Connect America Fund-Alaska Plan, 60162-60164 [2020-21045]

Download as PDF 60162 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 186 / Thursday, September 24, 2020 / Notices Generic Clearance for TSCA Section 4 Test Rules, Test Orders, Enforceable Consent Agreements (ECAs), Voluntary Data Submissions, and Exemptions from Testing Requirement (EPA ICR Number 1139.12 and OMB Control Number 2070–0033) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This is a proposed revision of the ICR that is currently approved through October 31, 2021. This notice allows for an additional 30 days for public comments. A fuller description of the ICR is given below, including its estimated burden and cost to the public. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 26, 2020. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2015–0436 to EPA online using www.regulations.gov or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes profanity, threats, information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Submit written comments and recommendations to OMB for the proposed information collection within 30 days of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or by using the search function. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Harlan Weir, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone number: (202) 564–9885; email address: weir.harlan@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supporting documents which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov or in person at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:00 Sep 23, 2020 Jkt 250001 Center is 202–566–1744. For additional information about EPA’s public docket, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets. Abstract: Under TSCA section 4, EPA has the authority to promulgate rules, issue orders, and enter into consent agreements requiring manufacturers and processors to develop information on chemical substances and mixtures. The revisions to this ICR cover the information collection activities associated with the submission of information to EPA pursuant to TSCA section 4, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act. Under TSCA section 4, EPA has the authority to issue regulatory actions designed to gather or develop information related to human and environmental health, including hazard and exposure information, on chemical substances and mixtures. This information collection addresses the burden associated with industry activities involved in the reporting and recordkeeping pursuant to TSCA section 4. The ICR, which is available in the docket along with other related materials, provides a detailed explanation of the collection activities and the burden estimate that is only briefly summarized here: Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers (including importers) or processors of chemical substances or mixtures, which are mostly chemical companies classified under NAICS Codes 325 and 324. Respondent’s obligation to respond: Mandatory (15 U.S.C. 2603 et seq.). Estimated total number of potential respondents: 175 (total). Frequency of response: On occasion. Total estimated burden: 32,147 hours (per year). Burden is defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(b). Total estimated cost: $7,650,663 (per year), includes $5,227,235 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs. Changes in the estimates: The modifications in this request would increase total respondent burden by 87,060 hours (29,020 hours annually) over the three-year period in which the generic ICR will be active. This increase reflects changes in the number of actions, CBI substantiation requirements, and methodological updates. However, there is a reduction in annual cost estimates due to a change in the assumed battery of tests that may be required for this three-year period under potential testing actions. The assumption is based on statutory changes under the Lautenberg Act, such as the mandated tiered testing approach. Further details about these changes are PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 included in this ICR supporting statement. Courtney Kerwin, Director, Regulatory Support Division. [FR Doc. 2020–21066 Filed 9–23–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P EXPORT-IMPORT BANK Sunshine Act Meetings; Withdrawal Notice of an open meeting of the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank of the United States; withdrawal. ACTION: The Export-Import Bank of the United States published a document in the Federal Register of September 17, 2020 concerning a Sunshine Act meeting. The Notice provided incorrect information. A correct notice will be published immediately. DATES: As of September 22, 2020, the notice published September 17, 2020, at 85 FR 58046, is withdrawn. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Original notice, found on pages: 58046–58047: Federal Register Citation: 85 FR 58046; FR Doc Number 2020–20626 contained incorrect information regarding the topic of the meeting and contact information. A correct notice will be published immediately. SUMMARY: Joyce B. Stone, Assistant Corporate Secretary. [FR Doc. 2020–21273 Filed 9–22–20; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 6690–01–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [WC Docket No. 16–271; DA 20–1097; FRS 17087] Connect America Fund—Alaska Plan Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) adopts the Alaska Population Distribution Model. The model provides a methodology for estimating the number of Alaskans who receive mobile service within census blocks in remote areas of Alaska, allowing consistent understanding of where providers need to provide coverage for their approved commitments under the Alaska Plan. The Bureau will also use the methodology for creation of an explicit list of census blocks eligible for use of frozen support under the Alaska Plan. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Warner, Wireless Telecommunications SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM 24SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 186 / Thursday, September 24, 2020 / Notices Bureau, (202) 418–2419, matthew.warner@fcc.gov. This is a summary of the Bureau’s Order in WC Docket No. 16–271; DA 20–1097, which was released on September 16, 2020. The full text of document DA 20–1097 may be found at: https://apps.fcc.gov/ edocs/. To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov, or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Synopsis 1. In this Order, the Bureau adopts a methodology for estimating the number of Alaskans who receive mobile service within census blocks in remote areas of Alaska. The Bureau will use this methodology to determine whether mobile providers that participate in the Commission’s plan for providing support for the deployment of fixed and mobile service in high cost areas of Alaska (the Alaska Plan) have met their performance commitments. The Bureau will also use the methodology to identify census blocks in remote areas of Alaska where these minimum service commitments apply. 2. Alaska faces unique circumstances, including its massive size, varying terrain, harsh climates, isolated populations, shortened construction season, and lack of access to infrastructure, which have made deploying communications infrastructure particularly challenging for Alaskan providers. To address Alaska’s unique challenges, the Commission adopted the Alaska Plan Order in 2016, which set forth a ten-year universal service plan specific to Alaska. The Alaska Plan Order froze mobile provider participants’ support at December 2014 levels (frozen support), but required them to commit to expanding their Fourth-Generation, Long-Term Evolution (4G LTE) service at speeds of at least 10/1 Mbps in eligible areas, subject to exceptions such as limited middle mile capability. 3. Mobile Provider Commitments. Under the Alaska Plan Order’s requirements, participating mobile providers must serve a specific number of people in remote parts of Alaska by the end of year 5 (ending December 31, 2021) and year 10 (ending December 31, 2026) of the support term. As part of their commitments, providers must identify the mobile technology that they will use to serve those populations (e.g., 3G, LTE) and the type of middle-mile connectivity (e.g., fiber, satellite) on which they will rely to provide mobile VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:00 Sep 23, 2020 Jkt 250001 services. The Alaska Plan required participating mobile service providers to submit performance plans with their commitments for Bureau review. In December 2016, the Bureau approved the service commitments made by eight Alaskan mobile service providers, and it subsequently accepted updated commitments from ASTAC and GCI. The Alaska Plan Order stated that the Commission would rely on participating providers’ Form 477 coverage data to evaluate whether providers have met their 5 and 10 year commitments. The Commission delegated authority to the Bureau to require additional information necessary to establish clear standards for determining whether providers have met their 5 and 10-year commitments. 4. Proposed Alaska PopulationDistribution Model. To establish a consistent methodology for determining the number of people served in Alaskan census blocks, the Bureau sought comment on a model, which the Bureau named the Alaska PopulationDistribution Model, to estimate the number of Alaskans who receive mobile service in census blocks in remote areas. The Alaska Population Model Public Notice sought comment on using this methodology for the purpose of evaluating whether participating providers have met their performance obligations associated with receiving frozen support under the Alaska Plan. The Alaska Population-Distribution Model identifies areas within a census block where people are likely to live and then evenly distributes the population throughout the livable area of the census block. 5. Specifically, the model uses a multi-step process to identify areas within a census block most likely to be populated and combines those results with service coverage maps to estimate the number of people with mobile wireless service in a partially-served census block. The model uses TIGER road data overlaid onto populated census blocks, under the premise that local roads (not highways or expressways) are a reliable predictor of population locations. Next, the model draws polygons extending 100 meters on either side of those roads, with areas further out assumed to be uninhabited. The model also overlays General Land Status data maintained by the State of Alaska and removes areas where people are unlikely to reside, such as National Forest Service land. Finally, the model evenly distributes the population of each census block within the remaining polygons to reflect the geographic areas where people are likely to live. For those census blocks where no populated PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 60163 areas are identified, the methodology evenly distributes the Census-reported population of each block across land within that block owned by municipalities, private entities, or Alaska Natives. If there is no land owned by those groups, then the population is distributed across the entire census block. 6. The Alaska Population Model Public Notice sought comment on exceptions to the methodology in four areas of Alaska in which the proposed methodology might not accurately reflect population coverage. Specifically, the Bureau proposed to adopt the following deviations from the general methodology: • In and around Unalaska, in an area covering 31 census blocks, address and other population location information from the local government could be used to create polygons around addresses (with a 50-meter buffer) in residential areas to represent the location of the population. • Near Nome and Unalakleet, in an area covering 187 census blocks, aerial imagery data from Google Earth can be used to identify building structures, and polygons could be drawn around them as a proxy for the location of population. • In the Prudhoe Bay area, in an area covering 16 census blocks where 2010 census data likely primarily reflects oil field workers rather than year-round population, Google Earth and internal ASTAC location data can be used to identify populated areas (primarily developed worksites, mobile camps, and staging areas). • In the Copper Valley, in an area covering 61 census blocks, Google Earth and internal Copper Valley Telephone Company structural location data can be used to identify structures. 7. The Bureau also sought comment on alternatives to the Alaska Population-Distribution Model that may better identify populated areas. The Bureau specifically sought comment on using a database of broadbandserviceable locations to identify the specific locations within a census block where fixed broadband is unavailable. 8. Finally, the Bureau proposed to use the Alaska Population-Distribution Model to identify the census blocks in remote areas of Alaska that are eligible for use of frozen support under the Alaska Plan (frozen-support eligible blocks), and it noted that the Bureau’s list of blocks developed using the methodology was the same as the list submitted by GCI. No commenter offered any alternatives to this proposal. 9. The Bureau adopts the Alaska Population-Distribution Model to E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM 24SEN1 60164 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 186 / Thursday, September 24, 2020 / Notices estimate the number of people in remote parts of Alaska who have access to mobile service in census blocks partially served by providers participating in the Alaska Plan. To assess a participating provider’s satisfaction of its service commitments at the 5 and 10-year performance benchmarks, the Bureau will use 2010 block-level population census data and the provider’s Form 477 data, in conjunction with the Alaska Population-Distribution Model, to estimate the number of Alaskans in remote parts of the state who are covered by the provider’s network (using the technology identified in the commitment). No commenter proposed an alternative approach, and the sole commenter, ATA, supports use of the model. The Bureau agrees with ATA that the Alaska Population-Distribution Model is the best currently available method for determining whether mobile providers meet their service commitments. In addition, the Bureau believes that the model is the best available methodology that likely will be available by the 5-year mark and that the same methodology should be applied to both the 5 and 10-year benchmark. Using two different methodologies for the 5 and 10-year evaluations would result in inconsistent evaluation of the commitments and could jeopardize the Commission’s ability to enforce those commitments. 10. Determining Whether Providers Have Met Their Commitments. Although the Alaska Plan Order required mobile participants to specify the number of people that they would commit to serve, it did not address how providers would calculate this number, other than to note that the Commission would use mobile providers’ nationwide coverage polygons from Form 477 for the analysis. Form 477 data, however, which reflect mobile providers’ coverage area, do not necessarily reflect the number of people served in Alaska. A map that reflects 75% coverage of the geographic area of a census block, for example, does not mean necessarily that 75% of the population of that census block is covered by that provider, given that population generally is not evenly distributed through a census block in remote areas of Alaska and that census blocks may be very large and sparsely populated. 11. To determine whether mobile providers have met their service commitments using their Form 477 nationwide coverage polygons, the Commission will superimpose these coverage polygons onto the Alaska Population-Distribution Model to distribute 2010 census population throughout the census block. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:00 Sep 23, 2020 Jkt 250001 Commission staff then will analyze how many people in that census block are located within the mobile provider’s coverage area to determine the number of people served by that provider. 12. Exceptions. The Bureau also adopts the four exceptions to the model that it proposed in the Alaska Population Model Public Notice (in and around Unalaska, near Nome and Unalakleet, in the Prudhoe Bay area, and in the Copper Valley area). Because of the unique nature of these four areas, the alternate data sources better reflect the location of population than the Alaska Population-Distribution Model; in addition, no commenters object to these exceptions. Allowing these limited exceptions to the model will provide more granular data of where people are located in remote areas, and it will ensure that participating mobile providers are deploying service that will benefit Alaskans. 13. The Bureau rejects ATA’s request for mobile providers to ‘‘submit available evidence regarding the true location of population no later than six months before the next approaching benchmark,’’ which the Bureau interprets to be a request to submit additional exceptions to the Alaska Population-Distribution Model by June 30, 2021 (six months before the 5-year mark of December 31, 2021). First, the Bureau notes that mobile providers already have had an opportunity to submit additional exceptions in response to the Alaska Population Model Public Notice, issued in February, and no commenter has identified any exceptions other than the four exceptions that the Bureau adopts here. Second, permitting the submission of additional exceptions after providers’ four-year performance plan resubmissions, due December 31, 2020, would unnecessarily complicate the Bureau’s review of those resubmissions, which must include population coverage commitments based on the model the Bureau adopts herein. The Bureau therefore declines to allow mobile providers to submit additional exceptions to the model and find the amount of time already allowed for such requests to have been sufficient. 14. Frozen-Support Eligible Census Blocks. Finally, the Bureau adopts its proposal to use the Alaska PopulationDistribution Model to identify those census blocks in remote areas of Alaska that are eligible for frozen support under the Alaska Plan and that can be counted by participating carriers towards their performance commitments. Specifically, the Bureau uses the model to identify those census blocks in remote Alaska where, as of December 31, 2014, less PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 than 85% of the population was covered by 4G LTE service of providers that are either unsubsidized or not eligible for frozen support in Alaska. The Bureau applies the Alaska PopulationDistribution Model—in combination with 2010 block-level population census data and Form 477 4G LTE coverage data for those unsubsidized or ineligible providers as of December 31, 2014—to generate the list of frozen-support eligible blocks. 15. As the Bureau explained in the Alaska Population Model Public Notice, the list of census blocks generated using our proposed Alaska Population Distribution Model aligns with the list of census blocks eligible for frozen support that GCI submitted on November 29, 2016. Commenters do not object to this list of census blocks, and the Bureau finds that it is the most accurate list of census blocks eligible for frozen support. Accordingly, the Bureau will use this list of frozen-support eligible census blocks to determine if mobile providers have met their service commitments at the 5 and 10-year benchmarks of the Alaska Plan. Consistent with the Alaska Plan Order, participating providers ‘‘may only satisfy their performance commitments through service coverage’’ in those census blocks included on the list. 16. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1–4 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151–154 and 254, and sections 0.91, 0.131, 0.291, 0.311, and 1.106 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0.131, 0.291, 0.311, and 1.106, and the delegated authority contained in the Alaska Plan Order, 31 FCC Rcd 10139, 10166, para. 85, this Order is adopted. Federal Communications Commission. Amy Brett, Associate Division Chief, Competition and Infrastructure Policy Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. [FR Doc. 2020–21045 Filed 9–23–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712–01–P FEDERAL MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION SERVICE [Docket No.: FMCS–2020–0005–0001] Notice of Succession Plan for the FMCS Office of the Director (OD), Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM 24SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 186 (Thursday, September 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60162-60164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21045]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

[WC Docket No. 16-271; DA 20-1097; FRS 17087]


Connect America Fund--Alaska Plan

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureau) adopts the 
Alaska Population Distribution Model. The model provides a methodology 
for estimating the number of Alaskans who receive mobile service within 
census blocks in remote areas of Alaska, allowing consistent 
understanding of where providers need to provide coverage for their 
approved commitments under the Alaska Plan. The Bureau will also use 
the methodology for creation of an explicit list of census blocks 
eligible for use of frozen support under the Alaska Plan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Warner, Wireless 
Telecommunications

[[Page 60163]]

Bureau, (202) 418-2419, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Bureau's Order in 
WC Docket No. 16-271; DA 20-1097, which was released on September 16, 
2020. The full text of document DA 20-1097 may be found at: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs/. To request materials in accessible formats for 
people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio 
format), send an email to [email protected], or call the Consumer and 
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice).

Synopsis

    1. In this Order, the Bureau adopts a methodology for estimating 
the number of Alaskans who receive mobile service within census blocks 
in remote areas of Alaska. The Bureau will use this methodology to 
determine whether mobile providers that participate in the Commission's 
plan for providing support for the deployment of fixed and mobile 
service in high cost areas of Alaska (the Alaska Plan) have met their 
performance commitments. The Bureau will also use the methodology to 
identify census blocks in remote areas of Alaska where these minimum 
service commitments apply.
    2. Alaska faces unique circumstances, including its massive size, 
varying terrain, harsh climates, isolated populations, shortened 
construction season, and lack of access to infrastructure, which have 
made deploying communications infrastructure particularly challenging 
for Alaskan providers. To address Alaska's unique challenges, the 
Commission adopted the Alaska Plan Order in 2016, which set forth a 
ten-year universal service plan specific to Alaska. The Alaska Plan 
Order froze mobile provider participants' support at December 2014 
levels (frozen support), but required them to commit to expanding their 
Fourth-Generation, Long-Term Evolution (4G LTE) service at speeds of at 
least 10/1 Mbps in eligible areas, subject to exceptions such as 
limited middle mile capability.
    3. Mobile Provider Commitments. Under the Alaska Plan Order's 
requirements, participating mobile providers must serve a specific 
number of people in remote parts of Alaska by the end of year 5 (ending 
December 31, 2021) and year 10 (ending December 31, 2026) of the 
support term. As part of their commitments, providers must identify the 
mobile technology that they will use to serve those populations (e.g., 
3G, LTE) and the type of middle-mile connectivity (e.g., fiber, 
satellite) on which they will rely to provide mobile services. The 
Alaska Plan required participating mobile service providers to submit 
performance plans with their commitments for Bureau review. In December 
2016, the Bureau approved the service commitments made by eight Alaskan 
mobile service providers, and it subsequently accepted updated 
commitments from ASTAC and GCI. The Alaska Plan Order stated that the 
Commission would rely on participating providers' Form 477 coverage 
data to evaluate whether providers have met their 5 and 10 year 
commitments. The Commission delegated authority to the Bureau to 
require additional information necessary to establish clear standards 
for determining whether providers have met their 5 and 10-year 
commitments.
    4. Proposed Alaska Population-Distribution Model. To establish a 
consistent methodology for determining the number of people served in 
Alaskan census blocks, the Bureau sought comment on a model, which the 
Bureau named the Alaska Population-Distribution Model, to estimate the 
number of Alaskans who receive mobile service in census blocks in 
remote areas. The Alaska Population Model Public Notice sought comment 
on using this methodology for the purpose of evaluating whether 
participating providers have met their performance obligations 
associated with receiving frozen support under the Alaska Plan. The 
Alaska Population-Distribution Model identifies areas within a census 
block where people are likely to live and then evenly distributes the 
population throughout the livable area of the census block.
    5. Specifically, the model uses a multi-step process to identify 
areas within a census block most likely to be populated and combines 
those results with service coverage maps to estimate the number of 
people with mobile wireless service in a partially-served census block. 
The model uses TIGER road data overlaid onto populated census blocks, 
under the premise that local roads (not highways or expressways) are a 
reliable predictor of population locations. Next, the model draws 
polygons extending 100 meters on either side of those roads, with areas 
further out assumed to be uninhabited. The model also overlays General 
Land Status data maintained by the State of Alaska and removes areas 
where people are unlikely to reside, such as National Forest Service 
land. Finally, the model evenly distributes the population of each 
census block within the remaining polygons to reflect the geographic 
areas where people are likely to live. For those census blocks where no 
populated areas are identified, the methodology evenly distributes the 
Census-reported population of each block across land within that block 
owned by municipalities, private entities, or Alaska Natives. If there 
is no land owned by those groups, then the population is distributed 
across the entire census block.
    6. The Alaska Population Model Public Notice sought comment on 
exceptions to the methodology in four areas of Alaska in which the 
proposed methodology might not accurately reflect population coverage. 
Specifically, the Bureau proposed to adopt the following deviations 
from the general methodology:
     In and around Unalaska, in an area covering 31 census 
blocks, address and other population location information from the 
local government could be used to create polygons around addresses 
(with a 50-meter buffer) in residential areas to represent the location 
of the population.
     Near Nome and Unalakleet, in an area covering 187 census 
blocks, aerial imagery data from Google Earth can be used to identify 
building structures, and polygons could be drawn around them as a proxy 
for the location of population.
     In the Prudhoe Bay area, in an area covering 16 census 
blocks where 2010 census data likely primarily reflects oil field 
workers rather than year-round population, Google Earth and internal 
ASTAC location data can be used to identify populated areas (primarily 
developed worksites, mobile camps, and staging areas).
     In the Copper Valley, in an area covering 61 census 
blocks, Google Earth and internal Copper Valley Telephone Company 
structural location data can be used to identify structures.
    7. The Bureau also sought comment on alternatives to the Alaska 
Population-Distribution Model that may better identify populated areas. 
The Bureau specifically sought comment on using a database of 
broadband-serviceable locations to identify the specific locations 
within a census block where fixed broadband is unavailable.
    8. Finally, the Bureau proposed to use the Alaska Population-
Distribution Model to identify the census blocks in remote areas of 
Alaska that are eligible for use of frozen support under the Alaska 
Plan (frozen-support eligible blocks), and it noted that the Bureau's 
list of blocks developed using the methodology was the same as the list 
submitted by GCI. No commenter offered any alternatives to this 
proposal.
    9. The Bureau adopts the Alaska Population-Distribution Model to

[[Page 60164]]

estimate the number of people in remote parts of Alaska who have access 
to mobile service in census blocks partially served by providers 
participating in the Alaska Plan. To assess a participating provider's 
satisfaction of its service commitments at the 5 and 10-year 
performance benchmarks, the Bureau will use 2010 block-level population 
census data and the provider's Form 477 data, in conjunction with the 
Alaska Population-Distribution Model, to estimate the number of 
Alaskans in remote parts of the state who are covered by the provider's 
network (using the technology identified in the commitment). No 
commenter proposed an alternative approach, and the sole commenter, 
ATA, supports use of the model. The Bureau agrees with ATA that the 
Alaska Population-Distribution Model is the best currently available 
method for determining whether mobile providers meet their service 
commitments. In addition, the Bureau believes that the model is the 
best available methodology that likely will be available by the 5-year 
mark and that the same methodology should be applied to both the 5 and 
10-year benchmark. Using two different methodologies for the 5 and 10-
year evaluations would result in inconsistent evaluation of the 
commitments and could jeopardize the Commission's ability to enforce 
those commitments.
    10. Determining Whether Providers Have Met Their Commitments. 
Although the Alaska Plan Order required mobile participants to specify 
the number of people that they would commit to serve, it did not 
address how providers would calculate this number, other than to note 
that the Commission would use mobile providers' nationwide coverage 
polygons from Form 477 for the analysis. Form 477 data, however, which 
reflect mobile providers' coverage area, do not necessarily reflect the 
number of people served in Alaska. A map that reflects 75% coverage of 
the geographic area of a census block, for example, does not mean 
necessarily that 75% of the population of that census block is covered 
by that provider, given that population generally is not evenly 
distributed through a census block in remote areas of Alaska and that 
census blocks may be very large and sparsely populated.
    11. To determine whether mobile providers have met their service 
commitments using their Form 477 nationwide coverage polygons, the 
Commission will superimpose these coverage polygons onto the Alaska 
Population-Distribution Model to distribute 2010 census population 
throughout the census block. Commission staff then will analyze how 
many people in that census block are located within the mobile 
provider's coverage area to determine the number of people served by 
that provider.
    12. Exceptions. The Bureau also adopts the four exceptions to the 
model that it proposed in the Alaska Population Model Public Notice (in 
and around Unalaska, near Nome and Unalakleet, in the Prudhoe Bay area, 
and in the Copper Valley area). Because of the unique nature of these 
four areas, the alternate data sources better reflect the location of 
population than the Alaska Population-Distribution Model; in addition, 
no commenters object to these exceptions. Allowing these limited 
exceptions to the model will provide more granular data of where people 
are located in remote areas, and it will ensure that participating 
mobile providers are deploying service that will benefit Alaskans.
    13. The Bureau rejects ATA's request for mobile providers to 
``submit available evidence regarding the true location of population 
no later than six months before the next approaching benchmark,'' which 
the Bureau interprets to be a request to submit additional exceptions 
to the Alaska Population-Distribution Model by June 30, 2021 (six 
months before the 5-year mark of December 31, 2021). First, the Bureau 
notes that mobile providers already have had an opportunity to submit 
additional exceptions in response to the Alaska Population Model Public 
Notice, issued in February, and no commenter has identified any 
exceptions other than the four exceptions that the Bureau adopts here. 
Second, permitting the submission of additional exceptions after 
providers' four-year performance plan resubmissions, due December 31, 
2020, would unnecessarily complicate the Bureau's review of those 
resubmissions, which must include population coverage commitments based 
on the model the Bureau adopts herein. The Bureau therefore declines to 
allow mobile providers to submit additional exceptions to the model and 
find the amount of time already allowed for such requests to have been 
sufficient.
    14. Frozen-Support Eligible Census Blocks. Finally, the Bureau 
adopts its proposal to use the Alaska Population-Distribution Model to 
identify those census blocks in remote areas of Alaska that are 
eligible for frozen support under the Alaska Plan and that can be 
counted by participating carriers towards their performance 
commitments. Specifically, the Bureau uses the model to identify those 
census blocks in remote Alaska where, as of December 31, 2014, less 
than 85% of the population was covered by 4G LTE service of providers 
that are either unsubsidized or not eligible for frozen support in 
Alaska. The Bureau applies the Alaska Population-Distribution Model--in 
combination with 2010 block-level population census data and Form 477 
4G LTE coverage data for those unsubsidized or ineligible providers as 
of December 31, 2014--to generate the list of frozen-support eligible 
blocks.
    15. As the Bureau explained in the Alaska Population Model Public 
Notice, the list of census blocks generated using our proposed Alaska 
Population Distribution Model aligns with the list of census blocks 
eligible for frozen support that GCI submitted on November 29, 2016. 
Commenters do not object to this list of census blocks, and the Bureau 
finds that it is the most accurate list of census blocks eligible for 
frozen support. Accordingly, the Bureau will use this list of frozen-
support eligible census blocks to determine if mobile providers have 
met their service commitments at the 5 and 10-year benchmarks of the 
Alaska Plan. Consistent with the Alaska Plan Order, participating 
providers ``may only satisfy their performance commitments through 
service coverage'' in those census blocks included on the list.
    16. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained 
in sections 1-4 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 
47 U.S.C. 151-154 and 254, and sections 0.91, 0.131, 0.291, 0.311, and 
1.106 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.91, 0.131, 0.291, 0.311, and 
1.106, and the delegated authority contained in the Alaska Plan Order, 
31 FCC Rcd 10139, 10166, para. 85, this Order is adopted.

Federal Communications Commission.
Amy Brett,
Associate Division Chief, Competition and Infrastructure Policy 
Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau.
[FR Doc. 2020-21045 Filed 9-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P


This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.