First Responder Network Authority; Final Interpretations of Parts of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, 63523-63533 [2015-26621]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
to secondary users on a statewide,
regional, or national basis—whichever
arrangement is most profitable.
Response: FirstNet agrees that it
should evaluate various funding and
deployment options in order to help
speed deployment and ensure the
establishment of a self-sustaining
broadband network dedicated to public
safety throughout the nation.
Comment #65: One commenter
suggested that, although revenue
generated from a covered leasing
agreement is an important financial
contribution to the construction and
maintenance of the nationwide network,
FirstNet should not allow the promise of
secondary leasing agreements to singlehandedly drive its strategic decisions.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comment and intends to analyze and
determine the most efficient and
effective way to utilize its various
funding streams to ensure the
deployment and operation of a
nationwide broadband network for
public safety.
Comment #66: One commenter
suggested that State law, not FirstNet,
should determine the ability of an optout State to profit from public-private
partnerships or covered leasing
agreements.
Response: The Act authorizes States
to enter into covered leasing agreements
with secondary users through publicprivate arrangements and establishes the
parameters of those arrangements.85
Indeed, the Act explicitly limits the use
of any revenue gained by a State
through a covered leasing agreement to
constructing, maintaining, operating, or
improving the RAN of that State.86
Similarly, FirstNet has also concluded
that section 1428(d), authorizing a State
to enter into public-private
partnerships, was intended by Congress
to be read consistently, to the extent
such an arrangement is considered
something different from a covered
leasing agreement, so as to ensure
ongoing reinvestment of all revenues
into the network. This is consistent with
the overall purpose and intent of the Act
to ensure the deployment and operation
of the NPSBN.
Dated: October 15, 2015.
Jason Karp,
Chief Counsel (Acting), First Responder
Network Authority.
[FR Doc. 2015–26622 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–TL–P
85 See
86 See
47 U.S.C. 1442(g)(2).
id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration
[Docket Number: 140821696–5908–04]
RIN 0660–XC012
First Responder Network Authority;
Final Interpretations of Parts of the
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012
First Responder Network
Authority, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; final interpretations.
AGENCY:
The First Responder Network
Authority (‘‘FirstNet’’) publishes this
Notice to issue final interpretations of
its enabling legislation that will inform,
among other things, forthcoming
requests for proposals, interpretive
rules, and network policies. The
purpose of this Notice is to provide
stakeholders FirstNet’s interpretations
on many of the key preliminary
interpretations presented in the
proposed interpretations published on
September 24, 2014.
DATES: Effective October 20, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eli
Veenendaal, First Responder Network
Authority, National
Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive,
M/S 243, Reston, VA 20192; 703–648–
4167; or elijah.veenendaal@firstnet.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Introduction and Background
The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112–96,
Title VI, 126 Stat. 256 (codified at 47
U.S.C. 1401 et seq.)) (the ‘‘Act’’)
established the First Responder Network
Authority (‘‘FirstNet’’) as an
independent authority within the
National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (‘‘NTIA’’).
The Act establishes FirstNet’s duty and
responsibility to take all actions
necessary to ensure the building,
deployment, and operation of a
nationwide public safety broadband
network (‘‘NPSBN’’).1
One of FirstNet’s initial steps in
carrying out this responsibility under
the Act is the issuance of open,
transparent, and competitive requests
for proposals (‘‘RFPs’’) for the purposes
of building, operating, and maintaining
the network. We have sought—and will
1 47
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 1426(b).
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63523
continue to seek—public comments on
many technical and economic aspects of
these RFPs through traditional
procurement processes, including
requests for information (‘‘RFIs’’) and
potential draft RFPs and Special
Notices, prior to issuance of RFPs.2
As a newly created entity, however,
we are also confronted with many
complex legal issues of first impression
under the Act that will have a material
impact on the RFPs, responsive
proposals, and our operations going
forward. Generally, the Administrative
Procedure Act (‘‘APA’’) 3 provides the
basic framework of administrative law
governing agency action, including the
procedural steps that must precede the
effective promulgation, amendment, or
repeal of a rule by a federal agency.4
However, 47 U.S.C. 1426(d)(2) provides
that any action taken or decision made
by FirstNet is exempt from the
requirements of the APA.
Nevertheless, although exempted
from these procedural requirements, on
September 24, 2014, FirstNet published
a public notice entitled ‘‘Proposed
Interpretations of Parts of the Middle
Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of
2012’’ (hereinafter ‘‘the First Notice’’),5
seeking public comments on
preliminary interpretations, as well as
technical and economic issues, on
certain foundational legal issues to help
guide our efforts in achieving our
mission.
The purpose of this Notice is to
provide stakeholders notice of the final
legal interpretations on many of the key
preliminary interpretations presented in
the First Notice. Additional background
and rationale for this action and
explanations of FirstNet’s
interpretations were included in the
First Notice and are not repeated herein.
The section immediately below labeled
‘‘Final Interpretations’’ summarizes
FirstNet’s final interpretations with
respect to the First Notice. Thereafter,
the section labeled ‘‘Response to
Comments’’ summarizes the comments
2 The pronouns ‘‘we’’ or ‘‘our’’ throughout this
Notice refer to ‘‘FirstNet’’ alone and not FirstNet,
NTIA, and the U.S. Department of Commerce as a
collective group.
3 See 5 U.S.C. 551–59, 701–06, 1305, 3105, 3344,
5372, 7521.
4 See 5 U.S.C. 551–559. The APA defines a ‘‘rule’’
as ‘‘the whole or a part of an agency statement of
general or particular applicability and future effect
designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law
or policy or describing the organization, procedure,
or practice requirements of an agency and includes
the approval or prescription for the future of rates,
wages, corporate or financial structures or
reorganizations thereof, prices, facilities,
appliances, services or allowances therefor or of
valuations, costs, or accounting, or practices bearing
on any of the foregoing.’’ 5 U.S.C. 551(4).
5 79 FR 57058 (September 24, 2014).
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
63524
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
received on the preliminary
interpretations contained in the First
Notice and provides FirstNet’s
responses to such comments, including
further explanations and any changes to
FirstNet’s interpretations.
II. Final Interpretations
A. FirstNet Network
Final Definitions of Core Network and
Radio Access Network
1. FirstNet defines the core network in
accordance with 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) of
the Act, relevant sections of the
Interoperability Board Report, and
commercial standards, as including,
without limitation, the standard
Evolved Packet Core elements under the
3rd Generation Partnership Project
(‘‘3GPP’’) standards (including the
Serving and Packet Data Network
Gateways, Mobility Management Entity,
Home Subscriber Server, and the Policy
and Charging Rules Function), device
services, location services, billing
functions, and all other network
elements and functions other than the
radio access network.
2. FirstNet defines the radio access
network in accordance with 47 U.S.C.
1422(b) of the Act, commercial
standards, and the relevant sections of
the Interoperability Board Report, as
consisting of the standard E–UTRAN
elements (e.g., the eNodeB) and
including, but not limited to, backhaul
to FirstNet designated consolidation
points.
3. FirstNet concludes that a State
choosing to conduct its own
deployment of a radio access network
under 47 U.S.C. 1442(e) must use the
FirstNet core network to provide public
safety services within the State.
B. Users
Network Users
4. FirstNet defines a ‘‘secondary user’’
as any user that seeks access to or use
of the NPSBN for non-public safety
services.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Prohibition on Providing Commercial
Services to Consumers
5. The definition of ‘‘consumers’’ as
used in 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not include:
a. any public safety entity as defined
in the Act;
b. States when seeking access to or
use of the core network, equipment, or
infrastructure; or
c. entities when seeking access to or
use of equipment or infrastructure.
6. The language of the Act under 47
U.S.C. 1432 prohibiting FirstNet from
directly serving ‘‘consumers’’ does not
limit potential types of public safety
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
entities that may use or access the
NPSBN for commercial
telecommunications or information
services.
7. The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not prohibit or act as a limit on
secondary users with which FirstNet
may enter into a covered leasing
agreement.
8. The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not limit the pool of secondary users
that may gain access to or use of the
network on a secondary basis.
C. Requests for Proposals
Requests for Proposals Process
9. FirstNet, to the extent it utilizes the
FAR, concludes that complying with the
FAR satisfies the open, transparent, and
competitive requirements of 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(B).
Minimum Technical Requirements
10. FirstNet concludes that it may
make non-material changes or
additions/subtractions to the minimal
technical requirements developed by
the Interoperability Board, including as
necessary to accommodate
advancements in technology as required
by the Act.
Final Definition of ‘‘Rural’’
11. FirstNet defines ‘‘rural,’’ for the
purposes of the Act, as having the same
meaning as ‘‘rural area’’ in Section
601(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act
of 1936, as amended (‘‘Rural
Electrification Act’’). Section 601(b)(3)
of the Rural Electrification Act provides
that ‘‘[t]he term ‘rural area’ means any
area other than—(i) an area described in
clause (i) or (ii) of Section
1991(a)(13)(A) of this title [section
343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act]; and (ii) a
city, town, or incorporated area that has
a population of greater than 20,000
inhabitants.’’ In turn, the relevant
portion of Section 343(a)(13)(A) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act explains that the
‘‘terms ‘rural’ and ‘rural area’ mean any
area other than—(i) a city or town that
has a population of greater than 50,000
inhabitants; and (ii) any urbanized area
contiguous and adjacent to a city or
town described in clause (i).’’ Thus, as
defined herein, the term ‘‘rural’’ means
any area that is not:
• A city, town, or incorporated area
that has a population of greater than
20,000 inhabitants
• any urbanized area contiguous and
adjacent to a city or town that has a
population of greater than 50,000
inhabitants
12. FirstNet concludes that a lower
boundary (e.g., ‘‘wilderness,’’ ‘‘frontier’’)
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
is not necessary to satisfy its rural
coverage requirements under the Act,
and thus FirstNet does not intend to
establish any such boundary.
Existing Infrastructure
13. FirstNet interprets that 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(B) is intended to require
FirstNet to encourage, through its
requests, that responsive proposals
leverage existing infrastructure in
accordance with the provision.
14. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(3) as requiring FirstNet to
include in its RFPs that such proposals
leverage partnerships with commercial
mobile providers where economically
desirable.
15. FirstNet concludes that factors
other than, or in addition to, cost may
be utilized in assessing whether existing
infrastructure is ‘‘economically
desirable,’’ including:
a. infrastructure type/characteristics
b. security (physical, network, cyber,
etc.)
c. suitability/viability (ability to
readily use, upgrade, and maintain)
d. readiness for reuse (e.g., already in
use for wireless communications)
e. scope of use (e.g., range of coverage)
f. availability/accessibility (time/
obstacles to acquiring access/use)
g. any use restrictions (e.g.,
prohibitions/limitations on commercial
use)
h. relationships with infrastructure
owners/managers (e.g., ease/difficulty in
working with owners/managers)
i. available alternatives in the area
D. Fees
General
16. FirstNet interprets each of the fees
authorized by the Act, including user or
subscription fees authorized by 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(1), covered leasing
agreement fees authorized by 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2), lease fees related to network
equipment and infrastructure
authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3), and
the fee for State use of elements of the
core network authorized by 47 U.S.C.
1442(f), as distinct and separate from
each other and may be assessed
individually or cumulatively, as
applicable.
Network User Fees
17. FirstNet concludes it may charge
a user or subscription fee under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) to any user that seeks
access to or use of the NPSBN.
State Core Network User Fees
18. FirstNet concludes that the fees
assessed on States assuming RAN
responsibilities for use of the core
network authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1442(f)
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
are distinct from and can be assessed in
addition to any other fees authorized
under the Act.
Lease Fees Related to Network Capacity
and Covered Leasing Agreements
19. FirstNet concludes that a covered
leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2) does not require a secondary
user to ‘‘construct, manage, and
operate’’ the entire FirstNet network,
either from a coverage perspective or
exclusively within a specific location.
20. FirstNet concludes that multiple
covered leasing agreement lessees could
coexist and be permitted access to
excess network capacity in a particular
geographic area.
21. FirstNet interprets that a covered
leasing agreement lessee satisfies the
definition under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) so
long as the lessee does more than a
nominal amount of constructing,
managing, or operating the network.
22. FirstNet concludes that an entity
entering into a covered leasing
agreement under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) is
not required to perform all three
functions of constructing, managing,
and operating a portion of the network,
so long as one of the three is performed
as part of the covered leasing agreement.
23. FirstNet interprets the reference to
‘‘network capacity’’ in the definition of
covered leasing agreement under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(i) as a generic
statement referring to the combination
of spectrum and network elements, as
defined by the Act, and including the
core network as well as the radio access
network of either FirstNet alone or that
of the secondary user under a covered
leasing agreement, whereby the core and
radio access network are used for
serving both FirstNet public safety
entities and the secondary user’s
commercial customers.
24. FirstNet interprets the term
‘‘secondary basis’’ under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(i) to mean that network
capacity will be available to the
secondary user unless it is needed for
public safety entities as defined in the
Act.
25. FirstNet interprets the phrase
‘‘spectrum allocated to such entity’’
found in 47 U.S. § 1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) as
allowing all or a portion of the spectrum
licensed to FirstNet by the Federal
Communications Commission (‘‘FCC’’)
under call sign ‘‘WQQE234’’ to be
allocated for use on a secondary basis
under a covered leasing agreement.
26. FirstNet concludes that the
reference to ‘‘dark fiber’’ in 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) cannot literally be
interpreted as such, and the reference
should be interpreted to allow the
covered leasing agreement lessee to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
transport such traffic on otherwise
previously dark fiber facilities.
Network Equipment and Infrastructure
Fee
27. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(3) as being limited to the
imposition of a fee for the use of static
or isolated equipment or infrastructure,
such as antennas or towers, rather than
for use of FirstNet spectrum or access to
network capacity.
28. FirstNet interprets the phrase
‘‘constructed or otherwise owned by
[FirstNet]’’ under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as
meaning that FirstNet ordered or
required the construction of such
equipment or infrastructure, paid for
such construction, simply owns such
equipment, or does not own but,
through a contract has rights to sublease
access to, or use of, such equipment or
infrastructure.
III. Response to Comments
FirstNet received 63 written
comments to the First Notice from
various stakeholders, including States,
tribes, public safety organizations,
commercial carriers, equipment
vendors, utilities, and various
associations. Comments on the First
Notice included a large number of
identical or similar written comments as
well as oral statements made during
meetings with FirstNet. FirstNet has
carefully considered each of the
comments submitted. It has grouped
and summarized the comments
according to common themes and has
responded accordingly. All written
comments can be found at
www.regulations.gov.
A. FirstNet Network
1. Final Definitions of Core Network and
Radio Access Network
The Act requires FirstNet to ‘‘ensure
the establishment of a nationwide,
interoperable public safety broadband
network’’ that is ‘‘based on a single
national network architecture.’’ 6 This
national network architecture must be
capable of evolving with technological
advancements and initially consists of
two primary network components: A
core network and a radio access
network.7 The Act defines the ‘‘core
network’’ as consisting of ‘‘the national
and regional data centers, and other
elements and functions that may be
distributed geographically . . . and
provid[ing] connectivity between (i) the
radio access network; and (ii) the public
Internet or public switched network, or
6 47
7 47
PO 00000
U.S.C. 1422.
U.S.C. 1422(b).
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
both . . . .’’ 8 Comparably, the Act
defines the ‘‘radio access network’’ as
consisting of ‘‘all cell site equipment,
antennas, and backhaul equipment . . .
that are required to enable wireless
communications with devices using the
public safety broadband spectrum . . .
.’’ 9
In the First Notice, FirstNet made
preliminary interpretations further
describing the scope of the definitions
of the core network and RAN. Although
the vast majority of commenters agreed
with the interpretations, some expressed
concerns that many of the key elements
of the network were either not
referenced or did not meet the criteria
described in the proposed definitions.
In response to these comments, FirstNet
has slightly modified its preliminary
interpretation of the ‘‘core network’’ to
include the Mobility Management Entity
within the Evolved Packet Core
elements under the 3GPP standards and
its preliminary interpretation of ‘‘radio
access network’’ to include backhaul to
FirstNet designated consolidation
points. Accordingly, FirstNet makes the
following final interpretations related to
the definitions of the core network and
radio access network under the Act.
(1) FirstNet defines the core network
in accordance with 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) of
the Act, relevant sections of the
Interoperability Board Report, and
commercial standards, as including,
without limitation, the standard
Evolved Packet Core elements under the
3GPP standards (including the Serving
and Packet Data Network Gateways,
Mobility Management Entity, Home
Subscriber Server, and the Policy and
Charging Rules Function), device
services, location services, billing
functions, and all other network
elements and functions other than the
radio access network.
(2) FirstNet defines the radio access
network in accordance with 47 U.S.C.
1422(b) of the Act, commercial
standards, and the relevant sections of
the Interoperability Board Report, as
consisting of the standard E–UTRAN
elements (e.g., the eNodeB) and
including, but not limited to, backhaul
to FirstNet designated consolidation
points.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Definition of Core Network and
Radio Access Network
Summary: The majority of
commenters agreed with FirstNet’s
proposed definitions of ‘‘core network’’
and ‘‘radio access network’’ and
supported FirstNet considering
8 47
9 47
Sfmt 4703
63525
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
U.S.C. 1422(b)(1).
U.S.C. 1422(b)(2)(B).
20OCN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
63526
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
commercial standards, as well as the
relevant sections of the Interoperability
Board Report and relevant 3GPP
standards, to provide further clarity
around the elements and functions of
the core network and radio access
network.
Comment #1: A few commenters
suggested that FirstNet simply use the
definitions of the terms ‘‘core network’’
and ‘‘radio access network’’ that are
provided in the statute. For example,
one commenter recommended FirstNet
use its wide discretion to consider other
interpretations as it carries out its
responsibilities to implement these
network components and not use the
Interoperability Board Report to help
derive any legal interpretations of the
Act.
Response: FirstNet agrees that the Act
provides it with broad discretion to
carry out its mission. In view of that
discretion, FirstNet has determined that
it is important to provide additional
clarity around certain delineation points
between the core network and RAN as
defined in the Act. These delineation
points become especially important in
light of the provisions of 47 U.S.C.
1442(e) that allow a State the
opportunity, under certain conditions,
to conduct the deployment of a RAN
within that State and require that State
to pay a fee for use of elements of the
core network. In response to the specific
example, the Act commissioned the
development of the Interoperability
Board Report to provide recommended
technical requirements to ensure a
nationwide level of interoperability for
the NPSBN.10 Under the Act, these
recommendations are intended to be
used by FirstNet to help develop and
maintain the NPSBN.11 Moreover, a
State choosing to assume RAN
responsibilities must demonstrate
compliance with the minimum
technical interoperability requirements
of the Interoperability Board Report in
order to receive approval of an
alternative RAN plan.12 Based on these
provisions, FirstNet believes that it is
important to give credence to the
relevant sections of the Interoperability
Board Report that relate to the
definitions of the core network and
RAN.
Comment #2: One commenter
suggested the proposed definition of the
core network is too expansive and
recommended that FirstNet remove the
language ‘‘device services’’ and ‘‘all
other network elements and functions
other than the radio access network’’
10 See
47 U.S.C. 1423(c).
id.
12 See 47 U.S.C. 1442(e)(3)(C)(i).
from its proposed definition of the core
network.
Response: FirstNet disagrees that the
proposed definition of core network is
too expansive and believes its proposed
interpretation, including the language
‘‘device services’’ and ‘‘all other
network elements and functions other
than the radio access network,’’ is
consistent with both the intent of the
Act as well as commercially accepted
standards for elements generally
comprising a core network.
Additionally, FirstNet’s inclusion of
these terms and phrases in its
interpretation assist in providing clarity
relating to the definitions of core
network and RAN that are critical to
establishing the NPSBN and providing
the scope of responsibility a State will
assume should it decide to conduct its
own RAN deployment. In delivering a
plan to a Governor for a determination
of whether to assume responsibilities for
RAN construction, FirstNet must
delineate between what elements of the
network in the proposed plan comprise
the core network versus the elements
that comprise the RAN. Accordingly, an
understanding of the elements that
make up the core network and RAN are
critical for a Governor to make an
effective determination about whether
the State should have FirstNet conduct
the RAN deployment or seek to conduct
its own RAN deployment.
Comment #3: One commenter
expressed concern that the proposed
definitions conflate issues of policy and
technology and suggested FirstNet avoid
rigid definitions of ‘‘core network’’ or
‘‘radio access network’’ and align their
technical and business development
efforts with standards that evolve with
the long term evolution (‘‘LTE’’)
broadband network.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comment, but believes its proposed
definitions of core network and RAN
provide additional certainty that is
necessary in order to build, operate, and
maintain the NPSBN, while, at the same
time, preserving, as contemplated by the
Act, the necessary flexibility to take into
account new and evolving technological
advancements. For example, FirstNet’s
interpretations of both the core network
and RAN are inclusive of the language
of 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) that specifically
states the national architecture must
‘‘evolve[] with technological
advancements and initially consists of’’
the stated core network and RAN
components.13 The use of the term
‘‘initially’’ and the phrase ‘‘evolve with
technological advancements’’ in 47
U.S.C. 1422(b) indicate that Congress
11 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
understood that the definitions of the
core network and RAN could not be
static. Rather, the definitions of such
terms would need to be modified
throughout the life of the network in
order to help ensure that public safety
would have a network capable of
supporting and providing access to new
and evolving technologies.
Comment #4: Several commenters,
although not disagreeing with the
proposed definitions, expressed
concerns that many of the key elements
of the network were either not
referenced or did not meet the criteria
described in the proposed core network
and radio access network definitions. To
illustrate this point, multiple
commenters reasoned that backhaul
transport connecting the radio access
network with the core network or the
backhaul connecting the core network
with geographically distributed
databases and application servers,
which are critical components of
network integration, need to be
addressed in the definitions.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comments and has modified its
interpretation of the ‘‘core network’’ to
include the Mobility Management Entity
within the Evolved Packet Core
elements under the 3GPP standards and
its interpretation of ‘‘radio access
network’’ to include backhaul to
FirstNet designated consolidation
points. To the extent additional clarity
is necessary to provide, for example,
more specific demarcation points or the
services and facilities that will be
provided by the various network
elements, FirstNet intends to address
such matters, as appropriate, in the
development of relevant network
policies.
2. State Radio Access Networks Must
Use the FirstNet Core Network
As discussed above, the Act charges
FirstNet with the duty to ‘‘ensure the
establishment of a nationwide,
interoperable public safety broadband
network . . . based on a single, national
network architecture’’ and defines the
architecture of the network as initially
consisting of a ‘‘core network’’ and a
‘‘radio access network.’’ 14 In addition,
FirstNet is required to take all actions
necessary to ensure the building,
deployment, and operation of the
network, including issuing RFPs for the
purposes of building, operating, and
maintaining the network.15 Thus,
overall, FirstNet is responsible for
ensuring the core network and radio
access network—subject to a State’s
14 47
13 47
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
U.S.C. 1422(b) (emphasis added).
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
15 47
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
U.S.C. 1422.
U.S.C. 1426(b).
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ability to assume RAN responsibilities
under 47 U.S.C. 1442—is built,
deployed, and operated throughout the
country.
As analyzed in the First Notice, the
Act, although providing each State an
opportunity to choose to conduct its
own deployment of a RAN in such
State, does not provide for State
deployment of a core network separate
from the core network that FirstNet is
charged with deploying.16 Rather,
according to the express language of the
Act, FirstNet, is the only entity
responsible for constructing a core
network. This interpretation is further
supported by the mandate that States
that choose to build their own RAN
must pay any user fees associated with
such State’s use of ‘‘the core
network.’’ 17 Thus, based on the
language of and overall interoperability
goals of the Act, FirstNet makes the
following conclusion related to State
use of the core network that is
constructed, operated, and maintained
by FirstNet.
FirstNet concludes that a State
choosing to conduct its own
deployment of a radio access network
under 47 U.S.C. 1442(e) must use the
FirstNet core network to provide public
safety services within the State.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
to Conclusions That State Radio Access
Networks Must Use the FirstNet Core
Network
Summary: The majority of
commenters agreed with FirstNet’s
proposed interpretation that a State
choosing to conduct its own
deployment of a radio access network
must use the FirstNet core network to
provide services to public safety
entities.
Comment #5: One commenter did not
support FirstNet’s preliminary
conclusion, asserting that direct
connectivity between the core network
and the RAN is excluded from FirstNet’s
definitions and that such network
element should be explicitly identified
and included either in the definition of
core network or radio access network.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comment and notes that, as detailed
above, it has clarified the definition of
RAN to include backhaul to FirstNet
consolidation points.
Comment #6: One commenter agreed
with the interpretation, but suggested
FirstNet should remain open to the
concept of a local ‘‘back-up’’ core
network, particularly for States or
localities with a high population
47 U.S.C. 1422, 1426.
U.S.C. 1442(f).
density, with this ‘‘back-up’’ core
network being designed and purposed
to protect against a total loss of
connectivity to the FirstNet nationwide
core network.
Response: The Act requires FirstNet
to establish a network with adequate
hardening, security, reliability, and
resiliency requirements, including by
addressing special considerations for
areas and regions with unique
homeland security or national security
needs.18 Accordingly, FirstNet intends
to construct the core network taking into
account these considerations and does
not anticipate the need to utilize a local
‘‘back-up’’ core network to serve public
safety, which, among other things,
potentially creates interoperability
complexities and increases network
security risks.
B. Network Users
1. Final Definition of ‘‘Secondary Users’’
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1)
authorizes FirstNet to charge ‘‘user or
subscription’’ fees to a ‘‘secondary user
. . . that seeks access to or use of the
[NPSBN].’’ Additionally, under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2), FirstNet may enter
into a covered leasing agreement with a
‘‘secondary user’’ that permits ‘‘access
to network capacity on a secondary
basis for non-public safety purposes.’’ 19
The Act does not expressly define the
term ‘‘secondary user.’’ However, based
on the plain language of 47 U.S.C. 1428,
FirstNet reaches the following
conclusion with respect to the meaning
of ‘‘secondary user’’:
FirstNet defines a ‘‘secondary user’’ as
any user that seeks access to or use of
the NPSBN for non-public safety
services.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Definition of Secondary User
Summary: The majority of
commenters agreed with the
interpretation of a ‘‘secondary user’’ as
a user that accesses network capacity on
a secondary basis for non-public safety
services. One such commenter noted
that while secondary users are not
public safety entities, they are important
to the financial sustainability of the
network. Similarly, another commenter
remarked that such non-public safety
secondary users are necessary to
implement a sophisticated and
expansive network.
Comment #7: One commenter
expressed concern that FirstNet’s
proposed definition, as formulated,
could be misconstrued and sought to
clarify that ‘‘secondary user’’ captures
16 See
19 47
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(2), (c)(2)(A).
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2).
those using the NPSBN for services that
are not related to public safety.
Response: FirstNet has attempted to
clearly state in its final definition of
‘‘secondary user’’ (identified above) that
such term refers to those users who
access the NPSBN only for non-public
safety services.
Comment #8: One commenter
expressed concern not about FirstNet’s
definition of ‘‘secondary user,’’ but
about the potential for secondary users
to adversely impact the performance of
the NPSBN at the expense of public
safety.
Response: FirstNet is committed to
ensuring the establishment of a network
that meets the needs of public safety
and believes that the 20 MHz of
available spectrum along with the
expected priority/preemption
capabilities of the network will allow
secondary users to access the NPSBN
without negatively impacting public
safety’s use of the NPSBN.
Comment #9: One commenter
asserted that any user of the NPSBN that
is not a ‘‘public safety entity’’ should be
considered a ‘‘consumer’’ rather than a
‘‘secondary user.’’ These ‘‘consumers’’
would use the network on a secondary
basis and yield to the primary user
public safety entities.
Response: While FirstNet certainly
agrees with the general concept of
public safety entities being the primary
users of the NPSBN, we do not agree
that the term ‘‘consumer’’ (which is also
undefined in the Act) encompasses all
other such users of the network on a
secondary basis. First, the Act explicitly
uses the term ‘‘secondary user’’ when
referring to those entities or individuals
that access or use the network ‘‘on a
secondary basis for non-public safety
services.’’ 20 Secondly, this use of the
term ‘‘consumer’’ is inconsistent with
47 U.S.C. 1432, which prohibits FirstNet
from providing ‘‘commercial
telecommunications or information
services directly to consumers.’’ Under
47 U.S.C. 1428, FirstNet is expressly
authorized to assess a network user fee
on secondary users. Thus, given the Act
prohibits FirstNet from providing
certain services directly to consumers
while it permits FirstNet to charge user
fees to secondary users, by definition all
secondary users cannot be consumers.
2. Prohibition on Providing Commercial
Services to Consumers
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1432(a) specifies
that FirstNet ‘‘shall not offer, provide, or
market commercial telecommunications
or information services directly to
consumers.’’ The Act does not define
18 See
17 47
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63527
20 47
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
U.S.C. 1428(a).
20OCN1
63528
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
the word ‘‘consumer’’ or indicate
whether the word is limited to
individuals or includes organizations
and businesses. In addition, under the
rule of construction specified in 47
U.S.C. 1432(b), nothing in 47 U.S.C.
1432(a) is intended to prohibit FirstNet
from entering into covered leasing
agreements with secondary users or to
limit FirstNet from collecting lease fees
for the use of network equipment and
infrastructure. FirstNet makes the
following conclusions with respect to
these provisions of the Act:
(1) The definition of ‘‘consumers’’ as
used in 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not include:
a. Any public safety entity as defined
in the Act;
b. States when seeking access to or
use of the core network, equipment, or
infrastructure; or
c. entities when seeking access to or
use of equipment and infrastructure.
(2) The language of the Act under 47
U.S.C. 1432 prohibiting FirstNet from
directly serving ‘‘consumers’’ does not
limit potential types of public safety
entities that may use or access the
NPSBN for commercial
telecommunications or information
services.
(3) The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not prohibit or act as a limit on
secondary users with which FirstNet
may enter into a covered leasing
agreement.
(4) The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not limit the pool of secondary users
that may gain access to or use of the
network on a secondary basis.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Prohibition on Providing
Commercial Services to Consumers
Summary: The vast majority of
commenters supported FirstNet’s
conclusions that the prohibition in 47
U.S.C. 1432 on FirstNet offering,
providing, or marketing commercial
telecommunications or information
services to consumers does not apply to
public safety entities, secondary users,
States seeking access to or use of the
FirstNet core network, or entities or
States seeking access to or use of
network equipment and infrastructure.
These commenters agreed that the intent
of this provision, whether explicit or
implicit, is to exclude these entities
from the definition of consumer.
Comment #10: One commenter, while
not disagreeing with FirstNet’s
conclusions, expressed concern
regarding the potential for network
capacity to become saturated from nonpublic safety use.
Response: As noted above, FirstNet is
committed to ensuring the
establishment of a network that meets
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
the needs of public safety and believes
that the 20 MHz of available spectrum
along with the expected priority/
preemption capabilities of the network
will allow secondary users to access the
NPSBN without negatively impacting
public safety’s use of the NPSBN.
C. Requests for Proposals
1. Requests for Proposals Process
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B)
requires FirstNet to issue ‘‘open,
transparent, and competitive’’ RFPs.
The procedural requirements for issuing
such RFPs to meet the ‘‘open,
transparent, and competitive’’ standard,
however, are not defined in the Act. The
Federal Acquisition Regulation
(‘‘FAR’’), codified in 48 CFR parts 1–99,
is the primary regulation used by federal
executive agencies in their acquisition
of supplies and services with
appropriated funds. Thus, FirstNet
makes the following conclusion with
respect to its compliance with this
provision:
FirstNet, to the extent it utilizes the
FAR, concludes that complying with the
FAR satisfies the open, transparent, and
competitive requirements of 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(B).
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Requests for Proposals
Summary: The overwhelming
majority of commenters agreed with
FirstNet’s proposed interpretation that
using the FAR satisfies FirstNet’s
statutory obligation to issue ‘‘open,
transparent, and competitive requests
for proposals to private sector entities
for the purposes of building, operating,
and maintaining the network . . . ’’ In
addition to commenting that
compliance with the FAR is a
reasonable way of meeting the Act’s
requirements for an ‘‘open, transparent,
and competitive’’ RFP process,
commenters noted that the FAR is a
well understood process, and that by
using it, FirstNet will save time by not
having to develop a new process for
issuing RFPs. Given the size and scope
of FirstNet’s task, commenters agreed
that using the FAR was the most logical
option. Some commenters agreed with
using the FAR generally, but encouraged
the use of only certain sections.
Comment #11: Some commenters
suggested that FirstNet exceed the
FAR’s requirements and reminded
FirstNet of its authority to make
agreements with States to use existing
infrastructure.
Response: FirstNet believes that using
the FAR satisfies the Act’s requirements.
FAR Part 1.102 provides guiding
principles of the Federal Acquisition
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
System, namely ‘‘promoting
competition, and conducting business
with integrity, fairness and openness.’’
The policies and procedures of the FAR
embody these principles. Adherence to
the FAR, therefore, ensures compliance
with the Act’s mandate to issue ‘‘open,
transparent, and competitive’’ RFPs.
With respect to existing infrastructure,
FirstNet plans to leverage such assets for
the NPSBN to the extent it is
economically desirable, as required by
the Act (see below for a further
discussion regarding existing
infrastructure).
Comment #12: One commenter
disagreed with FirstNet’s proposed
interpretation, observing that the
guidance in 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B)
would be unnecessary if Congress
intended FirstNet to comply with the
FAR, and that there is not a single
reference to the FAR in the Act, despite
the extensive statutory guidance the Act
provides to FirstNet concerning the RFP
process.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges this
comment and notes that its final
conclusion is not that FirstNet believes
it is required to use the FAR. Rather,
FirstNet’s interpretation merely is that
by complying with the FAR, FirstNet is
complying with this provision of the
Act.
2. Minimum Technical Requirements
47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B) requires
FirstNet to issue RFPs for the purposes
of building, operating, and maintaining
the network that use, without materially
changing, the minimum technical
requirements developed by the
Interoperability Board. 47 U.S.C.
1422(b) and 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(4) further
obligate FirstNet to accommodate
advancements in technology.21 With
respect to these provisions, FirstNet
makes the following final interpretation:
FirstNet concludes that it may make
non-material changes or additions/
subtractions to the minimal technical
requirements developed by the
21 Note that the Interoperability Board Report
states that ‘‘[g]iven that technology evolves rapidly,
the network components and associated interfaces
identified in the [Interoperability Board Report]
. . . are also expected to evolve over time. As such,
these aspects of the present document are intended
to represent a state-of-the-art snapshot at the time
of writing. In this context, the standards, functions,
and interfaces referenced in the present document
are intended to prescribe statements of intent.
Variations or substitutions are expected to
accommodate technological evolution consistent
with the evolution of 3GPP and other applicable
standards.’’ Interoperability Board, Recommended
Minimum Technical Requirements to Ensure
Nationwide Interoperability for the Nationwide
Public Safety Broadband Network at 27 (May 22,
2012), available at https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/
document/view?id=7021919873.
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Interoperability Board, including as
necessary to accommodate
advancements in technology as required
by the Act.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Minimum Technical Requirements
Summary: Commenters were virtually
unanimous in agreeing with FirstNet’s
proposed interpretation regarding
changes to the minimum technical
requirements established by the
Interoperability Board. Several
commenters reasoned that such changes
are necessary and fully contemplated
(by Congress and the Interoperability
Board itself) in order to keep pace with
evolutions in technology, address issues
that the Interoperability Board may not
have considered, and fulfill
requirements under the Act.
Comment #13: One commenter
maintained that the minimum technical
requirements developed by the
Interoperability Board are so
fundamental that they should be
utilized in their entirety regardless of
advancements in technology.
Response: FirstNet fully appreciates
the value of the minimum technical
requirements developed by the
Interoperability Board and the critical
role such requirements will have in the
development and maintenance of the
NPSBN. However, at the same time,
FirstNet seeks to ensure that the most
robust and technologically advanced
network as possible is established for
public safety in accordance with its
statutory mission, and FirstNet is
specifically directed by the Act to
consider advancements in technology in
the development and maintenance of
the NPSBN.22 Accordingly, FirstNet
intends to operate with those principles
and directives in mind in forming the
technical requirements for the network.
Comment #14: Multiple commenters
urged FirstNet to use open standards in
the implementation of advancements in
technology, focusing on 3GPP
architecture and interfaces that ensure
operability, interoperability, and
backwards compatibility. Some of these
commenters pointed out that the
Interoperability Board Report
contemplates advancements in
technology and supports the open
standards process.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this notice. However,
FirstNet acknowledges this
recommendation and will consider it as
any applicable decisions are developed
on the matter. We note that the Act
requires that the NPSBN be based on
commercial standards, including those
22 See
47 U.S.C. 1422(b), 1426(c)(4).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
developed by 3GPP and that comply
with the Interoperability Board Report.
Comment #15: A few commenters
suggested that FirstNet rely on the
Interoperability Board or a similar
independent technical advisory board
going forward to establish and maintain
ongoing minimum technical
requirements and compliance with
those requirements, in light of
technological advances.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this notice. However,
FirstNet acknowledges this
recommendation and will consider it as
any applicable decisions are developed
on the matter.
Comment #16: Some commenters
offered input as to what delineates nonmaterial versus material changes in the
minimum technical requirements. Most
commenters focused on critical features
or functions being backwards
compatible, as well as avoiding any
reduction in the quality of mission
critical service to end users.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges
these recommendations and will
consider them as any applicable
decisions are developed on the matter.
FirstNet’s goal is to ensure that the
NPSBN operates in a manner that
satisfies public safety’s critical
communication needs and is consistent
with the material terms of the
Interoperability Board report.
3. Final Definition of ‘‘Rural’’
The Act directs that FirstNet ‘‘shall
require deployment phases with
substantial rural coverage milestones as
part of each phase of the construction
and deployment of the network . . .
[and] utilize cost-effective opportunities
to speed deployment in rural areas.’’ 23
Additionally, the Act states, in relevant
part, that FirstNet ‘‘shall develop . . .
requests for proposals with appropriate
. . . timetables for construction,
including by taking into consideration
the time needed to build out to rural
areas.’’ 24 Finally, the Act explains that
FirstNet ‘‘shall develop . . . requests for
proposals with appropriate . . .
coverage areas, including coverage in
rural and nonurban areas.’’ 25
Since the Act does not define ‘‘rural,’’
we found it necessary to define this
term in order to fulfill our duties with
respect to the above noted statutory
rural coverage requirements.26
23 47
U.S.C. 1426(b)(3) (emphasis added).
U.S.C. 1426(c)(1)(A)(i) (emphasis added).
25 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(1)(A)(ii) (emphasis added).
26 We appreciate the position the FCC has taken
in this regard, and we are committed to fulfill our
duties in a way that will meet these rural coverage
requirements. See Implementing Public Safety
Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax
24 47
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63529
Accordingly, FirstNet makes the
following final interpretation regarding
the definition of ‘‘rural’’ under the Act:
(1) FirstNet defines ‘‘rural,’’ for the
purposes of the Act, as having the same
meaning as ‘‘rural area’’ in Section
601(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act
of 1936, as amended (‘‘Rural
Electrification Act’’ or ‘‘REA’’). Section
601(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act
provides that ‘‘[t]he term ‘rural area’
means any area other than—(i) an area
described in clause (i) or (ii) of Section
1991(a)(13)(A) of this title [section
343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm
and Rural Development Act]; and (ii) a
city, town, or incorporated area that has
a population of greater than 20,000
inhabitants.’’ In turn, the relevant
portion of Section 343(a)(13)(A) of the
Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act explains that the
‘‘terms ‘rural’ and ‘rural area’ mean any
area other than—(i) a city or town that
has a population of greater than 50,000
inhabitants; and (ii) any urbanized area
contiguous and adjacent to a city or
town described in clause (i).’’ Thus, as
defined herein, the term ‘‘rural’’ means
any area that is not:
• A city, town, or incorporated area
that has a population of greater than
20,000 inhabitants
• any urbanized area contiguous and
adjacent to a city or town that has a
population of greater than 50,000
inhabitants.
FirstNet also inquired whether there
should be a lower boundary separate
from the definition of ‘‘rural,’’ such as
‘‘wilderness’’ or ‘‘frontier.’’ Based in
part on the comments received, FirstNet
has reached the following final
conclusion:
(2) FirstNet concludes that a lower
boundary (e.g., ‘‘wilderness,’’ ‘‘frontier’’)
is not necessary to satisfy its rural
coverage requirements under the Act,
and thus FirstNet does not intend to
establish any such boundary.
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 et al., PS Docket
12–94 et al., Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 28
FCC Rcd 2715, 2728–29 ¶ 46 (2013) (Band 14
NPRM) (noting that, ‘‘We do not believe the
Commission should specify rural milestones as a
condition of FirstNet’s license at this time. Rather,
we recognize that at this early stage, the success of
FirstNet requires flexibility with respect to
deployment and planning, including deployment in
rural areas. Moreover, FirstNet has an independent
legal obligation under the Act to develop requests
for proposals with appropriate timetables for
construction, taking into account the time needed
to build out in rural areas, and coverage areas,
including coverage in rural and nonurban areas. In
addition, in light of the Congressional oversight that
will be exercised over FirstNet and its other
transparency, reporting and consultation
obligations, we do not believe it is necessary for the
Commission to set specific benchmarks in this
regard in these rules.’’).
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
63530
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Definition of Rural
Summary: Several commenters agreed
with FirstNet’s proposed definition of
‘‘rural,’’ pointing to the logic in using
the Rural Electrification Act definition.
Many of these commenters noted that
the Rural Electrification Act definition
is widely known and used. Some
specifically agreed that adopting the
Rural Electrification Act definition
makes sense in light of U.S. Department
of Agriculture’s (‘‘USDA’’) use of the
definition in the Rural Broadband
Access Loan and Loan Guarantee
Program.
However, several other commenters
disagreed with FirstNet’s proposed
definition of rural, suggesting that the
Rural Electrification Act definition was
inadequate. Multiple commenters
expressed concerns that the Rural
Electrification Act definition would not
accurately measure or reflect the rural
areas of a State.
Comment #17: One commenter
suggested that the geography of a State
could complicate the Rural
Electrification Act’s application due to
many remote, small but densely
populated communities and areas
without any defined government or
established limits.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges this
comment and recognizes that certain
States may not agree that the Rural
Electrification Act definition (or any
other definition for that matter)
adequately defines rural areas for that
State due to unique geographic or other
circumstances. However, because
FirstNet’s mission is to ensure the
establishment of a nationwide public
safety broadband network, it is
necessary to formulate a single,
objective definition that can be
reasonably applied on a national basis.
By way of example, the Rural
Electrification Act definition of ‘‘rural
area’’ has been adopted by other federal
agencies in determining rural areas on a
national basis, including by the USDA
in its Rural Broadband Access Loan and
Loan Guarantee Program, for application
nationwide.27
It is also important to note that the
primary purpose of the definition of
‘‘rural’’ under the Act is to measure
whether the statutory requirement to
include ‘‘substantial rural coverage
milestones’’ in each phase of network
deployment has been met. The
definition does not determine a state or
territory’s ultimate coverage, which
27 The USDA was designated as the lead federal
agency for rural development by the Rural
Development Policy Act of 1980. See 7 U.S.C.
2204b.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
instead will be determined by the input
obtained through the consultation
process along with FirstNet’s available
resources.28
Comment #18: Some commenters
suggested that FirstNet adopt a modified
or simplified aggregate populationderived definition utilizing various
alternative methodologies. Specifically,
a couple of commenters proposed the
use of the U.S. Census Bureau’s
definition of ‘‘rural’’—i.e., all areas that
are not ‘‘urban areas,’’ which consist of
Urbanized Areas (50,000 or more
people) and Urban Clusters (at least
2,500 and less than 50,000 people).
Response: FirstNet recognizes that
there are alternative definitions of
‘‘rural’’ utilized by other federal and
state government entities and
acknowledges that such definitions
could be applied in the context of the
nationwide public safety broadband
network. Consistent with its analysis in
the First Notice, FirstNet continues to
believe, however, that the Rural
Electrification Act’s definition of ‘‘rural
area’’ is sufficiently precise to allow for
consistent application, as well as widely
known and familiar to rural
telecommunications providers, rural
communities, and other stakeholders
considering its utilization specifically
with respect to rural broadband issues.
In addition, other federal agencies have
adopted the Rural Electrification Act
definition. The USDA, in particular,
utilizes this definition in a similar
context through its implementation of
the Rural Broadband Access Loan and
Loan Guarantee Program, which funds
the costs of construction, improvement,
and acquisition of facilities and
equipment to provide broadband service
to eligible rural areas.
Comment #19: Another commenter
proposed the adoption of the definition
used by USDA’s Rural Business Service,
indicating that rural areas under such
definition are those with 50,000 persons
or less excluding areas adjacent to
communities larger than 50,000 persons.
Response: See the response to
Comment #18 above.
Comment #20: Based on concerns
expressed regarding the omission of
unincorporated areas and the potential
confusion caused by the ‘‘adjacent and
contiguous’’ clause in the definition, an
additional commenter recommended
that ‘‘rural’’ be defined as a city, town,
incorporated area, or unincorporated
area that has a population of 20,000 or
less.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comment. To provide some additional
clarity, we note that in identifying
28 See
PO 00000
47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(2).
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
cities, towns, incorporated areas, and
urbanized areas, FirstNet intends to
leverage the U.S. Census definition of
‘‘places,’’ which is inclusive of towns,
cities, villages, boroughs, and Census
Designated Places (CDPs) (which in turn
are inclusive, at least in part, of
unincorporated areas).29
Comment #21: A few commenters
advocated for a definition based on
population density on a per county
basis, with varying formulations. For
instance, one such commenter proposed
to define rural as a county with a
population density of less than 160
persons per square mile, while another
commenter proffered any county (i)
with a population density of 100 or
fewer inhabitants or (ii) of less than 225
square miles. A couple of other
commenters suggested using a density
of 5/7 to 159 persons per square mile on
a county-by-county basis. Similarly,
another commenter recommended
adopting the definition used by the
School-to-Work Opportunities program
(i.e., a county, block number area in a
nonmetropolitan county, or consortium
of counties or such block number areas
with a population density of 20 or fewer
persons per square mile), reasoning that
the definition is simple, from a program
with a comparable process and
approach (grant eligibility based on an
approved State plan, intergovernmental
cooperation, seed money for initial
planning and development of school-towork transition system), more objective,
and more accurate in identifying rural
areas.
Response: See the response to
Comment #18 above.
Comment #22: Multiple commenters
maintained that instead of adopting the
Rural Electrification Act (or any other
single definition), the definition of
‘‘rural’’ should be determined on a stateby-state basis.
Response: FirstNet recognizes the Act
strikes a balance between establishing a
nationwide network and providing
States an opportunity to make certain
decisions about local implementation.
As noted above, however, the primary
purpose of the definition of ‘‘rural’’ is
for measuring whether ‘‘substantial
rural coverage milestones’’ have been
included in each phase of deployment,
which is required on a national basis.
Thus, as a practical matter, there must
be a single, uniform, and objective
definition of ‘‘rural’’ that can be applied
nationwide to assess whether such
milestones have been met by FirstNet
deployment.
29 See U.S. Census Bureau, Geographic Terms and
Concepts—Place, https://www.census.gov/geo/
reference/gtc/gtc_place.html.
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
4. Existing Infrastructure
Multiple provisions of the Act direct
FirstNet to leverage existing
infrastructure when ‘‘economically
desirable.’’ 30 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(C)
requires FirstNet in issuing RFPs to
‘‘encourag[e] that such requests
leverage, to the maximum extent
economically desirable, existing
commercial wireless infrastructure to
speed deployment of the network.’’
Similarly, 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(3)—in
addressing rural coverage and referring
to FirstNet’s duty and responsibility to
issue RFPs—requires that ‘‘[t]o the
maximum extent economically
desirable, such proposals shall include
partnerships with existing commercial
mobile providers to utilize cost-effective
opportunities to speed deployments in
rural areas.’’
Finally, 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(3) requires
that in carrying out its various
requirements related to the deployment
and operation of the NPSBN, ‘‘the First
Responder Network Authority shall
enter into agreements to utilize, to the
maximum extent economically
desirable, existing (A) commercial or
other communications infrastructure;
and (B) Federal, State, tribal, or local
infrastructure.’’ The Act, however, does
not define or establish any criteria for
determining economic desirability.
FirstNet reaches the following
conclusions regarding its obligations to
leverage existing infrastructure under 47
U.S.C. 1426:
1. FirstNet interprets that 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(B) is intended to require
FirstNet to encourage, through its
requests, that responsive proposals
leverage existing infrastructure in
accordance with the provision.
2. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(3) as requiring FirstNet to
include in its RFPs that such proposals
leverage partnerships with commercial
mobile providers where economically
desirable.
3. FirstNet concludes that factors
other than, or in addition to, cost may
be utilized in assessing whether existing
infrastructure is ‘‘economically
desirable,’’ including:
a. Infrastructure type/characteristics
b. security (physical, network, cyber,
etc.)
c. suitability/viability (ability to
readily use, upgrade, and maintain)
d. readiness for reuse (e.g., already in
use for wireless communications)
e. scope of use (e.g., range of coverage)
f. availability/accessibility (time/
obstacles to acquiring access/use)
30 See
47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(C), (b)(3), (c)(3).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
g. any use restrictions (e.g.,
prohibitions/limitations on commercial
use)
h. relationships with infrastructure
owners/managers (e.g., ease/difficulty in
working with owners/managers)
i. available alternatives in the area
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Leveraging Existing Infrastructure
and Economic Desirability
Summary: All commenters on the
subject agreed with FirstNet’s above
interpretations of 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(C) and (b)(3) that the
provisions are intended to require
FirstNet to encourage, through its RFPs,
that such responsive proposals leverage
existing infrastructure and partnerships
where economically desirable. Many of
these commenters emphasized the
importance of utilizing the RFP process
to leverage existing assets and
partnerships to lower costs and increase
speed to market.
Comment #23: Some commenters
provided input regarding the factors to
be considered in making an economic
desirability determination, focusing
largely on cost.
Response: Although FirstNet agrees
that cost is a major factor in assessing
economic desirability, we do not believe
it is the sole consideration. There are
several other factors, as noted above,
that are critical to making an informed
determination as to whether the
infrastructure should be leveraged. For
instance, it is essential to understand
the infrastructure’s suitability for
FirstNet’s purposes, as well as its
availability and readiness for use.
Likewise, FirstNet’s financial
sustainability model is based in large
part on its ability to lease excess
spectrum capacity to commercial
entities for secondary use, and thus
consideration of any limitations on
commercial use of the infrastructure is
imperative.
Comment #24: A couple of
commenters suggested other factors
besides cost in making an economic
desirability determination of whether to
leverage infrastructure. One such
commenter recommended the
consideration of geography and breadth
of coverage in addition to cost. Another
commenter urged that the requirements
of public safety should be considered as
a factor.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges
these recommendations and believes
they are encompassed within FirstNet’s
final conclusion above regarding
economic desirability factors.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63531
D. Fees
FirstNet is required by the Act to be
a self-funding entity and has been
authorized to assess and collect certain
fees for use of the network.31
Specifically, FirstNet has been
authorized to assess and collect a (1)
network user fee; (2) lease fee related to
network capacity (also known as
covered leasing agreement); (3) lease
fees related to network equipment and
infrastructure; and (4) a fee for State use
of elements of the core network.32 In
accordance with these provisions,
FirstNet makes the following
conclusions related to both the
assessment and collection of fees
authorized under the Act.
General
(1) FirstNet interprets each of the fees
authorized by the Act, including user or
subscription fees authorized by 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(1), covered leasing
agreement fees authorized by 47 U.S.C.
1428 (a)(2), lease fees related to network
equipment and infrastructure
authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3), and
the fee for State use of elements of the
core network authorized by 47 U.S.C.
1442(f), as distinct and separate from
each other and may be assessed
individually or cumulatively, as
applicable.
Network User Fees
(2) FirstNet concludes it may charge
a user or subscription fee under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) to any user that seeks
access to or use of the nationwide
public safety broadband network.
State Core Network User Fees
(3) FirstNet concludes that the fees
assessed on States assuming RAN
responsibilities for use of the core
network authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1442(f)
are distinct from and can be assessed in
addition to any other fees authorized
under the Act.
Lease Fees Related to Network Capacity
and Covered Leasing Agreements
(4) FirstNet concludes that a covered
leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2) does not require a secondary
user to ‘‘construct, manage, and
operate’’ the entire FirstNet network,
either from a coverage perspective or
exclusively within a specific location.
(5) FirstNet concludes that multiple
covered leasing agreement lessees could
coexist and be permitted access to
excess network capacity in a particular
geographic area.
31 See
32 47
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
47 U.S.C. 1428, 1442(f); 1426(b)(4)(C).
U.S.C. 1428, 1442(f).
20OCN1
63532
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
(6) FirstNet interprets that a covered
leasing agreement lessee satisfies the
definition under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) so
long as the lessee does more than a
nominal amount of constructing,
managing, or operating the network.
(7) FirstNet concludes that an entity
entering into a covered leasing
agreement under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) is
not required to perform all three
functions of constructing, managing,
and operating a portion of the network,
so long as one of the three is performed
as part of the covered leasing agreement.
(8) FirstNet interprets the reference to
‘‘network capacity’’ in the definition of
covered leasing agreement under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(i) as a generic
statement referring to the combination
of spectrum and network elements, as
defined by the Act, and includes the
core network as well as the radio access
network of either FirstNet alone or that
of the secondary user under a covered
leasing agreement whereby the core and
radio access network are used for
serving both FirstNet public safety
entities and the secondary user’s
commercial customers.
(9) FirstNet interprets the term
‘‘secondary basis’’ under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(i) to mean that network
capacity will be available to the
secondary user unless it is needed for
public safety entities as defined in the
Act.
(10) FirstNet interprets the phrase
‘‘spectrum allocated to such entity’’
found in 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3)(B)(ii) as
allowing all or a portion of the spectrum
licensed to FirstNet by the FCC under
call sign ‘‘WQQE234’’ to be allocated for
use on a secondary basis under a
covered leasing agreement.
(11) FirstNet concludes the reference
to ‘‘dark fiber’’ in 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) cannot literally be
interpreted as such, and the reference
should be interpreted to allow the
covered leasing agreement lessee to
transport such traffic on otherwise
previously dark fiber facilities.
Network Equipment and Infrastructure
Fee
(12) FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(3) as being limited to the
imposition of a fee for the use of static
or isolated equipment or infrastructure,
such as antennas or towers, rather than
for use of FirstNet spectrum or access to
network capacity.
(13) FirstNet interprets the phrase
‘‘constructed or otherwise owned by
[FirstNet]’’ under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as
meaning that FirstNet ordered or
required the construction of such
equipment or infrastructure, paid for
such construction, simply owns such
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
equipment, or does not own but,
through a contract has rights to sublease
access to, or use of, such equipment or
infrastructure.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments
on Fees
Summary: The majority of
commenters agreed with the various
interpretations related to the assessment
and collection of fees by FirstNet. The
commenters generally understood the
authority the Act gives FirstNet to assess
and collect fees and the importance of
such fees as a key funding resource
necessary to build, operate, and
maintain the NPSBN. However, a few
commenters, as described and
responded to below, either disagreed
with certain interpretations or provided
general comments relating to the
assessment and collection of the various
fees under the Act.
Comment #25: Two commenters
agreed that FirstNet is authorized to
assess a fee for use of the core network,
but suggested that States assuming RAN
deployment responsibilities should only
pay the costs associated with using the
core network and spectrum lease; they
should not have to pay a network user
or subscription fee, and that FirstNet is
not allowed to, or should not, impose
‘user’ fees on opt-out States in a
cumulative manner as interpreted by
FirstNet.
Response: FirstNet disagrees and
believes the Act authorizes FirstNet to
assess a user or subscription fee to each
entity, including a State choosing to
deploy its own radio access network,
that seeks access to or use of the
network. Specifically, the Act
authorizes FirstNet to collect a ‘‘user or
subscription fee from each entity,
including any public safety entity or
secondary user, that seeks access to or
use of the [NPSBN].’’ 33 Consequently, a
plain reading of this provision does not
appear to provide any exclusionary
language that would limit which entities
may be charged a fee for access to or use
of the network. Rather, as discussed in
the First Notice, the use of the term
‘‘including’’ rather than ‘‘consisting’’
when describing the scope of entities
that may be charged a network user fee
indicates that this group is not limited
to only public safety entities or
secondary users, but would include
other entities such as a State. Thus,
FirstNet believes the plain language of
the Act supports the conclusion that
FirstNet may charge a user or
subscription fee to any eligible user who
seeks access to or use of the nationwide
public safety broadband network,
33 47
PO 00000
U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) (emphasis added).
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
including, as appropriate, a State
assuming responsibilities for radio
access network deployment.
Comment #26: One commenter
suggested that all public safety user fees
should include nationwide coverage,
and should be for unlimited use of the
NPSBN. For example, a flat fee for
unlimited usage (and no roaming fees)
should be charged within each State,
similar to today’s carrier billing model.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this notice. However,
FirstNet acknowledges the comment
and will consider the recommendation
as it continues planning for the
deployment of the NPSBN.
Comment #27: One commenter
suggested that while the Act is
unambiguous on allowing FirstNet to
assess a fee to States assuming RAN
responsibilities for use of the core
network, it is important that this fee not
be set so high so as to discourage States
from opting out of the NPSBN. The
commenter further noted that the ability
of States to construct their own RAN is
clearly permissive under the Act and, in
fact, could enable significant growth
and adoption of the NPSBN as long as
the user fees for opt-out states are
reasonable and contemplate the budgets
of State and local public safety entities.
Response: This comment is outside
the scope of this notice. However,
FirstNet acknowledges the comment
and will consider the recommendation
as it continues planning for the
deployment of the NPSBN.
Comment #28: Two commenters
disagreed that ‘‘all’’ of the FirstNet Band
14 spectrum can be allocated for
secondary use under a covered leasing
agreement.
Response: FirstNet believes its
interpretation that the Act allows all or
part of the spectrum licensed to FirstNet
by the FCC under call sign ‘‘WQQE234’’
to be allocated for secondary use is
supported by language of the Act.
FirstNet is the entity created by the Act
to ensure the establishment of the
NPSBN, and as such has a duty to
ensure the efficient use of the funding
resources available to fulfill this duty,
including the ability to permit access to
spectrum capacity on a secondary basis.
To best utilize these funding resources,
the Act authorizes FirstNet to enter into
covered leasing agreements which
permit an entity entering into such an
agreement to have access to, or use of,
network capacity on a secondary basis
for non-public safety services. The Act,
as analyzed in the First Notice, does not
provide any cap or limitation on how
much of the network capacity may be
allocated on a secondary basis. Thus,
FirstNet believes the Act provides it
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 202 / Tuesday, October 20, 2015 / Notices
flexibility to determine how best to
utilize network capacity as a funding
resource to ensure both the
establishment and self-sustainability of
the network. Despite this flexibility,
however, it is important to note that
public safety entities will always have
priority use of the NPSBN over any nonpublic safety user that gains access to,
or use of, the network on a secondary
basis.
Comment #29: One commenter
suggested that the States should
determine how much capacity/spectrum
is made available within its borders
under a covered leasing agreement—
rather than FirstNet making the
determination.
Response: FirstNet is the entity
created by the Act to ensure the
establishment of the NPSBN and is also
the sole licensee of the 700 MHz D block
spectrum and the existing public safety
broadband spectrum.34 Thus, FirstNet is
the sole entity responsible for
determining how to allocate the
spectrum under a covered leasing
agreement.
Comment #30: One commenter
cautioned FirstNet to ensure there is not
an undue expectation by the covered
leasing agreement lessee that its lease of
the spectrum supersedes public safety’s
access to, and use of, that spectrum as
a priority in all cases, and at all times.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the
comment and reiterates that its primary
mission is to ensure the establishment
of a nationwide, interoperable network
for public safety. Accordingly, public
safety will always have priority use of
the NPSBN over any non-public safety
user that gains access to, or use of, the
network on a secondary basis through a
covered leasing agreement.
Comment #31: One commenter
recommended that FirstNet interpret 47
U.S.C. § 1428(a)(3) to only apply to the
RAN hardware in States that choose to
participate in the NPSBN as proposed
by FirstNet.
Response: FirstNet interprets the
phrase ‘‘constructed or otherwise owned
by [FirstNet]’’ under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(3) as meaning that FirstNet
ordered or required the construction of
such equipment or infrastructure, paid
for the construction, owns the
equipment, or does not own the
equipment, but, through a contract, has
the right to sublease the equipment or
infrastructure. Thus, unless the RAN
hardware in any State falls within the
criteria above, FirstNet would not have
the authority to assess and collect a fee
for use of such infrastructure or
equipment.
34 47
U.S.C. 1421, 1422.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Oct 19, 2015
Jkt 238001
Dated: October 15, 2015.
Jason Karp,
Chief Counsel (Acting), First Responder
Network Authority.
Dated: October 14, 2015.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–26621 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am]
63533
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
[FR Doc. 2015–26632 Filed 10–19–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–TL–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[S–134–2015]
[B–67–2015]
Foreign-Trade Zone 142—Salem/
Millville, New Jersey; Application for
Subzone; Nine West Holdings, Inc.;
West Deptford, New Jersey
Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 183—Austin,
Texas; Notification of Proposed
Production Activity; Flextronics
America, LLC (Automatic Data
Processing Machines); Austin, Texas
An application has been submitted to
the Foreign-Trade Zones (FTZ) Board by
the South Jersey Port Corporation,
grantee of FTZ 142, requesting subzone
status for the facilities of Nine West
Holdings, Inc., located in West
Deptford, New Jersey. The application
was submitted pursuant to the
provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones
Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u),
and the regulations of the FTZ Board (15
CFR part 400). It was formally docketed
on October 14, 2015.
The proposed subzone would consist
of the following sites: Site 1 (27.18
acres) 1245 Forest Parkway West, West
Deptford; and, Site 2 (33.28 acres) 1250
Parkway West, West Deptford. The
proposed subzone would be subject to
the existing activation limit of FTZ 142.
No authorization for production activity
has been requested at this time.
In accordance with the FTZ Board’s
regulations, Kathleen Boyce of the FTZ
Staff is designated examiner to review
the application and make
recommendations to the Executive
Secretary.
Public comment is invited from
interested parties. Submissions shall be
addressed to the FTZ Board’s Executive
Secretary at the address below. The
closing period for their receipt is
November 30, 2015. Rebuttal comments
in response to material submitted
during the foregoing period may be
submitted during the subsequent 15-day
period to December 14, 2015.
A copy of the application will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Executive Secretary,
Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room
21013, U.S. Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230–0002, and in the
‘‘Reading Room’’ section of the FTZ
Board’s Web site, which is accessible
via www.trade.gov/ftz.
For further information, contact
Kathleen Boyce at Kathleen.Boyce@
trade.gov or (202) 482–1346.
Flextronics America, LLC
(Flextronics) submitted a notification of
proposed production activity to the FTZ
Board for its facility in Austin, Texas
within Subzone 183C. The notification
conforming to the requirements of the
regulations of the FTZ Board (15 CFR
400.22) was received on October 9,
2015.
Flextronics already has authority to
produce automatic data processing
machines within Subzone 183C. The
current request would add finished
products and foreign status materials/
components to the scope of authority.
Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b),
additional FTZ authority would be
limited to the specific foreign-status
materials/components and specific
finished products described in the
submitted notification (as described
below) and subsequently authorized by
the FTZ Board.
Production under FTZ procedures
could exempt Flextronics from customs
duty payments on the foreign status
materials/components used in export
production. On its domestic sales,
Flextronics would be able to choose the
duty rates during customs entry
procedures that apply to: Video card
subassemblies; CPU and video card
connector subassemblies; external
power and USB port card
subassemblies; main controller board
subassemblies; and, internal power
supply subassemblies (duty-free) for the
foreign status materials/components
noted below and in the existing scope
of authority. Customs duties also could
possibly be deferred or reduced on
foreign status production equipment.
The materials/components sourced
from abroad include: Copper alloy
screws; and, lithium batteries (duty rate
ranges from 3.0 to 3.4%).
Public comment is invited from
interested parties. Submissions shall be
addressed to the Board’s Executive
Secretary at the address below. The
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\20OCN1.SGM
20OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 202 (Tuesday, October 20, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63523-63533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26621]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
[Docket Number: 140821696-5908-04]
RIN 0660-XC012
First Responder Network Authority; Final Interpretations of Parts
of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
AGENCY: First Responder Network Authority, National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice; final interpretations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The First Responder Network Authority (``FirstNet'') publishes
this Notice to issue final interpretations of its enabling legislation
that will inform, among other things, forthcoming requests for
proposals, interpretive rules, and network policies. The purpose of
this Notice is to provide stakeholders FirstNet's interpretations on
many of the key preliminary interpretations presented in the proposed
interpretations published on September 24, 2014.
DATES: Effective October 20, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eli Veenendaal, First Responder
Network Authority, National Telecommunications and Information
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 12201 Sunrise Valley
Drive, M/S 243, Reston, VA 20192; 703-648-4167; or
elijah.veenendaal@firstnet.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction and Background
The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L.
112-96, Title VI, 126 Stat. 256 (codified at 47 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.))
(the ``Act'') established the First Responder Network Authority
(``FirstNet'') as an independent authority within the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (``NTIA''). The Act
establishes FirstNet's duty and responsibility to take all actions
necessary to ensure the building, deployment, and operation of a
nationwide public safety broadband network (``NPSBN'').\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of FirstNet's initial steps in carrying out this responsibility
under the Act is the issuance of open, transparent, and competitive
requests for proposals (``RFPs'') for the purposes of building,
operating, and maintaining the network. We have sought--and will
continue to seek--public comments on many technical and economic
aspects of these RFPs through traditional procurement processes,
including requests for information (``RFIs'') and potential draft RFPs
and Special Notices, prior to issuance of RFPs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The pronouns ``we'' or ``our'' throughout this Notice refer
to ``FirstNet'' alone and not FirstNet, NTIA, and the U.S.
Department of Commerce as a collective group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a newly created entity, however, we are also confronted with
many complex legal issues of first impression under the Act that will
have a material impact on the RFPs, responsive proposals, and our
operations going forward. Generally, the Administrative Procedure Act
(``APA'') \3\ provides the basic framework of administrative law
governing agency action, including the procedural steps that must
precede the effective promulgation, amendment, or repeal of a rule by a
federal agency.\4\ However, 47 U.S.C. 1426(d)(2) provides that any
action taken or decision made by FirstNet is exempt from the
requirements of the APA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See 5 U.S.C. 551-59, 701-06, 1305, 3105, 3344, 5372, 7521.
\4\ See 5 U.S.C. 551-559. The APA defines a ``rule'' as ``the
whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular
applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or
prescribe law or policy or describing the organization, procedure,
or practice requirements of an agency and includes the approval or
prescription for the future of rates, wages, corporate or financial
structures or reorganizations thereof, prices, facilities,
appliances, services or allowances therefor or of valuations, costs,
or accounting, or practices bearing on any of the foregoing.'' 5
U.S.C. 551(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevertheless, although exempted from these procedural requirements,
on September 24, 2014, FirstNet published a public notice entitled
``Proposed Interpretations of Parts of the Middle Class Tax Relief and
Job Creation Act of 2012'' (hereinafter ``the First Notice''),\5\
seeking public comments on preliminary interpretations, as well as
technical and economic issues, on certain foundational legal issues to
help guide our efforts in achieving our mission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 79 FR 57058 (September 24, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this Notice is to provide stakeholders notice of the
final legal interpretations on many of the key preliminary
interpretations presented in the First Notice. Additional background
and rationale for this action and explanations of FirstNet's
interpretations were included in the First Notice and are not repeated
herein. The section immediately below labeled ``Final Interpretations''
summarizes FirstNet's final interpretations with respect to the First
Notice. Thereafter, the section labeled ``Response to Comments''
summarizes the comments
[[Page 63524]]
received on the preliminary interpretations contained in the First
Notice and provides FirstNet's responses to such comments, including
further explanations and any changes to FirstNet's interpretations.
II. Final Interpretations
A. FirstNet Network
Final Definitions of Core Network and Radio Access Network
1. FirstNet defines the core network in accordance with 47 U.S.C.
1422(b) of the Act, relevant sections of the Interoperability Board
Report, and commercial standards, as including, without limitation, the
standard Evolved Packet Core elements under the 3rd Generation
Partnership Project (``3GPP'') standards (including the Serving and
Packet Data Network Gateways, Mobility Management Entity, Home
Subscriber Server, and the Policy and Charging Rules Function), device
services, location services, billing functions, and all other network
elements and functions other than the radio access network.
2. FirstNet defines the radio access network in accordance with 47
U.S.C. 1422(b) of the Act, commercial standards, and the relevant
sections of the Interoperability Board Report, as consisting of the
standard E-UTRAN elements (e.g., the eNodeB) and including, but not
limited to, backhaul to FirstNet designated consolidation points.
3. FirstNet concludes that a State choosing to conduct its own
deployment of a radio access network under 47 U.S.C. 1442(e) must use
the FirstNet core network to provide public safety services within the
State.
B. Users
Network Users
4. FirstNet defines a ``secondary user'' as any user that seeks
access to or use of the NPSBN for non-public safety services.
Prohibition on Providing Commercial Services to Consumers
5. The definition of ``consumers'' as used in 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not include:
a. any public safety entity as defined in the Act;
b. States when seeking access to or use of the core network,
equipment, or infrastructure; or
c. entities when seeking access to or use of equipment or
infrastructure.
6. The language of the Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 prohibiting
FirstNet from directly serving ``consumers'' does not limit potential
types of public safety entities that may use or access the NPSBN for
commercial telecommunications or information services.
7. The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not prohibit or act as a limit
on secondary users with which FirstNet may enter into a covered leasing
agreement.
8. The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not limit the pool of
secondary users that may gain access to or use of the network on a
secondary basis.
C. Requests for Proposals
Requests for Proposals Process
9. FirstNet, to the extent it utilizes the FAR, concludes that
complying with the FAR satisfies the open, transparent, and competitive
requirements of 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B).
Minimum Technical Requirements
10. FirstNet concludes that it may make non-material changes or
additions/subtractions to the minimal technical requirements developed
by the Interoperability Board, including as necessary to accommodate
advancements in technology as required by the Act.
Final Definition of ``Rural''
11. FirstNet defines ``rural,'' for the purposes of the Act, as
having the same meaning as ``rural area'' in Section 601(b)(3) of the
Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (``Rural Electrification
Act''). Section 601(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act provides
that ``[t]he term `rural area' means any area other than--(i) an area
described in clause (i) or (ii) of Section 1991(a)(13)(A) of this title
[section 343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act]; and (ii) a city, town, or incorporated area that has a population
of greater than 20,000 inhabitants.'' In turn, the relevant portion of
Section 343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act explains that the ``terms `rural' and `rural area' mean any area
other than--(i) a city or town that has a population of greater than
50,000 inhabitants; and (ii) any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent
to a city or town described in clause (i).'' Thus, as defined herein,
the term ``rural'' means any area that is not:
A city, town, or incorporated area that has a population
of greater than 20,000 inhabitants
any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or
town that has a population of greater than 50,000 inhabitants
12. FirstNet concludes that a lower boundary (e.g., ``wilderness,''
``frontier'') is not necessary to satisfy its rural coverage
requirements under the Act, and thus FirstNet does not intend to
establish any such boundary.
Existing Infrastructure
13. FirstNet interprets that 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B) is intended to
require FirstNet to encourage, through its requests, that responsive
proposals leverage existing infrastructure in accordance with the
provision.
14. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(3) as requiring FirstNet
to include in its RFPs that such proposals leverage partnerships with
commercial mobile providers where economically desirable.
15. FirstNet concludes that factors other than, or in addition to,
cost may be utilized in assessing whether existing infrastructure is
``economically desirable,'' including:
a. infrastructure type/characteristics
b. security (physical, network, cyber, etc.)
c. suitability/viability (ability to readily use, upgrade, and
maintain)
d. readiness for reuse (e.g., already in use for wireless
communications)
e. scope of use (e.g., range of coverage)
f. availability/accessibility (time/obstacles to acquiring access/
use)
g. any use restrictions (e.g., prohibitions/limitations on
commercial use)
h. relationships with infrastructure owners/managers (e.g., ease/
difficulty in working with owners/managers)
i. available alternatives in the area
D. Fees
General
16. FirstNet interprets each of the fees authorized by the Act,
including user or subscription fees authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1),
covered leasing agreement fees authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2),
lease fees related to network equipment and infrastructure authorized
by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3), and the fee for State use of elements of the
core network authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1442(f), as distinct and separate
from each other and may be assessed individually or cumulatively, as
applicable.
Network User Fees
17. FirstNet concludes it may charge a user or subscription fee
under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) to any user that seeks access to or use of
the NPSBN.
State Core Network User Fees
18. FirstNet concludes that the fees assessed on States assuming
RAN responsibilities for use of the core network authorized by 47
U.S.C. 1442(f)
[[Page 63525]]
are distinct from and can be assessed in addition to any other fees
authorized under the Act.
Lease Fees Related to Network Capacity and Covered Leasing Agreements
19. FirstNet concludes that a covered leasing agreement under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) does not require a secondary user to ``construct,
manage, and operate'' the entire FirstNet network, either from a
coverage perspective or exclusively within a specific location.
20. FirstNet concludes that multiple covered leasing agreement
lessees could coexist and be permitted access to excess network
capacity in a particular geographic area.
21. FirstNet interprets that a covered leasing agreement lessee
satisfies the definition under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) so long as the
lessee does more than a nominal amount of constructing, managing, or
operating the network.
22. FirstNet concludes that an entity entering into a covered
leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) is not required to perform
all three functions of constructing, managing, and operating a portion
of the network, so long as one of the three is performed as part of the
covered leasing agreement.
23. FirstNet interprets the reference to ``network capacity'' in
the definition of covered leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(i) as a generic statement referring to the combination of
spectrum and network elements, as defined by the Act, and including the
core network as well as the radio access network of either FirstNet
alone or that of the secondary user under a covered leasing agreement,
whereby the core and radio access network are used for serving both
FirstNet public safety entities and the secondary user's commercial
customers.
24. FirstNet interprets the term ``secondary basis'' under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(i) to mean that network capacity will be available
to the secondary user unless it is needed for public safety entities as
defined in the Act.
25. FirstNet interprets the phrase ``spectrum allocated to such
entity'' found in 47 U.S. Sec. 1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) as allowing all or a
portion of the spectrum licensed to FirstNet by the Federal
Communications Commission (``FCC'') under call sign ``WQQE234'' to be
allocated for use on a secondary basis under a covered leasing
agreement.
26. FirstNet concludes that the reference to ``dark fiber'' in 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) cannot literally be interpreted as such, and
the reference should be interpreted to allow the covered leasing
agreement lessee to transport such traffic on otherwise previously dark
fiber facilities.
Network Equipment and Infrastructure Fee
27. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as being limited to
the imposition of a fee for the use of static or isolated equipment or
infrastructure, such as antennas or towers, rather than for use of
FirstNet spectrum or access to network capacity.
28. FirstNet interprets the phrase ``constructed or otherwise owned
by [FirstNet]'' under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as meaning that FirstNet
ordered or required the construction of such equipment or
infrastructure, paid for such construction, simply owns such equipment,
or does not own but, through a contract has rights to sublease access
to, or use of, such equipment or infrastructure.
III. Response to Comments
FirstNet received 63 written comments to the First Notice from
various stakeholders, including States, tribes, public safety
organizations, commercial carriers, equipment vendors, utilities, and
various associations. Comments on the First Notice included a large
number of identical or similar written comments as well as oral
statements made during meetings with FirstNet. FirstNet has carefully
considered each of the comments submitted. It has grouped and
summarized the comments according to common themes and has responded
accordingly. All written comments can be found at www.regulations.gov.
A. FirstNet Network
1. Final Definitions of Core Network and Radio Access Network
The Act requires FirstNet to ``ensure the establishment of a
nationwide, interoperable public safety broadband network'' that is
``based on a single national network architecture.'' \6\ This national
network architecture must be capable of evolving with technological
advancements and initially consists of two primary network components:
A core network and a radio access network.\7\ The Act defines the
``core network'' as consisting of ``the national and regional data
centers, and other elements and functions that may be distributed
geographically . . . and provid[ing] connectivity between (i) the radio
access network; and (ii) the public Internet or public switched
network, or both . . . .'' \8\ Comparably, the Act defines the ``radio
access network'' as consisting of ``all cell site equipment, antennas,
and backhaul equipment . . . that are required to enable wireless
communications with devices using the public safety broadband spectrum
. . . .'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 47 U.S.C. 1422.
\7\ 47 U.S.C. 1422(b).
\8\ 47 U.S.C. 1422(b)(1).
\9\ 47 U.S.C. 1422(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the First Notice, FirstNet made preliminary interpretations
further describing the scope of the definitions of the core network and
RAN. Although the vast majority of commenters agreed with the
interpretations, some expressed concerns that many of the key elements
of the network were either not referenced or did not meet the criteria
described in the proposed definitions. In response to these comments,
FirstNet has slightly modified its preliminary interpretation of the
``core network'' to include the Mobility Management Entity within the
Evolved Packet Core elements under the 3GPP standards and its
preliminary interpretation of ``radio access network'' to include
backhaul to FirstNet designated consolidation points. Accordingly,
FirstNet makes the following final interpretations related to the
definitions of the core network and radio access network under the Act.
(1) FirstNet defines the core network in accordance with 47 U.S.C.
1422(b) of the Act, relevant sections of the Interoperability Board
Report, and commercial standards, as including, without limitation, the
standard Evolved Packet Core elements under the 3GPP standards
(including the Serving and Packet Data Network Gateways, Mobility
Management Entity, Home Subscriber Server, and the Policy and Charging
Rules Function), device services, location services, billing functions,
and all other network elements and functions other than the radio
access network.
(2) FirstNet defines the radio access network in accordance with 47
U.S.C. 1422(b) of the Act, commercial standards, and the relevant
sections of the Interoperability Board Report, as consisting of the
standard E-UTRAN elements (e.g., the eNodeB) and including, but not
limited to, backhaul to FirstNet designated consolidation points.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Definition of Core Network and
Radio Access Network
Summary: The majority of commenters agreed with FirstNet's proposed
definitions of ``core network'' and ``radio access network'' and
supported FirstNet considering
[[Page 63526]]
commercial standards, as well as the relevant sections of the
Interoperability Board Report and relevant 3GPP standards, to provide
further clarity around the elements and functions of the core network
and radio access network.
Comment #1: A few commenters suggested that FirstNet simply use the
definitions of the terms ``core network'' and ``radio access network''
that are provided in the statute. For example, one commenter
recommended FirstNet use its wide discretion to consider other
interpretations as it carries out its responsibilities to implement
these network components and not use the Interoperability Board Report
to help derive any legal interpretations of the Act.
Response: FirstNet agrees that the Act provides it with broad
discretion to carry out its mission. In view of that discretion,
FirstNet has determined that it is important to provide additional
clarity around certain delineation points between the core network and
RAN as defined in the Act. These delineation points become especially
important in light of the provisions of 47 U.S.C. 1442(e) that allow a
State the opportunity, under certain conditions, to conduct the
deployment of a RAN within that State and require that State to pay a
fee for use of elements of the core network. In response to the
specific example, the Act commissioned the development of the
Interoperability Board Report to provide recommended technical
requirements to ensure a nationwide level of interoperability for the
NPSBN.\10\ Under the Act, these recommendations are intended to be used
by FirstNet to help develop and maintain the NPSBN.\11\ Moreover, a
State choosing to assume RAN responsibilities must demonstrate
compliance with the minimum technical interoperability requirements of
the Interoperability Board Report in order to receive approval of an
alternative RAN plan.\12\ Based on these provisions, FirstNet believes
that it is important to give credence to the relevant sections of the
Interoperability Board Report that relate to the definitions of the
core network and RAN.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 47 U.S.C. 1423(c).
\11\ See id.
\12\ See 47 U.S.C. 1442(e)(3)(C)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #2: One commenter suggested the proposed definition of the
core network is too expansive and recommended that FirstNet remove the
language ``device services'' and ``all other network elements and
functions other than the radio access network'' from its proposed
definition of the core network.
Response: FirstNet disagrees that the proposed definition of core
network is too expansive and believes its proposed interpretation,
including the language ``device services'' and ``all other network
elements and functions other than the radio access network,'' is
consistent with both the intent of the Act as well as commercially
accepted standards for elements generally comprising a core network.
Additionally, FirstNet's inclusion of these terms and phrases in its
interpretation assist in providing clarity relating to the definitions
of core network and RAN that are critical to establishing the NPSBN and
providing the scope of responsibility a State will assume should it
decide to conduct its own RAN deployment. In delivering a plan to a
Governor for a determination of whether to assume responsibilities for
RAN construction, FirstNet must delineate between what elements of the
network in the proposed plan comprise the core network versus the
elements that comprise the RAN. Accordingly, an understanding of the
elements that make up the core network and RAN are critical for a
Governor to make an effective determination about whether the State
should have FirstNet conduct the RAN deployment or seek to conduct its
own RAN deployment.
Comment #3: One commenter expressed concern that the proposed
definitions conflate issues of policy and technology and suggested
FirstNet avoid rigid definitions of ``core network'' or ``radio access
network'' and align their technical and business development efforts
with standards that evolve with the long term evolution (``LTE'')
broadband network.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the comment, but believes its
proposed definitions of core network and RAN provide additional
certainty that is necessary in order to build, operate, and maintain
the NPSBN, while, at the same time, preserving, as contemplated by the
Act, the necessary flexibility to take into account new and evolving
technological advancements. For example, FirstNet's interpretations of
both the core network and RAN are inclusive of the language of 47
U.S.C. 1422(b) that specifically states the national architecture must
``evolve[] with technological advancements and initially consists of''
the stated core network and RAN components.\13\ The use of the term
``initially'' and the phrase ``evolve with technological advancements''
in 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) indicate that Congress understood that the
definitions of the core network and RAN could not be static. Rather,
the definitions of such terms would need to be modified throughout the
life of the network in order to help ensure that public safety would
have a network capable of supporting and providing access to new and
evolving technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #4: Several commenters, although not disagreeing with the
proposed definitions, expressed concerns that many of the key elements
of the network were either not referenced or did not meet the criteria
described in the proposed core network and radio access network
definitions. To illustrate this point, multiple commenters reasoned
that backhaul transport connecting the radio access network with the
core network or the backhaul connecting the core network with
geographically distributed databases and application servers, which are
critical components of network integration, need to be addressed in the
definitions.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the comments and has modified its
interpretation of the ``core network'' to include the Mobility
Management Entity within the Evolved Packet Core elements under the
3GPP standards and its interpretation of ``radio access network'' to
include backhaul to FirstNet designated consolidation points. To the
extent additional clarity is necessary to provide, for example, more
specific demarcation points or the services and facilities that will be
provided by the various network elements, FirstNet intends to address
such matters, as appropriate, in the development of relevant network
policies.
2. State Radio Access Networks Must Use the FirstNet Core Network
As discussed above, the Act charges FirstNet with the duty to
``ensure the establishment of a nationwide, interoperable public safety
broadband network . . . based on a single, national network
architecture'' and defines the architecture of the network as initially
consisting of a ``core network'' and a ``radio access network.'' \14\
In addition, FirstNet is required to take all actions necessary to
ensure the building, deployment, and operation of the network,
including issuing RFPs for the purposes of building, operating, and
maintaining the network.\15\ Thus, overall, FirstNet is responsible for
ensuring the core network and radio access network--subject to a
State's
[[Page 63527]]
ability to assume RAN responsibilities under 47 U.S.C. 1442--is built,
deployed, and operated throughout the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 47 U.S.C. 1422.
\15\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As analyzed in the First Notice, the Act, although providing each
State an opportunity to choose to conduct its own deployment of a RAN
in such State, does not provide for State deployment of a core network
separate from the core network that FirstNet is charged with
deploying.\16\ Rather, according to the express language of the Act,
FirstNet, is the only entity responsible for constructing a core
network. This interpretation is further supported by the mandate that
States that choose to build their own RAN must pay any user fees
associated with such State's use of ``the core network.'' \17\ Thus,
based on the language of and overall interoperability goals of the Act,
FirstNet makes the following conclusion related to State use of the
core network that is constructed, operated, and maintained by FirstNet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 47 U.S.C. 1422, 1426.
\17\ 47 U.S.C. 1442(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FirstNet concludes that a State choosing to conduct its own
deployment of a radio access network under 47 U.S.C. 1442(e) must use
the FirstNet core network to provide public safety services within the
State.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments to Conclusions That State Radio
Access Networks Must Use the FirstNet Core Network
Summary: The majority of commenters agreed with FirstNet's proposed
interpretation that a State choosing to conduct its own deployment of a
radio access network must use the FirstNet core network to provide
services to public safety entities.
Comment #5: One commenter did not support FirstNet's preliminary
conclusion, asserting that direct connectivity between the core network
and the RAN is excluded from FirstNet's definitions and that such
network element should be explicitly identified and included either in
the definition of core network or radio access network.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the comment and notes that, as
detailed above, it has clarified the definition of RAN to include
backhaul to FirstNet consolidation points.
Comment #6: One commenter agreed with the interpretation, but
suggested FirstNet should remain open to the concept of a local ``back-
up'' core network, particularly for States or localities with a high
population density, with this ``back-up'' core network being designed
and purposed to protect against a total loss of connectivity to the
FirstNet nationwide core network.
Response: The Act requires FirstNet to establish a network with
adequate hardening, security, reliability, and resiliency requirements,
including by addressing special considerations for areas and regions
with unique homeland security or national security needs.\18\
Accordingly, FirstNet intends to construct the core network taking into
account these considerations and does not anticipate the need to
utilize a local ``back-up'' core network to serve public safety, which,
among other things, potentially creates interoperability complexities
and increases network security risks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(2), (c)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Network Users
1. Final Definition of ``Secondary Users''
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) authorizes FirstNet to charge
``user or subscription'' fees to a ``secondary user . . . that seeks
access to or use of the [NPSBN].'' Additionally, under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2), FirstNet may enter into a covered leasing agreement with a
``secondary user'' that permits ``access to network capacity on a
secondary basis for non-public safety purposes.'' \19\ The Act does not
expressly define the term ``secondary user.'' However, based on the
plain language of 47 U.S.C. 1428, FirstNet reaches the following
conclusion with respect to the meaning of ``secondary user'':
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FirstNet defines a ``secondary user'' as any user that seeks access
to or use of the NPSBN for non-public safety services.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Definition of Secondary User
Summary: The majority of commenters agreed with the interpretation
of a ``secondary user'' as a user that accesses network capacity on a
secondary basis for non-public safety services. One such commenter
noted that while secondary users are not public safety entities, they
are important to the financial sustainability of the network.
Similarly, another commenter remarked that such non-public safety
secondary users are necessary to implement a sophisticated and
expansive network.
Comment #7: One commenter expressed concern that FirstNet's
proposed definition, as formulated, could be misconstrued and sought to
clarify that ``secondary user'' captures those using the NPSBN for
services that are not related to public safety.
Response: FirstNet has attempted to clearly state in its final
definition of ``secondary user'' (identified above) that such term
refers to those users who access the NPSBN only for non-public safety
services.
Comment #8: One commenter expressed concern not about FirstNet's
definition of ``secondary user,'' but about the potential for secondary
users to adversely impact the performance of the NPSBN at the expense
of public safety.
Response: FirstNet is committed to ensuring the establishment of a
network that meets the needs of public safety and believes that the 20
MHz of available spectrum along with the expected priority/preemption
capabilities of the network will allow secondary users to access the
NPSBN without negatively impacting public safety's use of the NPSBN.
Comment #9: One commenter asserted that any user of the NPSBN that
is not a ``public safety entity'' should be considered a ``consumer''
rather than a ``secondary user.'' These ``consumers'' would use the
network on a secondary basis and yield to the primary user public
safety entities.
Response: While FirstNet certainly agrees with the general concept
of public safety entities being the primary users of the NPSBN, we do
not agree that the term ``consumer'' (which is also undefined in the
Act) encompasses all other such users of the network on a secondary
basis. First, the Act explicitly uses the term ``secondary user'' when
referring to those entities or individuals that access or use the
network ``on a secondary basis for non-public safety services.'' \20\
Secondly, this use of the term ``consumer'' is inconsistent with 47
U.S.C. 1432, which prohibits FirstNet from providing ``commercial
telecommunications or information services directly to consumers.''
Under 47 U.S.C. 1428, FirstNet is expressly authorized to assess a
network user fee on secondary users. Thus, given the Act prohibits
FirstNet from providing certain services directly to consumers while it
permits FirstNet to charge user fees to secondary users, by definition
all secondary users cannot be consumers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 47 U.S.C. 1428(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Prohibition on Providing Commercial Services to Consumers
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1432(a) specifies that FirstNet ``shall not
offer, provide, or market commercial telecommunications or information
services directly to consumers.'' The Act does not define
[[Page 63528]]
the word ``consumer'' or indicate whether the word is limited to
individuals or includes organizations and businesses. In addition,
under the rule of construction specified in 47 U.S.C. 1432(b), nothing
in 47 U.S.C. 1432(a) is intended to prohibit FirstNet from entering
into covered leasing agreements with secondary users or to limit
FirstNet from collecting lease fees for the use of network equipment
and infrastructure. FirstNet makes the following conclusions with
respect to these provisions of the Act:
(1) The definition of ``consumers'' as used in 47 U.S.C. 1432 does
not include:
a. Any public safety entity as defined in the Act;
b. States when seeking access to or use of the core network,
equipment, or infrastructure; or
c. entities when seeking access to or use of equipment and
infrastructure.
(2) The language of the Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 prohibiting
FirstNet from directly serving ``consumers'' does not limit potential
types of public safety entities that may use or access the NPSBN for
commercial telecommunications or information services.
(3) The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not prohibit or act as a
limit on secondary users with which FirstNet may enter into a covered
leasing agreement.
(4) The Act under 47 U.S.C. 1432 does not limit the pool of
secondary users that may gain access to or use of the network on a
secondary basis.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Prohibition on Providing
Commercial Services to Consumers
Summary: The vast majority of commenters supported FirstNet's
conclusions that the prohibition in 47 U.S.C. 1432 on FirstNet
offering, providing, or marketing commercial telecommunications or
information services to consumers does not apply to public safety
entities, secondary users, States seeking access to or use of the
FirstNet core network, or entities or States seeking access to or use
of network equipment and infrastructure. These commenters agreed that
the intent of this provision, whether explicit or implicit, is to
exclude these entities from the definition of consumer.
Comment #10: One commenter, while not disagreeing with FirstNet's
conclusions, expressed concern regarding the potential for network
capacity to become saturated from non-public safety use.
Response: As noted above, FirstNet is committed to ensuring the
establishment of a network that meets the needs of public safety and
believes that the 20 MHz of available spectrum along with the expected
priority/preemption capabilities of the network will allow secondary
users to access the NPSBN without negatively impacting public safety's
use of the NPSBN.
C. Requests for Proposals
1. Requests for Proposals Process
The Act in 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B) requires FirstNet to issue
``open, transparent, and competitive'' RFPs. The procedural
requirements for issuing such RFPs to meet the ``open, transparent, and
competitive'' standard, however, are not defined in the Act. The
Federal Acquisition Regulation (``FAR''), codified in 48 CFR parts 1-
99, is the primary regulation used by federal executive agencies in
their acquisition of supplies and services with appropriated funds.
Thus, FirstNet makes the following conclusion with respect to its
compliance with this provision:
FirstNet, to the extent it utilizes the FAR, concludes that
complying with the FAR satisfies the open, transparent, and competitive
requirements of 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B).
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Requests for Proposals
Summary: The overwhelming majority of commenters agreed with
FirstNet's proposed interpretation that using the FAR satisfies
FirstNet's statutory obligation to issue ``open, transparent, and
competitive requests for proposals to private sector entities for the
purposes of building, operating, and maintaining the network . . . ''
In addition to commenting that compliance with the FAR is a reasonable
way of meeting the Act's requirements for an ``open, transparent, and
competitive'' RFP process, commenters noted that the FAR is a well
understood process, and that by using it, FirstNet will save time by
not having to develop a new process for issuing RFPs. Given the size
and scope of FirstNet's task, commenters agreed that using the FAR was
the most logical option. Some commenters agreed with using the FAR
generally, but encouraged the use of only certain sections.
Comment #11: Some commenters suggested that FirstNet exceed the
FAR's requirements and reminded FirstNet of its authority to make
agreements with States to use existing infrastructure.
Response: FirstNet believes that using the FAR satisfies the Act's
requirements. FAR Part 1.102 provides guiding principles of the Federal
Acquisition System, namely ``promoting competition, and conducting
business with integrity, fairness and openness.'' The policies and
procedures of the FAR embody these principles. Adherence to the FAR,
therefore, ensures compliance with the Act's mandate to issue ``open,
transparent, and competitive'' RFPs. With respect to existing
infrastructure, FirstNet plans to leverage such assets for the NPSBN to
the extent it is economically desirable, as required by the Act (see
below for a further discussion regarding existing infrastructure).
Comment #12: One commenter disagreed with FirstNet's proposed
interpretation, observing that the guidance in 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B)
would be unnecessary if Congress intended FirstNet to comply with the
FAR, and that there is not a single reference to the FAR in the Act,
despite the extensive statutory guidance the Act provides to FirstNet
concerning the RFP process.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges this comment and notes that its
final conclusion is not that FirstNet believes it is required to use
the FAR. Rather, FirstNet's interpretation merely is that by complying
with the FAR, FirstNet is complying with this provision of the Act.
2. Minimum Technical Requirements
47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B) requires FirstNet to issue RFPs for the
purposes of building, operating, and maintaining the network that use,
without materially changing, the minimum technical requirements
developed by the Interoperability Board. 47 U.S.C. 1422(b) and 47
U.S.C. 1426(c)(4) further obligate FirstNet to accommodate advancements
in technology.\21\ With respect to these provisions, FirstNet makes the
following final interpretation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Note that the Interoperability Board Report states that
``[g]iven that technology evolves rapidly, the network components
and associated interfaces identified in the [Interoperability Board
Report] . . . are also expected to evolve over time. As such, these
aspects of the present document are intended to represent a state-
of-the-art snapshot at the time of writing. In this context, the
standards, functions, and interfaces referenced in the present
document are intended to prescribe statements of intent. Variations
or substitutions are expected to accommodate technological evolution
consistent with the evolution of 3GPP and other applicable
standards.'' Interoperability Board, Recommended Minimum Technical
Requirements to Ensure Nationwide Interoperability for the
Nationwide Public Safety Broadband Network at 27 (May 22, 2012),
available at https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021919873.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FirstNet concludes that it may make non-material changes or
additions/subtractions to the minimal technical requirements developed
by the
[[Page 63529]]
Interoperability Board, including as necessary to accommodate
advancements in technology as required by the Act.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Minimum Technical Requirements
Summary: Commenters were virtually unanimous in agreeing with
FirstNet's proposed interpretation regarding changes to the minimum
technical requirements established by the Interoperability Board.
Several commenters reasoned that such changes are necessary and fully
contemplated (by Congress and the Interoperability Board itself) in
order to keep pace with evolutions in technology, address issues that
the Interoperability Board may not have considered, and fulfill
requirements under the Act.
Comment #13: One commenter maintained that the minimum technical
requirements developed by the Interoperability Board are so fundamental
that they should be utilized in their entirety regardless of
advancements in technology.
Response: FirstNet fully appreciates the value of the minimum
technical requirements developed by the Interoperability Board and the
critical role such requirements will have in the development and
maintenance of the NPSBN. However, at the same time, FirstNet seeks to
ensure that the most robust and technologically advanced network as
possible is established for public safety in accordance with its
statutory mission, and FirstNet is specifically directed by the Act to
consider advancements in technology in the development and maintenance
of the NPSBN.\22\ Accordingly, FirstNet intends to operate with those
principles and directives in mind in forming the technical requirements
for the network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See 47 U.S.C. 1422(b), 1426(c)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #14: Multiple commenters urged FirstNet to use open
standards in the implementation of advancements in technology, focusing
on 3GPP architecture and interfaces that ensure operability,
interoperability, and backwards compatibility. Some of these commenters
pointed out that the Interoperability Board Report contemplates
advancements in technology and supports the open standards process.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of this notice.
However, FirstNet acknowledges this recommendation and will consider it
as any applicable decisions are developed on the matter. We note that
the Act requires that the NPSBN be based on commercial standards,
including those developed by 3GPP and that comply with the
Interoperability Board Report.
Comment #15: A few commenters suggested that FirstNet rely on the
Interoperability Board or a similar independent technical advisory
board going forward to establish and maintain ongoing minimum technical
requirements and compliance with those requirements, in light of
technological advances.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of this notice.
However, FirstNet acknowledges this recommendation and will consider it
as any applicable decisions are developed on the matter.
Comment #16: Some commenters offered input as to what delineates
non-material versus material changes in the minimum technical
requirements. Most commenters focused on critical features or functions
being backwards compatible, as well as avoiding any reduction in the
quality of mission critical service to end users.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges these recommendations and will
consider them as any applicable decisions are developed on the matter.
FirstNet's goal is to ensure that the NPSBN operates in a manner that
satisfies public safety's critical communication needs and is
consistent with the material terms of the Interoperability Board
report.
3. Final Definition of ``Rural''
The Act directs that FirstNet ``shall require deployment phases
with substantial rural coverage milestones as part of each phase of the
construction and deployment of the network . . . [and] utilize cost-
effective opportunities to speed deployment in rural areas.'' \23\
Additionally, the Act states, in relevant part, that FirstNet ``shall
develop . . . requests for proposals with appropriate . . . timetables
for construction, including by taking into consideration the time
needed to build out to rural areas.'' \24\ Finally, the Act explains
that FirstNet ``shall develop . . . requests for proposals with
appropriate . . . coverage areas, including coverage in rural and
nonurban areas.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(3) (emphasis added).
\24\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(1)(A)(i) (emphasis added).
\25\ 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(1)(A)(ii) (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the Act does not define ``rural,'' we found it necessary to
define this term in order to fulfill our duties with respect to the
above noted statutory rural coverage requirements.\26\ Accordingly,
FirstNet makes the following final interpretation regarding the
definition of ``rural'' under the Act:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ We appreciate the position the FCC has taken in this
regard, and we are committed to fulfill our duties in a way that
will meet these rural coverage requirements. See Implementing Public
Safety Broadband Provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012 et al., PS Docket 12-94 et al., Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 28 FCC Rcd 2715, 2728-29 ] 46 (2013) (Band 14
NPRM) (noting that, ``We do not believe the Commission should
specify rural milestones as a condition of FirstNet's license at
this time. Rather, we recognize that at this early stage, the
success of FirstNet requires flexibility with respect to deployment
and planning, including deployment in rural areas. Moreover,
FirstNet has an independent legal obligation under the Act to
develop requests for proposals with appropriate timetables for
construction, taking into account the time needed to build out in
rural areas, and coverage areas, including coverage in rural and
nonurban areas. In addition, in light of the Congressional oversight
that will be exercised over FirstNet and its other transparency,
reporting and consultation obligations, we do not believe it is
necessary for the Commission to set specific benchmarks in this
regard in these rules.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) FirstNet defines ``rural,'' for the purposes of the Act, as
having the same meaning as ``rural area'' in Section 601(b)(3) of the
Rural Electrification Act of 1936, as amended (``Rural Electrification
Act'' or ``REA''). Section 601(b)(3) of the Rural Electrification Act
provides that ``[t]he term `rural area' means any area other than--(i)
an area described in clause (i) or (ii) of Section 1991(a)(13)(A) of
this title [section 343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm and Rural
Development Act]; and (ii) a city, town, or incorporated area that has
a population of greater than 20,000 inhabitants.'' In turn, the
relevant portion of Section 343(a)(13)(A) of the Consolidated Farm and
Rural Development Act explains that the ``terms `rural' and `rural
area' mean any area other than--(i) a city or town that has a
population of greater than 50,000 inhabitants; and (ii) any urbanized
area contiguous and adjacent to a city or town described in clause
(i).'' Thus, as defined herein, the term ``rural'' means any area that
is not:
A city, town, or incorporated area that has a population
of greater than 20,000 inhabitants
any urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or
town that has a population of greater than 50,000 inhabitants.
FirstNet also inquired whether there should be a lower boundary
separate from the definition of ``rural,'' such as ``wilderness'' or
``frontier.'' Based in part on the comments received, FirstNet has
reached the following final conclusion:
(2) FirstNet concludes that a lower boundary (e.g., ``wilderness,''
``frontier'') is not necessary to satisfy its rural coverage
requirements under the Act, and thus FirstNet does not intend to
establish any such boundary.
[[Page 63530]]
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Definition of Rural
Summary: Several commenters agreed with FirstNet's proposed
definition of ``rural,'' pointing to the logic in using the Rural
Electrification Act definition. Many of these commenters noted that the
Rural Electrification Act definition is widely known and used. Some
specifically agreed that adopting the Rural Electrification Act
definition makes sense in light of U.S. Department of Agriculture's
(``USDA'') use of the definition in the Rural Broadband Access Loan and
Loan Guarantee Program.
However, several other commenters disagreed with FirstNet's
proposed definition of rural, suggesting that the Rural Electrification
Act definition was inadequate. Multiple commenters expressed concerns
that the Rural Electrification Act definition would not accurately
measure or reflect the rural areas of a State.
Comment #17: One commenter suggested that the geography of a State
could complicate the Rural Electrification Act's application due to
many remote, small but densely populated communities and areas without
any defined government or established limits.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges this comment and recognizes that
certain States may not agree that the Rural Electrification Act
definition (or any other definition for that matter) adequately defines
rural areas for that State due to unique geographic or other
circumstances. However, because FirstNet's mission is to ensure the
establishment of a nationwide public safety broadband network, it is
necessary to formulate a single, objective definition that can be
reasonably applied on a national basis. By way of example, the Rural
Electrification Act definition of ``rural area'' has been adopted by
other federal agencies in determining rural areas on a national basis,
including by the USDA in its Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan
Guarantee Program, for application nationwide.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ The USDA was designated as the lead federal agency for
rural development by the Rural Development Policy Act of 1980. See 7
U.S.C. 2204b.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is also important to note that the primary purpose of the
definition of ``rural'' under the Act is to measure whether the
statutory requirement to include ``substantial rural coverage
milestones'' in each phase of network deployment has been met. The
definition does not determine a state or territory's ultimate coverage,
which instead will be determined by the input obtained through the
consultation process along with FirstNet's available resources.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #18: Some commenters suggested that FirstNet adopt a
modified or simplified aggregate population-derived definition
utilizing various alternative methodologies. Specifically, a couple of
commenters proposed the use of the U.S. Census Bureau's definition of
``rural''--i.e., all areas that are not ``urban areas,'' which consist
of Urbanized Areas (50,000 or more people) and Urban Clusters (at least
2,500 and less than 50,000 people).
Response: FirstNet recognizes that there are alternative
definitions of ``rural'' utilized by other federal and state government
entities and acknowledges that such definitions could be applied in the
context of the nationwide public safety broadband network. Consistent
with its analysis in the First Notice, FirstNet continues to believe,
however, that the Rural Electrification Act's definition of ``rural
area'' is sufficiently precise to allow for consistent application, as
well as widely known and familiar to rural telecommunications
providers, rural communities, and other stakeholders considering its
utilization specifically with respect to rural broadband issues. In
addition, other federal agencies have adopted the Rural Electrification
Act definition. The USDA, in particular, utilizes this definition in a
similar context through its implementation of the Rural Broadband
Access Loan and Loan Guarantee Program, which funds the costs of
construction, improvement, and acquisition of facilities and equipment
to provide broadband service to eligible rural areas.
Comment #19: Another commenter proposed the adoption of the
definition used by USDA's Rural Business Service, indicating that rural
areas under such definition are those with 50,000 persons or less
excluding areas adjacent to communities larger than 50,000 persons.
Response: See the response to Comment #18 above.
Comment #20: Based on concerns expressed regarding the omission of
unincorporated areas and the potential confusion caused by the
``adjacent and contiguous'' clause in the definition, an additional
commenter recommended that ``rural'' be defined as a city, town,
incorporated area, or unincorporated area that has a population of
20,000 or less.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the comment. To provide some
additional clarity, we note that in identifying cities, towns,
incorporated areas, and urbanized areas, FirstNet intends to leverage
the U.S. Census definition of ``places,'' which is inclusive of towns,
cities, villages, boroughs, and Census Designated Places (CDPs) (which
in turn are inclusive, at least in part, of unincorporated areas).\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See U.S. Census Bureau, Geographic Terms and Concepts--
Place, https://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_place.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #21: A few commenters advocated for a definition based on
population density on a per county basis, with varying formulations.
For instance, one such commenter proposed to define rural as a county
with a population density of less than 160 persons per square mile,
while another commenter proffered any county (i) with a population
density of 100 or fewer inhabitants or (ii) of less than 225 square
miles. A couple of other commenters suggested using a density of 5/7 to
159 persons per square mile on a county-by-county basis. Similarly,
another commenter recommended adopting the definition used by the
School-to-Work Opportunities program (i.e., a county, block number area
in a nonmetropolitan county, or consortium of counties or such block
number areas with a population density of 20 or fewer persons per
square mile), reasoning that the definition is simple, from a program
with a comparable process and approach (grant eligibility based on an
approved State plan, intergovernmental cooperation, seed money for
initial planning and development of school-to-work transition system),
more objective, and more accurate in identifying rural areas.
Response: See the response to Comment #18 above.
Comment #22: Multiple commenters maintained that instead of
adopting the Rural Electrification Act (or any other single
definition), the definition of ``rural'' should be determined on a
state-by-state basis.
Response: FirstNet recognizes the Act strikes a balance between
establishing a nationwide network and providing States an opportunity
to make certain decisions about local implementation. As noted above,
however, the primary purpose of the definition of ``rural'' is for
measuring whether ``substantial rural coverage milestones'' have been
included in each phase of deployment, which is required on a national
basis. Thus, as a practical matter, there must be a single, uniform,
and objective definition of ``rural'' that can be applied nationwide to
assess whether such milestones have been met by FirstNet deployment.
[[Page 63531]]
4. Existing Infrastructure
Multiple provisions of the Act direct FirstNet to leverage existing
infrastructure when ``economically desirable.'' \30\ 47 U.S.C.
1426(b)(1)(C) requires FirstNet in issuing RFPs to ``encourag[e] that
such requests leverage, to the maximum extent economically desirable,
existing commercial wireless infrastructure to speed deployment of the
network.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(C), (b)(3), (c)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(3)--in addressing rural coverage and
referring to FirstNet's duty and responsibility to issue RFPs--requires
that ``[t]o the maximum extent economically desirable, such proposals
shall include partnerships with existing commercial mobile providers to
utilize cost-effective opportunities to speed deployments in rural
areas.''
Finally, 47 U.S.C. 1426(c)(3) requires that in carrying out its
various requirements related to the deployment and operation of the
NPSBN, ``the First Responder Network Authority shall enter into
agreements to utilize, to the maximum extent economically desirable,
existing (A) commercial or other communications infrastructure; and (B)
Federal, State, tribal, or local infrastructure.'' The Act, however,
does not define or establish any criteria for determining economic
desirability. FirstNet reaches the following conclusions regarding its
obligations to leverage existing infrastructure under 47 U.S.C. 1426:
1. FirstNet interprets that 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(B) is intended to
require FirstNet to encourage, through its requests, that responsive
proposals leverage existing infrastructure in accordance with the
provision.
2. FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(3) as requiring FirstNet
to include in its RFPs that such proposals leverage partnerships with
commercial mobile providers where economically desirable.
3. FirstNet concludes that factors other than, or in addition to,
cost may be utilized in assessing whether existing infrastructure is
``economically desirable,'' including:
a. Infrastructure type/characteristics
b. security (physical, network, cyber, etc.)
c. suitability/viability (ability to readily use, upgrade, and
maintain)
d. readiness for reuse (e.g., already in use for wireless
communications)
e. scope of use (e.g., range of coverage)
f. availability/accessibility (time/obstacles to acquiring access/
use)
g. any use restrictions (e.g., prohibitions/limitations on
commercial use)
h. relationships with infrastructure owners/managers (e.g., ease/
difficulty in working with owners/managers)
i. available alternatives in the area
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Leveraging Existing
Infrastructure and Economic Desirability
Summary: All commenters on the subject agreed with FirstNet's above
interpretations of 47 U.S.C. 1426(b)(1)(C) and (b)(3) that the
provisions are intended to require FirstNet to encourage, through its
RFPs, that such responsive proposals leverage existing infrastructure
and partnerships where economically desirable. Many of these commenters
emphasized the importance of utilizing the RFP process to leverage
existing assets and partnerships to lower costs and increase speed to
market.
Comment #23: Some commenters provided input regarding the factors
to be considered in making an economic desirability determination,
focusing largely on cost.
Response: Although FirstNet agrees that cost is a major factor in
assessing economic desirability, we do not believe it is the sole
consideration. There are several other factors, as noted above, that
are critical to making an informed determination as to whether the
infrastructure should be leveraged. For instance, it is essential to
understand the infrastructure's suitability for FirstNet's purposes, as
well as its availability and readiness for use. Likewise, FirstNet's
financial sustainability model is based in large part on its ability to
lease excess spectrum capacity to commercial entities for secondary
use, and thus consideration of any limitations on commercial use of the
infrastructure is imperative.
Comment #24: A couple of commenters suggested other factors besides
cost in making an economic desirability determination of whether to
leverage infrastructure. One such commenter recommended the
consideration of geography and breadth of coverage in addition to cost.
Another commenter urged that the requirements of public safety should
be considered as a factor.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges these recommendations and believes
they are encompassed within FirstNet's final conclusion above regarding
economic desirability factors.
D. Fees
FirstNet is required by the Act to be a self-funding entity and has
been authorized to assess and collect certain fees for use of the
network.\31\ Specifically, FirstNet has been authorized to assess and
collect a (1) network user fee; (2) lease fee related to network
capacity (also known as covered leasing agreement); (3) lease fees
related to network equipment and infrastructure; and (4) a fee for
State use of elements of the core network.\32\ In accordance with these
provisions, FirstNet makes the following conclusions related to both
the assessment and collection of fees authorized under the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See 47 U.S.C. 1428, 1442(f); 1426(b)(4)(C).
\32\ 47 U.S.C. 1428, 1442(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
General
(1) FirstNet interprets each of the fees authorized by the Act,
including user or subscription fees authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1),
covered leasing agreement fees authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1428 (a)(2),
lease fees related to network equipment and infrastructure authorized
by 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3), and the fee for State use of elements of the
core network authorized by 47 U.S.C. 1442(f), as distinct and separate
from each other and may be assessed individually or cumulatively, as
applicable.
Network User Fees
(2) FirstNet concludes it may charge a user or subscription fee
under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) to any user that seeks access to or use of
the nationwide public safety broadband network.
State Core Network User Fees
(3) FirstNet concludes that the fees assessed on States assuming
RAN responsibilities for use of the core network authorized by 47
U.S.C. 1442(f) are distinct from and can be assessed in addition to any
other fees authorized under the Act.
Lease Fees Related to Network Capacity and Covered Leasing Agreements
(4) FirstNet concludes that a covered leasing agreement under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) does not require a secondary user to ``construct,
manage, and operate'' the entire FirstNet network, either from a
coverage perspective or exclusively within a specific location.
(5) FirstNet concludes that multiple covered leasing agreement
lessees could coexist and be permitted access to excess network
capacity in a particular geographic area.
[[Page 63532]]
(6) FirstNet interprets that a covered leasing agreement lessee
satisfies the definition under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) so long as the
lessee does more than a nominal amount of constructing, managing, or
operating the network.
(7) FirstNet concludes that an entity entering into a covered
leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(2) is not required to perform
all three functions of constructing, managing, and operating a portion
of the network, so long as one of the three is performed as part of the
covered leasing agreement.
(8) FirstNet interprets the reference to ``network capacity'' in
the definition of covered leasing agreement under 47 U.S.C.
1428(a)(2)(B)(i) as a generic statement referring to the combination of
spectrum and network elements, as defined by the Act, and includes the
core network as well as the radio access network of either FirstNet
alone or that of the secondary user under a covered leasing agreement
whereby the core and radio access network are used for serving both
FirstNet public safety entities and the secondary user's commercial
customers.
(9) FirstNet interprets the term ``secondary basis'' under 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(i) to mean that network capacity will be available
to the secondary user unless it is needed for public safety entities as
defined in the Act.
(10) FirstNet interprets the phrase ``spectrum allocated to such
entity'' found in 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3)(B)(ii) as allowing all or a
portion of the spectrum licensed to FirstNet by the FCC under call sign
``WQQE234'' to be allocated for use on a secondary basis under a
covered leasing agreement.
(11) FirstNet concludes the reference to ``dark fiber'' in 47
U.S.C. 1428(a)(2)(B)(ii) cannot literally be interpreted as such, and
the reference should be interpreted to allow the covered leasing
agreement lessee to transport such traffic on otherwise previously dark
fiber facilities.
Network Equipment and Infrastructure Fee
(12) FirstNet interprets 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as being limited to
the imposition of a fee for the use of static or isolated equipment or
infrastructure, such as antennas or towers, rather than for use of
FirstNet spectrum or access to network capacity.
(13) FirstNet interprets the phrase ``constructed or otherwise
owned by [FirstNet]'' under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as meaning that
FirstNet ordered or required the construction of such equipment or
infrastructure, paid for such construction, simply owns such equipment,
or does not own but, through a contract has rights to sublease access
to, or use of, such equipment or infrastructure.
Analysis of and Responses to Comments on Fees
Summary: The majority of commenters agreed with the various
interpretations related to the assessment and collection of fees by
FirstNet. The commenters generally understood the authority the Act
gives FirstNet to assess and collect fees and the importance of such
fees as a key funding resource necessary to build, operate, and
maintain the NPSBN. However, a few commenters, as described and
responded to below, either disagreed with certain interpretations or
provided general comments relating to the assessment and collection of
the various fees under the Act.
Comment #25: Two commenters agreed that FirstNet is authorized to
assess a fee for use of the core network, but suggested that States
assuming RAN deployment responsibilities should only pay the costs
associated with using the core network and spectrum lease; they should
not have to pay a network user or subscription fee, and that FirstNet
is not allowed to, or should not, impose `user' fees on opt-out States
in a cumulative manner as interpreted by FirstNet.
Response: FirstNet disagrees and believes the Act authorizes
FirstNet to assess a user or subscription fee to each entity, including
a State choosing to deploy its own radio access network, that seeks
access to or use of the network. Specifically, the Act authorizes
FirstNet to collect a ``user or subscription fee from each entity,
including any public safety entity or secondary user, that seeks access
to or use of the [NPSBN].'' \33\ Consequently, a plain reading of this
provision does not appear to provide any exclusionary language that
would limit which entities may be charged a fee for access to or use of
the network. Rather, as discussed in the First Notice, the use of the
term ``including'' rather than ``consisting'' when describing the scope
of entities that may be charged a network user fee indicates that this
group is not limited to only public safety entities or secondary users,
but would include other entities such as a State. Thus, FirstNet
believes the plain language of the Act supports the conclusion that
FirstNet may charge a user or subscription fee to any eligible user who
seeks access to or use of the nationwide public safety broadband
network, including, as appropriate, a State assuming responsibilities
for radio access network deployment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(1) (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #26: One commenter suggested that all public safety user
fees should include nationwide coverage, and should be for unlimited
use of the NPSBN. For example, a flat fee for unlimited usage (and no
roaming fees) should be charged within each State, similar to today's
carrier billing model.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of this notice.
However, FirstNet acknowledges the comment and will consider the
recommendation as it continues planning for the deployment of the
NPSBN.
Comment #27: One commenter suggested that while the Act is
unambiguous on allowing FirstNet to assess a fee to States assuming RAN
responsibilities for use of the core network, it is important that this
fee not be set so high so as to discourage States from opting out of
the NPSBN. The commenter further noted that the ability of States to
construct their own RAN is clearly permissive under the Act and, in
fact, could enable significant growth and adoption of the NPSBN as long
as the user fees for opt-out states are reasonable and contemplate the
budgets of State and local public safety entities.
Response: This comment is outside the scope of this notice.
However, FirstNet acknowledges the comment and will consider the
recommendation as it continues planning for the deployment of the
NPSBN.
Comment #28: Two commenters disagreed that ``all'' of the FirstNet
Band 14 spectrum can be allocated for secondary use under a covered
leasing agreement.
Response: FirstNet believes its interpretation that the Act allows
all or part of the spectrum licensed to FirstNet by the FCC under call
sign ``WQQE234'' to be allocated for secondary use is supported by
language of the Act. FirstNet is the entity created by the Act to
ensure the establishment of the NPSBN, and as such has a duty to ensure
the efficient use of the funding resources available to fulfill this
duty, including the ability to permit access to spectrum capacity on a
secondary basis. To best utilize these funding resources, the Act
authorizes FirstNet to enter into covered leasing agreements which
permit an entity entering into such an agreement to have access to, or
use of, network capacity on a secondary basis for non-public safety
services. The Act, as analyzed in the First Notice, does not provide
any cap or limitation on how much of the network capacity may be
allocated on a secondary basis. Thus, FirstNet believes the Act
provides it
[[Page 63533]]
flexibility to determine how best to utilize network capacity as a
funding resource to ensure both the establishment and self-
sustainability of the network. Despite this flexibility, however, it is
important to note that public safety entities will always have priority
use of the NPSBN over any non-public safety user that gains access to,
or use of, the network on a secondary basis.
Comment #29: One commenter suggested that the States should
determine how much capacity/spectrum is made available within its
borders under a covered leasing agreement--rather than FirstNet making
the determination.
Response: FirstNet is the entity created by the Act to ensure the
establishment of the NPSBN and is also the sole licensee of the 700 MHz
D block spectrum and the existing public safety broadband spectrum.\34\
Thus, FirstNet is the sole entity responsible for determining how to
allocate the spectrum under a covered leasing agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ 47 U.S.C. 1421, 1422.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment #30: One commenter cautioned FirstNet to ensure there is
not an undue expectation by the covered leasing agreement lessee that
its lease of the spectrum supersedes public safety's access to, and use
of, that spectrum as a priority in all cases, and at all times.
Response: FirstNet acknowledges the comment and reiterates that its
primary mission is to ensure the establishment of a nationwide,
interoperable network for public safety. Accordingly, public safety
will always have priority use of the NPSBN over any non-public safety
user that gains access to, or use of, the network on a secondary basis
through a covered leasing agreement.
Comment #31: One commenter recommended that FirstNet interpret 47
U.S.C. Sec. 1428(a)(3) to only apply to the RAN hardware in States
that choose to participate in the NPSBN as proposed by FirstNet.
Response: FirstNet interprets the phrase ``constructed or otherwise
owned by [FirstNet]'' under 47 U.S.C. 1428(a)(3) as meaning that
FirstNet ordered or required the construction of such equipment or
infrastructure, paid for the construction, owns the equipment, or does
not own the equipment, but, through a contract, has the right to
sublease the equipment or infrastructure. Thus, unless the RAN hardware
in any State falls within the criteria above, FirstNet would not have
the authority to assess and collect a fee for use of such
infrastructure or equipment.
Dated: October 15, 2015.
Jason Karp,
Chief Counsel (Acting), First Responder Network Authority.
[FR Doc. 2015-26621 Filed 10-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-TL-P