Detailed Information on the
Federal Communications Commission - Salaries and Expenses Assessment

The FCC should develop an efficiency measure that directly reflects operational cost savings. Currently, proxy measures of efficiency are used, such as timeliness of processing license applications.

The FCC should regularly review its organizational structure to ensure alignment with its strategic goals.

The FCC should enhance transparency and public participation relating to the regulatory process by including more specific regulatory proposals in Notices of Proposed Rulemaking, explicitly defining desired outcomes in advance of regulatory action, and analyzing the impacts of its regulations to ensure maximization of net benefits to society.

Measure: Increase access to high-speed broadband services. Number of broadband high-speed lines in service.

Explanation:High-speed lines deliver services at speeds exceeding 200 kbps in at least one direction.

Measure: Increase access to advanced broadband services. Number of broadband advanced services lines in service.

Explanation:Advanced services lines deliver services at speeds exceeding 200 kbps in both directions.

Measure: Aggressively target junk fax violations through the increased issuance of citations.

Explanation:Increase enforcement of the Junk Fax Protection Act of 2005 and FCC rules regulating the faxing of unsolicited advertisements.

Measure: Enforce the Commission's rules for the benefit of consumers against individuals and entities that violate those rules. Effective methods for enforcing FCC rules include the assessment of monetary forfeitures against violators, and the negotiation of payments and compliance plans through consent decrees between the Commission and investigation targets.

Explanation:The consideration and adoption of rules is only part of the Commission's regulatory program. Those rules must be vigorously enforced as well. The FCC aggressively pursues violators of its rules. In order to reduce the continuation or repetition of violations, the Commission assesses monetary forfeitures where willful or repeated violations are found to have occurred. The Commission also enters into negotiations with parties that are the subject of an investigation with the goal of reaching agreement on a consent decree. The consent decree outlines the terms and conditions of a compliance plan to prevent future violations, compliance reporting to monitor improvements, and a voluntary payment to the U.S. Treasury. In exchange, the FCC agrees to terminate its investigation.

Measure: Percentage of U.S. households living in zip codes served by three or more local exchange carriers.

Explanation:The FCC seeks to foster greater choice among wireline communications services that are available to Americans.

Measure: Percentage of U.S. population living in counties served by three or more wireless carriers.

Explanation:The FCC seeks to foster greater choice among wireless communications service that are available to Americans.

Measure: Average price per minute for mobile telephone service.

Explanation:Consumer prices for wireless telephone calls have dropped significantly since the beginning of this decade. The FCC seeks to promote competitive choices for consumers that provide reliable and affordable services.

Measure: Average price per minute for international telephone calls.

Explanation:Consumer prices for international telephone calls have dropped significantly since the beginning of this decade. The FCC seeks to promote competitive choices for consumers that provide reliable and affordable services.

Measure: Percentage of full service television stations on the air with digital operations. The Commission's target is to have 100% of full service television stations on the air with digital operations by February 17, 2009.

Explanation:Results are expressed as a percentage of the 1,817 stations that have been granted a DTV construction permit or license. All percentages shown are as of June 30th of that year.

Measure: Increase participation in the Wireless Priority Service (WPS) program to facilitate the deployment of public safety technology and increases the chances that critical users, such as first responders, will be able to use cell phone services in an emergency. This measure indicates the number of individuals in federal, state and local government as well as critical infrastructure restoration who are subscribers to the WPS program.

Explanation:WPS is a Federal program that authorizes cellular communications service providers to prioritize calls over wireless networks. Participation in the WPS program is voluntary. The FCC sets the rules and policies for the WPS program; the National Communications System, a part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, manages the WPS program. Through an outreach program, the Commission seeks to increase participation in WPS.

Measure: Increase participation in the Telecommunications Service Priority (TSP) program to support priority restoration of communications services that support national security and emergency preparedness (NSEP) missions during disasters, including terrorist attacks. This measure indicates the number of circuits utilized by 911 call centers as well as federal, state and local government NSEP entities that have been registered for priority restoration through the TSP program.

Explanation:The FCC established the TSP program and the National Communications System oversees day-to-day operation of the TSP program. Any Federal, state, or local government entity that relies on telecommunications services to accomplish its NSEP mission can qualify for TSP. In order to facilitate an increase in TSP participation, the Commission conducts an outreach program to inform 911 administrators of the TSP program and to expedite their enrollment.

Measure: Percentage of license applications processed within 90 days of filing. This includes applications for wireless communications services, broadband services, paging, point-to-point microwave services, amateur radio, marine and aviation radio, public safety and first responder services, and commercial and private land mobile radio services.

Explanation:This measures the efficienvy of review and processing of applications for license authorizations to promote increased use of spectrum.

Measure: Percentage of applications and notifications filed electronically. Applications filed electronically save applicants preparation time and expenses incurred in completing forms and mailing them to the FCC. Electronic filing has also virtually eliminated data entry costs for the Commission. The FCC has shown a steady increase in the annual percentage of electronic filing, and increased its target from 90% to 95% in FY 2007.

Explanation:This measures the efficiency gained in processing applications and notifications through the provision of electronic filing.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was established by the Communications Act of 1934 and is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable; and promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communications. Congress subsequently enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996, "to promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies." Based on these legislative mandates, the FCC is responsible for ensuring that an orderly framework exists within which communications products and services can be quickly and reasonably provided to consumers and businesses. Equally important, the FCC must also address the communications aspects of public safety, health and emergency operations; ensure the universal availability of basic telecommunications service; make communications services accessible to all people; and protect and inform consumers about their rights. In support of this mission, the FCC has established the following six general goals as the focus of its strategic plan: (1) Broadband - All Americans should have affordable access to robust and reliable broadband products and services. Regulatory policies must promote technological neutrality, competition, investment, and innovation to ensure that broadband service providers have sufficient incentive to develop and offer such products and services. (2) Competition - Competition in the provision of communications services, both domestically and overseas, supports the Nation's economy. The competitive framework for communications services should foster innovation and offer consumers reliable, meaningful choice in affordable services. (3) Spectrum - Efficient and effective use of non-federal spectrum domestically and internationally promotes the growth and rapid deployment of innovative and efficient communications technologies and services. (4) Media - The Nation's media regulations must promote competition and diversity and facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery. (5) Public Safety and Homeland Security - Communications during emergencies and crises must be available for public safety, health, defense, and emergency personnel, as well as all consumers in need. The Nation's critical communications infrastructure must be reliable, interoperable, redundant, and rapidly restorable. (6) Modernize the FCC - The FCC shall strive to be a highly productive, adaptive, and innovative organization that maximizes the benefit to stakeholders, staff, and management from effective systems, processes, resources, and organizational culture.

Evidence: The Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 151) and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104). See the mission statement from the FCC Strategic Plan at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/strategicplan/. Other Federal laws that govern certain aspects of the FCC regulatory program include the Communications Satellite Act of 1962 (P.L. 87-624), the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-243) and the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (P.L. 103-414).

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Commission's regulatory program addresses specific and existing interests. Specifically, the program is designed to encourage (1) affordable access to broadband products and services and to provide broadband service providers with incentives to develop and offer such products and services; (2) competition in the provision of communications services; (3) efficient and effective management of non-federal spectrum; (4) media regulations that facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery as well as promoting competition and diversity; and (5) communications during emergencies and crises that are reliable, interoperable, redundant, and rapidly restorable.

Evidence: The Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 151) and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104). Goldberg, Godles, Wiener and Wright, "Communications Law and Regulation", FindLaw, January 1999 (http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241460.html).

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The FCC is uniquely charged with regulating private sector interstate and foreign communications in the United States. It does not have the authority or responsibility for regulating the use of spectrum by Federal agencies, which is the responsibility of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration within the Department of Commerce. As noted by GAO, this fragmented spectrum mangement framework may pose a barrier to significant spectrum reform efforts, because neither the FCC nor NTIA has the authority to impose fundamental reform. To address this, the President directed in a 2004 Executive Memorandum that a National Strategic Spectrum Plan be developed by both the FCC and NTIA. This plan has not yet been developed, so its efficacy in ensuring the efficient and effective use of the radio spectrum cannot yet be determined. While the Commission carries out this mandate to regulate private sector and interstate telecommunications in cooperation with other Federal agencies and state and local public utilities commissions, no other Federal, state, local, tribal or private entity's authority supersedes that of the FCC in carrying out its specific responsibilities.

Evidence: The Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 151) and the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104). See Goldberg, Godles, Wiener and Wright, "Communications Law and Regulation", FindLaw, January 1999 (http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jan/1/241460.html). See FCC Intergovernmental Advisory Committee web site, http://www.fcc.gov/statelocal/. GAO, "Options for and Barriers to Spectrum Reform", GAO-06-526T, March 14, 2006. Presidential Determination: Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, "Improving Spectrum Management for the 21st Century", November 30, 2004.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: There are several potential areas for improvement of the FCC's regulatory process. First, the organizational design of the FCC does not align directly with its strategic goals, and no regular review is undertaken to determine the efficacy of organizational design in achieving regulatory goals. For example, while a key goal of the FCC is to ensure affordable access to robust and reliable broadband products and services, responsibility for achieving this goal is divided between the Wireless Bureau and the Wireline Bureau. The FCC has recently recognized that legacy organizational design structures may be ineffective in achieving its goals, as evidenced by the formation in September 2006 of the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, which consolidated public safety activities across existing bureaus. However, no regular or comprehensive organizational effectiveness studies are undertaken to determine how other strategic goals of the FCC are best served by its organizational design. Also, the FCC's regulatory process could be improved to enhance public participation, transparency, and effectiveness in regulation of the communications and media industries. The FCC satisfies the requirements for public participation of the Administrative Procedures Act largely through allowing public comment on Notices of Proposed Rulemaking. However, the FCC's NPRMs often do not outline a specific proposal for regulatory action, but rather seek comment generally on the regulatory issue to be addressed. This lack of clarity hinders the ability of the public to provide relevant comments on the likely course of regulatory action. In addition, the FCC is often required by statute to adopt regulations that satisfy the "public interest", though this standard is ambiguous and rarely defined in advance of regulatory action. Public participation and comment is often crucial in determining what the FCC views to be the public interest, but such participation should not preclude the FCC from a rigorous analytical process that defines the public interest in terms of quantifiable net benefits to society when appropriate, or in a defined qualitative manner (on social policy issues, for example). To achieve regular rigor in regulatory analysis, economic analysis of the impacts of regulation is required, but the FCC is not does conduct such economic analyses on major rules. As a result, the effectiveness of regulations cannot be conclusively determined.

Evidence: Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808), the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. 1501-1511), Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and Review (as it applies to independent regulatory agencies) and all other applicable Congressional and Executive Branch mandates. Federal Communications Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf). United States Government Accountability Office - "Telecommunications: FCC Should Take Steps to Ensure Equal Access to Rulemaking Information" (September 2007)

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The main method used by the FCC to ensure that regulations reach intended beneficiaries is through public comment and participation in the rulemaking process, as well as through advisory committees. However, cost benefit analyses are not regularly performed to determine which regulatory options will achieve the highest net benefits to society. As a result, it cannot be conclusively determined if the FCC's regulatory actions contribute to its strategic goals and effect its intended beneficiaries in the manner intended.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission Strategic Plan, 2006-2011(http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-261434A1.pdf). Federal Communications Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf). Federal Communications Commission's home page (http://www.fcc.gov/) - see Advisory Committees. The most recent example of public hearings involves issues of Media Ownership (http://www.fcc.gov/ownership/hearings.html).

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: OMB describes in its PART guidance and Circular A-11 that performance measures are part of the up-front planning and performance commitment process each agency must carry out in-advance of each year's activity. OMB defines performance measures - part of the front-end, before-the-action process - as "indicators, statistics or metrics used to gauge program performance." For example, one of the Commission's performance goals in its FY 2008 Performance Budget is "to promote the availability of broadband to all Americans." The built-in performance indicator "used to gauge program performance" at the end of FY 2008 will be whether or not broadband is more available at the end of that year than it was at the start of the year. This is measured in the first three outcome measures shown under "Program Performance Measures" section of this evaluation, relating to the quantity and geographic distribution of broadband service. Similar long-term, outcome-oriented measures exist for the FCC's other strategic goals.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2008 Budget Submittal to Congress (February 2007)

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: As an agency with regulatory responsibility for the communications and media markets, many of the FCC's long-term performance measures track the progress of relevant market segments. For such measures (price per minute of an international telephone call, as one example), targeting market performance is not feasible or desireable. However, the FCC does also have measures that are conductive to targeting, such as the processing of consumer complaints. In areas such as this, the FCC does not set ambitious targets for the outcomes it desires in the long-term.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2008 Budget Submittal to Congress (February 2007)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: Similar to its long-term measures, the FCC tracks annual metrics related to the communications and media industries as a gauge of the effectiveness of its regulatory program. These annual measures reflect the strategic goals of the FCC, such as ensuring a competitive consumer wireless market, and focus on outcomes, such as the percentage of the population served by three or more wireless carriers. Similar annual measures exist for other FCC strategic goals.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007)

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: As an agency with regulatory responsibility for the communications and media markets, many of the FCC's annual performance measures track the progress of relevant market segments. For such measures, targeting market performance is not feasible or desireable. However, the FCC does also have measures that are conductive to targeting, such as the processing of consumer complaints. In areas such as this, the FCC does not set ambitious targets for its annual performance..

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007)

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The Commission engages in a wide range of collaborative activities with other Federal agencies, state and local governments, foreign governments, and other entities. Program staff coordinate mutual efforts in spectrum management activities with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). Coordination of frequency assignments is performed with the Intergovernmental Radio Advisory Committee (IRAC) to prevent interference to other government spectrum usage. The FCC and IRAC have established timeframes for frequency coordination to facilitate the efficient processing of license applications, an annual goal of the program. The Commission periodically undertakes initiatives with other Federal agencies. An example of this is the Joint Federal Rural Wireless Outreach Initiative, a partnership between the FCC and the US Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service. This faciilitates the long-term goal of more Americans having access to broadband technologies. The Commission is partnering with NTIA, along with broadcasters, cable system operators, electronics manufacturers and retailers, and consumer groups, to provide information and educate consumers concerning the impact of the transition to digital television (DTV) and how to navigate it successfully. This helps fulfill the long-term goal of moving the nation closer to full transition to DTV. The FCC also coordinates effectively with other governmental entities. The Intergovernmental Advisory Committee (IAC) provides ongoing advice and information to the Commission on a broad range of telecommunications issues of shared interest with state, local and tribal governments, including cable and local franchising, public rights-of-way, facilities siting, universal service, broadband access, barriers to competitive entry, and public safety communications. Ongoing efforts of the IAC help the Commission to meet a variety of long-term and annual goals

Evidence: Coordination with NTIA - http://www.fcc.gov/spectrum/ Joint Federal Rural Wireless Outreach Initiative - http://www.usda.gov/rus/jointoutreach/index.html DTV Transition - http://www.dtv.gov/index.html Intergovernmental Advisory Committee - http://www.fcc.gov/statelocal/

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Commission's regulatory program is regularly evaluated by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Commission's Inspector General. In 2007, the GAO undertook a review of the entire FCC rulemaking program and determined, for specific rulemakings, the extent to which FCC followed applicable law and its own internal processes. GAO found that the FCC generally fulfilled the legal requirements of the rulemaking process in the four case studies reviewed. Based on GAO's findings, the FCC began publishing a listing of items on circulation to the Commission on its internet site (http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/circ_items.cgi), and began releasing a tentative agenda three weeks in advance of Commission meetings. Both of these actions are helpful steps in providing equal access to all interested parties concerning proposed rules scheduled to be considered by the Commission, with the goal of ensuring a fair and transparent rulemaking process. In addition to its rulemaking study, GAO has issued seven other reports since April 2006 concerning other aspects of FCC programs. Specifically, these independent reports evaluated (1) the Commission's ability to monitor and determine the extent of broadcast competition and diversity of ownership, (2) the FCC's enforcement program, (3) activities undertaken to facilitate the DTV transition, (4) the effectiveness of the Emergency Alert System, (5) the extent of competition in dedicated access services, (6) broadband deployment throughout the United States particularly in rural areas, and (7) procedures and performance management of the Commission's junk fax enforcement program. Each of these evaluations resulted in program improvement recommendations which the Commission implemented or will address in the future. Program improvements include enhanced coordination with FEMA and NOAA and the adoption of rules that significantly improve the dependability and effectiveness of the Emergency Alert System; the adoption of rules that significantly improve the collection of broadband deployment data to enable policymakers to target assistance in achieving the goal of ubiquitous broadband availability; and simplifying the process for consumers to file complaints concerning violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. All GAO evaluations of Commission programs were performed in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards, requiring that GAO plan and perform each evaluation to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for their findings and conclusions based on their audit objectives. In addition to reviews of various aspects of the FCC's programs by GAO, the Commission's Inspector General conducts several performance audits annually. These systematic examinations are conducted to assess the performance of FCC programs, activities or functions so that corrective actions can be taken. The performance audits undertaken by the FCC IG or entities under contract to the IG include (1) an audit of Universal Licensing System application controls over intake, processing, storage and reporting of licensing data; (2) annual evaluations of the FCC's information security program; and (3) audit of the Commission's purchase card and travel card programs. The FCC's regulatory process is also informed by a robust telecommunications policy community, consisting of numerous and diverse interests such as industry, public interest advocacy groups, academics, lawyers, and others.

Evidence: The Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-602), the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808), the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. 1501-1511), Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and Review (as it applies to independent regulatory agencies), the Inspector General Act (5 U.S.C. App. 3), and all other applicable Congressional and Executive Branch mandates. Federal Communications Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf). Semi-Annual Reports issued by the FCC Office of Inspector General (http://www.fcc.gov/oig/oigreportssemiannual.html). United States Government Accountability Office - "Telecommunications: FCC Should Take Steps to Ensure Equal Access to Rulemaking Information", GAO-07-1046 (September 2007); "Media Ownership: Economic Factors Influence the Number of Media Outlets in Local Markets, While Ownership by Minorities and Women Appears Limited and Is Difficult to Assess", GAO-08-383 (March 2008); "Telecommunications: FCC Has Made Some Progress in the Management of Its Enforcement Program but Faces Limitations, and Additional Actions Are Needed", GAO-08-125 (February 2008); "Digital Television Transition: Increased Federal Planning and Risk Management Could Further Facilitate the DTV Transition", GAO-08-43 (November 2007); "Emergency Preparedness: Current Emergency Alert System Has Limitations, and Development of a New Integrated System Will Be Challenging", GAO-07-411 (March 2007); "Telecommunications: FCC Needs to Improve Its Ability to Monitor and Determine the Extent of Competition in Dedicated Access Services", GAO-07-80 (November 2006); "Telecommunications: Broadband Deployment Is Extensive throughout the United States, but It Is Difficult to Assess the Extent of Deployment Gaps in Rural Areas", GAO 06-426 (May 2006); "Telecommunications: Weaknesses in Procedures and Performance Management Hinder Junk Fax Enforcement", GAO-06-425 (April 2006).

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The FCC's annual budget is linked to six strategic goals which support 20 outcome- focused performance objectives. The Commission's presentation of resource needs is matched, through cost accounting projections, to the Commission's strategic goals and performance measures in a complete and transparent manner in the agency's annual budget request. All direct and indirect costs incurred by the FCC in fulfilling its mission are reported in the annual budget estimates and in the Performance and Accountability Report. Direct and indirect costs are associated with the Commission's strategic goals.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2009 Budget Submittal to Congress (February 2009) - Distribution of FTEs by strategic goal for FY 2007 through FY 2009 (page 8) and requested funding requirements by strategic goal (page 91). Federal Communications Commission Performance and Accountability Report for FY 2007

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The Commission complies with the requirements for the Government Performance and Results Act to have a 5-year strategic plan and to review that plan every three years to assess whether revisions need to be made to the plan. The most revision of the Commission's strategic plan took place in FY 2006. The next review of the strategic plan will occur in 2008 in preparation for any necessary revisions for FY 2009. The most recent independent audits of the Commission's compliance with laws and regulations and the agency's internal controls found no deficiencies in strategic planning.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission Performance and Accountability Reports for FY 2006 and FY 2007.

Are all regulations issued by the program/agency necessary to meet the stated goals of the program, and do all regulations clearly indicate how the rules contribute to achievement of the goals?

Explanation: The Telecommunications Act of 1996 provided the FCC with significant implementation discretion. Many parties regularly petition the FCC for regulatory action pursuant to its statutory authority, but it is not clear that all regulations issued are necessary to achieve its strategic goals. Specifically, economic analysis is not regularly used to identify market failures that require regulation, and cost benefit analysis is not regularly used to weigh regulatory options to determine the course that would achieve the highest net benefits to society.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007)

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: As demonstrated in its annual Performance and Accountability Report, the Commission regularly collects timely and credible performance information that it uses to manage the regulatory program and improve performance. The FCC employs management information systems such as the Electronic Management Tracking System (EMTS) and Universal Licensing System (ULS) to track rulemaking, licensing, and other program activities. These systems produce management reports on program performance and workload levels, and are analyzed to determine the efficiency of Commission operations. The Office of Managing Director collects monthly performance data from the agency's bureaus and offices to assess the efficiency of its license application and complaint processing, and to provide Commission management with the status of efforts to address docketed and non-docketed filings, petitions for reconsideration, and applications for review. The FCC collects and utilizes a variety of data to assess the effectiveness of its program and its impact on consumers and the communications industry. Twice per year, the Commission issues a report on High Speed Services for Internet Access after collecting information from facilities-based broadband providers. The data provides FCC management and the public with an assessment of the progress of broadband deployment. The Commission develops and produces annual reports on the status of competition in the wireless telecommunications industry, among local telephone companies, and in the delivery of video programming. The results of these reports are analyzed to identify the levels of competition in communications industries and markets, and the availability of choice and competitive rates for consumers. The Commission also collects or acquires available sources of data concerning pricing of domestic or international telephone calls, the transition to digital television and radio, and the deployment of E911 service. All of this information is used in the development of communications regulatory policies as well as the determination of progress in meeting the FCC's strategic goals and performance measures.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007) - http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf High Speed Services for Internet Access: Status as of June 30, 2007 - http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280906A1.pdf Local Telephone Competition: Status as of June 30, 2007 - http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-280943A1.pdf Twelfth Annual Report to Congress on the State of Competition in the Mobile Telephone Industry - http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-08-28A1.pdf 12th Annual Assessment of the Status of Competition in the Market for the Delivery of Video Programming - http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-11A1.pdf

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: The FCC Senior Executive Service performance review system annually holds program managers accountable for their performance results. Senior executives are rated on a 1 to 5 scale by their rating official on each of four elements: Program Performance, Operational Planning and Management, Human Resources Management, and Communication and Coordination. Senior Executives, in consultation with the Chairman's Office or their Bureau or Office Chief, develop performance measures that they commit to completing during the evaluation period. These measures are clearly linked to targets, performance goals, and the agency's six strategic goals. An overall rating of the executive's performance is determined from this evaluation. All SES executives are then evaluated by the FCC Performance Review Board who assesses the executive's performance and provides a recommendation to the Chairman as to a rating, pay increase, and/or performance bonus. The SES performance review process also determines if a Senior Executive Service member requires professional development to improve performance, transfer to a position more suited to his or her abilities, or removal from the SES. The SES performance standards also serve to provide targeted guidance for standards established in the supervisor and manager performance appraisal process, ensuring a consistent and comprehensive focus on the Commission's performance goals by all management personnel. The FCC received full certification from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) for 2007 and 2008 for its SES pay-for-performance system that will more closely link executive performance with compensation. The FCC has also implemented performance metrics in its contracts. Contractors are held accountable for quality measures, adherence to cost and schedule constraints, and customer satisfaction as measured by periodic surveys. Metrics are quantifiable, and incentives such as penalties for marginal or unsatisfactory performance or bonuses for exceptional performance are built into FCC contracts. Finally, the FCC manages several administrative entities that perform regulatory sub-functions, such as administration of payments in the Universal Service Fund, and management of the telephone numbering system. The FCC has recently initiated greater oversight of these entities, for example by adopting a Memorandum of Understanding with the Universal Service Administrative Company that includes specific deliverables and administrative performance metrics. The FCC should continue to enhance its management oversight of these entities.

Evidence: Template for FCC Senior Executive Service Performance Plan. Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007) - http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner, spent for the intended purpose and accurately reported?

Explanation: The FCC develops an annual operating plan that reflects the agency's appropriation for salaries and expenses and allocation decisions on how appropriated funds will be spent. Quarterly operating budgets are prepared by fund managers and reviewed and approved by the Chief of the FCC Budget Center based on the annual operating plan. Any reprogramming actions proposed by fund managers must also be approved by the Budget Center Chief in consultation with the Managing Director and the Chief Financial Officer. Each fund manager is responsible for obligating funds and for performing a monthly reconciliation of their accounts to ensure that funds are spent for their intended purposes and expenditures and amounts are accurately reflected in both their records and in the Commission's financial management system. Payments are made to vendors only after submission of a valid invoice. Prior to paying the invoice, it must be matched with a valid obligation, approved by an authorized official, and reviewed and approved by a certifying officer. For FY 2006 and FY 2007, the FCC received an unqualified audit opinion on each of its financial statements with no material weaknesses reported.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - Performance and Accountability Reports for FY 2006 and FY 2007. Federal Communications Commission - FY 2009 Budget Estimates Submitted to Congress (February 2008) - http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/fcc2009budget.html

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The FCC has utilized a variety of information technology (IT) improvements, competitive solicitations, and contract monitoring and incentives in order to achieve measurable efficiencies and cost effectiveness. Those interested in the Commission's rulemaking activities can access notices of proposed rulemaking, orders and public notices through the FCC internet site. Comments concerning open docketed proceedings can be made directly from the site through the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, which also provides the capability to research comments that have been filed. The process of analyzing comments and developing rulemaking documents is made more efficient through this capability. Information technology has also made the Commission's licensing process more efficient and cost effective. Most commercial license applications are required to be filed electronically, and on-line application filing is available and utilized for nearly all other applications including public safety and amateur radio licenses. 97% of all license applications were filed electronically in 2007, saving applicants preparation time and expense, and virtually eliminating data entry costs for the Commission. Automated reviews of applications, using specific criteria built into IT systems, have greatly improved the efficiency and cost effectiveness of licensing. More than two-thirds of license applications were electronically "auto-processed" in 2006, reducing staff resources needed for application review. The Commission uses eight information technology systems to perform its key licensing functions. These systems include the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau's Universal Licensing System and the Antenna Structure Registration, the Media Bureau's Consolidated Database System and the Cable Operation and Licensing System, the International Bureau Filing System and Canadian Co-channel Serial Coordination System, and the Office of Managing Director's Commission Registration System and General Menu System. These licensing systems have been independently developed, managed, and maintained to allow the public to file, search, view, and download applications submitted by various licensees. Several of these licensing systems are nearing the end of their useful life. Other systems need to be upgraded for the Commission's licensing operations to continue in an effective, reliable manner. In order to improve the efficiency of license application processing and to take advantage of technology advances, the FCC will undertake an initiative to conolidate the Commission's licensing systems beginning next fiscal year, subject to approval of funding. Once these systems are consolidated, it is estimated that the Commission will save a minimum of $2.2 million in annual expenses, due to reductions in systems software and maintenance costs. Consolidation will also enable the Commission to manage and process more than 1.7 million transactions each year in a more efficient and effective manner. The consolidation will take place over the course of three fiscal years. The FCC uses competitive sourcing to meet its needs whenever possible, and requires the administrator of the $7 billion Universal Service Fund to do so as well. The FCC makes use of performance-based contracting for numerous services to ensure that the Commission achieves the business results it is seeking through contracting. Milestones and/or performance objectives are established for each contract, with incentives for the contractor to meet or exceed the milestones and objectives. A contractor whose performance is marginal or unsatisfactory would suffer a percentage reduction in invoice payment to compensate the Commission for its losses due to the contractor's poor performance. Similarly, exceptional performance merits an increased payment to the contractor reflecting the benefit to the agency.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission Performance and Accountability Reports for FY 2006 and FY 2007. Federal Communications Commission Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Estimates Submitted to Congress (February 2008). FCC's Contracts and Purchasing Center web site (http://www.fcc.gov/omd/contracts/).

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The FCC engages in a wide range of collaborative activities with other Federal agencies, state and local governments, foreign governments, and other entities. Program staff coordinate mutual efforts in spectrum management activities with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the Department of Commerce which administers spectrum for Federal government use. This has become extremely important due to recent Congressional mandates to transfer spectrum from Federal to non-Federal use. When necessary, coordination of frequency assignments is performed with the Intergovernmental Radio Advisory Committee to prevent interference to other government spectrum usage. The Commission periodically undertakes initiatives with other Federal agencies. An example of this is the Joint Federal Rural Wireless Outreach Initiative, a partnership between the FCC and the US Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service. The objective of this initiative is to encourage greater access and deployment of wireless services to enhance economic development throughout rural America. The Commission is partnering with NTIA, along with broadcasters, cable system operators, electronics manufacturers and retailers, and consumer groups, to provide information and educate consumers concerning the impact of the transition to digital television and how to navigate it successfully. The FCC also coordinates effectively with other governmental entities. The Intergovernmental Advisory Committee provides ongoing advice and information to the Commission on a broad range of telecommunications issues of shared interest with state, local and tribal governments, including cable and local franchising, public rights-of-way, facilities siting, universal service, broadband access, barriers to competitive entry, and public safety communications. The program has effective working relationships with communications industry groups (e.g., the National Association of Broadcasters, CTIA Wireless, the Association of Public Safety Communications Officials) and state regulators (individual states and the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners).

Evidence: Coordination with NTIA - http://www.fcc.gov/spectrum/ Joint Federal Rural Wireless Outreach Initiative - http://www.usda.gov/rus/jointoutreach/index.html DTV Transition - http://www.dtv.gov/index.html Intergovernmental Advisory Committee - http://www.fcc.gov/statelocal/

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The FCC's FY 2006 and FY 2007 independent financial audits resulted in unqualified opinions on each of the Commission's financial statements. The FCC made significant advancements during the past 30 months in improving its financial operations and strengthening its internal control environment. The Commission closed previous audit findings and worked hard to resolve four material weaknesses that were reported in the FY 2005 audit. As a result of these efforts, the Commission closed out all material weaknesses from the FY 2005 audit and had no material weaknesses reported for FY 2006 nor FY 2007. The FCC met all deadlines for its internal risk assessments, external reports to the Department of the Treasury, and the preparation of its Performance and Accountability Report. FCC fund managers are responsible for performing a monthly reconciliation of their accounts to ensure that funds are spent for their intended purposes and expenditures and amounts are accurately reflected in both their records and in the Commission's financial management system. Payments are made to vendors only after submission of a valid invoice. Prior to paying the invoice, it must be matched with a valid obligation, approved by an authorized official, and reviewed and approved by a certifying officer.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission Performance and Accountability Reports for FY 2006 and FY 2007.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: The FCC regulatory program strives to effectively address management deficiencies as identified through Government Accountability Office reports, results of audits performed by the FCC's Office of Inspector General, or the Commission's program to assess and strengthen internal management controls. Assessments of internal controls follow the requirements of OMB Circular A-123, Appendix A to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of operations, the reliability of financial reporting, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Implementation of audit recommendations and risk assessment remediation plans are reported to the Senior Assessment Team (SAT), under the direction of the Managing Director and the Senior Management Council, to ensure timely and effective results. The SAT is responsible for assessing the effectiveness of existing management controls and making recommendations for improvements in prevention and detection controls to mitigate or eliminate risks, weaknesses or deficiencies. The Commission continued its focus on closing findings and weaknesses identified by the FCC's Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO). A team of internal audit staff managed this process and coordinated the closing of audit findings that cut across functional areas of the Commission's operations, including finance, human resources, administrative operations, and information technology. As of October 1, 2006, there were 163 open OIG and GAO recommendations. During FY 2007, the Commission closed 63% of those recommendations that were open as of October 1, 2006. In total for the year, the Commission completed action on 126 OIG or GAO recommendations. As of the end of FY 2007, 71 recommendations older than one year remained open. The Commission plans to close a large majority of these recommendations during FY 2008.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report (November 2007) - http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf

Did the program seek and take into account the views of all affected parties (e.g., consumers; large and small businesses; State, local and tribal governments; beneficiaries; and the general public) when developing significant regulations?

Explanation: The FCC regulatory program seeks and takes into account the views of all affected parties in developing its regulations. It solicits and considers such views at all stages of the regulatory cycle and employs a variety of methods to obtain and consider the views of affected parties in developing the factual and legal record for each rulemaking proceeding. The most important method the Commission uses to take into account the views of affected parties is a notice of proposed rulemaking routinely published in the Federal Register. Such notices are required by the Administrative Procedure Act. To encourage comments from all affected parties, the FCC provides convenient options for submitting the parties' views to the agency, including electronically on the FCC internet site, via e-mail, through a formal filing with the Office of the Secretary, or by meeting with FCC officials. In a final rulemaking order, discussion and analysis explains how the Commission considered the views of affected parties in issuing its final rule. Other outreach methods are used by the FCC to assess the views of affected parties, including public hearings, advisory committees, public notices soliciting comment, speeches and panel discussions at conferences, and consumer complaints received at the FCC's internet site or the FCC's National Call Center. The GAO study of the FCC's rulemaking process identified numerous opportunities for affected stakeholders to present their views. They found that the FCC generally followed the rulemaking process at each of its multiple steps. While the FCC does undertake significant public consultation in its regulatory process, the ability of the public to provide meaningful input to the FCC could be enhanced by regularly detailing its proposals in NPRMs, and outlining the objectives it seeks to achieve in advance of adopting a final rule.

Evidence: FCC internet site - http://www.fcc.gov/. Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551). United States Government Accountability Office - "Telecommunications: FCC Should Take Steps to Ensure Equal Access to Rulemaking Information" (September 2007)

Did the program prepare adequate regulatory impact analyses if required by Executive Order 12866, regulatory flexibility analyses if required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and SBREFA, and cost-benefit analyses if required under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act; and did those analyses comply with OMB guidelines?

Explanation: The FCC has prepared all necessary regulatory impact analyses in compliance with applicable statutory and OMB guidelines in instances where such analyses are required. The Commission conducts initial and final analyses evaluating the possible impacts of its regulatory action on small businesses as required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and SBREFA. These are included in all rulemaking items adopted by the Commission and published in the Federal Register. The GAO report of the FCC rulemaking process cited no deficiencies on the part of Commission staff in preparing mandated regulatory impact analyses. However, additional analyses that would be required under Executive Order 12866 or the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act for most regulatory agencies are not applicable to the FCC as an independent regulatory agency. As a result, the FCC does not regularly issue a clear statement of need for regulatory action, or weigh regulatory options through cost-benefit analysis, and therefore cannot demonstrate that regulations issued entail the highest net benefits to society.

Evidence: Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and Review (see Section 3(b)) United States Government Accountability Office - "Telecommunications: FCC Should Take Steps to Ensure Equal Access to Rulemaking Information" (September 2007)

Are the regulations designed to achieve program goals, to the extent practicable, by maximizing the net benefits of its regulatory activity?

Explanation: Throughout the rulemaking process, the FCC considers alternative mechanisms for regulated entities to comply with a proposed rule. Where applicable, the Commission conducts regulatory impact analyses as well as analyses of the burden of compliance, record keeping, and reporting. Such burdens are weighed against the benefits of regulatory action for the American consumer. Input and comments concerning proposed rules, regulatory impact, and paperwork burden are solicited from all interested parties through notices in the Federal Register. However, cost-benefit and cost effectiveness analyses are not regularly undertaken to weigh regulatory options, therefore the FCC cannot demonstrate that its regulations maximize net benefits.

Evidence: The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) and the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520)

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The FCC is meeting its long term strategic goals to a large extent, as demonstrated in many of the market-based indicators that the FCC uses to track its performance. For example, broadband is becoming more available, competition is increasing in many industry segments, digital broadcasting continues to take hold, and public safety capabilities of communications networks continues to increase. However, since it is not feasible to set targets for the performance of market segments, the FCC cannot be certain that its regulatory actions are maximizing its effectiveness in achieving its long-term goals.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission; FY 2006 - 2011 Strategic Plan Federal Communications Commission; FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Report

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Annual progress is evident in many of the market-based indicators that the FCC tracks to guage its performance. However, since it is not feasible to set targets for the performance of market segments, the FCC cannot be certain that its regulatory actions are maximizing its effectiveness in achieving its long-term goals.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission - FY 2003 and FY 2004 Annual Performance Reports and FY 2005, FY 2006 and FY 2007 Performance and Accountability Reports.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The Commission's goals are focused on innovation, competition, consumer protection, and the reliability, security, and survivability of the Nation's communications infrastructure. The Commission is a virtually self-supporting organization raising over 99% of its operating budget each year through the assessment of regulatory fees and - as directed by Congress - collecting millions of dollars of additional fees solely to help offset the National debt. Additionally, billions of dollars go directly to the Treasury from Commission auction and enforcement activities. Compared to a budget of $388 million (including auctions expenses) for FY 2008, the Commission generated approximately $19 billion dollars from the 700 MHz band auction. The cost effectiveness of this important auction was further increased by the use of blind bidding to maximize bids. Internal efficiency is demonstrated through timeliness of processing measures that the FCC uses to track its enforcement and license application activities, which demonstrate progress in these areas. As mentioned in the explanation to Question 3.4, the FCC will undertake an initiative to conolidate the Commission's eight licensing systems beginning next fiscal year, subject to approval of funding. Once these systems are consolidated, it is estimated that the Commission will save a minimum of $2.2 million in annual expenses, due to reductions in systems software and maintenance costs. The consolidation will take place over the course of three fiscal years. The results of IT improvements are also reflected in greater efficencies in the Commission's enforcement efforts. Implementation of a new on-line consumer complaint form has resulted in a nearly three-fold increase (17% to 50%) in the percentage of complaints filed that are immediately actionable and require no further consumer information. This has reduced the average time required to respond to complaints and saved thousands of dollars in staff time formerly spent contacting consumers for additional information. The FCC uses performance-based contracting for numerous services to ensure that the Commission achieves the business results it is seeking through contracting. Milestones and/or performance objectives are established for each contract, with incentives for the contractor to meet or exceed the milestones and objectives. A contractor whose performance is marginal or unsatisfactory would suffer a percentage reduction in invoice payment to compensate the Commission for its losses due to the contractor's poor performance. Similarly, exceptional performance merits an increased payment to the contractor reflecting the benefit to the agency. However, the answer to this question cannot be a "yes" because the FCC does not have an efficiency measure that directly demonstrates operational cost savings, and instead uses output-based proxies, such as timeliness of processing license applications.

Evidence: Federal Communications Commission's annual Budget Estimates Submitted to Congress (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/fccbudget.html). FCC's Contracting and Purchasing Center web site (http://www.fcc.gov/omd/contracts/).

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: As noted in the responses to Questions 1.3 and 2.5, the Commission is uniquely charged with regulating interstate and foreign communications in the United States.

Evidence: Communications Act of 1934, as amended

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The Commission's regulatory program is regularly evaluated by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Commission's Inspector General. In 2007, the GAO undertook a review of the entire FCC rulemaking program and determined, for specific rulemakings, the extent to which FCC followed applicable law and its own internal processes. GAO found that the FCC generally fulfilled the legal requirements of the rulemaking process in the four case studies reviewed. Based on GAO's findings, the FCC began publishing a listing of items on circulation to the Commission on its internet site (http://www.fcc.gov/fcc-bin/circ_items.cgi), and began releasing a tentative agenda three weeks in advance of Commission meetings. Both of these actions provide equal access to all interested parties concerning proposed rules scheduled to be consdiered by the Commission, with the goal of ensuring a fair and transparent rulemaking process. In addition to its rulemaking study, GAO has issued seven other reports since April 2006 concerning other aspects of FCC programs. Specifically, these independent reports evaluated (1) the Commission's ability to monitor and determine the extent of broadcast competition and diversity of ownership, (2) the FCC's enforcement program, (3) activities undertaken to facilitate the DTV transition, (4) the effectiveness of the Emergency Alert System, (5) the extent of competition in dedicated access services, (6) broadband deployment throughout the United States particularly in rural areas, and (7) procedures and performance management of the Commission's junk fax enforcement program. Each of these evaluations resulted in program improvement recommendations which the Commission implemented or will address in the future. Program improvements include enhanced coordination with FEMA and NOAA and the adoption of rules that significantly improve the dependability and effectiveness of the Emergency Alert System; the adoption of rules that significantly improve the collection of broadband deployment data to eable policymakers to target assistance in achieving the goal of ubiquitous braodband availability; and simplifying the process for consumers to file complaints concerning violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. All GAO evaluations of Commission programs were performed in acordance with generally accepted government auditing standards, requiring that GAO plan and perform each evaluation to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for their findings and conclusions based on their audit objectives. In addition to reviews of varous aspects of the FCC's programs by GAO, the Commission's Inspector General conducts several performance audits annually. These systematic examinations are conducted to assess the performance of FCC programs, activities or functions so that corrective actions can be taken. The perfromance audits undertaken by the FCC IG or entities under contract to the IG include (1) an audit of Universal Licensing System application controls over intake, processing, storage and reporting of licensing data; (2) annual evaluations of the FCC's information security program; and (3) and audit of the Commission's purchase card and travel card programs. The FCC uses this information, as well as information provided by other independent sources, to improve the effectiveness of its programs.

Evidence: In its regulatory activities, the Commission adheres to all provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 551), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-602), the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808), the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. 1501-1511), Executive Order 12866 Regulatory Planning and Review (as it applies to independent regulatory agencies) and all other applicable Congressional and Executive Branch mandates. Federal Communications Commission's Performance and Accountability Report for Fiscal Year 2007 (http://www.fcc.gov/Reports/ar2007.pdf). Semi-Annual Reports issued by the FCC Office of Inspector General (http://www.fcc.gov/oig/oigreportssemiannual.html). United States Government Accountability Office - "Telecommunications: FCC Should Take Steps to Ensure Equal Access to Rulemaking Information", GAO-07-1046 (September 2007); "Media Ownership: Economic Factors Influence the Number of Media Outlets in Local Markets, While Ownersip by Minorities and Women Appears Limited and Is Difficult to Assess", GAO-08-383 (March 2008); "Telecommunications: FCC Has Made Some Progress in the Management of Its Enforcement Program but Faces Limitations, and Additional Actions Are Needed", GAO-08-125 (February 2008); "Digital Television Transition: Increased Federal Planning and Risk Management Could FUrther Facilitate the DTV Transition", GAO-08-43 (November 2007); "Emergency Preparedness: Current Emergency Alert System Has Limitations, and Development of a New Integrated System Will Be Challenging", GAO-07-411 (March 2007); "Telecommunications: FCC Needs to Improve Its Ability to Monitor and Determine the Extent of Competition in Dedicated Access Services", GAO-07-80 (November 2006); "Telecommunications: Broadband Deployment Is Extensive throughout the United States, but It Is Difficult to Assess the Extent of Deployment Gaps in Rural Areas", GAO 06-426 (May 2006); "Telecommunications: Weaknesses in Procedures and Performance Management Hinder Junk Fax Enforcement", GAO-06-425 (April 2006).

Were programmatic goals (and benefits) achieved at the least incremental societal cost and did the program maximize net benefits?

Explanation: FCC regulations undergo regular review by the agency, the FCC's Office of Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office, and other parties. These reviews test and make recommendations to improve programmatic performance at reduced societal and monetary costs. However, unlike most other Federal agencies, the Commission is not required under statute, regulation, or Executive Order to conduct cost-benefit analyses for its regulations. Instead the standard the Commission is held to is found in 47 USC 303 wherein the Commission is required to regulate wire and radio (telephone, television, radio) "as public convenience, interest, or necessity requires." As a result, the FCC does not undertake regular analysis of the net benefits of its regulatory actions. Some evidence of the efficacy of the FCC's regulatory program is seen in the market-based indicators used to track performance against strategic goals, but this information is not determinative of the effects of individual regulations.

Evidence: Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Krasnow 1997 Analysis on The "Public Interest" Standard: The Elusive Search For The Holy Grail can be found at http://www.ntia.doc.gov/pubintadvcom/octmtg/Krasnow.htm