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