Home/Federal/Federal Register/2023-00519

Proposed Rule2023-00519

Location-Based Routing for Wireless 911 Calls

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

January 17, 2023

Issuing agencies

Federal Communications Commission

Abstract

In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (the FCC or Commission) proposes rules to more precisely route wireless 911 calls and texts to Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs), which can result in faster response times during emergencies. Wireless 911 calls have historically been routed to PSAPs based on the location of the cell tower that handles the call. Sometimes, however, the 911 call is routed to the wrong PSAP because the cell tower is not in the same jurisdiction as the 911 caller. This can happen, for instance, when an emergency call is placed near a county border. These misrouted 911 calls must be transferred from one PSAP to another, which consumes time and resources and can cause confusion and delay in emergency response. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to require wireless and covered text providers to deploy technology that supports location- based routing, a method that relies on precise information about the location of the wireless caller's device, on some networks and to use location-based routing to route 911 voice calls and texts originating on those networks when caller location is accurate and timely. In addition, the NPRM proposes to require CMRS and covered text providers to deliver 911 calls, texts, and associated routing information in internet Protocol (IP) format upon request of certain 911 authorities.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 88 Issue 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2023)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 17, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2565-2590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2023-00519]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 9

[PS Docket No. 18-64; FCC 22-96; FR ID 121633]

Location-Based Routing for Wireless 911 Calls

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (the
FCC or Commission) proposes rules to more precisely route wireless 911
calls and texts to Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs), which can
result in faster response times during emergencies. Wireless 911 calls
have historically been routed to PSAPs based on the location of the
cell tower that handles the call. Sometimes, however, the 911 call is
routed to the wrong PSAP because the cell tower is not in the same
jurisdiction as the 911 caller. This can happen, for instance, when an
emergency call is placed near a county border. These misrouted 911
calls must be transferred from one PSAP to another, which consumes time
and resources and can cause confusion and delay in emergency response.
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes to require wireless
and covered text providers to deploy technology that supports location-
based routing, a method that relies on precise information about the
location of the wireless caller's device, on some networks and to use
location-based routing to route 911 voice calls and texts originating
on those networks when caller location is accurate and timely. In
addition, the NPRM proposes to require CMRS and covered text providers
to deliver 911 calls, texts, and associated routing information in
internet Protocol (IP) format upon request of certain 911 authorities.

DATES: Comments are due on or before February 16, 2023, and reply
comments are due on or before March 20, 2023.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by PS Docket No. 18-64,
by any of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal Communications Commission's Website: <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/">https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/</a>. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
<bullet> Mail: 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. 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. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail
must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
<bullet> 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. 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#02646161373236426461612c656d74">[email&#160;protected]</a> or call the
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachel Wehr, Attorney Advisor, Policy
and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau,
(202) 418-1138, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#396b585a515c55176e5c514b795f5a5a175e564f">[email&#160;protected]</a>, or Brenda Boykin, Deputy Division
Chief, Policy and Licensing Division, Public Safety and Homeland
Security Bureau, (202) 418-2062, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3a78485f545e5b147855435153547a5c5959145d554c">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), FCC 22-96, in PS Docket No. 18-64,
adopted on December 21, 2022, and released on December 22, 2022. The
full text of this document is available at <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/edocs/search-results?t=quick&fccdaNo=22-96">https://www.fcc.gov/edocs/search-results?t=quick&fccdaNo=22-96</a>.

Initial Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 Analysis

This NPRM may contain proposed new or modified information
collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). The
Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork
burdens, invites the general public and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) to comment on any information collection requirements
contained in this document, as required by the PRA. If the Commission
adopts any new or modified information collection requirements, they
will be submitted to OMB for review under section 3507(d) of the PRA.
OMB, the general public, and other Federal agencies will be invited to
comment on the new or modified information collection requirements
contained in this proceeding. In addition, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, we seek specific comment on how
we might further reduce the information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Pursuant to Sec. Sec. 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules,
47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply
comments on or before the dates indicated in the DATES section above.
Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing
System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking
Proceedings, 63 FR 24121 (1998), <a href="https://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OGC/Orders/1998/fcc98056.pdf">https://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/OGC/Orders/1998/fcc98056.pdf</a>.
The Commission will treat this proceeding as a ``permit-but-
disclose'' proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte
rules. Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any
written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation
within 2 business days after the presentation (unless a different
deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making
oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the
presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise
participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was
made, and (2) summarize all data presented and

[[Page 2566]]

arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted
in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already
reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda, or other
filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such
data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other
filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where
such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the
memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex
parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must
be filed consistent with rule Sec. 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed
by rule Sec. 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a
method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and
memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments
thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system
available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format
(e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this
proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte
rules.

Synopsis

Background

In this NPRM, we propose to require wireless carriers and covered
text providers to implement location-based routing for 911 calls and
texts nationwide.\1\ With location-based routing, wireless providers
that originate 911 calls and texts use precise information about the
location of the wireless caller's device to route 911 calls and texts
to the appropriate PSAP for that location.\2\ Nationwide implementation
of location-based routing will significantly reduce misrouted 911 calls
and texts and the delays associated with transferring misrouted 911
calls and texts from one PSAP to another. For the millions of wireless
911 callers seeking emergency assistance each year, improving call
routing will reduce emergency response times and save lives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ In this NPRM, we use ``wireless carrier'' to mean Commercial
Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) provider as defined in 47 CFR 9.3. The
Commission defines the term ``covered text provider'' as including
``all CMRS providers as well as all providers of interconnected text
messaging services that enable consumers to send text messages to
and receive text messages from all or substantially all text-capable
U.S. telephone numbers, including through the use of applications
downloaded or otherwise installed on mobile phones.'' 47 CFR
9.10(q)(1).
\2\ For purposes of this NPRM, we use the term ``caller'' to
mean senders of both 911 voice calls and 911 texts except where
otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2018, the Commission released a Notice of Inquiry that sought to
determine the best way to avoid misrouted 911 calls.\3\ Earlier this
year, we refreshed the record on location-based routing with a public
notice that sought to update the record on developments since the
release of the Notice of Inquiry, including recent technological
improvements in location-based routing and the extent to which wireless
carriers have deployed location-based routing in their networks.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ Location-Based Routing for Wireless 911 Calls, PS Docket No.
18-64, Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd 3238, 3238 through 40,
paragraphs 1, 3 through 4 (2018) (Notice of Inquiry).
\4\ Federal Communications Commission Seeks to Refresh the
Record on Location-Based Routing for Wireless 911 Calls, PS Docket
No. 18-64, public notice, FCC 22-42, 2022 WL 2128689, at *1 (June 9,
2022) (public notice).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Developments since the Notice of Inquiry and comments in response
to the public notice make clear that location technology has advanced
significantly since 2018. Location-based routing appears to now be
technologically feasible, and indeed is already being implemented by
some wireless carriers. Moreover, implementing location-based routing
on a nationwide basis has the potential to provide significant public
safety benefits. Accordingly, in this NPRM, we propose rules to require
all wireless carriers and covered text providers to implement location-
based routing for all 911 calls and texts nationwide, including calls
and texts originating in legacy, transitional, and Next Generation 911
(NG911)-capable \5\ public safety jurisdictions. Specifically, we
propose to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ In this NPRM, we use ``NG911-capable'' to refer to PSAPs or
jurisdictions that have implemented IP-based network and software
components that are capable of supporting the provision of NG911,
including but not limited to an Emergency Services internet Protocol
Network (ESInet).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

<bullet> Require all Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS)
providers to (1) deploy technology that supports location-based routing
on their IP-based networks (i.e., 4G, 5G, and subsequent generations of
IP-based networks) and (2) use location-based routing to route all 911
voice calls originating on their IP-based networks when caller location
information available during origination of the 911 call meets certain
requirements for accuracy and timeliness. Nationwide CMRS providers
would have six months from the effective date of final rules to meet
these requirements. Non-nationwide CMRS providers would have an
additional year (i.e., eighteen months from the effective date of final
rules) to meet the same requirements.
<bullet> Require covered text providers to (1) deploy technology
that supports location-based routing and (2) use location-based routing
to route all 911 texts originating on their IP-based networks when
location information available during origination of the 911 text meets
certain requirements for accuracy and timeliness. Covered text
providers would have eighteen months from the effective date of final
rules to meet these requirements.
<bullet> Establish baseline requirements with respect to the
accuracy and timeliness of location information used for location-based
routing. When location information does not meet one or both of these
requirements, CMRS providers and covered text providers would be
required to route 911 calls and texts based on the best available
location information, which may include latitude/longitude coordinates
of the cell tower.
To help ensure that public safety jurisdictions transitioning to
NG911 can realize the benefits of location-based routing in an
efficient and cost-effective manner, we also propose to:
<bullet> Require CMRS providers and covered text providers to
deliver 911 calls, texts, and associated routing information in IP
format upon request of 911 authorities who have established the
capability to accept NG911-compatible IP-based 911 communications.
Nationwide CMRS providers and covered text providers would be subject
to this requirement six months from the effective date of final rules
on location-based routing or within six months of a valid request for
IP-based service from a local or state public safety authority,
whichever is later. Non-nationwide CMRS providers would have an
additional six months to comply with this requirement.
We believe that the above proposals for location-based routing of
911 calls and texts will promote the safety of life and property by
helping to ensure that those in need of emergency assistance can
receive the help they need in a more timely manner. We seek comment on
the tentative conclusions, proposals, and analyses set forth in this
NPRM, as well as on any alternative approaches.

Legacy E911 Routing

When 911 service was first introduced, all 911 calls originated
from wireline networks, and wireline providers used the fixed location
of the calling telephone to route 911 calls to the nearest PSAP. With
the deployment of the first generation of cellular service,

[[Page 2567]]

wireless 911 calls could originate from any location served by the
wireless network, and the caller could move locations during the call.
To enable timely routing of wireless 911 calls, CMRS providers
typically programmed their networks to use the location of the first
cell tower receiving the call to determine the nearest PSAP and route
the call accordingly. This became the basis for routing of wireless
Enhanced 911 (E911) calls (legacy E911 routing).
In legacy E911 routing, because the location of the cell tower may
be some distance from the caller's location, CMRS providers may route a
wireless 911 call to a PSAP other than the one designated by the
relevant state or local 911 authority to receive calls from the actual
location of the caller. For example, a cell tower in Northern Virginia
may pick up a wireless 911 call originating in Washington, DC, but
route the call to a Virginia PSAP.\6\ The Commission considers calls
routed to a PSAP other than the one designated for the actual location
of the caller to be ``misrouted.'' \7\ Misroutes can occur for several
reasons, including when more than one PSAP is within the coverage area
of a cell site or sector.\8\ The record indicates that misroutes are
frequent where legacy E911 routing is used. NENA: The 9-1-1 Association
(NENA) estimates that 23 million calls using legacy E911 routing are
misrouted annually. Other parties estimate that approximately 11-12% of
legacy E911 calls are misrouted,\9\ and the percentage of misrouted
calls can vary between and even within jurisdictions. For example, the
Fayetteville (Arkansas) Police Department reports that 30% of the 911
calls its jurisdiction receives are misrouted from neighboring
jurisdictions.\10\ Intrado estimates that Palm Beach County, Florida,
experiences misrouted calls at a rate as high as 20-50% along PSAP
boundaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ See, e.g., Jodie Fleischer et al., Nearly 100,000 Local 911
Calls Each Year Sent to Wrong 911 Center, Require Transfer, NBC4
Washington (Apr. 20, 2021), <a href="https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/nearly-100000-local-911-calls-each-year-sent-to-wrong-911-center-require-transfer/2646442/">https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/nearly-100000-local-911-calls-each-year-sent-to-wrong-911-center-require-transfer/2646442/</a> (discussing the number of
911 calls that require transfer from one jurisdiction to another in
the Washington, DC, region).
\7\ Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd at 3239, paragraph 2 & n.1.
The misroutes that are the subject of this proceeding generally
result from current 911 call routing mechanisms that rely on cell
tower location and are working as designed, not from technical
failure of those mechanisms. Id. In addition, the Commission's
definition of misroute excludes transfers that occur as the result
of preexisting routing arrangements. E.g., T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-
Mobile) Comments at 2 n.3 (rec. July 11, 2022) (T-Mobile Comments)
(noting that a state emergency service office may adopt policies
requiring calls from state highways to be routed to state police
instead of city or county agencies, ``even if the state highway is
located in city or county boundaries'').
\8\ See Communications Security, Reliability and
Interoperability Council (CSRIC) V, Working Group 1, Evolving 911
Services, Final Report--Task 2: 911 Location-Based Routing at 9
(2016), <a href="https://transition.fcc.gov/bureaus/pshs/advisory/csric5/WG1_Task2_FinalReport_092016.docx">https://transition.fcc.gov/bureaus/pshs/advisory/csric5/WG1_Task2_FinalReport_092016.docx</a> (CSRIC V LBR Report). The CSRIC is
a Federal advisory committee subject to the requirements of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. app. 2, and charged
with providing recommendations to the Commission to ensure, among
other things, the security and reliability of communications
systems. FCC, Communications Security, Reliability, and
Interoperability Council, <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/advisory-committees/communications-security-reliability-and-interoperability-council-0">https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/advisory-committees/communications-security-reliability-and-interoperability-council-0</a> (last visited Nov. 22, 2022).
\9\ E.g., The Association of Public-Safety Communications
Officials International, Inc. (APCO) Comments at 2 (rec. July 11,
2022) (APCO Comments) (citing Alliance for Telecommunications
Industry Solutions (ATIS), Analysis of Predetermined Cell Sector
Routing Outcomes Compared to Caller's Device Location, ATIS-0500039
(July 2, 2019), <a href="https://access.atis.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=48697">https://access.atis.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=48697</a> (ATIS-0500039)); Intrado Life &
Safety, Inc. (Intrado) Comments at 3 & n.8, 4 (rec. July 11, 2022)
(Intrado Comments) (first citing a 2018 Intrado study concluding
that 12.96% out of a set of five million wireless calls were
misrouted; and then finding at least 11% of calls in Palm Beach
County, Florida in February/March 2022 were misrouted due to tower-
based routing).
\10\ Natisha Claypool, Assistant Dispatch Manager, Fayetteville
Police Department (rec. July 11, 2022) (Fayetteville Police
Department Comments) (stating that the jurisdiction has determined
that ``roughly 30% or more of the 9-1-1 calls received in our county
are misroutes due to calls hitting cellular towers that border our
jurisdictions'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

When a 911 call is misrouted, the answering telecommunicator must
transfer the call to the PSAP that has jurisdiction to dispatch aid to
the 911 caller's location. This process consumes time and resources for
both the transferring PSAP and the receiving PSAP and delays the
dispatch of first responders to render aid.\11\ Commenters submit
anecdotal evidence that a typical misroute introduces a delay of about
a minute.\12\ NENA estimates that call transfers consume over 200,000
hours per year of excess 911 professional labor. Misrouted wireless
calls can also contribute to confusion and delay in emergency
response.\13\ This delay can have deadly consequences.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd at 3239, 3240 through 41,
paragraphs 2, 8. As the Commission has previously noted, a study in
Snohomish County, Washington, found that a call transfer adds
approximately 40 seconds to the total call time. Id. at 3239,
paragraph 2 n.2 (citing Robert Thurston, GIS Technician, Snohomish
County, Determining Routing of Wireless Sectors in a Multi PSAP 9-1-
1 System (2018), <a href="http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/proc15/papers/19_248.pdf">http://proceedings.esri.com/library/userconf/proc15/papers/19_248.pdf</a>).
\12\ APCO Comments at 2 (``[I]t's possible that a misrouted call
will introduce a delay of a minute or longer.''); NENA: The 9-1-1
Association (NENA) Comments at 4 (rec. July 11, 2022) (NENA
Comments) (``[T]he general anecdotal consensus was that a call
transfer typically takes `about a minute.' ''); Peninsula Fiber
Network Comments at 1 (rec. July 8, 2022) (Peninsula Fiber Network
Comments) (``Each transfer takes between 15 to 90 seconds to set up
and complete.'').
\13\ For example, on June 4, 2020, 16-year-old Fitz Thomas
drowned at Confluence Park on the Potomac River, which separates
Loudoun County, Virginia, and Montgomery County, Maryland. Press
Release, Office of the County Administrator, Public Affairs and
Communications, Loudoun County Releases Significant Incident Review
of Goose Creek Drowning at 1 (Aug. 31, 2020), <a href="https://www.loudoun.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/10062">https://www.loudoun.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/10062</a>. Due to the
incident's proximity to the jurisdictional border of the Potomac
River and the use of legacy E911 routing, both counties received
wireless 911 calls routed from the park located on the Virginia side
of the river. Id. at 2. Efforts to determine Thomas's actual
location contributed to a delay in dispatching first responders. Id.
On July 15, 2022, Ma Kaing was shot and killed by a stray bullet
outside her home in the East Colfax neighborhood of Denver. Jennifer
Kovaleski, Stuck on the line: Cellphone calls routed to the wrong
911 center are costing life-saving seconds, Denver7 (Nov. 18, 2022),
<a href="https://www.denver7.com/news/investigations/stuck-on-the-line-cellphone-calls-routed-to-the-wrong-911-center-are-costing-life-saving-seconds">https://www.denver7.com/news/investigations/stuck-on-the-line-cellphone-calls-routed-to-the-wrong-911-center-are-costing-life-saving-seconds</a>. The news media reports that four calls from her
family and neighbors were misrouted to a neighboring PSAP and
required transfer; three callers hung up after waiting minutes on
hold. Id.
\14\ The news media has widely reported on such tragic
occurrences. For example, in December 2014, dispatchers were unable
to locate Shanell Anderson, who drowned after accidentally driving
off the road and into a pond close to the line between Fulton and
Cherokee Counties in Georgia. Brendan Keefe and Phillip Kish, Lost
on the Line: Why 911 is broken, 11alive (Dec. 29, 2016), <a href="https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/lost-on-the-line-why-911-is-broken/85-225104578">https://www.11alive.com/article/news/local/lost-on-the-line-why-911-is-broken/85-225104578</a>. According to the news media, Shanell Anderson
was able to call 911, but the call was picked up by a cell tower in
Fulton County and routed to that county's PSAP, where critical
minutes were lost while dispatchers sought to determine the county
in which she was located (Cherokee County). Id. In another case in
2008, Olidia Kerr Day made a wireless 911 call before she was
fatally shot in a murder-suicide in front of the Plantation, Florida
police department. Sofia Santana, Cell Phone 911 Calls Are Often
Routed to the Wrong Call Centers, Sun Sentinel (June 21, 2008),
<a href="https://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-flbsafe911calls0621sbjun21-story.html">https://www.sun-sentinel.com/sfl-flbsafe911calls0621sbjun21-story.html</a>. According to the news media, though she placed the call
in Plantation, the call was routed to the 911 center in Sunrise,
Florida, and had to be transferred to Plantation. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2018 Notice of Inquiry

In 2018, the Commission released a Notice of Inquiry seeking
comment on issues related to misrouted wireless 911 calls, including
the feasibility of location-based routing.\15\ The Commission observed
that it had not previously addressed the accuracy of wireless 911 call
routing. Historically,

[[Page 2568]]

precise caller location information typically took too long to generate
to be available for routing purposes. The Commission noted, however,
that then-recent advances in location technology suggested it was
feasible to pinpoint a 911 caller's location quickly enough to support
an initial routing determination. The Commission found that many
location-based routing methods were promising and sought comment on the
``technical and operational implications, limitations, deployments, and
best common practices'' of location-based routing. The Commission also
requested comment on the frequency of wireless 911 call misroutes, the
impact of misroutes on public safety, and the implementation of
location-based routing technologies, including location-based routing
capabilities for jurisdictions that had deployed elements of NG911. In
addition, the Commission requested specific comment on the findings and
recommendations of a 2016 report on location-based routing released by
CSRIC V (CSRIC V LBR Report).\16\ The Commission also sought comment on
the means available to facilitate improvements to 911 routing and
reduce the likelihood of misrouted 911 calls, including the promotion
of voluntary best practices, implementation of incentive-based
mechanisms, or regulatory action, and on costs and benefits relating to
location-based routing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd at 3246 through 51,
paragraphs 17 through 33. The Notice of Inquiry stated that advances
in location technology suggested it was possible to support initial
call-routing based on a caller's actual location in many situations.
Id. at 3240, paragraph 3. The Commission also noted that while many
location-based routing methods were promising, uncertainty remained
regarding their reliability, the time required to develop necessary
standards, and the potential transition costs of implementing
location-based routing on current wireless 911 systems. Id. at 3240,
paragraph 4.
\16\ Id. at 3246 through 50, paragraphs 18 through 29. CSRIC V
defined location-based routing as ``[a] system of rules to varying
degrees of complexity dictating to where 9-1-1 calls from various
locations are routed.'' CSRIC V LBR Report at 6 through 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission received 22 comments and 14 reply comments in
response to the Notice of Inquiry.\17\ The record reflected uncertainty
about the capabilities of location-based routing at the time.\18\ In
particular, nationwide CMRS providers noted the lack of available
handset-based solutions that could generate a fix within a short period
of time \19\ and the presumption that any feasible solution would
require significant investments from PSAPs.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\17\ See Appendix C for a complete list of entities submitting
comments and/or reply comments both to the public notice and the
Notice of Inquiry. Commenters to the Notice of Inquiry included,
among others, national public safety entities, state and regional
911 entities, nationwide CMRS providers, emergency
telecommunications service providers, a handset manufacturer, a
technical standards organization, a public safety consulting firm,
and concerned members of the public. The record in this proceeding
may be viewed at: <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/results?q=">https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/search/search-filings/results?q=</a> (proceedings.name:(``18-64'')).
\18\ Commenters to the Notice of Inquiry offered varying
opinions about whether technologies were capable of location-based
routing without delaying 911 calls. E.g., AT&T Reply 11 through 12
(rec. June 28, 2018) (AT&T NOI Reply) (``Even the most promising of
location-based technologies . . . have limits.''); Motorola
Solutions, Inc. (Motorola) Comments at 2 (rec. May 7, 2018)
(Motorola NOI Comments) (asserting that testing has confirmed that
location-based wireless routing is faster and more accurate than
legacy wireless routing).
\19\ AT&T stated that although location-based routing solutions
hold potential to reduce wireless 911 call misroutes, regulatory
requirements were ``premature.'' AT&T NOI Reply at 3. AT&T asserted
that instead, the Commission should ``encourage further study of
potential handset-based solutions, which send location information
directly to the routing element,'' and that ``[g]iven their superior
speed, such solutions are preferable to network-based solutions''.
Id.; see also Verizon Comments at 3 (rec. May 7, 2018) (Verizon NOI
Comments) (``LBR is dependent on the handset's ability to deliver an
accurate and timely fix which, for well-established reasons, is not
feasible for every 911 call.''); T-Mobile Comments at 4 (rec. May 7,
2018) (T-Mobile NOI Comments) (``Even if a `real-time' location fix
could be obtained in a sufficiently short amount of time so as not
to disrupt the need to route the call quickly, . . . leveraging any
location fix for legacy PSAP call routing would require fundamental
changes to the wireless carrier's legacy call flow logic.'').
\20\ Verizon NOI Comments at 5 (``PSAP systems, not just
wireless networks, may require a number of software programming and
other changes. And PSAPs' and wireless providers' ability to handle
LBR would require testing to ensure reliability.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Developments Since 2018

Since the comment period for the Notice of Inquiry closed over four
years ago, several developments indicate that location-based routing
has become a viable methodology for CMRS providers to route 911 calls
and texts. These developments include studies on misroutes and
location-based routing technology, increased deployment of device-based
hybrid (DBH) location technologies on consumer handsets,\21\ and
voluntary implementation of location-based routing on CMRS provider
networks. In 2018, CTIA announced that the nationwide wireless carriers
planned to add DBH location technologies to their networks to improve
911 location accuracy. In 2019, the Alliance for Telecommunications
Industry Solutions (ATIS) published two studies with new information on
legacy E911 misroutes and the feasibility of location-based
routing.\22\ In those studies, ATIS concluded that ``location-based
routing is technically feasible within the timing considerations
recommended by CSRIC V'' and evaluated where ``sub-optimal routing''
occurred for a sample set of wireless emergency calls. In a 2019 ex
parte filing in the instant docket, Apple Inc. (Apple) noted that it
had made DBH location technology available on certain device models
that would support carrier implementation of location-based
routing.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\21\ Device-based hybrid (DBH) location is an estimation method
that typically utilizes either a selection or a combination of
location methods available to the handset in an environment,
including crowd-sourced Wi-Fi, A-GNSS, and possibly other handset-
based sensors. ATIS, Enhancing Location-Based Routing of Emergency
Calls, ATIS-0700042 at 2 (July 2019), <a href="https://access.atis.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=48218">https://access.atis.org/apps/group_public/document.php?document_id=48218</a> (ATIS-0700042). It also
includes an associated uncertainty estimate reflective of the
quality of the returned location. Id.
\22\ ATIS-0700042; ATIS-0500039. ATIS observed that calls that
are ``sub-optimally routed'' tend to occur along PSAP boundaries, in
areas with a dense concentration of PSAPs, around major water
features, and along narrow strips of jurisdictional territory. ATIS-
0500039 at 12.
\23\ Letter from Paul Margie, Counsel, Apple, to Marlene H.
Dortch, Secretary, FCC, PS Docket No. 18-64 et al., at 2 (filed
Sept. 24, 2019) (Apple Ex Parte). Apple also noted that it offers
wireless carriers the option to enable location-based routing for
iPhone models 6s and later running iOS 13 and Apple Watch devices
running watch OS 6. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The three nationwide wireless carriers (AT&T, T-Mobile, and
Verizon) now indicate that they have deployed or plan to deploy
location-based routing to varying extents on their networks. T-Mobile
launched location-based routing on its network in the states of Texas
and Washington in 2020 and as of July 2022 was offering location-based
routing to 770 PSAPs. AT&T completed the rollout of location-based
routing on its network in June 2022 and uses location-based routing to
deliver 911 calls and texts to nearly all PSAPs nationwide, whether
they are legacy or NG911-capable and without any additional action from
the receiving PSAP.\24\ Verizon has indicated that it plans to start
work in the first quarter of 2023 to enable location-based routing
nationwide.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\24\ AT&T Comments at 4 (rec. July 11, 2022) (AT&T Comments).
AT&T notes that a few PSAPs are using unique internal routing
solutions and that the company is working to ensure that its
implementation of location-based routing meets the needs of these
PSAPs. Id. at 4 n.3.
\25\ Noelle Phillips, Verizon agrees to upgrade 911 call-routing
in wake of complaints from Denver's East Colfax neighborhood, Denver
Post (Aug. 3, 2022), <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/03/verizon-911-call-routing-policy-change-east-colfax-ma-kaing/">https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/03/verizon-911-call-routing-policy-change-east-colfax-ma-kaing/</a>. Verizon did
not discuss plans to implement location-based routing in its
comments to the instant docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In June 2022, the Commission released a public notice to refresh
the record on location-based routing developments since the Notice of
Inquiry. The Commission sought information on industry trends, the 2019
ATIS studies on misroutes and location-based routing, increased
deployment of DBH, the use of location-based routing for text-to-911,
and implementation of location-based routing on carrier networks. The
Commission received 15 comments and 6 reply comments in response to the
public notice. We discuss these comments below in the context of the
proposals made in this NPRM.

[[Page 2569]]

A. Location Based Routing

1. Wireless 911 Voice Calls
Developments since the Notice of Inquiry and the record received in
response to the public notice indicate that nationwide location-based
routing is now feasible and has the potential to provide significant
public safety benefits by reducing the number of misrouted calls to
911. Commenters confirm that continued reliance on cell tower-based
routing results in a considerable number of 911 calls being misrouted
\26\ and that this is a significant problem for public safety.\27\ NENA
estimates that nationwide implementation of location-based routing
would reduce misrouted wireless 911 calls by 85% from 23 million to
3.45 million per year. Other commenters agree that implementation of
location-based routing can significantly mitigate misroutes and, as a
result, save lives and property.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\26\ E.g., Intrado Comments at 3 n.8, 4 through 5 (first finding
a 12.96% average rate of misroutes for a sample set of five million
wireless calls in 2018; and then reporting that 20-50% of wireless
calls may misroute along PSAP boundaries in Palm Beach County,
Florida); NENA Comments at 2 (estimating 23 million 911 calls are
misrouted annually); Fayetteville Police Department Comments (noting
that as many as 30% of wireless 911 calls it receives are misroutes
from neighboring jurisdictions); see also ATIS-0500039 at 4
(estimating a 12% national average rate for sub-optimally routed
wireless 911 calls in 2019).
\27\ E.g., APCO Comments at 2 (stating that there is a consensus
among Emergency Communications Centers that ``misroutes are a
problem''); The Boulder Regional Emergency Telephone Service
Authority (BRETSA) Reply at 1 through 3 (rec. July 25, 2022) (BRETSA
Reply) (calling misroutes ``problematic'' and detailing the
difficulties of misroutes for PSAPs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The record also indicates that carrier deployments of location-
based routing have already had a positive impact. As noted above, two
nationwide carriers, T-Mobile and AT&T, have already implemented
location-based routing: as of July 2022, T-Mobile was offering
location-based routing to 770 PSAPs,\28\ while AT&T has implemented
location-based routing throughout its network and is using it to
deliver 911 calls and texts to nearly all PSAPs nationwide.\29\
Commenters report that jurisdictions where carriers have implemented
location-based routing now experience fewer misroutes, fewer transfers,
and faster dispatch times. AT&T states that in trials and in subsequent
deployment, its location-based routing solution has significantly
improved call routing: AT&T estimates that it is able to route 80% of
911 calls on its network to the correct PSAP using location-based
routing, and that approximately 10% of these calls would have been
misrouted (and would have required a transfer) if it had used legacy
E911 routing based on cell tower location.\30\ The Texas 911 Entities
state that the rollout of T-Mobile's location-based routing solution
has had a ``noticeably positive impact'' on PSAPs experiencing
misrouted calls and has resulted in fewer transfers for some PSAPs.\31\
In 2020, T-Mobile announced that some areas where it implemented
location-based routing experienced 40% fewer call transfers.
Commenters' reported experiences align with CSRIC V's finding that
location-based routing would reduce call transfers when a location fix
is available within a few seconds of call origination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\28\ T-Mobile First to Roll Out Cutting-Edge 911 Capabilities
(Dec. 17, 2020), <a href="https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/tmobile-next-generation-911-location-based-routing">https://www.t-mobile.com/news/network/tmobile-next-generation-911-location-based-routing</a>; T-Mobile Reply at 2 n.6 (rec.
July 25, 2022) (T-Mobile Reply).
\29\ AT&T Comments at 4. AT&T notes that a few PSAPs are using
unique internal routing solutions and that the company is working to
ensure that its implementation of location-based routing meets the
needs of these PSAPs. Id. at 4 n.3.
\30\ Id. at 4. Intrado further clarifies that AT&T's solution
has been able to route 80% of all wireless 911 calls since early
implementation in February 2022 using device location information
with a small uncertainty range and high confidence level and that
most calls using location-based routing route on device locations
under 50 meters. Intrado Comments at 2, 9.
\31\ The Texas 9-1-1 Alliance, the Texas Commission on State
Emergency Communications, and the Municipal Emergency Communication
Districts Association (Texas 911 Entities) Comments at 2, 4 (rec.
July 11, 2022) (Texas 911 Entities Comments) (showing that average
percentage of 911 call transfers for two out of three PSAPs in
initial beta sites decreased by roughly 4 to 5% after T-Mobile
implemented location-based routing; the remaining PSAP showed a
slight increase in transfers of less than 1%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The record further indicates that it is now technologically
feasible for all CMRS providers to support location-based routing for a
significant percentage of wireless 911 calls. In its 2019 feasibility
study, ATIS concluded that location-based routing is technically
feasible within the five-second window recommended by CSRIC V.\32\ The
feasibility of location-based routing has also significantly increased
as a result of the widespread availability of DBH technologies to
support 911 location. Android devices using Emergency Location Service
(ELS) and iOS devices using Hybridized Emergency Location (HELO) are
capable of generating high accuracy, low latency location information
in time to support 911 call routing.\33\ In response to the public
notice released in 2022, several commenters note that these DBH
location technologies are widely available on mobile devices and can be
used for routing a high percentage of wireless 911 calls. This is a
significant change from the comments received in response to the Notice
of Inquiry, which indicated uncertainty regarding the availability of
technology that would support location-based routing information.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\32\ See ATIS-0700042 at 22. CSRIC V noted that location
information must be available to the Mobile Switching Center (MSC)
in 5 seconds or less in order for a carrier to route the voice
portion of a wireless 911 call no later than 6 seconds from call
initiation. CSRIC V LBR Report at 8. CSRIC V determined that if
location fixes are obtained in 5 seconds or less, location-based
routing would allow for delivery to a jurisdictionally appropriate
PSAP. CSRIC V LBR Report at 3.
\33\ Apple Ex Parte at 2 (indicating that device-based hybrid
location is available from certain devices during call set-up and
that location-based routing can be enabled on models 6s and later
running iOS 13 and Apple Watch devices running watch OS 6); Android,
Emergency Location Service--How It Works, <a href="https://www.android.com/safety/emergency-help/emergency-location-service/how-it-works/">https://www.android.com/safety/emergency-help/emergency-location-service/how-it-works/</a> (last
visited Dec. 5, 2022) (``On average, [Android's Emergency Location
Service (]ELS[)] is able to get a first location 3-4 seconds after
the call has started.''); Android, Emergency Location Service--
Overview, <a href="https://www.android.com/safety/emergency-help/emergency-location-service/">https://www.android.com/safety/emergency-help/emergency-location-service/</a> (last visited Dec. 5, 2022) (``ELS works on over
99% of active Android devices running OS4.4 and up, with Google Play
Services installed--no new hardware or activation required.'').
\34\ AT&T NOI Reply at 3; Verizon NOI Comments at 3 (``LBR is
dependent on the handset's ability to deliver an accurate and timely
fix which, for well-established reasons, is not feasible for every
911 call.''); T-Mobile NOI Comments at 4 (``Even if a `real-time'
location fix could be obtained in a sufficiently short amount of
time so as not to disrupt the need to route the call quickly, . . .
leveraging any location fix for legacy PSAP call routing would
require fundamental changes to the wireless carrier's legacy call
flow logic.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on the above, we propose to require that all CMRS providers
(1) deploy technology that supports location-based routing and (2) use
location-based routing to route all wireless 911 voice calls
originating on IP-based networks, when timely and accurate information
about the caller's location is available. When such information is not
available in time for routing the call, we propose to allow CMRS
providers to route 911 calls using the best available location
information, which may include cell tower coordinates. We also propose
to establish timeframes for compliance with these requirements and to
define specific terms to clarify the obligations of regulated entities.
We seek comment on these proposals.
Public safety commenters agree that early location-based routing
implementations by CMRS providers have shown that the technology is
technically feasible. Intrado states that AT&T's deployment of
location-based routing can serve as a model for other CMRS providers.
We seek comment on this analysis. For nationwide and non-nationwide
carriers that have not

[[Page 2570]]

implemented location-based routing across their entire networks, we
seek comment on the feasibility and cost of network upgrades (including
hardware, software, Geographic Information System (GIS), and service
upgrades) and testing that would be required to implement location-
based routing in their service areas by the proposed deadlines.
We tentatively conclude that a high percentage of consumer handsets
currently in use on nationwide and non-nationwide networks are
technically capable of supporting location-based routing using device-
based location technology. We seek comment on this tentative
conclusion. AT&T states that device-based location routing solutions do
not require changes to the network core and are relatively easy to
implement.\35\ However, T-Mobile states that ``not every carrier is
prepared to use DBH location estimates for routing today,'' \36\ and
Peninsula Fiber Network states that ``[o]ne major provider has a 99%
failure rate in providing the caller's location within the 5 second
window.'' We seek comment on whether there are technology or cost
barriers that prevent some CMRS providers from supporting device-based
location solutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\35\ AT&T NOI Reply at 10 (``Provided a device-based location
solution can generate accurate location information within the
necessary timeframe, implementing such a solution on the network
would be relatively straight forward as it would not require changes
to the network core.'').
\36\ T-Mobile Comments at 6. But see T-Mobile Reply at 1 through
2 (``[T]here are commenters that assert that wireless carriers are
not ready to offer location-based routing even though multiple
carriers and their vendors confirm that they can, and do, offer
location-based routing and are i3 compliant. Indeed, T-Mobile has
deployed location-based routing in twenty-one states; it has also
converted over 1,900 PSAPs in 24 states from TDM to NG911 SIP.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public safety entities and some technology providers urge the
Commission to require all CMRS providers to support location-based
routing.\37\ For example, APCO states that location-based routing
technology ``is available today, and the Commission should act quickly
to require service providers to implement it.'' NENA states that the
Commission should establish rules to implement location-based routing
nationwide to reduce response times for millions of 911 calls and save
lives. However, some CMRS providers urge us not to adopt requirements
and instead to permit carriers to implement location-based routing
voluntarily. We believe that requiring all CMRS providers to support
location-based routing would generate substantial public safety
benefits, whereas allowing CMRS providers to implement location-based
routing voluntarily would result in inconsistent routing of calls to
PSAPs and a higher risk of 911 misroutes for subscribers on CMRS
networks that did not support location-based routing.\38\ We seek
comment on whether there are countervailing reasons to allow voluntary
implementation of location-based routing by carriers rather than
adopting a requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\37\ In a separate docket, APCO also called for a rulemaking to
require carriers to implement location-based routing in comments on
a petition from NASNA regarding NG911. APCO Comments, PS Docket No.
21-479, 4 (rec. Jan. 19, 2022).
\38\ For example, in Denver, Colorado, carriers have not
uniformly implemented location-based routing. After 911 calls
following the fatal shooting of Ma Kaing in the East Colfax
neighborhood of Denver were misrouted to the city of Aurora, a news
report indicated that although AT&T and T-Mobile had previously
implemented location-based routing in Denver, Verizon initially
declined to do so. Noelle Phillips, 911 calls from cellphones can be
precisely pinpointed. One carrier won't install the technology in
Colorado, Denver Post (Aug. 1, 2022), <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/01/verizon-location-based-routing-denver-aurora/">https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/01/verizon-location-based-routing-denver-aurora/</a>. Verizon
later agreed to ``start the work [on location-based routing] during
the first quarter of 2023.'' Noelle Phillips, Verizon agrees to
upgrade 911 call-routing in wake of complaints from Denver's East
Colfax neighborhood, Denver Post (Aug. 3, 2022), <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/03/verizon-911-call-routing-policy-change-east-colfax-ma-kaing/">https://www.denverpost.com/2022/08/03/verizon-911-call-routing-policy-change-east-colfax-ma-kaing/</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We also seek comment on whether CMRS providers should be required
to use location-based routing to deliver 911 calls to all PSAPs served
by their networks, or whether the requirement should be triggered by
PSAP request or limited to certain categories of PSAPs. T-Mobile and
Verizon assert that not all PSAPs are currently interested in receiving
calls routed using device location and that in some instances it could
adversely impact PSAP operations. However, AT&T provides location-based
routing to virtually all PSAPs on its network and asserts that it can
do so without action by the PSAP. We seek comment on whether there have
been instances in which carrier implementation of location-based
routing has imposed costs or had an adverse impact on PSAPs or where
public safety authorities have had ``significant issues with
implementation.''
Some commenters contend that location-based routing should only be
made available to PSAPs that have achieved some level of NG911
capability. Verizon supports location-based routing only for PSAPs that
are operating in accordance with NG911 standards. T-Mobile states that
it deploys NG911 and location-based routing ``where jurisdictions are
ready,'' noting that it does so for PSAP operational awareness and
awareness of situations ``where service-area boundaries require
specific routing to achieve optimal routing improvements.'' CTIA argues
that providers and PSAPs need flexibility to implement location-based
routing in a manner that accounts for PSAP capabilities. However, AT&T
has implemented location-based routing for both legacy and NG911 PSAPs
across its network, with only very limited exceptions and without a
requirement that PSAPs take any particular action to receive calls
using location-based routing. In addition, the ATIS-0700042 standard
supports location-based routing of 911 calls delivered to both
Emergency Services internet Protocol Networks (ESInets) and legacy
selective routers.
We seek comment on our tentative conclusion that location-based
routing should be required for wireless 911 calling in legacy E911
jurisdictions as well as jurisdictions that have achieved partial or
full NG911 capability. Although many PSAPs are connected to ESInets and
some have become wholly or partially NG911-capable, approximately half
of primary PSAPs in the United States are not yet connected to an
ESInet.\39\ Thus, limiting location-based routing to jurisdictions that
are ESInet-connected or have developed some level of NG911 capability
would deprive legacy PSAPs and the communities they serve of the
benefits of location-based routing. We seek comment on whether the
requirement for CMRS providers to support location-based routing should
be conditioned on a determination that jurisdictions are ``ready'' to
receive location-routed calls, and if so, what criteria should be used
to make this determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\39\ The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
National 911 Program reports a gradual increase in the number of
PSAPs connected to an ESInet in the past few years. According to the
National 911 Program's 2020 National 911 Progress Report, only 2,177
PSAPs in 47 states connect to an ESInet. National 911 Program,
National 911 Progress Report: 2020 Data (Feb. 2022) at 64 <a href="https://www.911.gov/projects/national-911-annual-report/">https://www.911.gov/projects/national-911-annual-report/</a> (National 911
Progress Report). For context, the total number of primary PSAPs is
4,627 based on 48 reporting states. Id. at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some commenters contend that location-based routing should only be
required in jurisdictions with the highest incidence of misroutes. T-
Mobile asserts that location-based routing would not improve emergency
response in all jurisdictions and that the Commission should not
require location-based routing where it would not improve emergency
response. ATIS suggests that legacy E911 routing may be preferred for
cell sectors ``which display a very low (or no) incidence of sub-
optimal routing behavior'' and ``[i]n these cases, the potential time
delay associated with LBR may not be

[[Page 2571]]

justifiable.'' \40\ We note, however, that AT&T has implemented
location-based routing across all jurisdictions regardless of the prior
frequency of misroutes, without a significant impact on call-routing
time compared to legacy E911 routing.\41\ We tentatively conclude that
any potential time delay associated with location-based routing is
likely to be negligible even for sectors that do not have frequent
legacy E911 misroutes. In addition, CMRS providers or PSAPs may lack
granular data on misroutes, making it difficult to identify which
sectors have misroutes most frequently. We seek comment on whether
attempting to limit location-based routing to sectors prone to
misroutes would be less costly or provide any greater benefits than
supporting location-based routing across all jurisdictions. How would
the Commission determine which jurisdictions or sectors would benefit
most from location-based routing, and what are the constraints on
obtaining such information? Are there other approaches the Commission
should consider for implementing location-based routing?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\40\ While BRETSA supports nationwide implementation of
location-based routing, BRETSA would also support targeted
implementation in areas of high misroutes, even if limited delay of
911 call routing and delivery would occur. BRETSA Reply at 3. BRETSA
asserts that wireless providers should use PSAP jurisdictional
boundaries when determining the location and orientation of new
cell-sites and sectors, that providers should configure their
systems to identify calls which are Phase I routed from sites and
sectors with high misroutes, and that providers should indicate the
percentage of calls misrouted from that location to PSAPs. Id. at 8
through 9.
\41\ AT&T Comments at 3 through 4 (stating that latency for 95%
of location-based routed calls was consistent with latency for
legacy E911-routed calls).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compliance Timeframe. We propose to require nationwide CMRS
providers to deploy and commence use of location-based routing for 911
voice calls within six months from the effective date of final rules on
location-based routing. The three nationwide CMRS providers have
already deployed or are actively working toward deploying location-
based routing capabilities on their networks. The six-month
implementation timeframe is intended to provide the nationwide
providers adequate time to complete the implementation of location-
based routing. We seek comment on this proposal and on whether a longer
or shorter compliance timeframe should be considered for nationwide
CMRS providers.
We propose to provide non-nationwide CMRS providers an additional
year (i.e., eighteen months from the effective date of final rules on
location-based routing) to deploy and commence use of location-based
routing for 911 voice calls. This would give non-nationwide providers
additional time to take necessary steps to implement location-based
routing on their networks. Additionally, we anticipate that location-
based routing solutions will be more readily available to non-
nationwide providers on an extended timeframe. We note that no non-
nationwide providers submitted comments in response to the Notice of
Inquiry or public notice, and we seek comment on whether a longer or
shorter compliance period would be appropriate for such providers.
Calls Originating on IP-Based Networks. To reduce potential cost
burdens for CMRS providers, we propose to require location-based
routing for 911 calls originating on IP-based networks, but not for 911
calls originating on circuit-switched, time-division multiplex (TDM)
networks. ATIS assumes for purposes of ATIS-0700042 that location-based
routing is only supported on originating networks supporting Long Term
Evolution (LTE) and beyond. Intrado asserts that 4G and 5G networks
provide a ``much more supportive setting for LBR'' and notes that 4G
LTE and newer networks no longer require call holding to implement
location-based routing because the routing element has sufficient time
to transmit and evaluate confidence and uncertainty information and to
query the location server for PSAP routing instructions before the time
to route. Nationwide CMRS providers are also in the process of retiring
or have completed the retirement of TDM 2G and 3G networks,\42\ and
some non-nationwide providers have announced dates to sunset their 3G
networks in 2022. In light of the technical obstacles and upcoming
retirement of these networks, we tentatively conclude that requiring
location-based routing for 911 calls originating on TDM-based networks
would be unduly burdensome. Accordingly, we propose to require
location-based routing only for calls originating on IP-based networks,
i.e., 4G LTE, 5G, and subsequent generations of IP-based networks. We
seek comment on this proposal and on our analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\42\ AT&T has phased out its 3G network. AT&T, Get details on
the 3G network shut down (July 14, 2022), <a href="https://www.att.com/support/article/wireless/KM1324171/">https://www.att.com/support/article/wireless/KM1324171/</a>. Verizon announced it will
finish shutting down its 3G network by December 31, 2022. Verizon,
CDMA [(Code-Division Multiple Access)] Network Retirement, <a href="https://www.verizon.com/support/knowledge-base-218813/">https://www.verizon.com/support/knowledge-base-218813/</a> (last visited Nov.
29, 2022). T-Mobile announced that it finished shutting down
Sprint's 3G CDMA network as of March 31, 2022, and Sprint's 4G LTE
network as of June 30, 2022. T-Mobile Network Evolution, <a href="https://www.t-mobile.com/support/coverage/t-mobile-network-evolution">https://www.t-mobile.com/support/coverage/t-mobile-network-evolution</a> (last
visited Nov. 29, 2022). It also announced it shut down T-Mobile's 3G
Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) network as of July
1, 2022, but has not yet announced a shutdown date for its 2G
network. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Default to Best Available Location Information. We propose to
require that when location information does not meet one or both
requirements for accuracy and timeliness under our rules, wireless
providers shall route 911 calls based on the best available location
information available at the time the call is routed, which may include
cell tower coordinates. We agree with commenters who assert that there
is a continued need for cell-sector based routing as a fallback method
because accurate location information is not available to support call
routing in all scenarios.\43\ Our proposed requirement to default to
best available location information would be consistent with the ATIS-
0500039 report, which assumes that the fallback for location-based
routing should be cell sector routing ``for cases wherein no position
estimate is available in time to be used for [location-based routing]
or the position estimates lack requisite accuracy.'' It also would be
consistent with current CMRS provider deployments of location-based
routing, which default to legacy E911 routing when location does not
meet carriers' standards of accuracy and timely availability.\44\ In
addition, we agree with commenters who assert that CMRS providers
should be able to route based on the best available location
information at the time of routing. We believe that our proposal would
allow carriers to take full advantage of the location information
available at the time of routing while permitting them the flexibility
to use other information, including cell tower coordinates, when
precise location is not available in time. We seek comment on our
proposal. We also seek comment on the percentage of calls that CMRS
providers would continue to route using legacy E911 routing rather than
location-based routing under our proposed rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\43\ Intrado notes that AT&T's location-based routing solution
successfully used location-based routing for 80% of 911 calls.
Intrado Comments at 2.
\44\ AT&T Comments at 4 (``When location was not available, the
process defaults to using sector-based routing so that calls may be
completed without excessive delay.''); T-Mobile Comments at 4 (``T-
Mobile's policy is to route a 911 call based on the cell-sector
location if a routable, non-Phase I location estimate is not
generated quickly enough.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Disclosure of Location-Based Routing Information. We seek comment
on

[[Page 2572]]

whether the proposed rules should require CMRS providers to provide
information to PSAPs or state or local 911 authorities regarding the
routing methodology used for each 911 call. NASNA states that ``it is
important for the telecommunicator dispatching the call to know what
type of location technology has been used to route a 911 call'' and
that it is ``critical'' to provide the type of location technology CMRS
providers used to derive the caller's location, such as ``specific LBR
technology versus E-911,'' to the PSAP with each call. ATIS states that
any method providing location-based routing must be transparent to the
emergency services network and the PSAP.\45\ NENA notes that there are
already NG911 elements that partly meet NASNA's requirements, and that
additional standards under development should meet them in full. Given
the forthcoming development of additional standards by NENA, we do not
propose to add specific disclosure requirements at this time, but we
encourage state and local 911 authorities, service providers, and
vendors to develop mechanisms to provide PSAPs with information on call
routing methodology that could assist them in identifying the caller's
location and dispatching emergency response. We also note that our
proposed accuracy and timeliness criteria for location-based routing
include confidence and uncertainty metrics to ensure that CMRS
providers use the best available location information to route the call
in each instance. We seek comment on this approach. If we were to adopt
disclosure requirements, what information should be disclosed, what
would be the public safety benefits, and would such benefits justify
the cost to CMRS providers of making such disclosures to PSAPs?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\45\ ATIS-0700042 at 16. ATIS states that ``the CMRS network may
acquire a routable location and use it to route to the appropriate
emergency services network. A NENA i3 ESRP may query for routing
location and that routing location may be returned. However, when
the PSAP queries for location to support dispatch (i.e., [emergency
dispatch]) it should receive the estimated location of the caller.''
Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Text-to-911

Texting to 911 has become an integral component of emergency
response in many jurisdictions. Currently available data indicate that
in calendar year 2020, over 3,000 PSAPs in the U.S. supported text-to-
911 and that 11 states as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto
Rico had jurisdiction-wide text-to-911 coverage.\46\ Although the
volume of 911 texts in these jurisdictions is typically much lower than
the volume of 911 voice calls, it is equally important that all 911
texts as well as voice calls be routed to the appropriate PSAP
responsible for dispatch of emergency response to the texting party's
location. Therefore, for the same reasons set forth above with respect
to 911 voice calls, we propose to require covered text providers to use
location-based routing to route all 911 texts originating on IP-based
networks, provided that the information used for routing meets the same
requirements for accuracy and timeliness that would apply to 911 voice
calls. We further propose that when location information for routing
texts to 911 does not meet either one or both of these requirements,
covered text providers would be required to route texts to 911 on the
basis of the best available location information at time of routing. We
seek comment on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\46\ FCC, Thirteenth Annual Report to Congress on State
Collection and Distribution of 911 and Enhanced 911 Fees and Charges
at 79 through 83, paragraph 59 (2021), <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/13th-annual-911-fee-report-2021.pdf">https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/13th-annual-911-fee-report-2021.pdf</a> (Thirteenth 911
Fee Report). Eleven states have indicated statewide text-to-911
capability in response to the Commission's annual 911 fee reporting
questionnaire: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island,
and Vermont. Id. at 8 through 10, 80, Tbl. 22 (first showing the
total number of PSAPs per jurisdiction, and then showing how many
PSAPs are text-to-911 capable per jurisdiction). Puerto Rico and the
District of Columbia also indicate that they provide jurisdiction-
wide text-to-911 services. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The record indicates that location-based routing for 911 texts is
technically feasible and already in use by some providers. AT&T reports
that it has used location-based routing for its text-to-911 service
since 2016 and that it uses DBH location to route the majority of its
text messages. The Massachusetts State 911 Department reports that two
wireless carriers in the state provide location information to its
NG911 network to route texts to the appropriate PSAP. We also note that
no commenter has contended that location-based routing for 911 texts is
not technically feasible or expressed opposition to using location-
based routing for 911 texts as well as voice calls.
We seek comment on the technical feasibility of location-based
routing for 911 texts and whether there are any considerations specific
to 911 texting that would warrant adopting different location-based
routing requirements from those applicable to 911 voice calls. If so,
how should the requirements for text to 911 differ? Can providers use
DBH to support location-based routing of both voice and text? Are there
routing solutions besides DBH available to covered text providers to
route 911 texts? We seek comment and specific data on the benefits of
requiring covered text providers to implement location-based routing
for texts originating on IP-based networks, as well as the costs
involved in such a requirement.
We propose to require covered text providers to deploy and commence
use of location-based routing for 911 texts within eighteen months from
the effective date of final rules on location-based routing. This
proposed implementation timeframe is intended to provide the diverse
set of covered text providers, which includes nationwide and non-
nationwide CMRS providers offering text service as well as other
providers, adequate time to take necessary steps to complete the
implementation of location-based routing on their networks. We seek
comment on this proposed timeframe and on whether a longer or shorter
compliance period should be considered.
3. Definitions
We propose to adopt a definition of ``location-based routing'' that
requires routing based on the location of the calling device, as
opposed to the location of network elements such as cell site or
sector. We therefore propose to define ``location-based routing'' as
``the use of information on the location of a device, including but not
limited to device-based location information, to deliver 911 calls and
texts to point(s) designated by the authorized local or state entity to
receive wireless 911 calls and texts, such as an Emergency Services
internet Protocol Network (ESInet) or PSAP, or to an appropriate local
emergency authority.'' We propose to define ``device-based location
information'' as ``[i]nformation regarding the location of a device
used to call or text 911 generated all or in part from on-device
sensors and data sources.''
We seek comment on this proposed definition. Specifically, we seek
comment on whether the proposed definition of ``device-based location
information'' adequately encompasses current DBH location technologies,
such as Apple's HELO and Android's ELS, as well as possible future
location technologies that can determine the location of the calling
device. We seek comment on whether we should include other specific
location technologies as examples in our definition, such as Assisted-
Global Navigation Satellite System (A-GNSS) or Wi-Fi.\47\ We note

[[Page 2573]]

that the Commission also uses the term ``device-based location
information'' in its existing rule on delivery of 911 text messages and
intend that our proposed definition would also apply to that rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\47\ ATIS defines DBH as an ``estimation method that typically
utilizes either a selection or a combination of location methods
available to the handset in a given environment--including crowd-
sourced Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi), Assisted-Global Navigation
Satellite System (A-GNSS), and possibly other handset-based sensors.
It also includes an associated uncertainty estimate reflective of
the quality of the returned location.'' ATIS-0700042 at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We also seek comment on our proposal to explicitly identify ESInets
as an example of an end point that state or local 911 authorities can
designate for delivery of calls where location-based routing is used.
Because ESInets are an important component of NG911 networks, we
believe it is appropriate to identify them as a potential delivery
point. We also note that this proposed definition is not intended to
modify CMRS providers' obligation under Sec. 9.10 of the Commission's
rules, which requires such providers to transmit all wireless 911 calls
to a PSAP, designated statewide default answering point, or appropriate
local emergency authority. Thus, under our proposed definition, state
and local 911 authorities would retain the authority to specify the
delivery point for location-routed calls, whether the delivery point is
an ESInet, a legacy selective router, or some other designated
facility. We seek comment on this proposal.
4. Timeliness and Accuracy of Location-Based Routing Information
We propose to require CMRS providers and covered text providers to
use location-based routing for 911 calls and texts when they have
location information that meets the following specifications for
timeliness and accuracy: (i) the information must be available to the
provider network at the time the call or text is routed, and (ii) the
information must identify the caller's horizontal location within a
radius of 165 meters at a confidence level of at least 90%. We discuss
the timing and accuracy elements of the proposed rule below and seek
comment on each.
Timeliness of Location-Based Routing Information. Location-based
routing requires information about the caller's location to be
available quickly enough to enable the call to be routed without
delaying the normal call set-up process. For location-based routing of
911 voice calls to be feasible without delaying call set-up, caller
location information would need to be made available to the CMRS
provider's Mobile Switching Center (MSC) within five seconds or less of
the call being dialed. At the time of the Notice of Inquiry, commenters
questioned whether available technology could generate caller location
information this quickly. However, the record indicates that
significant technological advances have been made since then and that
currently available technology is routinely capable of delivering
caller location information in time to route the call without delay,
and well within the five-second threshold identified by CSRIC V.
Intrado states that 4G LTE and newer networks can obtain device-based
location information, calculate confidence and uncertainty, and query
the location server for PSAP routing instructions within the normal
call set-up interval. Intrado further notes that AT&T's location-based
routing solution provides location-based routing ``without any impact
to the timeline or the call.'' \48\ In a 2019 filing, Apple stated that
HELO can normally generate and transmit device location information
during call set-up. Google has stated that ELS can obtain a first
location of Android devices 3-4 seconds after a call has been started.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\48\ See also Peninsula Fiber Network Comments at 2 (``Most
originating service providers can provide accurate location
information in less than 5 seconds.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on these developments, we propose to require CMRS and covered
text providers to use location-based routing only if caller location
information is available at the time that the provider would otherwise
route the call (and if the information meets the proposed accuracy
requirements in the rules). Our proposal is intended to avoid delay in
transmitting 911 calls and texts because there would be no requirement
to hold calls and texts for purposes of obtaining a routing fix. We
seek comment on this proposal. For what percentage of calls and texts
would caller location-based routing information be available at the
time of routing, as contemplated by our proposal? Does the absence of
any required holding time protect against the risk of delaying
transmission of 911 calls and texts?
Accuracy of Location-Based Information. Location-based routing
requires caller location information to be sufficiently accurate and
reliable to support a routing decision that directs the call to the
correct PSAP for the caller's location and avoids misrouting the call.
The CSRIC V LBR Report recommends that wireless service providers that
deliver 911 calls ``must have metrics and procedures in place to ensure
that internal positioning methodologies used are reliable, consistent
and performing at expected accuracy and quality requirements.'' ATIS
notes that location-based routing solutions ``must consider
uncertainty, in addition to the estimated location, in making the
decision whether to use'' a location fix for routing purposes.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\49\ See also T-Mobile Comments at 4 (cautioning that using low
accuracy location information for location-based routing could lead
to more call transfers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We note that the location information used for routing a 911 call
to the correct PSAP may not need to be as precise as the location
information required under our location accuracy rules to support
dispatch to the caller's location. For example, AT&T's location-based
routing solution uses a horizontal accuracy metric of 165 meters and a
90% confidence threshold, i.e., if device-based location information
provided at call set-up establishes the caller's location within a 165-
meter radius at a 90% confidence level, AT&T will use the information
to route the call. While this is a less granular accuracy threshold
than the 50-meter horizontal accuracy metric that CMRS providers must
meet for dispatch purposes, Intrado reports that the 165 meter/90%
confidence metric has enabled AT&T to use location-based routing for
80% of 911 calls on its network.
Consistent with these developments, we propose to require that CMRS
and covered text providers use location-based routing if the location
information available at the time of routing identifies the caller's
horizontal location within a radius of 165 meters at a confidence level
of at least 90%. These metrics are consistent with AT&T's
implementation of location-based routing. In addition, our proposed
confidence metric is consistent with ATIS' recommendation that
uncertainty values for location-based routing ``be standardized to a
90% confidence for effective call handling.'' We seek comment on this
proposal. As BRETSA notes, even where location-based routing is used,
misroutes may still occur, e.g., when a caller is very near a
jurisdictional boundary. Do our proposed accuracy and confidence
metrics strike the right balance in terms of maximizing the number of
calls that will be successfully routed to the correct PSAP while
minimizing the number of potential misroutes? If not, how should we
modify those metrics, and what effect would such changes have on our
goal to reduce misrouted calls and texts? In addition, for calls that
fall outside the accuracy and confidence thresholds, should we provide
a minimum standard or standards for the determining the best

[[Page 2574]]

available location information for routing the call?
Validation. Several commenters recommend that carriers validate
location estimates for location-based routing against positioning
information from other sources, such as the originating cell
sector.\50\ We seek comment on whether we should require validation of
caller location information for purposes of location-based routing and,
if so, what validation steps we should require CMRS and covered text
providers to take. We intend for our proposed confidence and
uncertainty requirements to ensure that CMRS providers and covered text
providers use accurate device location for routing purposes when it is
available. Considering these proposals, do commenters believe that
additional validation steps are necessary? We also ask commenters to
address the validation process, including what information CMRS
providers and covered text providers should use to validate device-
based hybrid location information.\51\ Are there additional costs
associated with validation and, if so, what are they? In addition, we
seek comment on which parties should be responsible for validation, at
what point in the network validation should occur, and whether
requiring validation would introduce any delay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\50\ Comtech Telecommunications Corp. (Comtech) Comments at 5
through 6 (rec. July 11, 2022) (Comtech Comments) (urging the
Commission to ensure that DBH location information is only used to
route 911 calls if checked against cell site-based location
information); Verizon Comments at 4 (``For DBH-based routing, the
handset location fix must be validated against the cell radius with
sufficient accuracy, which will occur in many but not all cases.'').
These comments are consistent with ATIS' recommendation on the
matter. ATIS-0500039 at 15.
\51\ For example, Comtech urges the Commission to ensure that
device-based hybrid location information is only used for routing if
it has been checked against cell site-based location information.
Comtech Comments at 5 through 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Location-Based Routing of Calls and Texts to Next Generation 911
Networks

In the Notice of Inquiry and the public notice, the Commission
sought comment on potential interdependencies between location-based
routing and the transition to Next Generation 911. As the Commission
observed in the Notice of Inquiry, NG911 call routing differs from
legacy E911 call routing because NG911 architecture requires
originating service providers to route calls to ESInets rather than to
legacy selective routers, and calls are then routed over the ESInet to
the appropriate PSAP.\52\ In addition, NG911 differs from legacy E911
in that it is configured for originating service providers to deliver
911 calls and associated call routing information in IP-based format.
Specifically, in NG911 call flow, the originating service provider uses
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to embed routing information in the
IP data packets that control call initiation and set-up and uses the
SIP call routing information to route the call to the appropriate
ESInet. Then, the ESInet operator directs the call to the appropriate
PSAP by applying geospatial routing policies to the routing information
embedded in the call.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\52\ See Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd at 3251, paragraph 32. In
a legacy E911 environment, CMRS providers route wireless calls using
the pre-registered location of the tower and radio antennas through
which the 911 call was placed. Id. In a fully implemented NG911
environment, CMRS providers deliver device location derived from a
Location Information Server (LIS) to the ESInet, and the state or
local 911 authority determines how to route a 911 call to the
appropriate PSAP. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the public notice, we asked how the Commission could help to
ensure that the delivery of location information to NG911-capable PSAPs
is consistent with NG911 systems and architecture. In response,
commenters generally support the end goal of having originating service
providers deliver IP-formatted calls and SIP-based call routing
information to NG911-capable PSAPs, and some nationwide CMRS providers
state that they are already doing so.\53\ Some commenters, including
NENA, urge the Commission to require carriers to deliver calls and
routing information in IP-based format to NG911-capable PSAPs that
request it, arguing that this will speed the NG911 transition and
reduce transition costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\53\ Verizon Comments at 2 (stating that Verizon ``has largely
addressed the technical issues necessary to establish connectivity
between its wireless network and i3-capable NG911 networks'' and
incorporates DBH location into the SIP INVITE to an ESInet); T-
Mobile Reply at 2 (stating that T-Mobile has ``converted over 1,900
PSAPs in 24 states from TDM to NG911 SIP''); AT&T Comments at 5
(describing how AT&T calls route to NG911 System Service Providers).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We propose to require CMRS and covered text providers to deliver
911 calls, texts, and associated routing information in IP-based format
to NG911-capable PSAPs that request it. We seek comment on this
proposal. We believe that such a requirement, combined with our
proposed location-based routing requirements described above, would
help to advance the NG911 transition in several ways. First, it would
help to address operational and routing issues for jurisdictions that
have implemented NG911. The Task Force on Optimal PSAP Architecture
(TFOPA) report in 2016 concluded that a significant impediment to NG911
service was that originating service providers were not prepared to
deliver 911 calls via IP technology with location information to NG911
service providers. Some 911 authorities contend that the use of legacy
technology by originating service providers continues to be an obstacle
to the ability of jurisdictions to transition to NG911.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\54\ In Massachusetts, the Massachusetts State 911 Department
claims that lack of SIP on an end-to-end basis has created
operational issues, as only one carrier has connected to the NG911
network via IP for voice calls. Massachusetts State 911 Department
Comments at 2 through 3 (rec. July 8, 2022) (Massachusetts 911
Comments) (stating that lack of SIP has sometimes resulted in
canceled and redelivered 911 calls, which generate an abandoned call
and put the 911 caller further back in the queue).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second, requiring originating service providers to deliver IP-
formatted calls and routing information to NG911-capable PSAPs would
alleviate the burden on state and local 911 authorities of maintaining
transitional gateways and other network elements to process and convert
legacy calls. While some carriers are already delivering IP-based
traffic voluntarily to NG911-capable PSAPs, so long as any providers
continue to deliver 911 calls and routing information in legacy format,
the state or local 911 authority must fund and operate transitional
technology to receive the traffic in the ESInet and process it within
the NG911 system. We seek comment on the degree to which funding and
operating transitional facilities extend the timeline and add to the
cost incurred by state and local 911 authorities to transition to
NG911.
Third, the proposed IP-based delivery requirement would help
jurisdictions realize additional public safety benefits available on
NG911 networks, including enhanced policy routing functions, support
for communication in multiple languages, and enhanced services to
disabled communities. When NG911 systems have access to precise IP-
formatted location information for 911 calls, they can use it to
support geospatial routing and can more frequently update GIS data. IP-
formatted data can also support policy routing that flexibly routes
calls to PSAPs based on variables such as call volume, available
telecommunicator resources, or the need for specialized response to
particular emergencies. In addition, routing on NG911 networks can
result in material time savings for telecommunicators. For example, the
Massachusetts State 911 Department reports that using location-based
routing on its NG911 network has resulted in a reduction of over a half
million minutes per year in unwanted transfers.
We seek comment and specific data on the benefits that the public
would

[[Page 2575]]

derive from our proposals, as well as on the costs to nationwide and
non-nationwide providers to deliver calls and texts in IP-based format
when a state or local 911 authority has requested it. We also seek
comment on what level of NG911 readiness PSAPs should have achieved in
order to trigger the requirement for providers to begin delivering
calls, texts, and location information in IP format. Should individual
PSAPs be able to trigger the requirement or should readiness be
established at a more aggregated level, e.g., on an ESInet-by-ESInet or
state-by-state basis?
Timing of IP Service Delivery. For delivery of IP-formatted calls,
texts, and location information by nationwide CMRS and covered text
providers, we propose an implementation timeline of six months from the
effective date of the location-based routing requirement, or six months
after a valid request by a state or local 911 authority, whichever is
later. We also propose to provide non-nationwide CMRS providers an
extra six months to accommodate these requests. We seek comment on
these proposed timeframes for implementation. We also propose to allow
911 authorities and service providers to agree to alternate timeframes
for delivery of IP-formatted calls and texts, provided that the CMRS
provider or covered text provider notifies the Commission of the
alternate timeframe within 30 days of the parties' agreement. We seek
comment on this proposal.
Valid Request for IP Service. Because state or local 911
authorities would need to notify CMRS providers and covered text
providers of their readiness to receive calls in NG911-compatible
formats, we propose a framework for providing such notification.
Consistent with our rules for text-to-911,\55\ we propose to define a
valid request as one made by a local or state entity that certifies
that it (1) is technically ready to receive 911 calls and texts in the
IP-based format requested, (2) is specifically authorized to accept
calls and/or texts in the IP-based format requested, and (3) has
provided notification to the CMRS provider or covered text provider via
either a registry made available by the Commission or by written
notification reasonably acceptable to the CMRS provider or covered text
provider. We believe that this approach would minimize miscommunication
between carriers and 911 authorities \56\ and facilitate the timely
delivery of IP-based service once state and local 911 authorities
indicate their readiness. For purposes of determining whether a state
or local 911 authority could be technically ready to receive calls and
texts in an IP-based format, we seek comment on the elements that a
state or local 911 authority would need to have in place before making
a valid request.\57\ In addition, we seek comment on whether we should
require separate requests for IP-based call and text delivery.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\55\ See 47 CFR 9.10(q)(10)(iii) (defining a valid request for
text-to-911 service).
\56\ See Massachusetts 911 Comments at 2 through 3 (describing
lack of support for IP connection by some carriers); T-Mobile Reply
at 2 through 3 & n.3 (noting that multiple carriers are i3
compliant).
\57\ As an example of possible readiness elements, we note that
TFOPA created a ``NG9-1-1 Readiness Scorecard'' that categorizes
components of NG911 implementation. TFOPA, Working Group 2: NG9-1-1
Readiness Scorecard at 17 through 21 (2016), <a href="https://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/911/TFOPA/TFOPA_WG2_Supplemental_Report-120216.pdf">https://transition.fcc.gov/pshs/911/TFOPA/TFOPA_WG2_Supplemental_Report-120216.pdf</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

To facilitate notification, we seek comment on whether the
Commission should make available a registry or database that would
allow state and local 911 authorities to notify CMRS providers and
covered text providers of readiness to receive calls and texts in IP-
based format with associated location information. Such a registry
could simplify the request process for state and local 911 authorities
as well as CMRS providers and covered text providers. State and local
911 authorities are already familiar with the process of requesting
text-to-911 and RTT services via a similar process.\58\ We seek comment
on the granularity of such a registry, including whether to organize it
by PSAP, state, ESInet, or other level of specificity. Should it be
combined with our existing Master PSAP Registry and Text-to-911
Registry? If so, what features would be required in such a combined
registry?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\58\ See PSAP Text-to-911 Readiness and Certification Registry
(Text-to-911 Registry), https://www.fcc.gov/general/psap-text-911-
readiness-and-certification-form#:~:text=the%20format%20requested.-
,Text%2Dto%2D911%20Registry.,requested%20format%20within%20six%20mont
hs (last visited Nov. 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Timing Requirements for NG911 Routing. As previously noted, in
NG911 architecture, device-based location information embedded in IP-
formatted 911 calls is first used to route the call to an ESInet, and
the ESInet operator then applies NG911 network routing policies to the
embedded information to route the call to the appropriate PSAP. Some
commenters express concern that delay in making device location
information available to the ESInet operator could inhibit or prevent
the full application of these routing functions within NG911 networks,
thus depriving 911 authorities of the potential benefits of location-
based routing in the NG911 environment. T-Mobile, however, asks the
Commission not to impose mandates on carriers with respect to the use
of location-based routing in NG911 systems, as such deployments rely on
multi-stakeholder processes. We do not propose such mandates, but we
seek comment on whether there are factors that could impact the length
of time between the completion of the initial device location fix by an
originating service provider and the availability of device location
information to an NG911 network. Does our proposal to require delivery
of IP-formatted calls and texts address commenters' concerns about
making location information available in time for routing within NG911
networks?
Appropriate Requesting Entities. Under our proposed rule, the local
or state entity with authority and responsibility to designate the
point(s) to receive wireless 911 calls or texts would be the
appropriate authority to request IP-based service from CMRS providers
and covered text providers. However, statewide, regional, or county
governmental entities may deploy shared resources such as an ESInet,
and an ESInet may provide services for multiple PSAPs or public safety
entities. There are also still many PSAPs serving a single jurisdiction
managed by a city, county, or police or fire department. Should the
proposed rule include PSAPs, appropriate local emergency authorities,
state or local 911 authorities, and/or other specified authorities as
entities that may initiate a valid request for IP-based service? We
seek comment on the appropriate requesting entity or entities we should
include in our rule given the varied governance of ESInet deployments.

C. Monitoring and Compliance

We seek comment on whether the Commission should implement any new
data collections to assist in monitoring compliance with our proposed
location-based routing rules. For example, should we require CMRS
providers and/or covered text providers to provide performance data on
location-based routing, such as relative percentages of calls or texts
routed using location-based routing versus other routing methods such
as cell tower location? Should reporting on routing be included as an
additional component of the 911 live call data reports that CMRS
providers already file pursuant to our

[[Page 2576]]

wireless location accuracy rules?\59\ If reporting would be helpful,
what specific information should providers include and how frequently
should we require them to report? Should we require CMRS and covered
text providers to report information on misrouted 911 calls and texts?
Would a separate data collection from NG911 service providers be
helpful, as Peninsula Fiber Network suggests? If so, what information
should the Commission seek in such a data collection? We also seek
comment on measures the Commission could take to limit the burden of
reporting on location-based routing. To what extent could the
Commission limit the burden of any reporting requirements by providing
increased flexibility for non-nationwide CMRS providers or businesses
identified as small by the Small Business Administration? \60\ As an
alternative to reporting, should the Commission require providers to
certify that they are in compliance with requirements for location-
based routing and/or delivery of calls and texts in IP format?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\59\ Wireless location accuracy live call data reporting
requirements may be found at 47 CFR 9.10(i)(3)(ii).
\60\ For example, the Commission's requirements for live call
data reporting provide a reduced reporting schedule for non-
nationwide CMRS providers. See 47 CFR 9.10(i)(3)(ii)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Peninsula Fiber Network suggests that the Commission ``establish a
reporting system where 9-1-1 system service providers and local
agencies can report non-compliance information, and the Commission can
levy forfeiture orders to the providers for non-compliance.'' To the
extent Peninsula Fiber Network suggests establishment of a separate
reporting system for location-based routing information, we do not
believe such a reporting system is necessary. Public safety entities
and members of the public seeking to report non-compliance with the
proposed rules would be able to file informal complaints via the Public
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau's Public Safety Support Center or
the Commission's Consumer Complaint Center, or formal complaints under
the Commission's enforcement rules.\61\ We tentatively conclude that
these existing mechanisms should be sufficient for addressing potential
violations of the proposed location-based routing rules. We seek
comment on this tentative conclusion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\61\ The Public Safety Support Center is a web-based portal that
enables PSAPs and other public safety entities to request support or
information from the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and
to notify it of problems or issues impacting the provision of
emergency services. See Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
Announces Opening of Public Safety Support Center, public notice, 30
FCC Rcd 10639 (PSHSB 2015); FCC, Public Safety Support Center,
<a href="https://www.fcc.gov/general/public-safety-support-center">https://www.fcc.gov/general/public-safety-support-center</a> (last
visited Nov. 29, 2022). The Consumer Complaint Center handles
consumer inquiries and complaints, including consumer complaints
about access to 911 emergency services. FCC, Consumer Complaint
Center, <a href="https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us">https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us</a> (last visited
Nov. 29, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Additional Proposals

Further Study. Some commenters assert that the Commission should
facilitate additional study of various aspects of location-based
routing,\62\ and Comtech asserts that the problem of misrouted
emergency wireless calls is not yet fully understood or sufficiently
documented to justify regulatory changes. APCO, on the other hand,
states that there is a general public safety consensus that misroutes
are a problem and that the Commission should not delay action while
waiting for additional data. As discussed above, we believe that
misroutes resulting from legacy E911 routing are a well-documented
occurrence and impact a significant percentage of 911 calls.\63\ The
record also indicates that nationwide location-based routing would
reduce misrouted 911 calls and save 911 telecommunicators hundreds of
thousands of hours a year. Therefore, we do not propose to postpone
regulatory changes pending further study or documentation of misrouted
emergency calls as Comtech advocates. We seek comment on this approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\62\ T-Mobile Reply at 5 (asking the Commission to task the next
iteration of the CSRIC with a refreshed study of location-based
routing or encourage ATIS to undertake additional study of the
technology); BRETSA Reply at 9 (asserting that further analysis
should be completed to determine whether uncertainty and confidence
levels can be correlated with the likelihood of calls being
misrouted).
\63\ See, e.g., CSRIC V LBR Report at 9; ATIS-0500039 at 4 n.3
(one GMLC estimates that 12% of its wireless calls are misrouted);
Intrado Comments at 3 n.8 (estimating that approximately 12.96% of a
sample set of five million wireless calls were misrouted). Some
jurisdictions report even higher numbers of misrouted calls. See,
e.g., Fayetteville Police Department Comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional Measures to Decrease Call Transfer Times. Some
commenters recommend that the Commission encourage measures that would
decrease call transfer times.\64\ We encourage PSAPs and relevant state
and local 911 authorities to pursue these additional capabilities, but
at this time do not propose to undertake additional regulatory steps to
do so. We seek comment on this approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\64\ See CTIA Reply at 5 through 6 (rec. July 25, 2022) (CTIA
Reply) (urging the Commission to encourage PSAPs to pursue solutions
to minimize call-transfer times). See also NENA Comments at 4
through 10 (suggesting the implementation of both standards-based
and non-standards based solutions to decrease call transfer times);
BRETSA Reply at 4 through 5 (recommending inter-CAD transfer
capabilities and updating CAD systems with maps beyond PSAPs'
jurisdictional boundaries).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Promoting Digital Equity and Inclusion

The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to advance digital
equity for all,\65\ 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, invites comment on any
equity-related considerations \66\ and benefits, if any, that may be
associated with the proposals and issues discussed herein.
Specifically, we seek comment on how our proposals may promote or
inhibit advances in diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\65\ Section 1 of the Communications Act of 1934 as amended
provides that the FCC ``regulat[es] interstate and foreign commerce
in communication by wire and radio so as to make [such service]
available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United
States, without discrimination on the basis of race, color,
religion, national origin, or sex.'' 47 U.S.C. 151.
\66\ The term ``equity'' is used here consistent with Executive
Order 13985 as the consistent and systematic fair, just, and
impartial treatment of all individuals, including individuals who
belong to underserved communities that have been denied such
treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American
persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of
color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities;
persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely
affected by persistent poverty or inequality. See Exec. Order No.
13985, 86 FR 7009, Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and
Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government
(Jan. 20, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Summary of Benefits and Costs for Location-Based Routing

Benefits of Location-Based Routing. Any solution to the problem of
misrouted 911 calls and texts, no matter how effective, must withstand
the test of feasibility and functionality relative to cost. We
therefore seek comment on whether the implementation of location-based
routing for calls and texts can improve upon the speeds at which
emergency personnel and services relying on a legacy 911 system can
reach the caller, with a resulting improvement in the health and safety
of the caller and preservation of property, and the magnitude of this
presumed benefit. The record indicates that location-based routing may
correct for a substantial percentage of calls that would otherwise be
misrouted using legacy E911 routing,\67\ thereby minimizing transfers

[[Page 2577]]

and saving time required to transfer calls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\67\ See AT&T Comments at 4. Approximately 10% of all 911
wireless calls on AT&T's network would have been misrouted (and
would have required a transfer) but instead are routed to the
correct PSAP in the first instance as a result of AT&T's location-
based routing solution. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The potential benefits of location-based routing are very large.
Our proposed rules are directed at eliminating the estimated 23 million
misrouted 911 calls which occur annually.\68\ Moreover, NENA, APCO, and
Peninsula Fiber Network assert that a ``typical'' transfer takes about
a minute.\69\ Thus, by eliminating the need for transfer, the proposed
rules would shorten response time for these calls. As discussed above,
routing these calls accurately would reduce confusion, speed emergency
response, and save lives and property. The Commission has previously
relied on a study of emergency response incidents in Salt Lake City
(Salt Lake City Study) to estimate the reduction in mortality
attributable to measures that would decrease the total response time to
a 911 call.\70\ The Commission found that the Salt Lake City Study
demonstrates that faster response time in response to a 911 call lowers
mortality risk. The Salt Lake City Study shows a one-minute decrease in
ambulance response times reduced the likelihood of 90-day mortality
from approximately 6% to 5%, representing a 17% reduction in the total
number of deaths.\71\ Using this analysis, the Commission in the Indoor
Location Accuracy Fourth Report and Order estimated that wireless
location accuracy for purposes of dispatching first responders would
save approximately 10,120 lives annually when fully implemented. We
apply a comparable analysis here to estimate that implementation of
location-based routing would save 13,837 lives annually.\72\ Despite
some implementation of location-based routing on CMRS provider
networks, most of this life-saving benefit has not yet been realized
because routing for most wireless calls is still heavily reliant on
cell tower locations. Beyond saving lives, other benefits will also
accrue, including better health outcomes, less property loss, and
savings of PSAP resources. In all, we find these benefits to be
sufficiently large to justify the costs the proposed rules will entail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\68\ See NENA Comments at 2 (estimating that of the
approximately 240 million calls to 911 that are placed each year,
80% of all calls or approximately 192 million are placed on wireless
devices, and that around 12% of wireless calls or 23 million are
misrouted).
\69\ This conforms with anecdotal evidence in the record that
each transfer introduces about a minute of delay. APCO Comments at 2
(``[I]t's possible that a misrouted call will introduce a delay of a
minute or longer.''); NENA Comments at 4 (``[T]he general anecdotal
consensus was that a call transfer typically takes `about a minute.'
''); Peninsula Fiber Network Comments at 1 (``[E]ach transfer takes
between 15 to 90 seconds to set up and complete.'').
\70\ See Wireless E911 Location Accuracy Requirements, PS Docket
No. 07-114, Fourth Report and Order, 80 FR 11806 (March 4, 2015), 30
FCC Rcd 1259, 1317, paragraph 160 (2015) (Indoor Location Accuracy
Fourth Report and Order), corrected by Erratum (PSHSB Mar. 3, 2015).
The Commission has also relied on a 2002 Pennsylvania study of 911
calls to provide a basis for estimating the reduction in mortality
attributable to faster 911 service. Improving 911 Reliability and
Continuity of Communications Networks, Including Broadband
Technologies, PS Docket Nos. 13-75 and 11-60, Report and Order, 79
FR 3123 (Jan. 17, 2014), 28 FCC Rcd 17476, 17501, paragraphs 74
through 75 (2013) (Reliability Report and Order); see also Susan
Athey & Scott Stern, The Impact of Information Technology on
Emergency Health Care Outcomes, 33(3) Rand J. Econ. 399 through 432
(2002), <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12585298/">https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12585298/</a> (assessing the
impact of E911 on health outcomes using Pennsylvania ambulance and
hospital records between 1194 and 1996 and showing that E911 reduces
mortality and hospital costs).
\71\ See Wireless E911 Location Accuracy Requirements, PS Docket
No. 07-114, 79 FR 17820 (March 28, 2014), 29 FCC Rcd 2374, 2388
through 89, paragraph 7 (Indoor Location Accuracy Third Further
Notice). The Salt Lake City study, which was cited in the Indoor
Location Accuracy Fourth Report and Order and the Indoor Location
Accuracy Third Further Notice, examined 73,706 emergency incidents
during 2001 in the Salt Lake City area and found that, on average, a
decrease in ambulance response times reduced the likelihood of 90-
day mortality from approximately 6% to 5%, i.e., a 17% reduction in
the total number of deaths. See Wilde, Elizabeth Ty, ``Do Emergency
Medical System Response Times Matter for Health Outcomes?,'' 22
Health Econ. 7, 790 through 806 at 794 (2013), <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22700368/">https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22700368/</a> (Salt Lake City Study); Indoor
Location Accuracy Fourth Report and Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 1317,
paragraph 160; Indoor Location Accuracy Third Further Notice, 29 FCC
Rcd. at 2388 through 89, paragraph 7 & n.70. Because the regression
in the Salt Lake City Study is linear, this result implies that a
one-minute reduction in response time also saves lives at the same
rate of 17%. Indoor Location Accuracy Third Further Notice, 29 FCC
Rcd. at 2388, paragraph 7 n.70. In the Salt Lake City sample, the
study suggested that a one-minute reduction in response times would
have resulted in an annual saving of 746 lives. Id. at paragraph 7.
\72\ The Salt Lake City Study estimated a mean 90-day mortality
rate of 5.95% (4,386 mean number of deaths in the 90 days following
the 911 call divided by 73,706 emergency incidents during the study
period). Salt Lake City Study at 794. NENA estimates that 80% or
more of the total calls to 911 annually are from wireless devices.
NENA, 9-1-1 Statistics, https://www.nena.org/page/
911Statistics#:~:text=An%20estimated%20240%20million%20calls,more%20a
re%20from%20wireless%20devices (last accessed Nov. 29, 2022).
According to the National Association of State Emergency Medical
Services Officials (NASEMSO), local Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
agencies respond to nearly 28.5 million 911 dispatches each year.
NASEMSO, National Association of State EMS Officials releases stats
on local agencies, 911 Calls (April 10, 2020), <a href="https://www.ems1.com/ambulance-service/articles/national-association-of-state-ems-officials-releases-stats-on-local-agencies-911-calls-LPQTHJrK2oIpxuR1/">https://www.ems1.com/ambulance-service/articles/national-association-of-state-ems-officials-releases-stats-on-local-agencies-911-calls-LPQTHJrK2oIpxuR1/</a>. Assuming that 80% of these calls are from
wireless devices yields an estimate of 22.8 million wireless calls
for 911 dispatch annually. For purposes of this analysis, we
estimate that 12% of the 22.8 million annual wireless calls for
dispatch (or 2,736,000 calls) would be misrouted. See ATIS-0500039
at 4. We also estimate that location-based routing with a horizontal
uncertainty value of 300 meters would resolve approximately 50% of
these misroutes. See id. at 13. Accordingly, we estimate that
1,368,000 calls would avoid the need for a transfer due to a
misroute, reducing the response time for these calls by one minute.
Applying the original mortality rate of 5.95% to this set of calls
yields an estimate of the original total mortality for calls in need
of transfer due to a misroute, or 81,396 lives per year. Reducing
the original total mortality (81,396 lives) by 17%, representing the
expected benefits of a one minute reduction in response time,
results in a revised mortality estimate of 67,559 lives. The
difference between the original and revised mortalities (81,396
minus 67,559) yields the estimated number of lives saved annually
due to implementation of location-based routing, or 13,837 lives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Estimating the dollar value of these benefits raises certain
challenges. While we do not attempt to place a value on human life,
regulators have estimated the value that consumers place on mortality
risk reduction by their willingness to purchase safety features on cars
and other products. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has
created such an estimate, which concludes that consumers, as a group,
show a willingness to pay $11.8 million to reduce risk sufficiently
that one life would likely be saved.\73\ Therefore, to reduce expected
mortalities by 13,837, the DOT estimate of value would be 13,837 x
$11.8 million or approximately $163 billion. This estimate is
conservative. First, it excludes the value of reduced human suffering
and property destruction occurring due to a delayed arrival of first
responders. In addition, it does not include the benefits of location-
based routing for text messages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\73\ See U.S. Department of Transportation, Departmental
Guidance on Valuation of a Statistical Life in Economic Analysis
(Mar. 4, 2022), <a href="https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/revised-departmental-guidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-in-economic-analysis">https://www.transportation.gov/office-policy/transportation-policy/revised-departmental-guidance-on-valuation-of-a-statistical-life-in-economic-analysis</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The record indicates that location-based routing solutions are
expected to benefit PSAPs by resulting in time savings for
telecommunicators.\74\ In addition, the proposal to require service
providers to deliver 911 calls, texts, and location information in IP-
based format to NG911-capable PSAPs could enable

[[Page 2578]]

state and local 911 authorities avoid the cost and inefficiency of
maintaining legacy and NG911 systems simultaneously.\75\ We therefore
seek additional specificity on the time and cost savings to PSAPs and
state and local 911 authorities under these proposed rules. We also
seek comment on the reasonableness of the underlying assumptions in our
above analysis of lives expected to be saved under the proposed rules.
Further, we ask commenters to identify other benefits, such as a
reduction in both human suffering and property damage, that have been
or could be accrued from adoption of location-based routing or other
provisions in our proposed rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\74\ E.g., NENA Comments at 4 (``NENA estimates over 200,000
hours per year of excess 9-1-1 professional labor is consumed due to
call transfer events'' (emphasis omitted)). See also Texas 911
Entities at 2 through 4 (noting that the implementation of location-
based routing has had a noticeably positive impact on PSAPs with
misrouted 911 calls); Intrado Comments at 6 (recounting feedback
from Palm Beach County, Florida, that PSAPs have experienced
improvements in operations after location-based routing, including
immediate access to granular device information).
\75\ NENA Comments at 8 (``Routing in NG9-1-1 is more efficient
and requires much less physical hardware. Many NG9-1-1 systems are
forced to operate in a transitional environment. The 9-1-1 authority
is forced to operate both an ESInet and a legacy E9-1-1 system that
supports Selective Routers. NG9-1-1 transitional environments are
very costly and inefficient.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Costs of Implementation. In order to determine whether the proposed
requirements are reasonable, we must determine whether they are
feasible and do not impose costs that exceed their benefits. Because
three nationwide carriers are already providing location-based routing
and IP-based service to PSAPs now, or plan to do so in the near future,
we tentatively conclude that the proposed rules are feasible. We seek
comment on this tentative conclusion. With respect to costs, the record
does not currently contain detailed information on costs required for
nationwide and non-nationwide CMRS providers and covered text providers
to implement location-based routing and IP-based service delivery. We
therefore seek comment on whether the implementation of location-based
routing and IP-based service delivery as proposed under our rules would
result in significant hardware, software, services, GIS, testing, or
other costs to CMRS and covered text providers, NG911 services
providers, or state and local 911 authorities. We seek comment on the
amount of those costs and ask commenters to provide sufficiently
detailed information to allow accurate cost calculations.
T-Mobile asserts that implementing location-based routing may
involve procedural and technical complexities and that not all carriers
are prepared to implement location-based routing on their networks
using DBH location. We seek additional detailed information on whether
the providers referenced by T-Mobile are unable to implement location-
based routing, and if so, an explanation of why they are unable to do
so. T-Mobile also notes that it worked closely with Operating System
(OS)-based location providers to generate DBH location quickly for
location-based routing. Do other carriers need to make similar
investments or efforts in working with OS-based location providers? If
yes, what would be the timeline and cost to do so? We seek additional
detailed information on the costs for nationwide and non-nationwide
carriers and covered text providers to implement the required software,
hardware, and service upgrades to comply with our proposed rules. Where
specifically would these upgrades need to occur on the end-to-end
network, e.g., on the device, on specific CMRS providers' network
elements, or on specific 911 network elements? How many software,
hardware, and service upgrades would be required for nationwide and
non-nationwide carriers and covered text providers? How many work-hours
would be necessary to implement these upgrades and what kind of workers
would be required to implement these upgrades?
We are especially interested in cost data on existing deployments
of location-based routing. We also seek information on planned or
expended costs by CMRS providers and covered text providers that have
voluntarily implemented or plan to implement location-based routing to
any extent on their networks. To what extent would non-nationwide CMRS
providers and covered text providers be able to leverage costs already
incurred by nationwide CMRS providers, such as costs to develop and
test location-based routing solutions, to reduce their own costs to
comply with our proposed rules? Intrado maintains that CMRS providers
would need to make ``appropriate investments'' and rigorously test
location-based routing solutions before implementation, but that once
these steps are taken ``there should be insignificant cost and
administrative effort for nationwide deployment[.]'' Are costs to
implement location-based routing significantly different for different
network operators? If so, why? We seek comment on the details and the
amount of these investments as well as the anticipated cost of testing
location-based routing solutions. We also seek information on what
equipment and software CMRS providers and covered text providers would
need to test, how these tests would be performed, and CMRS providers'
and covered text providers' plans for testing.
We also seek comment on whether there are differences for CMRS and
covered text providers with respect to investments required to
implement location-based routing when the receiving jurisdiction is
legacy or NG911-capable, and, if so, a detailed explanation of costs
associated with each scenario. Would the implementation of location-
based routing require public safety investment? APCO comments that
``[l]ocation-based routing can and should be implemented without
imposing additional costs on [PSAPs],'' and AT&T states that a PSAP
``does not need to take any action to receive 911 calls that utilize
location-based routing when the wireless call originates on AT&T's
network.'' However, T-Mobile appears to disagree with APCO's assertion
that location-based routing should not impose costs on public safety,
noting that ``the single most useful milestone for location-based
routing would be widespread implementation of NG911,'' and only
supports location-based routing for certain PSAPs.\76\ What are the
comparative costs of CMRS provider or covered text provider
implementations of location-based routing for NG911-capable versus
legacy jurisdictions? Are additional investments required for CMRS
providers and covered text providers to implement location-based
routing when the receiving jurisdiction has not implemented NG911
components? If so, what are these investments and what are their costs?
If these investments are services from third-party service providers,
are these services available for all CMRS providers and covered text
providers?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\76\ T-Mobile Reply at 2 through 3. In addition, T-Mobile has
stated that it deploys location-based routing ``where jurisdictions
are ready.'' Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We also seek comment on the specific costs to nationwide and non-
nationwide CMRS providers and covered text providers to deliver IP-
based 911 calls, texts, and SIP-formatted location information to
requesting state and local 911 authorities within the specified
timeframes under our proposed rules. What specific investments would be
required for hardware, software, and services for CMRS providers and
covered text providers to deliver IP-based service? Verizon states that
it will formally launch end-to-end i3 call delivery during 2022. T-
Mobile says it has converted over 1,900 PSAPs from TDM to SIP. Are
other CMRS providers and covered text providers planning to implement
IP-based delivery? Is there additional cost to requiring IP-based
delivery within six months? Would a longer timeframe for IP-based
delivery result in lower costs to CMRS and

[[Page 2579]]

covered text providers? What specific upgrades would be required to
comply with the requirement to deliver IP-based service under our
proposed rules, and what would such upgrades cost?
We seek information on the costs of nationwide and non-nationwide
CMRS providers providing text service and other covered text providers
to implement location-based routing for texts as described under our
rules, including hardware, software, and service upgrade costs. AT&T
states that it has already implemented nationwide location-based
routing for texts. What costs would non-CMRS text providers incur to
comply with our proposed rules? What costs would non-CMRS text
providers incur for hardware, software, and service upgrades, as well
as any other types of upgrades? What other types of costs, such as
testing, would covered text providers incur?
In the absence of a detailed record on costs, we provide estimates
below, and ask commenters to provide information to improve these
estimates if necessary. To be conservative in our approach, we seek to
provide upper-bound estimates, so that actual costs will be at or below
these levels. First, we separate the costs into material costs and
labor costs. T-Mobile states that it deployed location-based routing to
some PSAPs and not others, so we rely on this statement in tentatively
concluding that CMRS providers implement location-based routing at the
PSAP level and CMRS providers incur material costs on a per-PSAP basis.
We seek comment on this tentative conclusion. The record also suggests
that material costs may require the use of additional software features
\77\ and changes to legacy components if the PSAP has not yet upgraded
to NG911. There is little in the record to suggest what the average
material cost of software features or component upgrades would be, so
as a starting point, we set the total material costs for each CMRS
provider at $10,000 per PSAP as an upper bound.\78\ We ask commenters
to provide cost information to inform our estimate of per-PSAP costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\77\ AT&T's implementation of location-based routing uses
Intrado's ``Locate Before Route'' feature and ``implemented several
timer changes in the GMLC housing AT&T [Location Information Server
(LIS)].'' AT&T Comments at 2, 5.
\78\ Estimate based on staff expertise in absence of a record on
costs. This may be a very high estimate of costs as Intrado states
that conditional on nationwide VoLTE there is ``insignificant cost
and administrative effort'' to implement location-based routing.
Intrado Comments at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our proposed upper bound on material costs for CMRS providers is
then $10,000 per PSAP times the total number of CMRS providers
communicating to PSAPs. AT&T states that it has already deployed
location-based routing to its network, so our proposed rules will not
impose any additional material costs on AT&T. The news media report
that Verizon plans to implement location-based routing in the future,
so it is unclear the extent to which Verizon plans to implement
location-based routing on its network at this time. T-Mobile states
that it has deployed location-based routing to 770 PSAPs and intends to
deploy it to another 62, for a total of 832 PSAPS for which our
proposed rules will impose no additional material costs.\79\ There are
approximately 5,728 PSAPs nationally, which would mean that T-Mobile
may have to implement location-based routing for another 4,896 PSAPs.
Staff analysis of Form 477 data suggests that when that when there is a
fourth non-nationwide wireless provider in any particular location, it
is usually the only one.\80\ Thus an upper bound for the number of
PSAPs non-nationwide wireless providers must upgrade would be the full
national set of 5,728 PSAPs. Including the 4,896 PSAPs T-Mobile does
not already plan to upgrade, our upper bound of PSAPs is 10,624, and
the implied material cost upper bound is approximately $106
million.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\79\ T-Mobile states it deploys location-based routing and NG911
to ``jurisdictions when ready.'' Thus, it is a conservative
overestimate to assume deployment at all deployments at PSAPs not
yet completed or planned are induced by the Rulemaking. T-Mobile
Reply at 2 & n.6.
\80\ FCC, Mobile Deployment Form 477 Data (Jul. 29, 2022),
<a href="https://www.fcc.gov/mobile-deployment-form-477-data">https://www.fcc.gov/mobile-deployment-form-477-data</a>.
\81\ 5,728 PSAP upgrades for non-nationwide CMRS providers plus
4,896 PSAP upgrades for T-Mobile equals 10,624. Multiplying this
figure by the cost per PSAP of $10,000 = $106,240,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We propose to calculate labor costs in line with the 2016 Weather
Alerts Order,\82\ the 2017 Blue Alerts Order,\83\ and the 2022
Comprehensible Alerts Order.\84\ The Office of Management and Budget
approved an estimate of $25 per hour of labor cost for an EAS
Participant to fill out the Commission online report form for EAS
National Tests in 2011.\85\ We find that the labor cost of employing
software workers would be similar and adjust the labor cost upward to
$35.25 to reflect inflation since 2011.\86\ While some workers may be
involved in physical labor to install equipment or run trials, they are
likely to be compensated less than software workers, so assuming they
are compensated at $35.25 would be an overestimate of their labor
costs. AT&T reports that their rollout of location-based routing
nationwide took two months, following several months of trials.\87\ We
therefore assume that a reasonable upper bound of the time to implement
the upgrades with trials is 6 months (26 weeks) and workers have a
forty hour work week, or 1040 hours per worker.\88\ It is unclear how
many workers are required to implement the upgrades, but we find 10
simultaneous workers at a time on average is a generous upper bound,
resulting in 10,400 labor hours per CMRS provider. Multiplying this by
the hourly labor cost of $35.25, the labor cost per CMRS provider is
$366,600. Our proposed estimates of labor cost for the 58 non-
nationwide CMRS providers \89\ plus T-Mobile is then $366,600 x 59, or
$21,629,400, which we round up to $22 million as a labor cost upper
bound.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\82\ Amendment of Part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding
Emergency Alert System, PS Docket No. 15-94, Report and Order, 81 FR
53039 (Aug. 11, 2016) (Weather Alerts Order).
\83\ Amendment of Part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding
Emergency Alert System, PS Docket No. 15-94, Report and Order, 83 FR
2557 (Jan. 18, 2018) (Blue Alerts Order).
\84\ Amendment of Part 11 of the Commission's Rules Regarding
Emergency Alert System, PS Docket No. 15-94, Report and Order, 87 FR
67808 (Nov. 10, 2022) (Comprehensible Alerts Order).
\85\ See FCC, Public Information Collections Approved by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 76 FR 68756 through 01 (Nov.
7, 2011).
\86\ The average hourly earnings of private employees increased
40.5% from November 2011 to October 2022, according to estimates
provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. We therefore find a 41%
increase in wages ($25 x 1.41 = $35.25) to be an appropriate
adjustment from the OMB-approved labor cost from November 2011.
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Average Hourly Earnings of All
Employees, Total Private (CES0500000003], <a href="https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000003">https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES0500000003</a> (last visited Nov. 29,
2022) (using statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics).
\87\ The AT&T Snohomish County (Washington) trial occurred from
October 2021 to January 2022 and the West Palm Beach County
(Florida) trial occurred from February 2022 to March 2022. The
rollout occurred from May 2022 to June 2022. AT&T Comments at 2
through 4.
\88\ With available NG911, conversion to location-based routing
would likely be much less work intensive because it would only
require reconfiguration of the existing software rather that a full
upgrade. We assume full upgrade to generate an upper bound on costs.
\89\ The June 2021 Voice Telephone Services Report lists 61
wireless carriers in total. FCC Office of Economics and Analytics,
Industry Analysis Division, Voice Telephone Services: Status as of
June 30, 2021 at 10 (2022) at 10 & Tbl. 2, <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/document/oea-releases-voice-telephone-services-report-june-2021">https://www.fcc.gov/document/oea-releases-voice-telephone-services-report-june-2021</a>.
\90\ We lack information in the record to pin down how the
number of required workers would vary between T-Mobile and non-
nationwide carriers. Non-nationwide carriers may require less work
for upgrades because they have smaller networks, but may require
more work because they have less specialized expertise on staff. T-
Mobile may require less work because it has already deployed LBR to
some PSAPs. We therefore tentatively assume a constant rate of
workers for all carriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The proposed upper bound of total material and labor costs we
estimate is therefore $128 million, which is easily justified by the
thousands of lives

[[Page 2580]]

projected to be saved by location-based routing of 911 calls. Because
our conservative estimate of benefits of the proposed rules is in the
billions of dollars, the prospective benefits to be realized by the
proposed rules will well exceed their cost even under the conservative
upper-bound assumptions we make here. We seek comment on the
reasonableness of the above methodology, assumptions, and estimates.

Procedural Matters

Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended
(RFA), the Commission has prepared this Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed
in this NPRM. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA.
Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed
by the deadlines in the NPRM.

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules

In the NPRM, we propose requirements for Commercial Mobile Radio
Service (CMRS) providers and covered text providers to implement
location-based routing for 911 calls and texts nationwide. In 2018, the
Commission released a Notice of Inquiry that sought to determine the
best way to avoid misrouted 911 calls.\91\ We recently refreshed the
record on location-based routing with a public notice that sought to
update the record on developments since the release of the Notice of
Inquiry, including technological improvements in location-based routing
and the extent to which CMRS providers have deployed location-based
routing in their networks. Developments since the Notice of Inquiry and
comments in response to the public notice indicate that location-based
routing is both feasible and reliable and that implementing it on a
nationwide basis would provide significant public safety benefits.
Based on the record, we determine that our proposed rule changes are
necessary to reduce emergency response time because implementation of
location-based routing will significantly reduce misrouted 911 calls
and the delays associated with transferring misrouted calls from one
public safety answering point (PSAP) to another. Consistent with our
authority in the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, we propose to
amend our rules to ensure that more people will receive better 911
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\91\ Notice of Inquiry, 33 FCC Rcd at 3240 paragraph 6 (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We propose rules in the NPRM that will require CMRS providers and
covered text providers to implement location-based routing for 911
calls and texts nationwide, including calls and texts originating in
both legacy and Next Generation 911 (NG911) jurisdictions. More
specifically, we propose the following steps to advance location-based
routing of wireless calls and texts:
<bullet> Require all Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS)
providers to (1) deploy technology that supports location-based routing
on their internet Protocol (IP)-based networks (i.e., 4G LTE, 5G, and
subsequent generations of IP-based networks) and (2) use location-based
routing to route all 911 voice calls originating on their IP-based
networks when caller location information available during origination
of the 911 call meets certain requirements for accuracy and timeliness.
Nationwide CMRS providers would have six months from the effective date
of final rules to meet these requirements. Non-nationwide CMRS
providers would have an additional year (i.e., eighteen months from the
effective date of final rules) to meet the same requirements.
<bullet> Require covered text providers to (1) deploy technology
that supports location-based routing and (2) use location-based routing
to route all 911 texts originating on their IP-based networks when
location information available during origination of the 911 text meets
certain requirements for accuracy and timeliness. Covered text
providers would have eighteen months from the effective date of final
rules to meet these requirements.
<bullet> Establish baseline requirements with respect to the
accuracy and timeliness of location information used for location-based
routing. When location information does not meet one or both of these
requirements, CMRS providers and covered text providers would be
required to route 911 calls and texts based on the best available
location information, which may include latitude/longitude coordinates
of the cell tower.
To help ensure that public safety jurisdictions transitioning to
NG911 can realize the benefits of location-based routing in an
efficient and cost-effective manner, we also propose to:
<bullet> Require CMRS providers and covered text providers to
deliver 911 calls, texts, associated routing information in IP format
upon request of 911 authorities who have established the capability to
accept NG911-compatible IP-based 911 communications. Nationwide CMRS
providers and covered text providers would be subject to this
requirement six months from the effective date of final rules on
location-based routing or within six months of a valid request for IP-
based service from a local or state public safety authority, whichever
is later. Non-nationwide CMRS providers would have an additional six
months to comply with this requirement.
We believe that the above proposals for location-based routing of
911 calls and texts will promote the safety of life and property by
helping to ensure that those in need of emergency assistance can
receive the help they need in a more timely manner.

B. Legal Basis

The proposed action is authorized under Sections 1, 2, 4(i), 10,
201, 214, 222, 251(e), 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 316, and 332, of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152(a), 154(i),
160, 201, 214, 222, 251(e), 301, 302, 303, 307, 309, 316, 332; the
Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999, Public Law 106-
81, 47 U.S.C. 615 note, 615, 615a, 615b; and Section 106 of the Twenty-
First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010,
Public Law 111-260, 47 U.S.C. 615c.

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

The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where
feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be
affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines
the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.
Small Businesses, Small Organizations, Small Governmental
Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, may affect small entities that
are not easily categorized at present. We therefore describe, at the
outset, three broad groups of small entities that could be directly
affected herein. First, while there are industry specific size
standards for small businesses that are used in the regulatory
flexibility

[[Page 2581]]

analysis, according to data from the SBA's Office of Advocacy, in
general a small business is an independent business having fewer than
500 employees. These types of small businesses represent 99.9% of all
businesses in the United States, which translates to 32.5 million
businesses.
Next, the type of small entity described as a ``small
organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.''
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses a revenue benchmark of $50,000
or less to delineate its annual electronic filing requirements for
small exempt organizations.\92\ Nationwide, for tax year 2020, there
were approximately 447,689 small exempt organizations in the U.S.
reporting revenues of $50,000 or less according to the registration and
tax data for exempt organizations available from the IRS.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\92\ The IRS benchmark is similar to the population of less than
50,000 benchmark in 5 U.S.C. 601(5) that is used to define a small
governmental jurisdiction. Therefore, the IRS benchmark has been
used to estimate the number small organizations in this small entity
description. See Annual Electronic Filing Requirement for Small
Exempt Organizations--Form 990-N (e-Postcard), ``Who must file,''
<a href="https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/annual-electronic-filing-requirement-for-small-exempt-organizations-form-990-n-e-postcard">https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/annual-electronic-filing-requirement-for-small-exempt-organizations-form-990-n-e-postcard</a>. We
note that the IRS data does not provide information on whether a
small exempt organization is independently owned and operated or
dominant in its field.
\93\ See Exempt Organizations Business Master File Extract (E.O.
BMF), ``CSV Files by Region,'' <a href="https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/exempt-organizations-business-master-file-extract-eo-bmf">https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/exempt-organizations-business-master-file-extract-eo-bmf</a>.
The IRS Exempt Organization Business Master File (E.O. BMF) Extract
provides information on all registered tax-exempt/non-profit
organizations. The data utilized for purposes of this description
was extracted from the IRS E.O. BMF data for businesses for the tax
year 2020 with revenue less than or equal to $50,000 for Region 1-
Northeast Area (58,577), Region 2-Mid-Atlantic and Great Lakes Areas
(175,272), and Region 3-Gulf Coast and Pacific Coast Areas (213,840)
that includes the continental U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii. This data
does not include information for Puerto Rico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the small entity described as a ``small governmental
jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities,
counties, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special
districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.'' U.S. Census
Bureau data from the 2017 Census of Governments \94\ indicate there
were 90,075 local governmental jurisdictions consisting of general
purpose governments and special purpose governments in the United
States.\95\ Of this number, there were 36,931 general purpose
governments (county,\96\ municipal, and town or township \97\) with
populations of less than 50,000 and 12,040 special purpose
governments--independent school districts \98\ with enrollment
populations of less than 50,000.\99\ Accordingly, based on the 2017
U.S. Census of Governments data, we estimate that at least 48,971
entities fall into the category of ``small governmental
jurisdictions.'' \100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\94\ The Census of Governments survey is conducted every five
(5) years compiling data for years ending with ``2'' and ``7''. See
Census of Governments, <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cog/about.html">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/cog/about.html</a>.
\95\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Census of Governments--
Organization Table 2. Local Governments by Type and State: 2017
[CG1700ORG02], <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html">https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html</a>. Local governmental jurisdictions are made up
of general purpose governments (county, municipal and town or
township) and special purpose governments (special districts and
independent school districts). See also tbl.2. CG1700ORG02 Table
Notes_Local Governments by Type and State_2017.
\96\ See id. at tbl.5. County Governments by Population-Size
Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG05], <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html">https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html</a>. There were 2,105 county
governments with populations less than 50,000. This category does
not include subcounty (municipal and township) governments.
\97\ See id. at tbl.6. Subcounty General-Purpose Governments by
Population-Size Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG06], <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html">https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html</a>.
There were 18,729 municipal and 16,097 town and township governments
with populations less than 50,000.
\98\ See id. at tbl.10. Elementary and Secondary School Systems
by Enrollment-Size Group and State: 2017 [CG1700ORG10], <a href="https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html">https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/econ/gus/2017-governments.html</a>.
There were 12,040 independent school districts with enrollment
populations less than 50,000. See also tbl.4. Special-Purpose Local
Governments by State Census Years 1942 to 2017 [CG1700ORG04],
CG1700ORG04 Table Notes_Special Purpose Local Governments by
State_Census Years 1942 to 2017.
\99\ While the special purpose governments category also
includes local special district governments, the 2017 Census of
Governments data does not provide data aggregated based on
population size for the special purpose governments category.
Therefore, only data from independent school districts is included
in the special purpose governments category.
\100\ This total is derived from the sum of the number of
general purpose governments (county, municipal and town or township)
with populations of less than 50,000 (36,931) and the number of
special purpose governments--independent school districts with
enrollment populations of less than 50,000 (12,040), from the 2017
Census of Governments--Organizations tbls.5, 6 & 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Telecommunications Service Providers
a. Wireless Telecommunications Providers
Pursuant to 47 CFR 9.10(a), the Commission's 911 service
requirements are only applicable to ``CMRS providers, excluding mobile
satellite service operators, to the extent that they: (1) Offer real-
time, two way switched voice service that is interconnected with the
public switched network; and (2) Use an in-network switching facility
that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless
hand-offs of subscriber calls. These requirements are applicable to
entities that offer voice service to consumers by purchasing airtime or
capacity at wholesale rates from CMRS licensees.''
Below, for those services subject to auctions, we note that, as a
general matter, the number of winning bidders that qualify as small
businesses at the close of an auction does not necessarily represent
the number of small businesses currently in service. Also, the
Commission does not generally track subsequent business size unless, in
the context of assignments or transfers, unjust enrichment issues are
implicated.
All Other Telecommunications. This industry is comprised of
establishments primarily engaged in providing specialized
telecommunications services, such as satellite tracking, communications
telemetry, and radar station operation. This industry also includes
establishments primarily engaged in providing satellite terminal
stations and associated facilities connected with one or more
terrestrial systems and capable of transmitting telecommunications to,
and receiving telecommunications from, satellite systems. Providers of
internet services (e.g. dial-up ISPs) or voice over internet protocol
(VoIP) services, via client-supplied telecommunications connections are
also included in this industry. The SBA small business size standard
for this industry classifies firms with annual receipts of $35 million
or less as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were
1,079 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of
those firms, 1,039 had revenue of less than $25 million.\101\ Based on
this data, the Commission estimates that the majority of ``All Other
Telecommunications'' firms can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\101\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard. We also note that according to the U.S. Census Bureau
glossary, the terms receipts and revenues are used interchangeably,
see <a href="https://www.census.gov/glossary/#term_ReceiptsRevenueServices">https://www.census.gov/glossary/#term_ReceiptsRevenueServices</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advanced Wireless Services (AWS)--(1710-1755 MHz and 2110-2155 MHz
bands (AWS-1); 1915-1920 MHz, 1995-2000 MHz, 2020-2025 MHz and 2175-
2180 MHz bands (AWS-2); 2155-2175 MHz band (AWS-3); 2000-2020 MHz and
2180-2200 MHz (AWS-4)). Spectrum is made available and licensed in
these bands for the provision of various wireless communications
services. Wireless Telecommunications

[[Page 2582]]

Carriers (except Satellite) is the closest industry with a SBA small
business size standard applicable to these services. The SBA small
business size standard for this industry classifies a business as small
if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017
show that there were 2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the
entire year.\102\ Of this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\103\ Thus, under the SBA size standard, the Commission
estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can be
considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\102\ See U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 Economic Census of the United
States, Employment Size of Firms for the U.S.: 2017, Table ID:
EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM, NAICS Code 517312, <a href="https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=517312&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false">https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?y=2017&n=517312&tid=ECNSIZE2017.EC1700SIZEEMPFIRM&hidePreview=false</a>.
\103\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Commission data as December 2021, there were
approximately 4,472 active AWS licenses.\104\ The Commission's small
business size standards with respect to AWS involve eligibility for
bidding credits and installment payments in the auction of licenses for
these services. For the auction of AWS licenses, the Commission defined
a ``small business'' as an entity with average annual gross revenues
for the preceding three years not exceeding $40 million, and a ``very
small business'' as an entity with average annual gross revenues for
the preceding three years not exceeding $15 million. Pursuant to these
definitions, 57 winning bidders claiming status as small or very small
businesses won 215 of 1,087 licenses. In the most recent auction of AWS
licenses 15 of 37 bidders qualifying for status as small or very small
businesses won licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\104\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 10, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = AD, AH, AT,
AW; Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the
number of active licenses does not equate to the number of
licensees. A licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). Neither the Commission
nor the SBA has developed a size standard for small businesses
specifically applicable to local exchange services. Providers of these
services include several types of competitive local exchange service
providers.\105\ Wired Telecommunications Carriers is the closest
industry with a SBA small business size standard. The SBA small
business size standard for Wired Telecommunications Carriers classifies
firms having 1,500 or fewer employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data
for 2017 show that there were 3,054 firms that operated in this
industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,964 firms operated with
fewer than 250 employees.\106\ Additionally, based on Commission data
in the 2021 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31,
2020, there were 3,956 providers that reported they were competitive
local exchange service providers. Of these providers, the Commission
estimates that 3,808 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees.
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of
these providers can be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\105\ Competitive Local Exchange Service Providers include the
following types of providers: Competitive Access Providers (CAPs)
and Competitive Local Exchange Carriers (CLECs), Cable/Coax CLECs,
Interconnected VOIP Providers, Non-Interconnected VOIP Providers,
Shared-Tenant Service Providers, Audio Bridge Service Providers,
Local Resellers, and Other Local Service Providers.
\106\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the
Commission nor the SBA have developed a small business size standard
specifically for incumbent local exchange carriers. Wired
Telecommunications Carriers is the closest industry with an SBA small
business size standard. The SBA small business size standard for Wired
Telecommunications Carriers classifies firms having 1,500 or fewer
employees as small. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there
were 3,054 firms in this industry that operated for the entire year. Of
this number, 2,964 firms operated with fewer than 250 employees.\107\
Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2021 Universal Service
Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2020, there were 1,227 providers
that reported they were incumbent local exchange service providers. Of
these providers, the Commission estimates that 929 providers have 1,500
or fewer employees. Consequently, using the SBA's small business size
standard, the Commission estimates that the majority of incumbent local
exchange carriers can be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\107\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Broadband Personal Communications Service. The broadband personal
communications services (PCS) spectrum encompasses services in the
1850-1910 and 1930-1990 MHz bands. The closest industry with a SBA
small business size standard applicable to these services is Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). The SBA small business
size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if it
has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show
that there were 2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the
entire year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\108\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the Commission
estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can be
considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\108\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Based on Commission data as of November 2021, there were
approximately 5,060 active licenses in the Broadband PCS service.\109\
The Commission's small business size standards with respect to
Broadband PCS involve eligibility for bidding credits and installment
payments in the auction of licenses for these services. In auctions for
these licenses, the Commission defined ``small business'' as an entity
that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has
average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding
three years, and a ``very small business'' as an entity that, together
with its affiliates and controlling interests, has had average annual
gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the preceding

[[Page 2583]]

three years. Winning bidders claiming small business credits won
Broadband PCS licenses in C, D, E, and F Blocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\109\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
November 16, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = CW;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these, at this time we are not able to estimate the
number of licensees with active licenses that would qualify as small
under the SBA's small business size standard.
Narrowband Personal Communications Services. Narrowband Personal
Communications Services (Narrowband PCS) are PCS services operating in
the 901-902 MHz, 930-931 MHz, and 940-941 MHz bands. PCS services are
radio communications that encompass mobile and ancillary fixed
communication that provide services to individuals and businesses and
can be integrated with a variety of competing networks. Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is the closest industry
with a SBA small business size standard applicable to these services.
The SBA small business size standard for this industry classifies a
business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms that operated in
this industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed
fewer than 250 employees.\110\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the
Commission estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can
be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\110\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Commission data as of December 2021, there were
approximately 4,211 active Narrowband PCS licenses.\111\ The
Commission's small business size standards with respect to Narrowband
PCS involve eligibility for bidding credits and installment payments in
the auction of licenses for these services. For the auction of these
licenses, the Commission defined a ``small business'' as an entity
that, together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average
gross revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $40
million. A ``very small business'' is defined as an entity that,
together with affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross
revenues for the three preceding years of not more than $15 million.
Pursuant to these definitions, 7 winning bidders claiming small and
very small bidding credits won approximately 359 licenses. One of the
winning bidders claiming a small business status classification in
these Narrowband PCS license auctions had an active license as of
December 2021.\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\111\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 10, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = CN;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
\112\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 10, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = CN;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Offshore Radiotelephone Service. This service operates on several
UHF television broadcast channels that are not used for television
broadcasting in the coastal areas of states bordering the Gulf of
Mexico.\113\ Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is
the closest industry with a SBA small business size standard applicable
to this service. The SBA small business size standard for this industry
classifies a business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms that
operated in this industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837
firms employed fewer than 250 employees.\114\ Thus under the SBA size
standard, the Commission estimates that a majority of licensees in this
industry can be considered small. Additionally, based on Commission
data, as of December 2021, there was one licensee with an active
license in this service.\115\ However, since the Commission does not
collect data on the number of employees for this service, at this time
we are not able to estimate the number of licensees that would qualify
as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\113\ This service is governed by subpart I of part 22 of the
Commission's Rules. See 47 CFR 22.1001-22.1037.
\114\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
\115\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 10, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = CO;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. This industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and
wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment. The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies businesses having 1,250 employees or less as small.
U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 656 firms in this
industry that operated for the entire year. Of this number, 624 firms
had fewer than 250 employees.\116\ Thus, under the SBA size standard,
the majority of firms in this industry can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\116\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rural Radiotelephone Service. Neither the Commission nor the SBA
have developed a small business size standard specifically for small
businesses providing Rural Radiotelephone Service. Rural Radiotelephone
Service is radio service in which licensees are authorized to offer and
provide radio telecommunication services for hire to subscribers in
areas where it is not feasible to provide communication services by
wire or other means. A significant subset of the Rural Radiotelephone
Service is the Basic Exchange Telephone Radio System

[[Page 2584]]

(BETRS).\117\ Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite),
is the closest applicable industry with a SBA small business size
standard. The SBA small business size standard for Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) classifies firms having
1,500 or fewer employees as small. For this industry, U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms that operated for
the entire year. Of this total, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\118\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the Commission
estimates that the majority of Rural Radiotelephone Services firm are
small entities. Based on Commission data as of December 27, 2021, there
were approximately 119 active licenses in the Rural Radiotelephone
Service.\119\ The Commission does not collect employment data from
these entities holding these licenses and therefore we cannot estimate
how many of these entities meet the SBA small business size standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\117\ BETRS is defined in 47 CFR 22.757, 22.759.
\118\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
\119\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 27, 2021. <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = CR;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wireless Communications Services. Wireless Communications Services
(WCS) can be used for a variety of fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and
digital audio broadcasting satellite services. Wireless spectrum is
made available and licensed for the provision of wireless
communications services in several frequency bands subject to part 27
of the Commission's rules. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite) is the closest industry with an SBA small business size
standard applicable to these services. The SBA small business size
standard for this industry classifies a business as small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
there were 2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the entire
year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\120\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the Commission
estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can be
considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\120\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission's small business size standards with respect to WCS
involve eligibility for bidding credits and installment payments in the
auction of licenses for the various frequency bands included in WCS.
When bidding credits are adopted for the auction of licenses in WCS
frequency bands, such credits may be available to several types of
small businesses based average gross revenues (small, very small and
entrepreneur) pursuant to the competitive bidding rules adopted in
conjunction with the requirements for the auction and/or as identified
in the designated entities section in part 27 of the Commission's rules
for the specific WCS frequency bands.\121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\121\ The Designated entities sections in Subparts D through Q
each contain the small business size standards adopted for the
auction of the frequency band covered by that subpart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite). This
industry comprises establishments engaged in operating and maintaining
switching and transmission facilities to provide communications via the
airwaves. Establishments in this industry have spectrum licenses and
provide services using that spectrum, such as cellular services, paging
services, wireless internet access, and wireless video services. The
SBA size standard for this industry classifies a business as small if
it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show
that there were 2,893 firms in this industry that operated for the
entire year. Of that number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\122\ Additionally, based on Commission data in the 2021
Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of December 31, 2020, there
were 797 providers that reported they were engaged in the provision of
wireless services. Of these providers, the Commission estimates that
715 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees. Consequently, using the
SBA's small business size standard, most of these providers can be
considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\122\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wireless Telephony. Wireless telephony includes cellular, personal
communications services, and specialized mobile radio telephony
carriers. The closest applicable industry with an SBA small business
size standard is Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except
Satellite). The size standard for this industry under SBA rules is that
a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For this
industry, U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893
firms that operated for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837 firms
employed fewer than 250 employees.\123\ Additionally, based on
Commission data in the 2021 Universal Service Monitoring Report, as of
December 31, 2020, there were 407 providers that reported they were
engaged in the provision of cellular, personal communications services,
and specialized mobile radio services. Of these providers, the
Commission estimates that 333 providers have 1,500 or fewer employees.
Consequently, using the SBA's small business size standard, most of
these providers can be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\123\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

700 MHz Guard Band Licensees. The 700 MHz Guard Band encompasses
spectrum in 746-747/776-777 MHz and 762-764/792-794 MHz frequency
bands. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is the
closest industry with a SBA small business size standard applicable to
licenses providing services in these bands. The SBA small business size
standard for this industry classifies a business as small if it has
1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that
there were 2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the entire
year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250
employees.\124\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the Commission
estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can be
considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\124\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Commission data as of December 2021, there were
approximately 224 active 700 MHz Guard Band licenses.\125\ The

[[Page 2585]]

Commission's small business size standards with respect to 700 MHz
Guard Band licensees involve eligibility for bidding credits and
installment payments in the auction of licenses. For the auction of
these licenses, the Commission defined a ``small business'' as an
entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals,
has average gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding
three years, and a ``very small business'' an entity that, together
with its affiliates and controlling principals, has average gross
revenues that are not more than $15 million for the preceding three
years. Pursuant to these definitions, five winning bidders claiming one
of the small business status classifications won 26 licenses, and one
winning bidder claiming small business won two licenses. None of the
winning bidders claiming a small business status classification in
these 700 MHz Guard Band license auctions had an active license as of
December 2021.\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\125\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 14, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = WX;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
\126\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 14, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = WX;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Lower 700 MHz Band Licenses. The lower 700 MHz band encompasses
spectrum in the 698-746 MHz frequency bands. Permissible operations in
these bands include flexible fixed, mobile, and broadcast uses,
including mobile and other digital new broadcast operation; fixed and
mobile wireless commercial services (including FDD- and TDD-based
services); as well as fixed and mobile wireless uses for private,
internal radio needs, two-way interactive, cellular, and mobile
television broadcasting services. Wireless Telecommunications Carriers
(except Satellite) is the closest industry with a SBA small business
size standard applicable to licenses providing services in these bands.
The SBA small business size standard for this industry classifies a
business as small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S. Census
Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 2,893 firms that operated in
this industry for the entire year. Of this number, 2,837 firms employed
fewer than 250 employees.\127\ Thus under the SBA size standard, the
Commission estimates that a majority of licensees in this industry can
be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\127\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Commission data as of December 2021, there were
approximately 2,824 active Lower 700 MHz Band licenses.\128\ The
Commission's small business size standards with respect to Lower 700
MHz Band licensees involve eligibility for bidding credits and
installment payments in the auction of licenses. For auctions of Lower
700 MHz Band licenses the Commission adopted criteria for three groups
of small businesses. A very small business was defined as an entity
that, together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has
average annual gross revenues not exceeding $15 million for the
preceding three years, a small business was defined as an entity that,
together with its affiliates and controlling interests, has average
gross revenues not exceeding $40 million for the preceding three years,
and an entrepreneur was defined as an entity that, together with its
affiliates and controlling interests, has average gross revenues not
exceeding $3 million for the preceding three years. In auctions for
Lower 700 MHz Band licenses seventy-two winning bidders claiming a
small business classification won 329 licenses, twenty-six winning
bidders claiming a small business classification won 214 licenses, and
three winning bidders claiming a small business classification won all
five auctioned licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\128\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 14, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = WY, WZ;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Upper 700 MHz Band Licenses. The upper 700 MHz band encompasses
spectrum in the 746-806 MHz bands. Upper 700 MHz D Block licenses are
nationwide licenses associated with the 758-763 MHz and 788-793 MHz
bands. Permissible operations in these bands include flexible fixed,
mobile, and broadcast uses, including mobile and other digital new
broadcast operation; fixed and mobile wireless commercial services
(including FDD- and TDD-based services); as well as fixed and mobile
wireless uses for private, internal radio needs, two-way interactive,
cellular, and mobile television broadcasting services.\129\ Wireless
Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite) is the closest industry
with a SBA small business size standard applicable to licenses
providing services in these bands. The SBA small business size standard
for this industry classifies a business as small if it has 1,500 or
fewer employees. U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were
2,893 firms that operated in this industry for the entire year. Of that
number, 2,837 firms employed fewer than 250 employees.\130\ Thus, under
the SBA size standard, the Commission estimates that a majority of
licensees in this industry can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\129\ See Federal Communications Commission, Economics and
Analytics, Auctions, Auction 73: 700 MHz Band, Fact Sheet,
Permissible Operations, <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/auction/73/factsheet">https://www.fcc.gov/auction/73/factsheet</a>. We
note that in Auction 73, Upper 700 MHz Band C and D Blocks as well
as Lower 700 MHz Band A, B, and E Blocks were auctioned.
\130\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Commission data as of December 2021, there were
approximately 152 active Upper 700

[[Page 2586]]

MHz Band licenses.\131\ The Commission's small business size standards
with respect to Upper 700 MHz Band licensees involve eligibility for
bidding credits and installment payments in the auction of licenses.
For the auction of these licenses, the Commission defined a ``small
business'' as an entity that, together with its affiliates and
controlling principals, has average gross revenues not exceeding $40
million for the preceding three years, and a ``very small business'' an
entity that, together with its affiliates and controlling principals,
has average gross revenues that are not more than $15 million for the
preceding three years. Pursuant to these definitions, three winning
bidders claiming very small business status won five of the twelve
available licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\131\ Based on a FCC Universal Licensing System search on
December 14, 2021, <a href="https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp">https://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/UlsSearch/searchAdvanced.jsp</a>. Search parameters: Service Group = All, ``Match
only the following radio service(s)'', Radio Service = WP, WU;
Authorization Type = All; Status = Active. We note that the number
of active licenses does not equate to the number of licensees. A
licensee can have one or more licenses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In frequency bands where licenses were subject to auction, the
Commission notes that as a general matter, the number of winning
bidders that qualify as small businesses at the close of an auction
does not necessarily represent the number of small businesses currently
in service. Further, the Commission does not generally track subsequent
business size unless, in the context of assignments or transfers,
unjust enrichment issues are implicated. Additionally, since the
Commission does not collect data on the number of employees for
licensees providing these services, at this time we are not able to
estimate the number of licensees with active licenses that would
qualify as small under the SBA's small business size standard.
Wireless Resellers. Neither the Commission nor the SBA have
developed a small business size standard specifically for Wireless
Resellers. The closest industry with a SBA small business size standard
is Telecommunications Resellers. The Telecommunications Resellers
industry comprises establishments engaged in purchasing access and
network capacity from owners and operators of telecommunications
networks and reselling wired and wireless telecommunications services
(except satellite) to businesses and households. Establishments in this
industry resell telecommunications and they do not operate transmission
facilities and infrastructure. Mobile virtual network operators (MVNOs)
are included in this industry. Under the SBA size standard for this
industry, a business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. U.S.
Census Bureau data for 2017 show that 1,386 firms in this industry
provided resale services during that year. Of that number, 1,375 firms
operated with fewer than 250 employees.\132\ Thus, for this industry
under the SBA small business size standard, the majority of providers
can be considered small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\132\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Equipment Manufacturers
Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications
Equipment Manufacturing. This industry comprises establishments
primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and
wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these
establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable
television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile
communications equipment, and radio and television studio and
broadcasting equipment. The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies businesses having 1,250 employees or less as small.
U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 656 firms in this
industry that operated for the entire year. Of this number, 624 firms
had fewer than 250 employees.\133\ Thus, under the SBA size standard,
the majority of firms in this industry can be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\133\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing. This industry
comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing
semiconductors and related solid state devices. Examples of products
made by these establishments are integrated circuits, memory chips,
microprocessors, diodes, transistors, solar cells and other
optoelectronic devices. The SBA small business size standard for this
industry classifies entities having 1,250 or fewer employees as small.
U.S. Census Bureau data for 2017 show that there were 729 firms in this
industry that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 673 firms
operated with fewer than 250 employees.\134\ Thus under the SBA size
standard, the majority of firms in this industry can be considered
small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\134\ The available U.S. Census Bureau data does not provide a
more precise estimate of the number of firms that meet the SBA size
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other
Compliance Requirements for Small Entities

The NPRM proposes and seeks comment on implementing new location-
based routing requirements for 911 voice calls and text messages, that
if adopted, may impose new or modified reporting or recordkeeping, and
other compliance obligations on small entities. Some of our proposed
requirements contain written notification and certification
requirements that will be applicable to small entities. For example, in
the NPRM we propose to require that not later than six months from the
effective date of final rules on location-based routing, or within six
months of a valid request for delivery of IP-formatted calls, texts,
and location information by a local or state authority, whichever is
later, CMRS providers and covered text providers must deliver 911
calls, texts, and associated routing information in IP-based format to
NG911-capable PSAPs that request it. Non-nationwide providers would
have an additional six months to comply with this requirement. CMRS and
covered text providers and state or local 911 authorities would be
allowed to agree to alternate timeframes for delivery of IP-formatted
calls, texts, and associated routing information as long as the CMRS or
covered text provider notifies the Commission of the alternate
timeframe within 30 days of the parties' agreement.
Regarding CMRS or covered text providers' receipt of a ``valid
request,'' the criteria we proposed to constitute a valid request
includes certification from a requesting local or state entity that is
technically ready to receive calls and/or texts in the IP-based format
requested, that it is specifically authorized to accept calls and/or
texts in the IP-based format requested, and that has provided
notification to the CMRS or covered text providers via either a
registry made available by the Commission or any other written
notification reasonably acceptable to the CMRS provider or covered text
provider.
In the NPRM, we seek comment on whether to implement any new data
collections to assist in monitoring performance and compliance with the
proposed location-based routing rules. For example, we ask: (1) whether
to require CMRS providers or covered text providers to provide
performance data on location-based routing, such as relative
percentages of calls or texts routed using location-based routing
versus other routing methods such as

[[Page 2587]]

cell tower location, (2) if so,

[…truncated; see source link]

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on January 17, 2023.

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.