amelia County, Virginia also stated that NSI 
devices were the biggest problem we have with the E911 system, and 
that, at times, they had been inundated with phone calls from these 
phones with the only purpose being to harass the call takers/
dispatchers. Washington State likewise indicated that by far, the 
majority of calls to 911 from NSI sets did not appear to be legitimate 
emergencies. Moreover, Washington estimated that reported NSI problems 
were very likely an understatement, due to lack of time and resources 
of PSAPs to respond to the Notice of Inquiry. Other public safety 
commenters reported similar patterns of frequent and recurring non-
emergency calls from NSI devices.
    13. Subsequent to the close of the Notice of Inquiry comment 
period, the Commission continued to receive evidence that fraudulent 
911 calls from NSI devices remain a large problem for PSAPs and other 
public safety entities. Comments received in response to the 2013 PN 
also indicate that the problem is continuing. For example, Tennessee 
states that during a three-month period in 2008, of over 10,000 NSI 
calls only 188 were valid emergencies. Sonoma County, California 
indicates that between April 2011 and April 2013 only approximately 8% 
of calls from NSI devices were to report an emergency or crime. Peoria, 
Illinois similarly asserts that it got numerous calls from NSI phones 
that were used to harass the 9-1-1 telecommunicators and pump as many 
as 25 calls per day into Peoria's system, while few if any actual 9-1-1 
calls came from these types of phones. Media reports also indicate that 
this is a serious and continuing problem.
    14. The Commission seeks comment and updated data regarding the 
degree to which the issue of fraudulent calls from NSI devices has 
continued since the 2013 PN comments were filed, as well as any other 
data that will help clarify the extent of the problem. Have changes in 
mobile device technology or design had any impact on the overall 
numbers of fraudulent NSI 911 calls? Has the increased proliferation 
and use of smartphones added to or reduced the problem, and if so, how? 
What technological advancements, if any, might increase the ability to 
trace back individual NSI callers and thereby deter fraudulent calls?
    15. The Commission also seeks comment on the percentage of 
fraudulent 911 calls coming from particular types of NSI devices or 
subsets of NSI device users. Several commenters suggested that a 
disproportionate number of fraudulent 911 calls come from a relatively 
small subset of NSI devices. California, for example, stated that 
between October 1, 2007 and May 15, 2008, PSAPs across the state 
reported 266 active repetitive callers who placed over 77,000 calls to 
911, mainly using NSI devices. Of the 266 callers identified, 85 had 
placed 200 or more calls, and eight callers had made more than 1,000 
calls. Other commenters noted that such calling patterns were often 
related to the accessibility of NSI devices to minors. For example, 
Petitioners stated that donated phones appear to be only a small 
portion of the problem, with the bulk of troublesome devices being old 
equipment no longer in use, often given to children to play with. Is 
data available regarding the percentage of fraudulent NSI calls that 
come from minors? Are there other categories of NSI devices that are 
disproportionately associated with fraudulent calls? For example, how 
frequently do fraudulent calls originate from NSI devices that appear 
to have been purchased by individuals specifically for the purpose of 
placing such fraudulent calls (e.g., devices purchased on auction sites 
or at pawn shops)?
    16. Some public safety commenters have also argued that the NSI 
rule exposes PSAPs to the risk of coordinated efforts to overload or 
impair their operations. Clinton County, Illinois, for example, cited 
the possibility of a group of individuals perpetrating a wireless 
denial-of-service by placing large amounts of calls to 9-1-1 from NSI 
phones, with the potential of jamming or at the very least severely 
impairing the operations of the 9-1-1 system. Accordingly, the 
Commission seeks comment on the extent to which NSI devices could be 
used in a coordinated manner to deny 911 service.
    17. Finally, the Commission seeks further comment regarding the 
costs that fraudulent NSI calls to 911 continue to impose on public 
safety and on consumers. For example, in response to the Notice of 
Inquiry, Kentucky indicated that the time taken away from real 
emergency calls to deal with calls from NSI devices seriously threatens 
the safety of any citizen in true need of service. Amelia County, 
Virginia similarly stated that there have been times when it has been 
totally inundated with calls from NSI devices. Tennessee notes how 
calls from a single child in one night nearly immobilized the call 
center's ability to receive actual emergency calls. Spokane County, 
Washington noted receiving 911 calls from a non-initialized cellular 
phone that was an open line and therefore tied up one of our 911 trunks 
and made it unavailable for emergency calls. Laredo, Texas cited bomb 
threats made from NSI phones which, when they cannot be identified with 
absolute certainty as a hoax, require deployment of response agencies 
to the alleged target. The Commission asks commenters to provide 
instances of fraudulent NSI calls delaying the ability of public safety 
dispatchers to send help to callers in distress or otherwise negatively 
impacting the ability of first responders to respond to actual 
emergencies, and seeks examples of fraudulent NSI calls impeding public 
safety, such as whether prison inmates have used the 911-calling 
capability of NSI devices to harass PSAPs or to circumvent call 
blocking or managed access technologies designed to deter contraband 
cellphone use from inside prison facilities. In all of the above 
examples, the Commission seeks cost estimates of the losses--including 
financial or human capital resources--

[[Page 25981]]

that PSAPs have incurred due to fraudulent calls.
2. Decreasing Benefits of the NSI Rule
    18. At the same time that the NSI requirement imposes costs on 
public safety resources--by diverting much-needed resources from 
legitimate emergencies--the record suggests that the benefits of the 
NSI rule are diminishing and the need for the rule is decreasing. The 
Commission seeks comment on whether this is the case. For example, 
several commenters pointed out that service-initialized devices have 
become far more ubiquitous and inexpensive, as compared to when the 
Commission originally implemented the NSI rule, thereby decreasing 
public reliance on the ability of NSI devices to call 911. Washington 
State, for instance, noted that when the NSI rule was adopted, there 
were few opportunities for a customer to acquire a wireless device 
other than by signing a relatively expensive long-term contract. Thus, 
while the rule originally ensured access to 911-service for segments of 
the population that could not afford a long-term wireless subscription, 
Washington contended that service-initialized devices are now 
sufficiently ubiquitous and affordable to render the rule unnecessary. 
CTIA likewise indicated that wireless device prices in the U.S. keep 
dropping; since 2006, wireless CPI has fallen 8.0%, even as the CPI for 
all items has increased 16.7%. In this regard, the Commission notes 
that the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Wireless Price Index shows that 
the effective monthly cost of wireless service to consumers has fallen 
by more than 40% since December 1997. There has also been a 
proliferation of pre-paid devices since the Commission promulgated the 
NSI rule. For example, CTIA reported that 76.4 million consumers had 
prepaid plans in 2012, up from 71.7 million in 2011.
    19. Several commenters have also noted the potential of Lifeline-
supported wireless services to provide a sufficient alternative to NSI 
phones. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on whether the 
increasing ubiquity and decreasing cost of service-initialized devices 
obviates the need for the NSI rule. Does the increased availability and 
use of pre-paid services provide a sufficient alternative?
    20. Many commenters also referenced a decrease in NSI handset 
donation programs. For example, NENA stated that most charities and 
domestic violence advocates have abandoned the practice of distributing 
NSI devices. APCO similarly indicated its understanding that current 
programs for at-risk individuals only distribute handsets that have at 
least limited carrier-subscription status and are `service 
initialized.' This also seems to indicate a decreasing need for the NSI 
rule due to fewer NSI devices in circulation.
    21. Two public safety commenters (King County, Washington, and 
Livingston County, New York, Sherriff's Department) also argued that 
eliminating the NSI requirement would eliminate false expectations 
among NSI device users who are unaware that NSI devices do not provide 
911 call-back capability or Phase II location information. Other 
commenters, however, argued that the public has come to rely on the 
fact that NSI devices are 911-capable, and that eliminating the call-
forwarding requirement could lead to tragic results given this public 
reliance. CTIA, for example, stated that the public now has a 
reasonable expectation that all wireless 911 calls will terminate at a 
PSAP. Likewise, the Petitioners noted that they while they were 
sympathetic to those calling for an outright FCC reversal of current 
rule, they could not support such a request at this time because there 
remain a significant number of legitimate 9-1-1 calls from NSI devices. 
California noted that calls from NSI phones have saved many lives, and 
Maryland indicated that 30% of calls to 911 from NSI handsets were 
legitimate in Montgomery County during the one-month period studied in 
2008. Vermont also questions the availability of low-cost service-
initialized devices, and adds that it is puzzled by the comment that 
calls on these devices do not include location information, as its 
review identified a high percentage of calls from NSI devices that 
arrive with Phase II location information.
    22. Accordingly, the Commission seeks comment on the extent to 
which the public, especially lower-income populations, the elderly, and 
other vulnerable segments of society, still rely on the use of NSI 
devices to seek emergency assistance. Has such reliance decreased, 
increased, or remained the same? Would consumers who presently use NSI 
devices to call 911 be able to effectively utilize other means of 
accessing 911? To what extent are ``911-only'' wireless handsets that 
rely on the NSI rule to enable a caller to reach a PSAP in use today? 
Are CMRS providers or third parties continuing to support NSI phone 
donation programs, and if so, are figures available for the number of 
phone donations within the last five years?

B. Sunset of the NSI Requirement After a Reasonable Transition Period

    23. Background. In the E911 Second Report and Order, the Commission 
declined to eliminate the 911 call-forwarding requirement for NSI 
devices because abolishing the requirement at this stage would restrict 
basic 911 service and result in the inability of many non-initialized 
wireless phone users to reach help in the event of an emergency. 
However, in the subsequent Notice of Inquiry, the Commission noted that 
the evidence suggested that NSI devices were the source of an 
overwhelming number of fraudulent 911 calls and sought comment 
regarding whether it should eliminate the NSI requirement. In response 
to the Notice of Inquiry, a significant number of public safety 
commenters advocated for elimination of the rule. Washington, for 
example, asserted that there is no justification in retaining the rules 
permitting calls to 911 from non-initialized handsets; more recently, 
NENA stated that there is now a consensus view that the promotion of 
NSI devices does more harm than good.
    24. Accordingly, the 2013 PN sought comment, in particular, on 
whether other interested parties agree or disagree with NENA's view 
that the Commission should consider phasing out the call-forwarding 
requirement as it applies to NSI devices. The subsequent record 
indicates that APCO now also agrees that the FCC should eliminate the 
requirement that wireless carriers forward to PSAPs 9-1-1 calls from 
NSI handsets, as do some other public safety commenters.
    25. At the same time, some commenters continue to advocate 
retention of the NSI requirement, arguing that the public has come to 
rely on the fact that NSI devices are 911-capable, and that given this 
public reliance, eliminating the call-forwarding requirement could lead 
to tragic results.
    26. Discussion. The Commission believes that the concerns that led 
the Commission to adopt the NSI rule in 1996, and to retain it twelve 
years ago, are less relevant today, and that it is now in the public 
interest to sunset the requirement. The record suggests that fraudulent 
calls to 911 from NSI devices constitute a large and continuing drain 
on public safety resources and that the problem is not abating. 
Moreover, it appears there is now less public need for the NSI rule 
than at the time the Commission implemented it. Indeed, while the 
Commission implemented the NSI rule in large part at the urging of 
public safety entities, including NENA

[[Page 25982]]

and APCO, both of these entities now favor elimination of the rule.
    27. Additionally, impending technological changes in carrier 
networks are likely to make the NSI call-forwarding rule less effective 
in protecting consumers while increasing the cost of implementation. As 
carriers migrate their networks away from legacy 2G technology, 2G-only 
NSI handsets will no longer be technically capable of supporting 911 
call-forwarding. If we retain the NSI rule, this technological shift is 
likely to create confusion among the very consumers that have retained 
older-generation NSI handsets for their 911 capability. Moreover, 
retaining the rule will impose added costs on carriers to implement NSI 
call-forwarding capability in 3G and 4G networks. While the Commission 
recognizes that public safety interests are driven by more than 
economic considerations, it believes that avoiding these added costs by 
sunsetting the rule will have significant net cost benefits for 
carriers, in addition to eliminating the burden of fraudulent 911 calls 
on first responders. Conversely, the Commission believes that any cost 
to carriers associated with removing NSI call-forwarding capability 
from their networks will be relatively minor. For these reasons, the 
Commission believes that the costs of retaining the NSI rule appear to 
outweigh the benefits, and thus proposes to sunset the NSI rule after a 
six-month transition period.
    28. Based on the comments advocating for elimination of the rule, 
the Commission believes that a uniform, nationwide deadline to sunset 
the NSI requirement would best address the concerns that have been 
raised in the record regarding the prevalence of fraudulent calls from 
NSI devices. A uniform sunset date would provide the greatest certainty 
to the public, as well as to PSAPs and CMRS providers, and would be 
easiest for all parties to administer. The Commission also believes 
that any necessary consumer education and outreach regarding a uniform 
deadline would be less burdensome than for an alternative ``phase-out'' 
approach, as it would avoid public confusion with respect to timing and 
with regard to which NSI devices could and could not call 911; this 
method of eliminating the NSI requirement best balances the needs of 
the public, public safety, and CMRS providers.
    29. The Commission also seeks comment on other possible transition 
approaches. For example, NENA has suggested that the Commission phase 
out the NSI rule for devices and networks that no longer support legacy 
circuit-switched voice calling, reasoning that this will minimize 
stranded investments by carriers and consumers as carriers transition 
to fully IP-based architectures such as LTE and as consumers transition 
to IP-only devices that no longer support circuit-switched voice 
services. Alternatively, the Commission seeks comment on whether to 
eliminate the NSI requirement for new wireless devices sold after a 
particular date, thus grandfathering the 911 call-forwarding capability 
for existing NSI devices.
    30. In the event the Commission sunsets the NSI rule, it would seek 
to educate consumers during the transition on whether their particular 
NSI device will allow them to reach 911, and on how to ensure 
continued, uninterrupted access to 911. The Commission recognizes that 
the public is increasingly reliant on wireless technology for their 
basic communications needs and that many persons have elected to do 
without landline telephone service. With this in mind, the Commission 
believes that elimination of the NSI rule must be accompanied by 
sufficient public education and outreach to ensure that the public is 
aware that they can no longer call 911 from NSI devices prior to loss 
of that capability, but that there are low-cost options for replacing 
such devices. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to allow a six-month 
transition period for service providers, public interest organizations, 
and other interested parties to engage in this educational outreach 
process, and seek comment on this proposal. We also seek comment on the 
necessary components of such an education and outreach effort, and on 
implementation of these components.
    31. Finally, assuming that the NSI call-forwarding rule is 
eliminated after a transition period, should CMRS providers be allowed 
to forward 911 calls from NSI devices at their discretion on a 
voluntary basis, or should we prohibit NSI call forwarding? What is the 
likelihood that CMRS providers would voluntarily continue to forward 
911 calls from NSI devices? Would allowing them to do so reduce the 
benefits of eliminating the NSI requirement?

C. Protecting Calls to 911 From Service-Initialized Devices That May 
Appear To Be NSI Devices

    32. Background. The obligation of CMRS providers to transmit 911 
calls without regard to their call validation process ensures that 
wireless customers are able to access life-saving emergency services 
without delay. This obligation to connect 911 calls from service-
initialized devices ensures, for example, that customers have access to 
911 when traveling in areas where service may be provided by another 
provider which does not have a roaming agreement with the customer's 
provider or when a wireless customer's provider is experiencing a 
network outage. The Commission does not propose to alter the obligation 
of CMRS providers to connect calls from devices that have a valid 
agreement with any CMRS provider at the time of the 911 call.
    33. The record indicates, however, that in certain circumstances a 
service-initialized device may appear to be an NSI device to a CMRS 
provider's network. For example, according to the Petitioners, devices 
can also become NSI in the following situations: (1) When a phone has 
not completed registration at the time a 9-1-1 call is placed; (2) when 
calls are placed from areas of weak or no signal for one carrier that 
receive a signal from another carrier; (3) when calls are made from a 
handset that selects the strongest signal, which may not be the 
subscriber's carrier; (4) for calls placed by consumers roaming in 
areas with or without automatic roaming agreements; (5) for calls 
placed on foreign phones; or (6) because of normal network events, 
system reboots, and other circumstances that can occur during mobile 
switching center (`MSC') to MSC handoffs, for several seconds after the 
phone is powered on, and as the phone recovers from loss of service in 
a tunnel. The Commission also observes that, when pre-paid phones have 
run out of minutes, they become de facto NSI devices until the user 
pays for more pre-paid minutes.
    34. Discussion. The Commission seeks comment on how calls to 911 
from service-initialized devices that may appear to be NSI might be 
affected, in the event it sunsets the requirement to transmit calls 
from NSI devices. Is this an extensive issue of concern? For example, 
in what specific circumstances would a service-initialized device 
nevertheless appear to a CMRS network as an NSI device? If the 
Commission were to sunset the NSI requirement, is there a way to ensure 
that such service-initialized devices could still call 911? What would 
be the cost of implementing such a solution? The Commission is also 
concerned that consumers with service-initialized phones could be at 
risk if they were to lose 911-capability immediately following a CMRS 
provider's stoppage of service for non-payment. Would it be in the 
public interest to require all CMRS providers to continue to forward

[[Page 25983]]

calls to 911 from such devices for a certain ``grace period'' following 
stoppage of service? If so, what would be the proper length of such a 
grace period? Should it differ based on whether the device is pre-paid 
or post-paid? Alternatively, rather than establishing a grace period, 
would it be sufficient for CMRS providers to send automated messages to 
pre-paid customers when their minutes are about to expire, warning them 
that if they do not extend their pre-paid service their devices will 
not support 911 calling?

D. Technical and Operational Considerations Relating to Sunset of the 
NSI Rule

    35. The Commission seeks to determine what technical and 
operational changes, if any, CMRS providers and/or PSAPs would need to 
implement in conjunction with the sunset of the NSI rule, including the 
timeframe needed to implement any such changes, as well as the costs 
involved, as well as determining how these answers might vary depending 
on whether the Commission sunsets the rule on a date certain or whether 
it phases out the rule.
    36. What network modifications or other technical and operational 
changes would CMRS providers need to undertake, if any, if we were to 
sunset the NSI requirement as of a date certain? How long would it take 
to implement these changes? At what cost? Is the Commission's 
assumption that any costs associated with discontinuing call-forwarding 
of 911 calls from NSI devices as of the six-month sunset date proposed 
above would be relatively minor correct? The Commission also seeks 
comment on what, if anything, PSAPs would need to do to accommodate the 
sunset of the NSI requirement after six months. Would PSAPs incur any 
costs or are there timing considerations that the Commission should 
take into account? Alternatively, what technical and operational 
changes would CMRS providers and PSAPs need to implement if the 
Commission were to phase out the NSI requirement rather than sunset the 
rule on a uniform date?

E. Alternative Approaches to the Problem of Fraudulent NSI 911 Calls

    37. The Commission recognizes that sunsetting the NSI rule is not 
the only means of reducing the incidence of fraudulent calls to 911 
from such devices. In the Notice of Inquiry, the Commission examined 
the possibility of blocking NSI devices used to make fraudulent 911 
calls while retaining the NSI rule itself, and sought comment on 
suggestions for making blocking a more viable option for CMRS 
providers, as well as on other possible solutions. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether call-blocking is a viable alternative to sunsetting 
the NSI rule. While Commission rules generally require CMRS providers 
to forward all 911 calls to PSAPs, including calls from NSI devices, 
they do not prohibit CMRS providers from blocking fraudulent 911 calls 
pursuant to applicable state and local law enforcement procedures. 
Nevertheless, the Petition asserted that CMRS providers refuse to honor 
PSAP blocking requests due to technical and legal concerns. In response 
to the Notice of Inquiry, many commenters--both CMRS provider and 
public safety--cited technical and legal problems that continue to make 
blocking calls difficult.
    38. In the Notice of Inquiry, the Commission requested comment on 
two other alternative approaches to address the problem of fraudulent 
911 calls from NSI devices: (1) Implementing call-back capabilities for 
NSI devices, and (2) requiring CMRS provider-sponsored device donation 
programs to provide service-initialized devices. The Commission seeks 
further comment on the relative costs and benefits of these proposals 
as alternatives to sunsetting the NSI rule.

IV. Procedural Matter

F. Ex Parte Presentations

    39. The proceedings initiated by this NPRM shall be treated as 
``permit-but-disclose'' proceedings 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 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by 
rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of 
electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda 
summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, 
must be filed through the electronic comment filing system 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.

G. Comment Filing Procedures

    40. Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply 
comments in response to this NPRM on or before the dates indicated on 
the first page of this document. Comments may be filed using the 
Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic 
Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998).
    [ssquf] Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/.
    [ssquf] Paper Filers: Parties that 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.
    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

[[Page 25984]]

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol 
Heights, MD 20743. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and 
Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 
20554.

H. Accessible Formats

    41. To request materials in accessible formats for people with 
disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), 
send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental 
Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (TTY).

I. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    42. An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the 
possible significant economic impact on small entities of the policies 
and rules addressed in this document is located under section titled 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. Written public comments are 
requested in the IRFA. These comments must be filed in accordance with 
the same filing deadlines as comments filed in response to this NPRM as 
set forth on the first page of this document, and have a separate and 
distinct heading designating them as responses to the IRFA.

J. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis

    43. This document contains proposed new information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant 
to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the Commission 
seeks specific comment on how it might further reduce the information 
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 
employees.

V. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    44. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared this present Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant 
economic impact of the proposal described in the attached Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking on small entities. Written public comments are 
requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the 
IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments in the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking. The Commission will send a copy of the Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). In addition, the 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be 
published in the Federal Register.

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

    45. In this NPRM, we address regulatory concerns raised by non-
service initialized (NSI) devices. The Commission's rules require 
commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) providers subject to the 911 
rules to transmit all wireless 911 calls, including those originated 
from ``non-service-initialized'' (NSI) devices, to Public Safety 
Answering Points (PSAPs). A NSI device is a mobile device for which 
there is no valid service contract with a CMRS provider. Examples of 
NSI devices include prepaid cell phones with expired minutes, devices 
under an expired contract, donated cell phones, and ``911-only'' 
devices that are configured solely to make emergency calls. NSI devices 
by their nature have no associated subscriber name and address, and do 
not provide Automatic Number Identification (ANI) or call-back 
features. As a result, when a caller uses a NSI device to call 911, the 
PSAP typically cannot identify the caller.
    46. While the 911 calling capability of NSI devices initially 
provided significant public safety benefits by increasing the public's 
access to 911, those benefits have greatly decreased due to changed 
call validation methods and the increase in low-cost options for 
wireless services. Moreover, the inability of PSAPs to identify the 
caller on an NSI device creates significant difficulty for them when a 
caller uses a NSI device to place fraudulent non-emergency calls to the 
PSAP. Numerous PSAPs around the nation have reported that fraudulent 
and harassing calls from NSI devices are a persistent and significant 
problem that requires action. In February 2008, a group of public 
safety entities filed a petition requesting that the Commission examine 
the issue. In response to the petition, the Commission adopted a Notice 
of Inquiry in April 2008 to enhance our understanding of fraudulent and 
harassing 911 calls made from NSI devices and to explore potential 
solutions.
    47. In this NPRM, the Commission proposes to sunset the NSI rule 
after a six month transition period that will allow for public outreach 
and education. It also seeks comment on alternative approaches to 
addressing the issue of fraudulent calls from NSI devices.

B. Legal Basis

    48. The legal basis for any action that may be taken pursuant to 
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is contained in Sections 1, 4(i), 
4(j), 303(r) and 332 of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 
154(i), 154(j), 303(r), 332.

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

    49. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the proposed rules. The RFA generally defines the term 
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).
    50. Small Businesses, Small Organizations, and Small Governmental 
Jurisdictions. Our action may, over time, affect small entities that 
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe here, at 
the outset, three comprehensive, statutory small entity size standards. 
First, nationwide, there are a total of approximately 27.5 million 
small businesses, according to the SBA. In addition, a ``small 
organization'' is generally any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. 
Nationwide, as of 2007, there were approximately 1,621,315 small 
organizations. Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is 
defined generally as governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, 
school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than 
fifty thousand. Census Bureau data for 2011 indicate that there were 
89,476 local governmental jurisdictions in the United States. We 
estimate that, of this total, as many as 88, 506 entities may qualify 
as ``small governmental jurisdictions.'' Thus, we estimate that most 
governmental jurisdictions are small.

[[Page 25985]]

1. Telecommunications Service Entities
a. Wireless Telecommunications Service Providers
    51. Pursuant to 47 CFR 20.18(a), the Commission's 911 service 
requirements are only applicable to Commercial Mobile Radio Service 
(CMRS) providers, excluding mobile satellite service operators, to the 
extent that they: (1) Offer real-time, two way switched voice service 
that is interconnected with the public switched network; and (2) 
Utilize an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to 
reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless hand-offs of subscriber 
calls. These requirements are applicable to entities that offer voice 
service to consumers by purchasing airtime or capacity at wholesale 
rates from CMRS licensees.
    52. Below, for those services subject to auctions, we note that, as 
a general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small 
businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent 
the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the 
Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in 
the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are 
implicated.
    53. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since 
2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms within this new, 
broad, economic census category. Prior to that time, such firms were 
within the now-superseded categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and 
Other Wireless Telecommunications.'' Under the present and prior 
categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if it 
has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the category of Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), Census data for 2007, 
which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 
1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer 
than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of firms can be considered small.
    54. Wireless Service Providers. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic 
census categories of ``Paging'' and ``Cellular and Other Wireless 
Telecommunications.'' Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless 
business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census 
category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 
807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this 
total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three 
firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this 
category and associated small business size standard, the majority of 
firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and 
Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show 
that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the 
entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer 
employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. 
Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of 
firms can, again, be considered small.
    55. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the 
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard 
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The appropriate 
size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size standard, such a business 
is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census Bureau data for 
2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 Census, show that there 
were 3,188 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of 
this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or fewer, and 44 firms had had 
employment of 1000 or more. 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 Notice. Thus under this category and the associated 
small business size standard, the majority of these incumbent local 
exchange service providers can be considered small.
    56. A Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs), 
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers, 
and Other Local Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA 
has developed a small business size standard specifically for these 
service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for 
the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. Under that size 
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Census Bureau data for 2007, which now supersede data from the 2002 
Census, show that there were 3,188 firms in this category that operated 
for the entire year. Of this total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 
fewer, and 44 firms had had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of these Competitive LECs, CAPs, Shared-Tenant Service 
Providers, and Other Local Service Providers can be considered small 
entities. According to Commission data, 1,442 carriers reported that 
they were engaged in the provision of either competitive local exchange 
services or competitive access provider services. Of these 1,442 
carriers, an estimated 1,256 have 1,500 or fewer employees and 186 have 
more than 1,500 employees. In addition, 17 carriers have reported that 
they are Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and all 17 are estimated to 
have 1,500 or fewer employees. In addition, 72 carriers have reported 
that they are Other Local Service Providers. Of the 72, seventy have 
1,500 or fewer employees and two have more than 1,500 employees. 
Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers of 
competitive local exchange service, competitive access providers, 
Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and Other Local Service Providers are 
small entities that may be affected by rules adopted pursuant to the 
Notice.
    57. Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband 
personal communications services (PCS) spectrum is divided into six 
frequency blocks designated A through F, and the Commission has held 
auctions for each block. The Commission initially defined a ``small 
business'' for C- and F-Block licenses as an entity that has average 
gross revenues of $40 million or less in the three previous calendar 
years. For F-Block licenses, an additional small business size standard 
for ``very small business'' was added and is defined as an entity that, 
together with its affiliates, has average gross revenues of not more 
than $15 million for the preceding three calendar years. These small 
business size standards, in the context of broadband PCS auctions, have 
been approved by the SBA. No small businesses within the SBA-approved 
small business size standards bid successfully for licenses in Blocks A 
and B. There were 90 winning bidders that claimed small business status 
in the first two C-Block auctions. A total of 93 bidders that claimed 
small business status won approximately 40 percent of the 1,479 
licenses in the first auction for the D, E, and F Blocks. On April 15, 
1999, the Commission completed the reauction of 347 C-, D-, E-, and F-
Block licenses in Auction No. 22. Of the

[[Page 25986]]

57 winning bidders in that auction, 48 claimed small business status 
and won 277 licenses.
    58. On January 26, 2001, the Commission completed the auction of 
422 C and F Block Broadband PCS licenses in Auction No. 35. Of the 35 
winning bidders in that auction, 29 claimed small business status. 
Subsequent events concerning Auction 35, including judicial and agency 
determinations, resulted in a total of 163 C and F Block licenses being 
available for grant. On February 15, 2005, the Commission completed an 
auction of 242 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block licenses in Auction No. 58. Of 
the 24 winning bidders in that auction, 16 claimed small business 
status and won 156 licenses. On May 21, 2007, the Commission completed 
an auction of 33 licenses in the A, C, and F Blocks in Auction No. 71. 
Of the 12 winning bidders in that auction, five claimed small business 
status and won 18 licenses. On August 20, 2008, the Commission 
completed the auction of 20 C-, D-, E-, and F-Block Broadband PCS 
licenses in Auction No. 78. Of the eight winning bidders for Broadband 
PCS licenses in that auction, six claimed small business status and won 
14 licenses.
    59. Narrowband Personal Communications Services. To date, two 
auctions of narrowband personal communications services (PCS) licenses 
have been conducted. For purposes of the two auctions that have already 
been held, ``small businesses'' were entities with average gross 
revenues for the prior three calendar years of $40 million or less. 
Through these auctions, the Commission has awarded a total of 41 
licenses, out of which 11 were obtained by small businesses. To ensure 
meaningful participation of small business entities in future auctions, 
the Commission has adopted a two-tiered small business size standard in 
the Narrowband PCS Second Report and Order. A ``small business'' is an 
entity that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has 
average gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than 
$40 million. A ``very small business'' is an entity that, together with 
affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues for 
the three preceding years of not more than $15 million. The SBA has 
approved these small business size standards.
    60. Specialized Mobile Radio. The Commission awards ``small 
entity'' bidding credits in auctions for Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) 
geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz bands to firms that 
had revenues of no more than $15 million in each of the three previous 
calendar years. The Commission awards ``very small entity'' bidding 
credits to firms that had revenues of no more than $3 million in each 
of the three previous calendar years. The SBA has approved these small 
business size standards for the 900 MHz Service. The Commission has 
held auctions for geographic area licenses in the 800 MHz and 900 MHz 
bands. The 900 MHz SMR was completed in 1996. Sixty bidders claiming 
that they qualified as small businesses under the $15 million size 
standard won 263 geographic area licenses in the 900 MHz SMR band. The 
800 MHz SMR auction for the upper 200 channels was conducted in 1997. 
Ten bidders claiming that they qualified as small businesses under the 
$15 million size standard won 38 geographic area licenses for the upper 
200 channels in the 800 MHz SMR band. A second auction for the 800 MHz 
band was conducted in 2002 and included 23 BEA licenses. One bidder 
claiming small business status won five licenses.
    61. The auction of the 1,050 800 MHz SMR geographic area licenses 
for the General Category channels was conducted in 2000. Eleven bidders 
won 108 geographic area licenses for the General Category channels in 
the 800 MHz SMR band qualified as small businesses under the $15 
million size standard. In an auction completed in 2000, a total of 
2,800 Economic Area licenses in the lower 80 channels of the 800 MHz 
SMR service were awarded. Of the 22 winning bidders, 19 claimed ``small 
business'' status and won 129 licenses. Thus, combining all three 
auctions, 40 winning bidders for geographic licenses in the 800 MHz SMR 
band claimed status as small business.
    62. In addition, there are numerous incumbent site-by-site SMR 
licensees and licensees with extended implementation authorizations in 
the 800 and 900 MHz bands. We do not know how many firms provide 800 
MHz or 900 MHz geographic area SMR pursuant to extended implementation 
authorizations, nor how many of these providers have annual revenues of 
no more than $15 million. One firm has over $15 million in revenues. In 
addition, we do not know how many of these firms have 1500 or fewer 
employees. We assume, for purposes of this analysis, that all of the 
remaining existing extended implementation authorizations are held by 
small entities, as that small business size standard is approved by the 
SBA.
    63. AWS Services (1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz bands (AWS-1); 
1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2020-2025 MHz and 2175-2180 MHz bands 
(AWS-2); 2155-2175 MHz band (AWS-3)). For the AWS-1 bands, the 
Commission has defined a ``small business'' as an entity with average 
annual gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 
million, and a ``very small business'' as an entity with average annual 
gross revenues for the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. 
In 2006, the Commission conducted its first auction of AWS-1 licenses. 
In that initial AWS-1 auction, 31 winning bidders identified themselves 
as very small businesses. Twenty-six of the winning bidders identified 
themselves as small businesses. In a subsequent 2008 auction, the 
Commission offered 35 AWS-1 licenses. Four winning bidders identified 
themselves as very small businesses, and three of the winning bidders 
identified themselves as a small business. For AWS-2 and AWS-3, 
although we do not know for certain which entities are likely to apply 
for these frequencies, we note that the AWS-1 bands are comparable to 
those used for cellular service and personal communications service. 
The Commission has not yet adopted size standards for the AWS-2 or AWS-
3 bands but has proposed to treat both AWS-2 and AWS-3 similarly to 
broadband PCS service and AWS-1 service due to the comparable capital 
requirements and other factors, such as issues involved in relocating 
incumbents and developing markets, technologies, and services.
    64. Rural Radiotelephone Service. The Commission has not adopted a 
size standard for small businesses specific to the Rural Radiotelephone 
Service. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone Service is 
the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System (``BETRS''). In the present 
context, we will use the SBA's small business size standard applicable 
to Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), i.e., an 
entity employing no more than 1,500 persons. There are approximately 
1,000 licensees in the Rural Radiotelephone Service, and the Commission 
estimates that there are 1,000 or fewer small entity licensees in the 
Rural Radiotelephone Service that may be affected by the rules and 
policies adopted herein.
    65. Wireless Communications Services. This service can be used for 
fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital audio broadcasting satellite 
uses in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands. The Commission 
defined ``small business'' for the wireless communications services 
(WCS) auction

[[Page 25987]]

as an entity with average gross revenues of $40 million for each of the 
three preceding years, and a ``very small business'' as an entity with 
average gross revenues of $15 million for each of the three preceding 
years. The SBA has approved these definitions. The Commission auctioned 
geographic area licenses in the WCS service. In the auction, which 
commenced on April 15, 1997 and closed on April 25, 1997, there were 
seven bidders that won 31 licenses that qualified as very small 
business entities, and one bidder that won one license that qualified 
as a small business entity.
    66. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase I Licensees. The 220 MHz service 
has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. Phase I licensing was conducted 
by lotteries in 1992 and 1993. There are approximately 1,515 such non-
nationwide licensees and four nationwide licensees currently authorized 
to operate in the 220 MHz band. The Commission has not developed a 
small business size standard for small entities specifically applicable 
to such incumbent 220 MHz Phase I licensees. To estimate the number of 
such licensees that are small businesses, the Commission applies the 
small business size standard under the SBA rules applicable. The SBA 
has deemed a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. For this service, the SBA uses the category of Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Census data for 2007, 
which supersede data contained in the 2002 Census, show that there were 
1,383 firms that operated that year. Of those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer 
than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more than 100 employees. Thus 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of firms can be considered small.
    67. 220 MHz Radio Service--Phase II Licensees. The 220 MHz service 
has both Phase I and Phase II licenses. The Phase II 220 MHz service is 
a new service, and is subject to spectrum auctions. In the 220 MHz 
Third Report and Order, the Commission adopted a small business size 
standard for defining ``small'' and ``very small'' businesses for 
purposes of determining their eligibility for special provisions such 
as bidding credits and installment payments. This small business 
standard indicates that a ``small business'' is an entity that, 
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average 
gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding three years. 
A ``very small business'' is defined as an entity that, together with 
its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues 
that do not exceed $3 million for the preceding three years. The SBA 
has approved these small size standards. Auctions of Phase II licenses 
commenced on and closed in 1998. In the first auction, 908 licenses 
were auctioned in three different-sized geographic areas: three 
nationwide licenses, 30 Regional Economic Area Group (EAG) Licenses, 
and 875 Economic Area (EA) Licenses. Of the 908 licenses auctioned, 693 
were sold. Thirty-nine small businesses won 373 licenses in the first 
220 MHz auction. A second auction included 225 licenses: 216 EA 
licenses and 9 EAG licenses. Fourteen companies claiming small business 
status won 158 licenses. A third auction included four licenses: 2 BEA 
licenses and 2 EAG licenses in the 220 MHz Service. No small or very 
small business won any of these licenses. In 2007, the Commission 
conducted a fourth auction of the 220 MHz licenses. Bidding credits 
were offered to small businesses. A bidder with attributed average 
annual gross revenues that exceeded $3 million and did not exceed $15 
million for the preceding three years (``small business'') received a 
25 percent discount on its winning bid. A bidder with attributed 
average annual gross revenues that did not exceed $3 million for the 
preceding three years received a 35 percent discount on its winning bid 
(``very small business''). Auction 72, which offered 94 Phase II 220 
MHz Service licenses, concluded in 2007. In this auction, five winning 
bidders won a total of 76 licenses. Two winning bidders identified 
themselves as very small businesses won 56 of the 76 licenses. One of 
the winning bidders that identified themselves as a small business won 
5 of the 76 licenses won.
    68. 700 MHz Guard Band Licenses. In the 700 MHz Guard Band Order, 
the Commission adopted size standards for ``small businesses'' and 
``very small businesses'' for purposes of determining their eligibility 
for special provisions such as bidding credits and installment 
payments. A small business in this service is an entity that, together 
with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross 
revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 
Additionally, a ``very small business'' is an entity that, together 
with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross 
revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three 
years. SBA approval of these definitions is not required. In 2000, the 
Commission conducted an auction of 52 Major Economic Area (``MEA'') 
licenses. Of the 104 licenses auctioned, 96 licenses were sold to nine 
bidders. Five of these bidders were small businesses that won a total 
of 26 licenses. A second auction of 700 MHz Guard Band licenses 
commenced and closed in 2001. All eight of the licenses auctioned were 
sold to three bidders. One of these bidders was a small business that 
won a total of two licenses.
    69. Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses. In the 700 MHz Second Report and 
Order, the Commission revised its rules regarding Upper 700 MHz 
licenses. On January 24, 2008, the Commission commenced Auction 73 in 
which several licenses in the Upper 700 MHz band were available for 
licensing: 12 Regional Economic Area Grouping licenses in the C Block, 
and one nationwide license in the D Block. The auction concluded on 
March 18, 2008, with 3 winning bidders claiming very small business 
status (those with attributable average annual gross revenues that do 
not exceed $15 million for the preceding three years) and winning five 
licenses.
    70. Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses. The Commission previously adopted 
criteria for defining three groups of small businesses for purposes of 
determining their eligibility for special provisions such as bidding 
credits. The Commission defined a ``small business'' as an entity that, 
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average 
gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years. 
A ``very small business'' is defined as an entity that, together with 
its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross revenues 
that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three years. 
Additionally, the lower 700 MHz Service had a third category of small 
business status for Metropolitan/Rural Service Area (MSA/RSA) 
licenses--``entrepreneur''--which is defined as an entity that, 
together with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average 
gross revenues that are not more than $3 million for the preceding 
three years. The SBA approved these small size standards. An auction of 
740 licenses (one license in each of the 734 MSAs/RSAs and one license 
in each of the six Economic Area Groupings (EAGs)) was conducted in 
2002. Of the 740 licenses available for auction, 484 licenses were won 
by 102 winning bidders. Seventy-two of the winning bidders claimed 
small business, very small business or entrepreneur status and won 
licenses. A second auction commenced on May 28, 2003, closed on June 
13, 2003, and included 256 licenses. Seventeen winning bidders claimed 
small or very small business status, and nine winning bidders claimed 
entrepreneur status. In 2005,

[[Page 25988]]

the Commission completed an auction of 5 licenses in the Lower 700 MHz 
band. All three winning bidders claimed small business status.
    71. In 2007, the Commission reexamined its rules governing the 700 
MHz band in the 700 MHz Second Report and Order. An auction of A, B and 
E block 700 MHz licenses was held in 2008. Twenty winning bidders 
claimed small business status (those with attributable average annual 
gross revenues that exceed $15 million and do not exceed $40 million 
for the preceding three years). Thirty three winning bidders claimed 
very small business status (those with attributable average annual 
gross revenues that do not exceed $15 million for the preceding three 
years).
    72. Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on 
several UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for 
television broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the 
Gulf of Mexico. There are presently approximately 55 licensees in this 
service. The Commission is unable to estimate at this time the number 
of licensees that would qualify as small under the SBA's small business 
size standard for the category of Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 
(except Satellite). Under that standard. Under that SBA small business 
size standard, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Census data for 2007, which supersede data contained in the 2002 
Census, show that there were 1,383 firms that operated that year. Of 
those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 employees, and 15 firms had more 
than 100 employees. Thus under this category and the associated small 
business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    73. Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, 
personal communications services, and specialized mobile radio 
telephony carriers. As noted, the SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except 
Satellite). Under the SBA small business size standard, a business is 
small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. According to Trends in 
Telephone Service data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged in 
wireless telephony. Of these, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees and 152 have more than 1,500 employees. Therefore, more than 
half of these entities can be considered small.
    74. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. Two economic census 
categories address the satellite industry. The first category has a 
small business size standard of $15 million or less in average annual 
receipts, under SBA rules. The second has a size standard of $25 
million or less in annual receipts.
    75. The category of Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises 
establishments primarily engaged in providing telecommunications 
services to other establishments in the telecommunications and 
broadcasting industries by forwarding and receiving communications 
signals via a system of satellites or reselling satellite 
telecommunications.'' Census Bureau data for 2007 show that 512 
Satellite Telecommunications firms that operated for that entire year. 
Of this total, 464 firms had annual receipts of under $10 million, and 
18 firms had receipts of $10 million to $24,999,999. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of Satellite Telecommunications 
firms are small entities that might be affected by our action.
    76. The second category, i.e. ``All Other Telecommunications,'' 
comprises ``establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized 
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications 
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes 
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal 
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing Internet services or Voice over Internet 
Protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry.'' For this category, 
Census Bureau data for 2007 show that there were a total of 2,383 firms 
that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 2,346 firms had 
annual receipts of under $25 million and 37 firms had annual receipts 
of $25 million to $49,999,999. Consequently, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of All Other Telecommunications firms are small 
entities that might be affected by our action.
b. Equipment Manufacturers
    77. Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications 
Equipment Manufacturing. The Census Bureau defines this category as 
follows: ``This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in 
manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless 
communications equipment. Examples of products made by these 
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable 
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile 
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and 
broadcasting equipment.'' The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless 
Communications Equipment Manufacturing which is: all such firms having 
750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2007, there 
were a total of 939 establishments in this category that operated for 
part or all of the entire year. Of this total, 784 had less than 500 
employees and 155 had more than 100 employees. Thus, under this size 
standard, the majority of firms can be considered small.
    78. Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. These 
establishments manufacture computer storage devices that allow the 
storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, magnetic, optical, 
or magnetic/optical media. The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for this category of manufacturing; that size standard is 500 
or fewer employees storage and retrieval of data from a phase change, 
magnetic, optical, or magnetic/optical media. According to data from 
the 2007 U.S. Census, in 2007, there were 954 establishments engaged in 
this business. Of these, 545 had from 1 to 19 employees; 219 had from 
20 to 99 employees; and 190 had 100 or more employees. Based on this 
data, the Commission concludes that the majority of the businesses 
engaged in this industry are small.

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

    79. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking does not propose any 
recordkeeping or reporting requirements.

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

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

[[Page 25989]]

standards; and (4) and exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part 
thereof, for small entities.
    81. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes sunsetting the NSI 
rule after a six-month transition period, as well as seeking comment on 
a variety of possible alternatives to addressing the issue of 
fraudulent calls from NSI handsets. Because sunsetting the NSI rule 
will remove certain call-forwarding obligations on small entities, it 
is likely the method that would impose the least costs on these small 
entities.

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

    82. None.

VI. Ordering Clause

    83. The Federal Communications Commission ADOPTS, pursuant to 
Sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 303(r) and 332 of the Communications Act of 
1934, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 303(r), 332, this Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking.
    84. It is further ORDERED that the Commission's Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a 
copy of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, including the Initial 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 20

    Communications common carriers, Communications equipment.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

Proposed Rules

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal 
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 part 20 as follows:

PART 20--COMMERCIAL MOBILE RADIO SERVICES

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

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

0
2. Section 20.18 is amended by revising paragraph (b) and adding 
paragraph (o)(4), to read as follows:


Sec.  20.18  911 Service.

* * * * *
    (b) Basic 911 Service. CMRS providers subject to this section must 
transmit all wireless 911 calls without respect to their call 
validation process to a Public Safety Answering Point, or, where no 
Public Safety Answering Point has been designated, to a designated 
statewide default answering point or appropriate local emergency 
authority pursuant to Sec.  64.3001 of this chapter, provided that 
``all wireless 911 calls'' is defined as ``any call initiated by a 
wireless user dialing 911 on a phone using a compliant radio frequency 
protocol of the serving carrier.'' After [insert date six months from 
the effective date of the Order], the requirements of this section will 
no longer apply to calls from non-service-initialized handsets as 
defined in paragraph (o)(3)(i) of this section.
* * * * *
    (o) * * *
    (4) Sunset. The requirements of this paragraph shall cease to be 
effective [insert date six months from the effective date of the 
Order].
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-10472 Filed 5-5-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P