[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 117 (Wednesday, June 17, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36522-36526]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12845]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Parts 1 and 54
[GN Docket No. 20-32; DA 20-594; FRS 16841]
Office of Economics and Analytics and Wireline Competition Bureau
Seek Comment on Adjustment Factor Values for the 5G Fund
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Office of Economics and Analytics
(Office) and the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) propose and seek
comment on specific adjustment factor values for purposes of bidding in
the 5G Fund auction as well as for disaggregating legacy support. The
Office and Bureau seek comment on these adjustment factor values and
specifically on whether these values are appropriate to achieve the
Commission's objective of distributing 5G Fund and legacy support to a
range of areas across the country that are geographically and
economically diverse, and to ensure that the 5G Fund supports those
areas that absent such support would be unlikely to reap the benefits
of 5G deployment.
DATES: Comments are due on or before July 7, 2020; reply comments are
due on or before August 6, 2020.
ADDRESSES: 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 identified by GN Docket No. 20-32 on or before the dates
indicated on the first page of this document. 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).
Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically
using the internet by accessing the Commission's Electronic Comment
Filing System (ECFS) at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Except when the
filer requests that materials be withheld from public inspection, any
document may be submitted electronically through the Commission's ECFS.
Persons that need to submit confidential filings to the Commission
should follow the instructions provided in the Commission's March 31,
2020 public notice, DA 20-361, regarding the procedures for submission
of confidential materials.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must
file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by
commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S.
Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's
Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
Commercial Overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service
Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Dr.,
Annapolis Junction, Annapolis, MD 20701.
U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority
mail must be addressed to 445 12th St. SW, Washington, DC 20554.
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). https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-closes-headquarters-open-window-and-changes-hand-delivery-policy.
During the time the Commission's building is closed to the
general public and until further notice, if more than one docket or
rulemaking number appears in the caption of a proceeding, paper filers
need not submit two additional copies for each additional docket or
rulemaking number; an original and one copy are sufficient.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Matraves, Economic Analysis
Division, Office of Economics and Analytics, (202) 391-6272 or
[email protected], or Emily Burke, Auctions Division, Office
of Economics and Analytics, (202) 418-1470 or [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Adjustment Factor
Comment Public Notice, GN Docket No. 20-32, DA 20-594, released on June
5, 2020. The complete text of this document and its appendices is
available for public inspection and
[[Page 36523]]
copying during regular business hours from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. ET
Monday through Thursday or from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. ET on Fridays
in the FCC Reference Information Center, Room CY-A257, 445 12th Street
SW, Washington, DC 20554, except when FCC Headquarters is otherwise
closed to visitors. See Public Notice, Restrictions on Visitors to FCC
Facilities, March 12, 2020. The complete text of this document and its
appendices are also available on the Commission's website at https://www.fcc.gov/document/bureau-seek-comment-adjustment-factor-values-5g-fund or by using the search function for GN Docket No. 20-32 on the
Commission's ECFS web page at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Alternative
formats (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format) are
available to persons with disabilities by sending an email to
[email protected] or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
at (202) 418 0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY).
I. Introduction
1. On April 23, 2020, the Commission adopted the 5G Fund NPRM and
Order, 85 FR 31636, May 26, 2020, 85 FR 34525, Jun. 5, 2020, in which
it proposed to adopt rules and a framework for establishing the 5G Fund
for Rural America. Using multi-round reverse auctions, the 5G Fund
would provide up to $9 billion to support 5G service in rural areas of
the country that otherwise would be unlikely to see unsubsidized
deployment. Every American, including those living in rural areas,
should have access to high-speed, mobile wireless broadband networks
that are capable of providing 5G service in order to facilitate the
development of new technologies, foster economic growth, and ensure
that educational opportunities are widely available. To account for the
relative costs of serving areas that vary in terrain characteristics
and potential business cases, the Commission proposed to apply an
adjustment factor to make the most difficult areas to serve more
attractive at auction in order to encourage more bidding for these
areas. The adjustment factor also would be used to transition legacy
high-cost support to 5G Fund support. The Office of Economics and
Analytics (Office) and the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) seek
comment on proposed adjustment factor values and on three economic
analyses that have informed their proposed adjustment factor values.
2. In the 5G Fund NPRM and Order, the Commission declared its
commitment to bridging the digital divide and proposed to dedicate
universal service funds to bring 5G mobile wireless service to the
rural areas where there is likely insufficient financial incentive for
mobile wireless carriers to invest in 5G-capable networks absent
support. In proposing the 5G Fund as a replacement for Mobility Fund
Phase II (which focused on 4G LTE), the Commission recognized that all
American consumers, not just those living in urban areas, must have
access to the most current and advanced technologies and services
available in the marketplace in order to fully participate in today's
society. By supporting the construction and operation of 5G mobile
broadband networks in areas that may otherwise go unserved, the
Commission stated that it can help Americans living, working, and
traveling in rural communities gain access to communication options on
par with those offered in urban areas.
3. The Commission proposed in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order to use a
multi-round, descending clock auction similar to the Connect America
Fund Phase II for Phase I of the 5G Fund to identify: (1) The areas
that will receive support; (2) the provider that will be assigned to
receive support in each such area; and (3) the amount of support that
each winning bidder will be eligible to receive. Further, the
Commission proposed that bids for 5G Fund support would be accepted and
winning bids would be determined based on a support price per adjusted
square kilometer of the eligible area covered by the bid. To determine
the adjusted square kilometers of the eligible areas, the Commission
proposed to incorporate an adjustment factor into the auction design.
This factor would assign a weight to be applied to the actual square
kilometers of eligible areas that would reflect, among other things,
the relative cost of serving areas with differing terrain
characteristics, as well as the potential business case for serving
each area. In the Mobility Fund Phase II Report and Order, 82 FR 154221
(Mar. 28, 2017), 82 FR 13413 (Mar. 13, 2017), the Commission
acknowledged that terrain could affect the cost of deploying service,
noting that more mountainous terrains with greater variations in slope
are areas that tend to be more costly to serve than level plains. A
terrain factor was adopted in Mobility Fund Phase II to weight the area
of each square kilometer within a census block such that eligible areas
in more mountainous areas would be allocated a greater amount of a
competitive ETC's total legacy support to reflect the higher costs of
serving such areas. The Commission explained in the 5G Fund NPRM and
Order that the auction format proposed for the 5G Fund is one in which
a uniform support rate is offered across all eligible areas, and
carriers indicate which specific areas they would service at that rate.
If the sum of all payments that would be made at a specific rate given
carriers' expressed willingness to serve exceeds the 5G Fund budget,
then the rate would decrease and carriers would express their
willingness to serve at the lower rate. This process would continue
until the payment is less than or equal to the 5G Fund budget. Under
this process, carriers would be willing to serve fewer areas as the
rate falls, but if the same rate is offered for all remaining areas,
more support than is needed would flow to the less costly-to-serve and
more profitable remaining areas. The adjustment factor would,
therefore, allocate a multiple of any given support rate to more costly
and less profitable areas, thereby making them more attractive to serve
and increasing the support to such areas.
4. In addition, for purposes of transitioning legacy high-cost
support to 5G support, the Commission proposed to disaggregate legacy
high-cost support. To account for the relative costs of providing
mobile service, the Commission proposed to apply an adjustment factor
to these disaggregation steps. This adjustment factor would determine
how support will be treated during the transition across difference
types of areas--for example, how support will be disaggregated across
eligible and ineligible portions of the legacy support area, as well as
in eligible portions of the legacy support area where a bidder wins
support and where there is no winner. In other words, the Commission
proposed to multiply the actual square kilometers of eligible areas
and/or disaggregated areas of legacy support by an adjustment factor so
as to increase the amount of support per actual square kilometer that
goes to more costly or less profitable areas.
5. In the 5G Fund NPRM and Order, the Commission directed the
Office and Bureau to propose and seek comment on the appropriate
adjustment factor values and the underlying methodologies that could be
used to develop them, and recommended that they inform their proposals
by using data from several sources, including the U.S. Geological
Survey, historical coverage and infrastructure deployment data received
by the Commission, data from the U.S. Census Bureau, spectrum holdings
information, and Mobility Fund Phase I auction data. In the Adjustment
Factor Comment Public Notice, the Office and Bureau propose specific
adjustment
[[Page 36524]]
factor values for purposes of bidding in the 5G Fund auction as well as
for disaggregating legacy support. These proposed values reflect the
Office and Bureau's evaluation of the costs and benefits of providing
5G services to different geographic areas, as informed and supported by
three economic analyses developed by Commission staff and described in
detail in Appendix B to the Adjustment Factor Comment Public Notice.
The Office and Bureau seek comment on these adjustment factor values
and specifically on whether these values are appropriate to achieve the
Commission's objective of distributing 5G Fund and legacy support to a
range of areas across the country that are geographically and
economically diverse, and to ensure that the 5G Fund supports those
areas that absent such support would be unlikely to reap the benefits
of 5G deployment.
II. Determination of an Adjustment Factor
6. In this section, the Office and Bureau first describe the cost
factors underlying the deployment of a 5G network in rural areas, as
well as the potential expected revenues for each area, and then propose
certain adjustment factor values and provide a summary of the three
underlying economic analyses used to develop these values. In Appendix
A to the Adjustment Factor Comment Public Notice, the Office and Bureau
provide a terrain elevation map of the United States. In Appendix B to
the Adjustment Factor Comment Public Notice, the Office and Bureau
provide a detailed description of the three economic analyses under
comment, which account for the expected variations in terrain and
revenues across different geographic areas.
A. Factors Underlying an Adjustment Factor
7. Deploying 5G wireless networks in rural areas is a capital-
intensive investment primarily driven by the costs of deploying base
station cell sites. The costs of constructing, operating, and upgrading
tower sites, or leasing tower sites, will vary depending on factors
such as the location's remoteness, distance to the nearest road, access
to backhaul, variance in terrain elevation, land cover, and the cost of
local construction and installation labor. The potential coverage area
of a site, and hence the number of sites needed, in turn will depend on
the specific site location, antenna height above average terrain,
terrain variation, foliage and the density of local structures, the
spectrum band, and the number of subscribers served. Terrain variation
can limit overall signal propagation and cell coverage depending on the
specific location of the cell site due to the obstructions of the
signal's path. For example, in a hilly area with terrain obstacles,
signal propagation losses are more severe at higher frequencies,
although a cell site would typically be located on higher ground in
order to minimize terrain obstructions.
8. Site Costs. The initial capital expenditure for deploying a
wireless network base station includes site construction costs, such as
site acquisition; site development; leasehold improvements; shelter,
including the equipment shelter and installation services; structure
cost including the tower structure, design, construction, and
installation costs; radio frequency cost including the radio and
baseband electronics, antennas, and cables; and backhaul cost including
equipment and service to connect the site to the core network.
Collocation on an existing tower generally should cost less than
building a new tower site, but it is less likely that existing towers
are available in more remote and unserved areas. In addition, deploying
new sites in hillier terrain is likely to incur higher site costs due
to the need to construct backhaul and leasehold improvement
requirements such as constructing road and utility access, in addition
to excavating a level space with proper drainage to construct a tower.
Remote site development costs are largely dependent on the specific
location and the leasehold improvements required can vary
significantly. It is typically more expensive to provide service to
rural subscribers due to the scarcity of utility and other services and
the long distances required to travel to reach the sites in less
densely populated areas, especially if terrain is more mountainous.
9. Spectrum. Spectrum bands can be classified broadly as: Low-band
(below 1 GHz), mid-band (between 1 GHz and 6 GHz), and high-band. Each
band has unique coverage and capacity properties; low-band spectrum is
better suited for wider coverage (both in terms of range as well as
better indoor penetration) and higher-band spectrum is better suited
for higher capacity and throughput. The wavelength of the signal, which
is inversely proportional to frequency, impacts the signal's ability to
propagate over and around obstacles and to penetrate various building
materials and land cover such as trees and shrubs. A higher frequency
signal is generally attenuated more at greater distances than a lower
frequency signal due to antenna and atmospheric effects. Frequencies
below 1 GHz experience lower propagation losses and therefore can
provide coverage over a larger area which leads to cost advantages for
network deployment in rural areas. Higher frequency bands, on the other
hand, are typically available in larger channel bandwidths which lead
to higher throughput speeds but the wavelength of the signal results in
greater propagation losses. A higher frequency signal generally
encounters higher penetration losses as it propagates through
obstructions such as buildings or trees; larger amounts of contiguous
spectrum are typically available in higher operating frequencies than
in lower frequencies. The additional contiguous spectrum, however,
allows for assignment of larger channel bandwidths, thereby making
available more capacity as compared to lower frequencies. Mobile
wireless carriers, depending on their spectrum holdings, may be able to
simultaneously deploy low and mid-band spectrum in rural areas to take
advantage of both propagation and capacity capabilities, respectively.
If the cost of spectrum is lower in more rural areas, this could
significantly offset many of the other higher site costs. In addition,
5G technology enables carrier aggregation to further optimize the
desired coverage, throughput, and capacity. Carrier aggregation enables
the use of two different channels within the same frequency spectrum or
in different spectra, allowing, for example, the augmentation of low
band propagation capabilities with mid band capacity advantages.
10. The Office and Bureau propose to use various cost
characteristics as outlined here and described in more detail in
Appendices A and B to the Adjustment Factor Comment Public Notice--
including terrain elevation, spectrum frequency and clutter--to capture
the relative cost of serving areas with differing terrain
characteristics. The Office and Bureau seek comment on this proposal.
11. Business Case: Demand Factors. As well as being geographically
diverse, the United States is economically diverse. As set out in the
5G Fund NPRM and Order, in addition to relative cost characteristics,
the adjustment factor values the Office and Bureau propose should also
capture the expected revenues that might be generated in each area. The
Office and Bureau propose to use various economic characteristics--
including income, GDP, and population density--as proxies for the
demand factors in each of the economic analyses. The Office and Bureau
seek comment on this proposal.
[[Page 36525]]
B. Proposed Adjustment Factor Values
12. The Commission proposed in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order to adopt
an adjustment factor that would assign a weight to specific geographic
areas. The proposed adjustment factor values would increase the
likelihood that 5G Fund support is distributed to geographically and
economically diverse areas by taking into account the differences among
such areas in the costs and benefits of providing services. The
Commission also proposed a process in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order to
disaggregate legacy high-cost support. As the Commission explained, to
disaggregate legacy support, it ``would overlay the boundaries of
eligible areas and the minimum geographic area for bidding over each
legacy support recipient's service area[,]'' in effect ``subdivid[ing]
the geographic boundary for each carrier's subsidized service area into
the smallest constituent piece for which support must be disaggregated
and transitioned separately'' and then apply the adjustment factor to
each such area. In this way, a larger portion of a carrier's
disaggregated legacy high-cost support would be assigned to those
portions of its subsidized service area that have a higher adjustment
factor, using the same values calculated for bidding. For example,
suppose that a carrier receives $100 in legacy high-cost support for
its subsidized service area, the entirety of which is eligible for 5G
Fund support. If 15 square kilometers of the service area falls within
census tract A, which has an adjustment factor value of 2.0, and 70
square kilometers of the service area falls within census tract B,
which has an adjustment factor value of 1.0, the Commission would
disaggregate its legacy support and assign $30 to the portion of the
service area in census tract A and $70 to the portion of the service
area in census tract B. The 5G Fund NPRM and Order directs the Office
and Bureau to propose specific values for the adjustment factor and to
detail the underlying methodologies that could be used to develop the
weights. The Office and Bureau accordingly seek comment on how to apply
the adjustment factor to the disaggregation of legacy support.
13. First, the Office and the Bureau seek comment on the adjustment
factor values presented in Figure 1, which synthesize and are informed
by the three economic analyses. Each of the economic analyses estimates
one or more sets of adjustment factor values. To generate the values
presented in Figure 1, essentially the Office and Bureau considered a
middle ground of the three specific analyses so as to take all three
analyses into account, and then rounded for administrative simplicity.
The Office and Bureau believe this is the most reasonable way to
integrate all the results generated by the Entry Model, the Cell Site
Density Model and the Auction Bidding Model. The explanation of the
three terrain categories and the demand factors listed in Figure 1 can
be found in Appendix A and Appendix B to the Adjustment Factor Comment
Public Notice, respectively. The Office and Bureau seek comment
generally on their proposed adjustment factor values. The Office and
Bureau recognize that the Commission does not intend that the
adjustment factor that is ultimately adopted will capture the full
differences between the costs and expected revenues of providing
service to different types of geographic areas. In addition, the
Commission stated in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order that, if necessary, the
adjustment factor will be capped to ensure the funding allocation
determined by the auction is both equitable and efficient. Commenters
are invited to address whether the specific proposed adjustment factor
values are consistent with the intentions of the Commission as stated
in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JN20.021
14. The Office and Bureau seek comment also on the three economic
analyses that inform their estimated adjustment factor values. The
technical descriptions of the three economic analyses which informed
the Office and Bureau's proposal are found in Appendix B to the
Adjustment Factor Comment Public Notice. The Office and Bureau ask
commenters to submit any analysis that alternatively or additionally
might inform the adjustment factor values that the Office and Bureau
propose. Further, the Office and Bureau seek comment on the data
sources staff used, and ask that commenters submit alternative data
sources to the extent that they might better inform the Office's and
Bureau's analyses. In addition, the Office and Bureau seek comment on
whether, in determining whether an area would be likely to receive 5G
service, the Office and Bureau have identified appropriately the
underlying factors that wireless carriers use in considering whether to
deploy 5G service. Finally, the Office and Bureau ask commenters to
submit any alternative methodological approaches and
[[Page 36526]]
analyses for determining the appropriate adjustment factor values.
15. Entry Model Adjustment Factor. In order to estimate how
relative costs and revenues differ across geographic areas, the Office
and Bureau's first analysis examines how geographic areas' physical and
demographic characteristics affect carriers' network deployment
decisions. The Office and Bureau assume that carriers only enter areas
where their long-run incremental revenues are greater than their long-
run incremental cost of deploying wireless mobile service; this implies
those areas with high demand and low costs attract a greater number of
carriers than those areas with low demand and high costs. To understand
what makes an area attractive to carriers, the Office and Bureau
estimate an ordered logistic regression of the number of carriers
providing service. To proxy for the carriers' expected revenue
generated by entering the area and providing service, the Office and
Bureau include independent variables such as population, local GDP, and
median household income. To proxy for network deployment costs, the
Office and Bureau include independent variables such as terrain
variation and the percentage of forested land. Finally, the Office and
Bureau include a variable that accounts for past universal service
support. To construct the adjustment factor, the Office and Bureau
solve for the adjustments necessary to offset entry probability
differences caused by variations in terrain and income. The Commission
has proposed in the 5G Fund NPRM and Order that the adjustment factor
would be applied in the auction bidding system as a multiplicative
factor on the number of square kilometers associated with a biddable
area, so the Office and Bureau estimate the adjustment factor values
that, all else equal, would make the adjusted square kilometers in all
areas equally attractive to bidders. To ensure that the model's
estimated parameters and resulting adjustment factors are robust to
alternative assumptions, the Office and Bureau report the estimation
results and the accompanying factors from twelve different
specifications of the model.
16. Cell Site Density Model Adjustment Factor. In their second
analysis, the Office and Bureau estimate the difference in the number
of cell sites required to provide high-quality 5G service in hillier
terrain areas compared to flat areas. Since more variability in the
terrain of a cell site service area tends to reduce the received signal
strength at a given location, wireless carriers must, all else equal,
build more cell sites in mountainous rural areas compared to flat rural
areas to provide the same quality of service (e.g., speed). Using
county-level cell site locations and coverage data, the Office and
Bureau's model estimates differences in the average coverage area of a
site due to the terrain of the site service area, holding all other
determinants of cell site coverage areas fixed. To predict cell site
coverage areas by terrain category, the Office and Bureau first run a
regression analysis of cell site coverage area on variables that
account for network capacity, network load, signal propagation, and
service quality. Then using the regression model estimates, the Office
and Bureau predict the average coverage area of a site in a typical
rural area for their three terrain categories (flat, hilly, and
mountainous) to calculate an adjustment factor that estimates how many
sites per square mile on average are required to deploy comparable 5G
mobile service in rural areas within each terrain category. If cell
site deployment costs are the same across terrain categories, the
adjustment factor values estimate the cost differences in providing
wireless service across terrain types. If sites cost more to deploy in
more mountainous terrain, then the adjustment factor values are
underestimated. The Office and Bureau do not have information on
deployment cost variation by terrain, so these potential cost
differences are not accounted for in the estimated adjustment factors
in the Cell Site Density Model.
17. Auction Bidding Model Adjustment Factor. In their third
analysis, the Office and Bureau use Mobility Fund Phase I (Auction 901)
sealed bid data (i.e., a firm's requested subsidy to provide mobile
service to a specified unserved geographic area) to understand how
terrain and other factors impact the bid amount requested by a carrier
to deploy service. The Office and Bureau assume that a carrier's bid
amount is a function of its expected revenues, expected competition in
the auction, and expected costs. The Office and Bureau estimate
adjustment factor values by applying a regression model that estimates
the effect of terrain on the bid amount controlling for variables that
determine revenues and costs. To calculate adjustment factor values,
the Office and Bureau divide their measure of terrain into the same
three categories and then predict the expected ratio of bid amounts in
the hilly and mountainous terrain categories over the bid amount in
flat terrain while holding all other factors fixed.
III. Procedural Matters
18. Ex Parte Rules--Permit-But-Disclose. Pursuant to Sec.
1.1200(a) of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1200(a), this document
shall be treated 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 two business days
after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the
Sunshine period applies).
19. 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
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 Sec. 1.1206(b) of the Commission's rules, 47
CFR 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by Sec. 1.49(f) of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 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.
Federal Communications Commission.
Gary Michaels,
Deputy Chief, Auctions Division, Office of Economics and Analytics.
[FR Doc. 2020-12845 Filed 6-16-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P