Proposed Rule2022-02483
Empowering Broadband Consumers Through Transparency
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 7, 2022
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Commission proposes measures to implement certain provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Infrastructure Act). Specifically, the Commission proposes to require that broadband internet access service providers (ISPs) display, at the point of sale, labels to disclose to consumers certain information about prices, introductory rates, data allowances, broadband speeds, and management practices, among other things.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6827-6838]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02483]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 8
[CG Docket No. 22-2; FCC 22-7; FR ID 69891]
Empowering Broadband Consumers Through Transparency
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Commission proposes measures to
implement certain provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (Infrastructure Act). Specifically, the Commission proposes to
require that broadband internet access service providers (ISPs)
display, at the point of sale, labels to disclose to consumers certain
information about prices, introductory rates, data allowances,
broadband speeds, and management practices, among other things.
DATES: Comments are due on or before March 9, 2022, and reply comments
are due on or before March 24, 2022.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by CG Docket No. 22-2,
by any of the following methods:
<bullet> Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the ECFS: <a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/">https://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/</a>.
<bullet> Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing.
Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier, or by first-
class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be
addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
<bullet> Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive,
Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
<bullet> U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
<bullet<ls-thn-eq> Effective March 19, 2020, and until further
notice, the Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger
delivered filings. This is a temporary measure taken to help protect
the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission
of COVID-19. In the event that the Commission announces the lifting of
COVID-19 restrictions, a filing window will be opened at the
Commission's office located at 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis, MD
20701. See FCC Announces Closure of FCC Headquarters Open Window and
Change in Hand-Delivery Policy, Public Notice, DA 20-304 (March 19,
2020), <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy">https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy</a>.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible
formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic
files, audio format), send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#791f1a1a4c494d391f1a1a571e160f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="85e3e6e6b0b5b1c5e3e6e6abe2eaf3">[email protected]</span></a> or call the
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-
418-0432 (TTY).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erica H. McMahon of the Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0346 or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1a5f6873797b345779577b7275745a7c7979347d756c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5c192e353f3d72113f113d3433321c3a3f3f723b332a">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), in CG Docket No. 22-2, FCC 22-7, adopted
and released on January 27, 2022. The full text of the document is
available for public inspection and copying via the Commission's
Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). To request materials in
accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print,
electronic files, audio format), send an email to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d9bfbabaece9ed99bfbabaf7beb6af"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="03656060363337436560602d646c75">[email protected]</span></a> or
call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530
(voice).
This matter shall be treated as a ``permit-but-disclose''
proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules. 47 CFR
1.1200 through 1.1216. 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).
Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis
The NPRM proposes rule amendments that may result in modified
information collection requirements. If the Commission adopts any
modified information collection requirements, the Commission will
publish a 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; 44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
Synopsis
1. In 2021, Congress enacted and the President signed the
Infrastructure Act, which, in relevant part, directs the Commission
``[n]ot later than 1 year after the date of enactment of th[e] Act, to
promulgate regulations to require the display of broadband consumer
labels, as described in the Public Notice of the Commission issued on
April 4, 2016 (DA 16-357), to disclose to consumers information
regarding broadband internet access service plans.'' See Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law 117-58, 135 Stat. 429, section
60504(a) (2021) (Infrastructure Act). Further, the Infrastructure Act
requires that any broadband consumer label adopted by the Commission
``shall include information regarding whether
[[Page 6828]]
the offered price is an introductory rate and, if so, the price the
consumer will be required to pay following the introductory period.''
2. The Infrastructure Act also directs the Commission to conduct a
series of public hearings to assess: (1) How consumers evaluate
broadband internet access service plans; and (2) whether disclosures to
consumers of information regarding broadband internet access service
plans, including the disclosures required under 47 CFR 8.1, are
available, effective, and sufficient. The Commission will announce the
dates of such hearings, which will inform the Commission's conclusions
in this proceeding, in a forthcoming Public Notice and will provide
notice of the hearings separately in the Federal Register as soon as
such dates are determined.
3. In this NPRM, the Commission initiates a proceeding to implement
section 60504 of the Infrastructure Act, and proposes to require ISPs
to display the labels approved in 2016 as part of a safe harbor, with
any necessary modifications. The Commission seeks comment on the extent
to which the Infrastructure Act requires or permits the Commission to
depart from the labels described in its 2016 Public Notice. See
Consumer and Governmental Affairs, Wireline Competition, and Wireless
Telecommunications Bureaus Approve Open Internet Broadband Consumer
Labels, GN Docket No. 14-28, Public Notice, 31 FCC Rcd 3358 (CGB/WCB/
WTB 2016).
A. Proposed Broadband Consumer Labels
4. In the NPRM, the Commission proposes to adopt the 2016 labels
subject to appropriate modifications and asks whether anything has
changed since the Consumer Advisory Committee (CAC) developed the
labels in 2016 that suggests the Commission should consider updating
the labels in terms of content and format, and providing new guidance
about where ISPs must display such labels. The Commission also seeks
comment on how consumers evaluate broadband service plans and whether
the 2016 labels will assist consumers with the purchase process. Should
the Commission consider updating the labels to assist consumers with:
(1) Selecting a broadband provider; (2) selecting a broadband service
plan; (3) managing use of a broadband service plan; and (4) deciding
whether and when to switch an existing broadband provider or plan? The
Commission also seeks comment on how ISPs currently disclose
information about their broadband services. How should their current
practices inform the Commission's decisions about the labels adopted
going forward? Additionally, the Commission seeks comment on the scope
of broadband service plans to which the labels requirement should
apply. For example, how should providers treat plans that are not
currently available for purchase by consumers, such as legacy or
grandfathered plans?
Content
5. The Commission proposes to adopt the content of the 2016 labels,
both for fixed and mobile broadband services, with appropriate
modifications. As reflected below, the 2016 labels for fixed broadband
service include the following content: (1) Pricing; (2) monthly data
allowance; (3) overage charges; (4) equipment fees; (5) other monthly
fees; (6) one-time fees; and (7) early termination fees. The 2016
labels also include information on performance (speed, latency, and
packet loss) and on network management practices. The 2016 labels for
mobile broadband service include information on: (1) Pricing; (2) when
you exceed data allowance; (3) other included services/features; (4)
other monthly fees; (5) one-time fees; (6) service contract terms; (7)
early termination fees; and (8) ``bring your own device'' information.
The mobile broadband labels also include performance information
(speed, latency, and other services on the network) and network
management practices. Both the fixed and mobile broadband labels
include a link to the provider's privacy policy and a link to how to
file complaints and inquiries. The Commission seeks comment on whether
the 2016 labels' content sufficiently includes all the information
consumers need to make informed decisions. Conversely, is there
information contained in the 2016 labels that is no longer necessary to
serve the goals of the Infrastructure Act or the Commission, or might
overwhelm consumers with too much information? For example, in regard
to mobile broadband, do reporting obligations related to packet loss
provide enough consumer benefit relative to any reporting costs?
6. Introductory Rates. The Commission seeks comment on whether the
2016 labels satisfy the Infrastructure Act's requirement that any label
make clear whether the price offered is an introductory rate and what
the price will be when the introductory period ends. Further, is the
information related to introductory rates and subscription rates
contained in the labels readily available to consumers and easy to
understand?
7. Service Levels and Bundles. The Commission recognizes that
broadband service offerings can include numerous characteristics based
on differing service levels, features, add-ons, consumer location, and
other factors. Is flexibility in the labels' content necessary or wise
to avoid the possibility that consumers could be overwhelmed with
information? Should labels include services bundled with broadband such
as video, telephony, or mobile services? Should such information
include any information about the quality of the bundled services,
e.g., whether video is limited to 480i or allows 1080p or 4K quality?
8. Additional Content. Is there additional content the Commission
should consider, given changes in the broadband marketplace, that
providers were not required to include in the 2016 labels? For example,
in 2017, the Commission required broadband providers to disclose
whether they engage in blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization.
Should the labels include information about whether there are any
limitations when consumers use multiple devices on the same broadband
plan? Should the labels make clear when the offered rate is contingent
on consumer consent to particular restrictions, e.g., paperless
billing, electronic payment, rental of equipment, and/or enrollment in
related services? The Commission seeks comment on whether such
information or other content should be added to the broadband consumer
labels and, if so, how and where it should be presented.
9. Affordable Connectivity Program. The Commission seeks comment on
whether and how to include information about the Affordable
Connectivity Program (ACP) in the broadband labels. The Infrastructure
Act requires providers to notify consumers about the existence of the
ACP and how to enroll in the program ``when a customer subscribes to,
or renews a subscription to, an internet service offering of a
participating provider.'' In the ACP Public Notice, the Wireline
Competition Bureau asked for comment on the type of disclosures the
Commission should require providers to make regarding the ACP to
consumers. See FCC Seeks Comment on the New Affordable Connectivity
Program, WC Docket No. 21-450, Public Notice, DA 21-1453 (WCB 2021).
Should the Commission require that the broadband labels include
information about the ACP? To what extent can broadband labels be used
to promote awareness of
[[Page 6829]]
the ACP and how to enroll? How might those disclosures be presented on
the labels?
10. Direct Notification of Term Changes. Should the Commission
adopt a ``direct notification'' requirement for changes to terms in the
labels? If so, how should providers notify consumers directly of any
changes in terms of service or of any other changes to the information
contained in the labels displayed to consumers when they purchased
service? Should the Commission adopt a timeframe within which providers
must make such notifications? Should the Commission require that the
notifications be sent in advance of the changes taking affect? If so,
how far in advance? The Commission also seeks comment on the costs and
benefits of a direct notification requirement and any alternative
approaches that should be considered.
Format
11. The Commission also proposes to adopt the format of the 2016
labels, which resemble the nutrition labels the United States Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) has prescribed for food products, and seeks
comment on whether the format sufficiently displays information to
consumers in an effective and helpful way. The Commission seeks comment
on this proposal. Are there any changes the Commission should consider
to the format? Should the Commission allow ISPs any flexibility in
displaying the label contents to reflect the variety of formats
consumers use to learn about and subscribe to broadband services? How
can the Commission provide this flexibility without weakening the
effectiveness of the preferred format of the 2016 labels? How can the
Commission ensure that any such flexibility would not undermine
consumers' ability to comparison shop between services and providers?
Should the Commission require that the labels be provided in a machine-
readable format with standard, labeled fields to ensure that third
parties and consumers can more readily compare across multiple
providers? The term ``machine-readable,'' when used with respect to
data, means ``data in a format that can be easily processed by a
computer without human intervention while ensuring no semantic meaning
is lost.'' See 44 U.S.C. 3502(18).
12. The Commission will be undertaking a separate rulemaking to
implement section 60502(c) of the Infrastructure Act, which requires
the Commission to conduct an ``annual collection . . . of data relating
to the price and subscription rates of each internet service offering
of a participating provider under the Affordable Connectivity
Program.'' See Infrastructure Act, section 60502(c)(1). The
Infrastructure Act further requires that the Commission ``shall rely on
the price information displayed on the broadband consumer label . . .
for any collection of data . . . under section 60502(c)'' See
Infrastructure Act, section 60504(b)(2). In order to rely on such data,
the Commission will need a means by which to associate the broadband-
label information with the data collected under section 60502(c). One
means of making that association would be for the Commission to collect
all the broadband-label data, with each plan having a unique identifier
that could be referenced in the section 60502(c) data collection.
Another approach would be for the Commission to require all ISPs to
make information about each plan available in a machine-readable format
via an Application Program Interface (API) so that the Commission could
access the broadband-label information for any plan included in the
ISP's submission to the section 60502(c) collection. The Commission
seeks comment on these two alternative approaches and their relative
burdens on ISPs. The Commission also seeks comment on other approaches
that should be considered to fulfill the statutory requirements of
section 60502(c).
Display Location
13. The Commission proposes to require ISPs to display the labels
at the point of sale. Specifically, the Commission proposes to require
providers to prominently display the labels in a manner that is easily
accessible to consumers and in the format prescribed by the Commission.
The Commission proposes to require providers, at a minimum, to disclose
the labels of any broadband service presented to consumers on an ISP's
website when a consumer browses service options. The Commission seeks
comment on this proposal. In addition, the Commission asks for comments
on exactly how the labels should be disclosed on ISPs' websites. For
instance, is including a link to the label sufficient? If so, how
should the link be presented to consumers? Where else on the ISP's
website should the labels be displayed and/or disclosed and how should
ISPs' websites be configured for search engine optimization? The
Commission also seeks comment on how the labels should be displayed at
other points of sale, such as at retail locations, on apps, on online
platforms, on other digital locations, and on telemarketing calls.
Should ISPs provide hardcopies of the labels in retail locations?
Should their telemarketing representatives email, or otherwise make
available to, consumers labels before consumers make a purchase? Are
there other marketing channels the Commission should consider in
developing this requirement? Should these be included in bills or other
communications about changes in service?
Accessibility
14. In 2015, the Commission stipulated that ISPs that wished to
avail themselves of the transparency safe harbor needed to ensure that
the broadband consumer label was accessible to persons with
disabilities. The CAC determined that participating ISPs can best
ensure accessibility to printed and online information by relying on
well-established legal requirements included in the Americans with
Disabilities Act and by following the guidance developed by the Web
Accessibility Initiative. The CAC found that relying on these
guidelines provides the best likelihood of ensuring that consumers with
disabilities will be able to access necessary information about
broadband services. The Commission seeks comment on whether such
guidelines remain accurate today and how best to ensure that any
required labels are accessible to persons with disabilities.
B. Relationship to Transparency Rule
15. The Commission seeks comment on the interplay between the
existing transparency rule and the proposed broadband labels. See 47
CFR 8.1. There may be differences between the information required by
the transparency rule and the proposed broadband labels. The Commission
therefore seeks comment on the interplay between the two. Should
display of the proposed labels fully satisfy the current transparency
rule? In what ways does the transparency rule require disclosures
beyond those in the proposed labels? Alternatively, do the broadband
consumer labels require disclosures beyond the scope of the existing
transparency rule? Will the broadband consumer labels' requirements
necessitate further changes to the Commission's transparency rule? If
so, how should the Commission resolve potential inconsistencies? The
draft proposed rule reflects the view that display of the broadband
labels would be necessary for compliance with the general transparency
rule. The Commission nevertheless seeks comment on alternative rule
formulations that would
[[Page 6830]]
reflect different possible approaches to the relationship between the
two and that sufficiently satisfy the objectives outlined in this NPRM.
C. Enforcement Issues
16. The Commission seeks comment on issues related to enforcement
of the proposed broadband labels. What is the extent of the
Commission's authority under the Infrastructure Act to enforce the
broadband consumer labels as an entirely separate requirement from the
transparency rule, or as an adjunct of the transparency rule, which was
promulgated pursuant to the Commission's authority under the
Communications Act? The Commission asks that commenters address the
scope of the Commission's enforcement authority, particularly in light
of Commission precedent in this area. Should the Commission adopt rules
specifically governing enforcement of the broadband label requirement,
or should the Commission employ the same enforcement rules and
requirements that it relies on in other contexts?
17. The Commission seeks comment on how to evaluate and enforce the
accuracy of the information presented in the broadband consumer labels.
How can the Commission verify the accuracy of the information that a
broadband provider uses in a broadband consumer label? How best can the
Commission confirm that any variance between the disclosed performance
metrics and actual performance as experienced by individual consumers
is or is not consistent with normal network variation? How should the
Commission enforce against inaccuracies in the provided information?
D. Implementation and Other Issues
18. The Commission seeks comment on the best ways for providers to
implement the proposed labels, including the timelines within which
they should implement them. The Commission expects providers to develop
and implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with
the proposed labels' requirements and, as part of that process, to
notify employees, sub-contractors, agents or other persons acting on
behalf of the provider in marketing the provider's services of these
disclosure requirements. The Commission proposes to adopt rules in that
regard, including specifying that the provider will bear the burden to
demonstrate that it has made all reasonable efforts to ensure
compliance should a complaint arise or other information is brought to
the Commission's attention regarding the label disclosure practices of
a third party acting on the provider's behalf. The Commission seeks
comment on that proposal and on any alternatives.
19. In order to allow sufficient time for providers to implement
the measures necessary to comply with these requirements, the
Commission proposes to make these rules effective six months following
publication in the Federal Register of the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB's) approval of the adopted rules. Is six months
sufficient for both large and smaller providers? Should the Commission
adopt a different implementation timeline or temporary exemption for
smaller providers to allow them more time to come into compliance with
the labels' requirements, and does the Commission have the discretion
to do so? The Commission seeks comment on the proposed implementation
period(s) generally. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on whether
there are alternative ways, other than different implementation
timeframes, to minimize the economic impact on smaller service
providers while achieving the Commission's transparency objectives.
20. As part of the Commission's continuing effort to advance
digital equity for all, including people of color, persons with
disabilities, persons who live in rural or Tribal areas, and others who
are or have been historically underserved, marginalized, or adversely
affected by persistent poverty or inequality, the Commission invites
comment on how any broadband consumer labels can advance equity in the
provision of and access to digital communications services and products
for all people of the United States, without discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability.
See 47 U.S.C. 151. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on how
the NPRM's proposals may promote or inhibit advances in diversity,
equity, inclusion, and accessibility, as well the scope of the
Commission's relevant legal authority.
21. The Commission also seeks comment on whether and how the
broadband consumer labels can be used to facilitate equal access to
broadband internet access services. Are there particular label
requirements that would support Commission efforts in this regard? In
implementing the broadband consumer labels requirement, the Commission
seeks comment on the cost effectiveness of the proposals viewed as a
whole. Are the costs to ISPs of adding extra information to labels at
the point of sale relatively small, when considered against the
benefits additional labeling would provide consumers? What are the most
cost-effective ways of making labels available to consumers?
E. Legal Authority
22. The Commission believes the Infrastructure Act affords the
Commission legal authority to adopt the proposed labels' requirements
for ISPs. In addition, the Commission notes that the D.C. Circuit
severed and upheld the Commission's 2010 transparency rule in Verizon
v. FCC. See Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014). While the
majority did not expressly opine on the legal authority for the
Commission's prior transparency rule, the Commission believes that,
like the 2010 transparency rule, the labels proposed fall well within
multiple, independent sources of the Commission's authority. The D.C.
Circuit also affirmed the Commission's reliance on statutory authority
under prior section 257 of the Communications Act (now moved in part to
section 13 of the Act) for the transparency rule adopted there. The
Commission also seeks comment on the use of Title III authority,
insofar as the broadband label requirements apply to wireless
licensees. Do the proposed broadband labeling requirements also advance
other statutory goals? If so, what are those?
23. When the Commission has adopted disclosure requirements in the
past, such as the transparency rule and its truth-in-billing
requirements, it has evaluated its approach to ensure it was consistent
with the First Amendment. The Commission thus likewise seeks comment on
any First Amendment considerations relevant here. The Infrastructure
Act directs the Commission to promulgate rules to require the display
of broadband consumer labels, and the Commission's other statutory
obligations include protecting consumers from unjust or unreasonable
charges and practices. See 47 U.S.C. 201(b). The Commission believes
the proposed regulations are designed to directly advance the
government's substantial interest by providing consumers with the basic
tools necessary to understand the broadband services they are
purchasing and the prices for those services. In addition, they are
designed to protect consumers from contracting for service where the
terms of service are either unexplained or presented in a confusing
manner. The Commission encourages parties to address First Amendment
issues in their comments, particularly with respect to the specific
labels proposed. Parties are asked to address
[[Page 6831]]
how the proposed regulation in the area of consumer disclosures meets
the requirements of Zauderer and the three prongs of the Central Hudson
test. See Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, 471 U.S. 626
(1985); Cent. Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n of New
York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980). Parties should address specifically how the
proposals harmonize with Commission precedent in this area and relevant
case law.
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
24. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as
amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared the 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 NPRM. Written public comments are requested on the
IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be
filed by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM provided.
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules
25. The NPRM proposes rules to implement section 60504 of the
Infrastructure Act to ensure that consumers have an easy way to
understand ISPs' prices, performance, and network practices in a
simple-to-understand format that does not overwhelm consumers with too
much information.
26. The NPRM proposes rules to meet its statutory obligations under
section 60504 of the Infrastructure Act. Specifically, the NPRM
proposes to amend 47 CFR 8.1(a) of the Commission's rules to require
ISPs to display labels at the point of sale to disclose to consumers
certain information about prices, introductory rates, data allowances,
broadband speeds, and management practices, among other things. The
labels proposed are modified versions of those recommended by the
Commission's Consumer Advisory Committee (CAC) in 2015, which are
similar to the nutrition labels required by the United States Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) on food products, and which the Commission
incorporated as part of a safe harbor from the transparency
requirements in 2016.
27. The NPRM proposes broadband consumer labels that contain, at a
minimum, the same content contained in the 2016 labels, both for fixed
and mobile broadband services. To ensure that broadband consumers have
the information they need to make informed decisions, the NPRM proposes
to adopt the content of the 2016 labels, both for fixed and mobile
broadband services, with appropriate modifications. The 2016 labels for
fixed broadband service include the following content: (1) Pricing; (2)
monthly data allowance; (3) overage charges; (4) equipment fees; (5)
other monthly fees; (6) one-time fees; and 7) early termination fees.
In addition, the 2016 labels also include information on performance
(speed, latency, and packet loss) and on network management practices.
The 2016 labels for mobile broadband service include information on:
(1) Pricing; (2) when you exceed data allowance; (3) other included
services/features; (4) other monthly fees; (5) one-time fees; 6)
service contract terms; (7) early termination fees; and (8) ``bring
your own device'' information. The mobile broadband labels also include
performance information (speed, latency, and other services on the
network) and network management practices. Both the fixed and mobile
broadband labels include a link to the provider's privacy policy and a
link to how to file complaints and inquiries.
28. The NPRM seeks comment on whether there is other content beyond
what is in the 2016 labels that should be considered. For example,
should the labels include information about whether there are any
limitations when consumers use multiple devices on the same broadband
plan? Should the labels make clear when the offered rate is contingent
on consumer consent to particular restrictions, e.g., paperless
billing, electronic payment, rental of equipment, and/or enrollment in
related services?
29. The NPRM proposes to adopt the format of the 2016 labels and
require it for broadband consumer labels based on its success as a
nutrition label format and the considerable work the CAC did in
adapting the format to broadband service. In addition, the NPRM
proposes to require ISPs to display the labels at the point of sale.
This means disclosing the labels of any broadband service presented to
consumers on an ISP's website when a consumer browses service options.
Finally, the NPRM proposes to ensure that any required labels are
accessible to persons with disabilities and that any broadband consumer
label advances equity in the provision of and access to digital
communications services and products for all people of the United
States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, sex, or disability.
B. Legal Basis
30. The proposed rules are authorized under sections 4(i), 4(j),
13, 201(b), 257, and 303(r) of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 163, 201(b), 257, 303(r), and
section 60504 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Public Law
117-58, 135 Stat. 429.
C. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements
31. The NPRM proposes to require ISPs to disclose, through a label
similar in format to the required FDA-approved nutrition labels,
certain information about the provider's performance characteristics,
network practices, and commercial terms.
32. The NPRM proposes to adopt the content of the Commission's 2016
safe harbor labels, both for fixed and mobile broadband services, and
to make any appropriate modifications to the labels so that they
``include information regarding whether the offered price is an
introductory rate and, if so, the price the consumer will be required
to pay following the introductory period,'' as required by the
Infrastructure Act.
33. The Commission proposes that the labels be provided at the
point of sale and that, at a minimum, the ISPs should disclose the
label on any website an ISP uses to market broadband internet access
services. The NPRM also seeks comment on how the labels should be
displayed at other points of sale, such as retail locations, on apps,
on online platforms, on other digital locations, and on telemarketing
calls and asks whether providers should provide hardcopies of the
labels in retail locations. In addition, the NPRM considers whether a
provider's telemarketing representative should email, or otherwise make
available to, consumers labels before consumers make a purchase and
whether there are other marketing channels to consider in developing
this point-of-sale requirement. The Commission also considers whether
the labels should be provided in a machine-readable format with
standard, labeled fields to ensure that third parties and consumers can
more readily compare across multiple providers. Further, the NPRM seeks
comment on whether ISPs should be required to make direct notifications
to consumers if any terms of service change after the labels are
provided to consumers at the time of purchase.
[[Page 6832]]
D. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small
Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered
34. 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.
35. The NPRM specifically considers the impact of the proposed
label requirements on smaller broadband service providers. To address
any concerns about compliance with the proposed rules by smaller
broadband providers, the NPRM seeks comment on appropriate timeframes
for smaller providers to implement the new requirements and asks
whether there are any alternative ways, other than different
implementation timeframes, to minimize the economic impact on smaller
service providers while achieving the objectives set forth in the NPRM.
36. The Commission will evaluate the economic impact on small
entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the NPRM and
this IRFA, in reaching its final conclusions and taking action in this
proceeding.
E. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the
Proposed Rules
37. None.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 8
Cable Television, Common Carriers, Communications common carriers,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Satellites,
Telecommunications, Telephone, Radio.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
Proposed Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR part 8 as follows:
PART 8--INTERNET FREEDOM
0
1. The authority citation for part 8 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 201(b), 257, 303(r), and the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Pub. L. 117-58 (2021).
0
2. Amend Sec. 8.1 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 8.1 Transparency.
(a) Any person providing broadband internet access service shall
publicly disclose accurate information regarding the network management
practices, performance characteristics, and commercial terms of its
broadband internet access services sufficient to enable consumers to
make informed choices regarding the purchase and use of such services
and entrepreneurs and other small businesses to develop, market, and
maintain internet offerings. Such disclosure shall be made via a
broadband consumer label that is prominently displayed, publicly
available, and easily accessible at the point of sale in the format
prescribed by the Commission:
(1) For fixed broadband, as described in ``Fixed Broadband Consumer
Disclosure Label'';
(2) For mobile broadband, as described in ``Mobile Broadband
Consumer Disclosure Label.''
BILLING CODE 67112-01-P
[[Page 6833]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.000
[[Page 6834]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.001
[[Page 6835]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.002
[[Page 6836]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.003
[[Page 6837]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.004
[[Page 6838]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE22.005
[FR Doc. 2022-02483 Filed 2-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-C
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 7, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.