Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations agency functions, expressing confidence that the Commission will continue to recognize and address the specific needs of Federal Government users during the IP transition. In particular, NTIAs letter endorses the Commissions discussion of Federal agencies in the Second Report and Order, noting that the Commission retains flexibility to address issues related to national security and public safety raised by legacy voice service discontinuances on a case-by-case basis. As Verizon notes, NTIA agreed with the Commissions finding that the Federal Government generally is well-positioned to protect its interests through large-scale service contracts with carriers. While the NTIA letter cited in the Petition notes that some Federal agencies in remote or less populated areas may not enjoy the level of competition for communications services that exists in other areas of the country, NTIA goes on to state that it is encouraged by the Commissions discussion of Federal agencies interests regarding service discontinuances in the Second Report and Order. The letter likewise expresses confidence that the Commissions procedures for processing service discontinuances will be sufficient to safeguard the interests of Federal agencies in maintaining mission critical communications infrastructure. In its reply comments in support of its Petition, Public Knowledge seems to suggest that despite its amicable tone we should nonetheless read the NTIA
letter as constituting an implied opposition to the alternative options test adopted in the Second Report and Order. The Wireline Competition Bureau declines, however, to read into NTIAs letter arguments that do not appear in its text. And although NTIA
suggests that the Bureau should hold in abeyance any copper retirement if a Federal user credibly alleges that the carriers proposed retirement date does not give the user sufficient time to accommodate the transition to new network facilities, nowhere does NTIA argue that the framework adopted in the Second Report and Order is likely to adversely impact Federal agencies, nor does NTIA argue that any replacement test without quantifiable performance standards has inherent shortcomings, as claimed in the Petition. Copper retirements are subject to the Commissions section 251
network change disclosure rules rather than the section 214 discontinuance rules. Those rules contain objection procedures that allow for a limited extension of the proposed copper retirement effective date.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:50 Feb 09, 2021

Jkt 253001

13. The Wireline Competition Bureau also disagrees with arguments in the Petition that the Commissions alternative options test and consumer comment period for discontinuances are arbitrary, inconsistent with the public interest, or unsupported by the record underlying the Second Report and Order. The Commission already considered, and rejected, these arguments in the underlying Order. As the Commission found in that Order, the record shows strong support for further streamlining the section 214a discontinuance process for legacy voice services for carriers in the midst of a technology transition. The Commission observed that the number of switched access lines has continued to plummet since the adequate replacement test was adopted, while the number of interconnected VoIP and mobile voice subscriptions have continued to climb, and concluded that providing additional opportunities to streamline the discontinuance process for legacy voice services, with appropriate limitations to protect consumers and the public interest, will allow carriers to more quickly redirect resources to nextgeneration networks, and the public to receive the benefit of those new networks. Based on these findings, the Commission adopted the alternative options test for carriers seeking streamlined treatment of applications to discontinue legacy voice services, while retaining the preexisting adequate replacement test as an option for carriers.
14. We also dismiss Petitioners arguments that we must reconsider the Second Report and Order because of perceived deficiencies regarding the Commissions broadband maps.
Petitioner offers no support for its speculation that these maps would presumably guide the Commissions analysis regarding whether another stand-alone facilities-based service is available. Indeed, nothing in the Second Report and Order suggests that the Commissions broadband maps would provide the basis for this determination, and the burden falls on the provider seeking discontinuance to demonstrate the existence of alternative service options.
15. The Petition argues that the absence of specific performance metrics in the alternative options test indicates that the Commission has abdicated its statutory duty to promote the public interest. The Wireline Competition Bureau disagrees. As Verizon notes in its opposition, the Petition ignores the Commissions explanation for why the . . . compliance obligations that it found necessary for the . . . adequate
PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

8875

replacement test are not necessary under the alternative options test, which, unlike the adequate replacement test, requires the existence of at least two alternative services. The alternative options test complements, rather than replaces, the adequate replacement test, both of which ensure that the public interest is protected when carriers seek to discontinue legacy voice services that are part of a technology transition. As the Commission explained in the Second Report and Order, where only one potential replacement service exists, a carrier must meet the more rigorous demands of the adequate replacement test in order to receive streamlined treatment of its discontinuance application. But where there is more than one facilities-based alternative . . .
we expect customers will benefit from competition between facilities-based providers. The Commission went on to explain that the stand-alone interconnected VoIP service option required to meet the alternative options test embodies managed service quality and underlying network infrastructure, and disabilities access and 911 access requirements, key components of the Commissions 2016 streamlining action. For these reasons, the Commission explained, under either test, customers will be assured a smooth transition to a voice replacement service that provides capabilities comparable to legacy TDM-based voice services and, often, numerous additional advanced capabilities. For this reason, the Wireline Competition Bureau also disagrees with Petitioners argument that there are instances of specific harm that the Commission appeared to purposefully overlook during its 2018
rulemaking, citing critical functions like medical device support, fire alarms, and connecting credit card readers for small businesses and the effects of natural disasters like hurricanes and wildfires. As the Commission explained in the Second Report and Order, the two parts of the alternative options test . . . address commenters concerns about potentially inadequate mobile wireless replacement services for customers requiring service quality guarantees and their concerns that vulnerable populations will be unable to use specialized equipment for people with disabilities, such as TTYs or analog captioned telephone devices or will be left without access to 911.
16. The Wireline Competition Bureau also disagrees with arguments in the Petition that we should reconsider the 10-day consumer comment period adopted in the Second Report and Order and reinstate the 180-day notice period
E:FRFM10FER1.SGM

10FER1