Advanced Methods To Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls, 770-774 [2018-00100]

Agencies

• FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 5 (Monday, January 8, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 770-774]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-00100]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 64

[CG Docket No. 17-59; FCC 17-151]


Advanced Methods To Target and Eliminate Unlawful Robocalls

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission invites comment on proposed 
changes to its rules. The Commission proposes rules regarding 
mechanisms to ensure that erroneously blocked calls can be unblocked as 
quickly as possible and without undue harm to callers and consumers. It 
also seeks comment on ways to measure the effectiveness of the 
Commission's robocalling efforts, as well as those of industry.

DATES: Comments are due on January 23, 2018. Reply Comments are due on 
February 22, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by CG Docket No. 17-59 
and/or FCC Number 17-151, by any of the following methods:
     Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically 
using the internet by accessing the Commission's Electronic Comment 
Filing System (ECFS), through the Commission's website: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Filers should follow the instructions provided on 
the website for submitting comments. For ECFS filers, in completing the 
transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal 
service mailing address, and CG Docket No. 17-59.
     Mail: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an 
original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or 
messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class 
or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although the Commission 
continues to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). 
All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of 
the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
    For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerusha Burnett, Consumer Policy 
Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB), at (202) 418- 
0526, email: [email protected], or Karen A Schroeder, Consumer 
Policy Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB), at 
(202) 418-0654, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM), document FCC 17-151, 
adopted on November 16, 2017, and released on November 17, 2017. The 
full text of document FCC 17-151 will be available for public 
inspection and copying via ECFS, and during regular business hours at 
the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, 
Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. A copy of document FCC 17-151 and 
any subsequently filed documents in this matter may also be found by 
searching ECFS at: https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/ (insert CG Docket No. 17-
59 into the Proceeding block). The Report and Order that was adopted 
concurrently with the FNPRM is published elsewhere in the Federal 
Register. Pursuant to 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file 
comments and reply comments on or before the dates indicated on the 
first page of this document. Comments may be filed using ECFS. See 
Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 
(1998).
     All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings 
for the Commission's Secretary must be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 
445 12th Street SW, Room TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. All hand 
deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any 
envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building.
     Commercial Mail sent by overnight mail (other than U.S. 
Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 
Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
     U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority 
mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554.
    Pursuant to Sec.  1.1200 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1200, 
this matter shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose'' proceeding in 
accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. Persons making oral ex 
parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the 
presentations must contain summaries of the substances of the 
presentations and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed. More 
than a one or two sentence description of the views and arguments 
presented is generally required. See 47 CFR 1.1206(b). Other rules 
pertaining to oral and written ex parte presentations in permit-but-
disclose proceedings are set forth in Sec.  1.1206(b) of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1206(b).
    To request materials in accessible formats for people with 
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), 
send an email to: [email protected] or call CGB at: (202) 418-0530 
(voice), or (202) 418-0432 (TTY). The FNPRM can also be downloaded in 
Word or Portable Document Format (PDF) at: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-rules-help-block-illegal-robocalls-0.

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

    The FNPRM seeks comment on proposed rule amendments that may result 
in modified information collection requirements. If the Commission 
adopts any modified information collection requirements, the Commission 
will publish another notice in the Federal Register inviting the public 
to comment on the requirements, as required by the Paperwork Reduction 
Act. Public Law 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3501-3520. In addition, pursuant to 
the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the Commission seeks 
comment on how it might further reduce the information collection 
burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. Public 
Law 107-198, 116 Stat. 729; 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

Synopsis

    1. The Commission takes another important step in combatting 
illegal robocalls by enabling voice service providers to block certain 
calls before they reach consumers' phones. In the Report and Order 
portion of the document, the Commission adopts rules allowing voice 
service providers to block calls from phone numbers on a Do-Not-
Originate (DNO) list and those that purport to be from invalid, 
unallocated, or unused numbers. Voice service providers have been 
active in identifying these calls and there is broad support for these 
rules. In the FNPRM portion of the document, the Commission seeks 
comment on two discrete issues related to the rules.
    2. The Commission seeks comment on two discrete issues related to 
the rules adopted in the Report and Order portion of document FCC 17-
151. First, the Commission seeks comment on

[[Page 771]]

potential mechanisms to ensure that erroneously blocked calls can be 
unblocked as quickly as possible and without undue harm to callers and 
consumers. The Commission encourages voice service providers who block 
calls under certain stated criteria to identify and quickly rectify any 
erroneous blocking. The Commission now seeks comment on whether it 
should require providers who block calls to provide a formal challenge 
mechanism. Should the Commission require blocking providers to 
establish a challenge mechanism by which callers can inform them of 
erroneous blocking and such blocking can quickly be fixed? What is the 
quickest way for callers to be informed of blocking, e.g., should 
providers send an intercept message to callers to notify them of the 
block with contact information by which a caller may report and rectify 
the situation? Should challenge mechanisms be different based on the 
scale of the blocking provider? What challenge mechanisms are blocking 
providers considering adopting, even absent a requirement? Is such a 
requirement necessary? Alternatively, does the Commission's informal 
complaint process provide a mechanism to surface erroneous blocking to 
providers and correct it? Are there ways the Commission could modify 
its informal complaint process to address the time-sensitive nature of 
erroneous call blocking? Are there other Commission processes that 
would provide an appropriate mechanism for rectifying erroneous 
blocking?
    3. Once a caller is aware of erroneous blocking, how can the 
Commission best ensure their calls are unblocked? Should providers 
cease blocking calls as soon as is practicable upon a credible claim by 
the caller that its calls are being blocked in error? Should the 
Commission establish specific timeframes and requirements for making a 
credible claim of erroneous blocking? How can the Commission mitigate 
the risk that makers of illegal robocalls will exploit such a process? 
Commenters should address the balance between quickly identifying and 
rectifying erroneous blocking against imposing unduly onerous burdens 
on providers that might disincent helpful call blocking. In this light, 
the Commission seeks comment on call blocking models voice providers or 
third parties may have developed to address erroneous call blocking.
    4. Second, the Commission seeks comment on ways it can measure the 
effectiveness of the robocalling efforts as well as those of industry. 
If the Commission were to adopt a reporting obligation on all voice 
service providers, what information should be collected? Should 
providers be required to report the quantity of false positives? Should 
this be a quarterly requirement or an annual requirement? In what ways 
could the information collected help the Commission evaluate the 
effectiveness of its efforts as well as those of industry and/or 
support additional measures to combat illegal robocalls? What consumer 
benefits would come from requiring all voice service providers to 
publicly report the number of illegal robocalls blocked each day/month/
year? What are the costs of requiring voice service providers to report 
this information? Should the Commission consider different requirements 
for smaller providers? Alternatively, should the Commission use data 
from the FCC's Consumer Complaint Data Center as a benchmark for 
determining the effectiveness of FCC and industry efforts? Are there 
other Commission or third-party data sources that the Commission could 
use to assess the effectiveness of its efforts as well as industry's at 
targeting illegal robocalls?

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    5. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as 
amended, (RFA) the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory 
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules 
proposed in the FNPRM. Written public comments are requested on this 
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be 
filed by the deadlines for comments on the FNPRM indicated above in the 
DATES portion of this document. The Commission will send a copy of the 
FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration.

Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

    6. The FNPRM builds on the Report and Order portion of document FCC 
17-151 by inquiring about two related matters: How to effectively 
implement a challenge mechanism to allow erroneously blocked calls to 
be unblocked as quickly as possible and how to measure the 
effectiveness of the rules adopted in the Report and Order.
    7. First, the FNPRM seeks comment on how to best ensure that a 
challenge mechanism unblocks erroneously blocked calls as quickly as 
possible without undue harm to callers and consumers. It seeks comment 
about what mechanism to use to allow consumers to complain about 
erroneously blocked numbers. It also asks if the Commission should 
require blocking carriers to establish a formal challenge mechanism and 
how callers will be informed that their calls have been blocked. In 
addition, the FNPRM seeks comment on how to best ensure calls are 
unblocked once providers are aware they are blocking them in error. It 
asks whether the Commission should establish timeframes and 
requirements for making a credible claim of erroneous blocking and how 
to mitigate the risk that makers of illegal calls will exploit the 
process. In addition, the FNPRM seeks comment on models that have 
already been developed to accomplish these tasks.
    8. Second, the FNPRM seeks comment on ways to measure the 
effectiveness of the call blocking rules adopted in the concurrent 
Report and Order. The FNPRM asks about requiring reporting by 
providers, including what information should be collected, the 
frequency of information collection, how the information should be 
used, and how to use various data sources as benchmarks for the 
effectiveness of the rules. In addition, the FNPRM seeks comment on the 
consumer benefits such information would provide.

Legal Basis

    9. The proposed and anticipated rules are authorized under sections 
201, 202, 222, 251(e) and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
amended, 47 U.S.C. 201, 202, 222, 251(e), 403.

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the 
Proposed Rules Will Apply

    10. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where 
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be 
affected by the rules adopted herein. The RFA generally defines the 
term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small 
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small-business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A ``small-business concern'' is one which: (1) Is independently 
owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and 
(3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.

Wireline Carriers

    11. Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census Bureau 
defines this industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in 
operating and/or providing access to transmission

[[Page 772]]

facilities and infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the 
transmission of voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired 
communications networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a 
single technology or a combination of technologies. Establishments in 
this industry use the wired telecommunications network facilities that 
they operate to provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony 
services, including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video 
programming distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By 
exception, establishments providing satellite television distribution 
services using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are 
included in this industry.'' The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers, which consists of 
all such companies having 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 
2012 shows that there were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this 
total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this 
size standard, the majority of firms in this industry can be considered 
small.
    12. Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the Commission nor the 
SBA has developed a small business size standard specifically for local 
exchange services. The closest applicable size standard under SBA rules 
is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census 
Bureau defines this industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in 
operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and 
infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of 
voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications 
networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology 
or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use 
the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to 
provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, 
including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming 
distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, 
establishments providing satellite television distribution services 
using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in 
this industry.'' Under that size standard, such a business is small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 show that there 
were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated 
with fewer than 1,000 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates 
that most providers of local exchange service are small businesses.
    13. Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the 
Commission nor the SBA has developed a small business size standard 
specifically for incumbent local exchange services. The closest 
applicable size standard under SBA rules is for the category Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census Bureau defines this 
industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in operating and/or 
providing access to transmission facilities and infrastructure that 
they own and/or lease for the transmission of voice, data, text, sound, 
and video using wired communications networks. Transmission facilities 
may be based on a single technology or a combination of technologies. 
Establishments in this industry use the wired telecommunications 
network facilities that they operate to provide a variety of services, 
such as wired telephony services, including VoIP services, wired 
(cable) audio and video programming distribution, and wired broadband 
internet services. By exception, establishments providing satellite 
television distribution services using facilities and infrastructure 
that they operate are included in this industry.'' Under that size 
standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 
Census data for 2012 show that there were 3,117 firms that operated 
that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated with fewer than 1,000 
employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that most providers 
of incumbent local exchange service are small businesses.
    14. Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (Competitive LECs), 
Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), Shared-Tenant Service Providers, 
and Other Local Service Providers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA 
has developed a small business size standard specifically for these 
service providers. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules is for 
the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census Bureau 
defines this industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in 
operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and 
infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of 
voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications 
networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology 
or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use 
the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to 
provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, 
including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming 
distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, 
establishments providing satellite television distribution services 
using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in 
this industry.'' Under that size standard, such a business is small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 show that there 
were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated 
with fewer than 1,000 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates 
that most providers of competitive local exchange service, competitive 
access providers, shared-tenant service providers, and other local 
service providers are small entities.
    15. The Commission has included small incumbent LECs in this 
present RFA analysis. As noted above, a ``small business'' under the 
RFA is one that, inter alia, meets the pertinent small business size 
standard (e.g., a telephone communications business having 1,500 or 
fewer employees), and ``is not dominant in its field of operation.'' 
The SBA's Office of Advocacy contends that, for RFA purposes, small 
incumbent LECs are not dominant in their field of operation because any 
such dominance is not ``national'' in scope. The Commission has 
therefore included small incumbent LECs in this RFA analysis, although 
it emphasizes that this RFA action has no effect on Commission analyses 
and determinations in other, non-RFA contexts.
    16. Interexchange Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a small business size standard specifically for providers of 
interexchange services. The appropriate size standard under SBA rules 
is for the category Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census 
Bureau defines this industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in 
operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and 
infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of 
voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications 
networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology 
or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use 
the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to 
provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, 
including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming 
distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, 
establishments providing satellite television distribution services 
using

[[Page 773]]

facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in this 
industry.'' Under that size standard, such a business is small if it 
has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 show that there were 
3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated with 
fewer than 1,000 employees. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of interexchange carriers are small entities.
    17. Cable System Operators (Telecom Act Standard). The 
Communications Act also contains a size standard for small cable system 
operators, which is ``a cable operator that, directly or through an 
affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer than 1 percent of all 
subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity 
or entities whose gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed 
$250,000,000.'' There are approximately 52,403,705 cable video 
subscribers in the United States today. Accordingly, an operator 
serving fewer than 524,037 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator 
if its annual revenues, when combined with the total annual revenues of 
all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the aggregate. Based 
on available data, the Commission finds that all but nine incumbent 
cable operators are small entities under this size standard. Note that 
the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether 
cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual 
revenues exceed $250 million. Although it seems certain that some of 
these cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross 
annual revenues exceed $250 million, the Commission is unable at this 
time to estimate with greater precision the number of cable system 
operators that would qualify as small cable operators under the 
definition in the Communications Act.
    18. Other Toll Carriers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA has 
developed a size standard for small businesses specifically applicable 
to other toll carriers. This category includes toll carriers that do 
not fall within the categories of interexchange carriers, operator 
service providers, prepaid calling card providers, satellite service 
carriers, or toll resellers. The closest applicable size standard under 
SBA rules is for Wired Telecommunications Carriers. The U.S. Census 
Bureau defines this industry as ``establishments primarily engaged in 
operating and/or providing access to transmission facilities and 
infrastructure that they own and/or lease for the transmission of 
voice, data, text, sound, and video using wired communications 
networks. Transmission facilities may be based on a single technology 
or a combination of technologies. Establishments in this industry use 
the wired telecommunications network facilities that they operate to 
provide a variety of services, such as wired telephony services, 
including VoIP services, wired (cable) audio and video programming 
distribution, and wired broadband internet services. By exception, 
establishments providing satellite television distribution services 
using facilities and infrastructure that they operate are included in 
this industry.'' Under that size standard, such a business is small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 show that there 
were 3,117 firms that operated that year. Of this total, 3,083 operated 
with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the 
associated small business size standard, the majority of other toll 
carriers can be considered small.

Wireless Carriers

    19. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). Since 
2007, the Census Bureau has placed wireless firms within this new, 
broad, economic census category. Under the present and prior 
categories, the SBA has deemed a wireless business to be small if it 
has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the category of Wireless 
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), Census data for 2012 
show that there were 967 firms that operated for the entire year. Of 
this total, 955 firms had fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this 
category and the associated size standard, the Commission estimates 
that the majority of wireless telecommunications carriers (except 
satellite) are small entities. Similarly, according to internally 
developed Commission data, 413 carriers reported that they were engaged 
in the provision of wireless telephony, including cellular service, 
Personal Communications Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile Radio 
(SMR) services. Of this total, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or fewer 
employees. Thus, using available data, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of wireless firms can be considered small.
    20. Satellite Telecommunications Providers. The category of 
Satellite Telecommunications ``comprises establishments primarily 
engaged in providing telecommunications services to other 
establishments in the telecommunications and broadcasting industries by 
forwarding and receiving communications signals via a system of 
satellites or reselling satellite telecommunications.'' This category 
has a small business size standard of $32.5 million or less in average 
annual receipts, under SBA rules. For this category, Census Bureau data 
for 2012 show that there were a total of 333 firms that operated for 
the entire year. Of this total, 299 firms had annual receipts of under 
$25 million. Consequently, the Commission estimates that the majority 
of satellite telecommunications firms are small entities.
    21. All Other Telecommunications. All other telecommunications 
comprises, inter alia, ``establishments primarily engaged in providing 
specialized telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, 
communications telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry 
also includes establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite 
terminal stations and associated facilities connected with one or more 
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to, 
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. 
Establishments providing internet services or voice over internet 
protocol (VoIP) services via client-supplied telecommunications 
connections are also included in this industry.'' The SBA has developed 
a small business size standard for the category of All Other 
Telecommunications. Under that size standard, such a business is small 
if it has $32.5 million in annual receipts. For this category, Census 
Bureau data for 2012 show that there were a total of 1,442 firms that 
operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,400 had annual receipts 
below $25 million per year. Consequently, the Commission estimates that 
the majority of all other telecommunications firms are small entities.

Resellers

    22. Toll Resellers. The Commission has not developed a definition 
for toll resellers. The closest NAICS Code Category is 
Telecommunications Resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers industry 
comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and network 
capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications networks and 
reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services (except 
satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this 
industry resell telecommunications; they do not operate transmission 
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) 
are included in this industry. The SBA has developed a small business 
size standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. Under 
that size standard, such

[[Page 774]]

a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 
2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale services during that year. 
Of that number, all operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, 
under this category and the associated small business size standard, 
the majority of these resellers can be considered small entities. 
According to Commission data, 881 carriers have reported that they are 
engaged in the provision of toll resale services. Of this total, an 
estimated 857 have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, the 
Commission estimates that the majority of toll resellers are small 
entities.
    23. Local Resellers. The SBA has developed a small business size 
standard for the category of Telecommunications Resellers. The 
Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises establishments engaged 
in purchasing access and network capacity from owners and operators of 
telecommunications networks and reselling wired and wireless 
telecommunications services (except satellite) to businesses and 
households. Establishments in this industry resell telecommunications; 
they do not operate transmission facilities and infrastructure. Mobile 
virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included in this industry. Under 
that size standard, such a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 
employees. Census data for 2012 show that 1,341 firms provided resale 
services during that year. Of that number, all operated with fewer than 
1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and the associated small 
business size standard, the majority of these local resellers can be 
considered small entities.
    24. Prepaid Calling Card Providers. The SBA has developed a small 
business size standard for the category of Telecommunications 
Resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers industry comprises 
establishments engaged in purchasing access and network capacity from 
owners and operators of telecommunications networks and reselling wired 
and wireless telecommunications services (except satellite) to 
businesses and households. Establishments in this industry resell 
telecommunications; they do not operate transmission facilities and 
infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs) are included 
in this industry. Under that size standard, such a business is small if 
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census data for 2012 show that 1,341 
firms provided resale services during that year. Of that number, all 
operated with fewer than 1,000 employees. Thus, under this category and 
the associated small business size standard, the majority of these 
prepaid calling card providers can be considered small entities.

Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements

    25. As indicated above, the FNPRM builds on the Report and Order 
portion of document FCC 17-151 by inquiring about how to effectively 
implement a challenge mechanism to allow erroneously blocked calls to 
be unblocked as quickly as possible and seeking comment on how to 
measure the effectiveness of the rules adopted in the Report and Order. 
The Commission seeks to minimize the burden associated with reporting, 
recordkeeping, and other compliance requirements for the proposed 
rules.
    26. Under the proposed rules, providers may need to establish 
procedures to respond to and evaluate complaints of erroneous call 
blocking, and quickly cease blocking that it determined to have been 
initiated in error. In addition, providers may need to retain records 
of calls blocked and report that information on a periodic basis.

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

    27. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant 
alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, 
which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) 
The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or 
timetables that take into account the resources available to small 
entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; 
(3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an 
exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small 
entities.
    28. The challenge mechanism and reporting on which the Commission 
seeks comment could apply to all providers that block calls under the 
permissive rules in the Report and Order. In the Report and Order, the 
Commission encourages all carriers, including small businesses, to 
block illegal calls, and the Commission therefore seeks comment from 
small businesses on how to minimize costs associated with the challenge 
mechanism and the reporting. The FNPRM poses specific requests for 
comment from small businesses regarding how the proposed rules affect 
them and what could be done to minimize any disproportionate impact on 
small businesses.
    29. The Commission will consider ways to reduce the impact on small 
businesses, such as establishment of different compliance or reporting 
requirements or timetables that take into account the resources 
available to small entities based on the record in response to the 
FNPRM. The Commission has requested feedback from small businesses in 
the FNPRM and seeks comment on ways to make a challenge mechanism and 
reporting less costly. The Commission seeks comment on how to minimize 
the economic impact of these potential requirements.
    30. The Commission expects to consider the economic impact on small 
entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the FNPRM, in 
reaching its final conclusions and taking action in this proceeding.

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

    31. None.


Federal Communications Commission.
Katura Jackson,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-00100 Filed 1-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P