******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



PUBLIC NOTICE
Federal Communications Commission
445 12
th
St., S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20554
News Media Information 202 / 418-0500
Internet: https://www.fcc.gov
TTY: 1-888-835-5322
DA 16-569
May 19, 2016
GUIDANCE ON OPEN INTERNET TRANSPARENCY RULE REQUIREMENTS
GN Docket No. 14-28
In this Public Notice, the Chief Technologist, Office of General Counsel, and Enforcement 
Bureau (collectively the Bureaus) offer guidance regarding acceptable methodologies for disclosure of 
network performance to satisfy the enhanced transparency requirements in the 2015 Open Internet 
Order.
1
  Further, the Bureaus offer guidance on compliance with the point of sale disclosure requirement 
under the 2015 Open Internet Order.  This guidance is intended to clarify what disclosure practices will 
satisfy the Transparency Rule.
2
In the 2010 Open Internet Order, the Commission concluded that effective disclosure of network 
management practices, performance characteristics, and commercial terms helps to ensure that 
“broadband providers will abide by open Internet principles,” enhances the general public’s and the 
Commission’s ability to identify and address open Internet violations, and correspondingly increases “the 
chances that harmful practices will not occur.”
3
  The Commission further found that these disclosures 
empower consumers and promote competition and investment, further reducing broadband Internet access 
service (BIAS) providers’ incentives and ability to engage in harmful conduct.
4
To achieve these objectives, the Commission adopted the Transparency Rule:
                                                     
1
Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 14-28, Report and Order on Remand, 30 FCC Rcd 
5601, 5673-75, para. 166 (2015) (2015 Open Internet Order), pets. for review pending sub nom USTA v. FCC No. 
15-1063 (D.C. Cir. filed May 22, 2015).  When it adopted the 2015 Open Internet Order, the Commission cited 
approvingly previous staff guidance “in interpreting and applying the general requirements of the transparency rule” 
and anticipated that “further such guidance may be appropriate concerning the transparency rule.”  Id. at 5682, para. 
185. Parties have raised concerns about disclosures regarding network performance.  See, e.g., AT&T PRA 
Comments at 4-5, 12, 17-18, 19-20, 22-27 (July 20, 2015); CTIA PRA Comments at 13-14, 24-25 (July 20, 2015); 
Mobile Future PRA Comments at 6-7 (July 20, 2015); USTelecom PRA Comments at 9-10, 14-15 (July 20, 2015).  
Anticipating the need to address these kinds of concerns, the Order delegated to the Chief Technologist authority to 
provider further guidance on the subject. 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5673-75, para. 166.
2
The Transparency Rule under the 2010 Open Internet Order remains in effect.  The Commission will publish a 
notice in Federal Register announcing an effective date for the transparency rule enhancements upon approval of the 
modified information collection by the Office of Management and Budget. 
3
Preserving the Open Internet, GN Docket No. 09-191, WC Docket No. 07-52, Report and Order, 25 FCC Rcd 
17905, 17937, 17941, paras. 56, 59 (2010) (2010 Open Internet Order), aff’d in relevant part Verizon v. FCC, 740 
F.3d 623 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
4
Id. at 17940, para. 59.
A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service shall publicly disclose 
accurate information regarding the network management practices, performance, and commercial 
terms of its broadband Internet access services sufficient for consumers to make informed choices 
regarding use of such services and for content, application, service, and device providers to 
develop, market, and maintain Internet offerings.
5
In 2011 and in 2014, Commission staff released advisory guidance to assist BIAS providers in 
complying with the Transparency Rule.
6
  The 2011 Advisory Guidance gave fixed and mobile BIAS 
providers guidance regarding acceptable methodologies for disclosure of network performance metrics to 
satisfy the Transparency Rule.
7
  For example, fixed BIAS providers could use Measuring Broadband 
America (MBA) data, or “disclose actual performance based on internal testing; consumer speed test data; 
or other data regarding network performance, including reliable, relevant data from third-party sources.”
8
  
Mobile providers who had access to reliable data regarding their network performance could “disclose the 
results of their own or third-party testing.”
9
  For those providers without access to reliable data, the 2011 
Advisory Guidance allowed disclosure of “a Typical Speed Range (TSR) representing the range of speeds 
and latency that can be expected by most of their customers, for each technology/service tier offered, 
along with a statement that such information is the best approximation available to the broadband 
provider.”
10
  The 2011 Advisory Guidance further stated that the 2010 Open Internet Order does not 
require distribution of disclosure materials in hard copy or extensive training of sales employees to 
provide the disclosures themselves.
11
  It also stated that BIAS providers can comply with the point of sale 
requirement by “directing prospective customers at the point of sale, orally and/or prominently in writing, 
to a web address at which the required disclosures are clearly posted and appropriately updated.”
12
The text of the codified Transparency Rule, which was upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court in 
Verizon v. FCC,
13
was not changed in the 2015 Open Internet Order.  Instead, the 2015 Open Internet 
Order enhanced the Transparency Rule by clarifying certain aspects of the rule including disclosure of 
specific commercial terms, performance characteristics, and network management practices.
14
   Among 
other things, BIAS providers are specifically required to disclose expected and actual download and 
upload speeds, latency, and packet loss, but are no longer required to disclose the typical frequency of 
                                                     
5
47 CFR § 8.3.
6
See FCC Enforcement Bureau and Office of General Counsel Issue Advisory Guidance for Compliance with Open 
Internet Transparency Rule, Public Notice, 26 FCC Rcd 9411, 9414-15 (2011) (2011 Advisory Guidance); FCC 
Enforcement Advisory, Open Internet Transparency Rule: Broadband Providers Must Disclose Accurate 
Information to Protect Consumers, Public Notice, 29 FCC Rcd 8606, 8607 (2014) (2014 Advisory Guidance). To 
the extent they are not superseded by the 2015 Open Internet Order or this guidance, the 2011 Advisory Guidance
and 2014 Advisory Guidance continue to apply to enhancements made to the Transparency Rule. See Letter from 
Thomas Cohen, Counsel for the American Cable Association, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket 
No. 14-28, at  (filed Oct. 2, 2015) (requesting clarification regarding the effectiveness of past guidance).
7
2011 Advisory Guidance, 26 FCC Rcd at 9411-18.
8
Id. at 9414-15.
9
Id. at 9415.
10
Id.
11
Id. at 9413.
12
Id. at 9414.
13
See Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623.
14
See 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5672-79, paras. 162-175.
congestion.
15
   In addition, the 2015 Open Internet Order reconfirmed—but did not modify—the 
Transparency Rule requirements around disclosure at the point of sale, requiring “at a minimum, the 
prominent display of disclosures on a publicly available website and disclosure of relevant information.”
16
  
In May 2015, the Commission issued the PRA Notice
17
seeking comment on the information 
collection requirements for the enhancements to the Transparency Rule made in the 2015 Open Internet 
Order.  The comments filed in response reflected concern regarding some of the requirements.
18
  Some 
areas of particular concern were the geographic and peak hour disclosure requirements and the packet loss 
disclosure.
19
  They also noted concerns about the lack of a mobile Measuring Broadband America safe 
harbor and uncertainty about whether the point of sale disclosure requirement had changed.
20
To provide further clarity regarding the Transparency Rule, this Public Notice offers guidance for 
compliance with certain aspects of the Transparency Rule.  We emphasize that, with the exception of the 
requirements for participation in the MBA safe harbor, any examples provided here are not exhaustive; 
BIAS providers may implement alternative approaches that disclose information sufficient to adequately 
inform consumers and relevant third parties.
I. NETWORK PERFORMANCE METRICS
A. Guidance on Disclosure of Network Performance Metrics
Service Tiers.  The 2015 Open Internet Order clarified that, “for mobile broadband providers, the 
obligation in the Transparency Rule to disclose performance characteristics for ‘each broadband service’ 
refers to separate disclosures for services with each technology (e.g., 3G and 4G)”.
21
  We similarly clarify 
that, for fixed BIAS providers, the obligation in the Transparency Rule to disclose performance 
characteristics for “each broadband service” refers to separate disclosures for services with each 
technology (e.g., digital subscriber line (DSL), cable, fiber, or satellite) and service tier (e.g., 50 Mbps 
download / 10 Mbps upload), as it is the combination of technology and service tier that BIAS providers 
use to market the service.
22
Disclosure of Actual Network Performance Metrics.  The 2015 Open Internet Order requires all 
BIAS providers to disclose both expected and actual download and upload speeds, latency, and packet 
loss for each service.
23
  Here, we give guidance on disclosure of actual network performance metrics.  
                                                     
15
Id.
16
Id. at 5677, para. 171.
17
Federal Communications Commission, Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications 
Commission, 80 Fed. Reg. 29000 (May 20, 2015) (PRA Notice).
18
See, e.g., AT&T PRA Comments at 4-6, 17-18, 20-27, 29-30, 32-33, 37-41; CTIA PRA Comments at 13-14, 17-
25; Mobile Future PRA Comments at 6-7, 9; USTelecom PRA Comments at 9-10, 14-15. 
19
See AT&T PRA Comments at 4-6, 17-18, 20-27, 30; CTIA PRA Comments at 13-14, 22, 24-25; Mobile Future 
PRA Comments at 6, 9; USTelecom PRA Comments at 9-10, 14-15.
20
See AT&T PRA Comments at 5, 20, 29; CTIA PRA Comments at 13; Mobile Future PRA Comments at 6-7.
21
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
22
See 2010 Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17939, para. 56 (“Service Description: A general description of the
service, including the service technology, expected and actual access speed and latency, and the suitability of the 
service for real-time applications.”).
23
See 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5673-74, paras. 165-166.  The MBA program measures speed by 
the throughput over a five second time window, latency by the round trip time between an end user and an off-net 
measurement server, and packet loss by the percentage of packets transmitted from an end user to a measurement 
The Measuring Broadband America (MBA) program, which may be used by fixed BIAS 
providers as a safe harbor in meeting the requirement to disclose actual network performance,
24
presents 
both median speeds and percentiles of speed.
25
  We clarify that providers may comply with the 
requirement to disclose actual speeds—both download and upload—by disclosing either the median 
speed or a range of actual speeds that includes the median speed (e.g., 25
th
to 75
th
percentile).  However, 
we note that speed ranges may be more appropriate when there is substantial variation in speed, e.g. for 
fixed BIAS using DSL technology
26
and for mobile BIAS.
27
  Similarly, latency may be disclosed using 
either the median latency or a range of actual latencies that includes the median latency (e.g., 25
th
to 75
th
percentile).  If speed or latency ranges are used, the percentiles used to determine the endpoints of the 
ranges must also be disclosed.
28
  Packet loss may be disclosed as the average packet loss.
29
  In order to 
ensure that the actual and expected network performance metrics can be compared, it is best to provide 
actual and expected performance in comparable formats.  For example, if actual download speed is 
provided as a range, the expected download speed should use a range with the same percentile endpoints.
Geographic Granularity for Actual Network Performance Metrics. The 2015 Open Internet 
Order requires that disclosures of actual speed, latency and packet loss “be reasonably related to the 
performance the consumer would likely experience in the geographic area in which the consumer is 
purchasing service.”
30
  BIAS performance may vary by location.
31
  For fixed BIAS, however, except for 
fine-grained variations in performance based on the distance between a consumer and network equipment, 
commenters agree that there are few variations in actual BIAS performance across a BIAS provider’s 
service area for a particular combination of technology and service tier unless the BIAS provider is using 
different network management practices in different geographical areas.
32
   Therefore, we clarify that 
fixed BIAS providers may meet this requirement by disclosing actual performance metrics for “each 
                                                                                                                                                                          
server for which no acknowledgement was received.  The detailed methodology is available in the Technical 
Appendix of the 2015 Measuring Broadband America Report. FCC, 2015 Technical Appendix; Measuring 
Broadband America Fixed Broadband: A Report on Consumer Fixed Broadband Performance in the US (2015), 
http://data.fcc.gov/download/measuring-broadband-america/2015/Technical-Appendix-fixed-2015.pdf.
24
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674-75, n.411.
25
See FCC, 2015 Measuring Broadband America Fixed Broadband Report: A Report on Consumer Fixed 
Broadband Performance in the US at 30-36 (2015), http://data.fcc.gov/download/measuring-broadband-
america/2015/2015-Fixed-Measuring-Broadband-America-Report.pdf (2015 Fixed MBA Report).
26
See id. at 8.
27
See 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, n.409 (“Given that the performance of mobile broadband 
networks is subject to a greater array of factors than fixed networks, we note that disclosure of a range of speeds 
may be more appropriate for mobile broadband consumers.”), n.410 (“Per the 2011 Advisory Guidance, those 
mobile broadband providers that ‘lack reasonable access’ to reliable information on their network performance 
metrics may disclose a ‘Typical Speed Range (TSR)’ to meet the requirement to disclose actual performance.”).
28
The percentiles used should be sufficient for consumers to make informed choices regarding the use of such 
services and for content, application, service, and device providers to develop, market, and maintain Internet 
offerings.
29
See 2015 Fixed MBA Report at 18.
30
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
31
See 2015 Fixed MBA Report at 14-17.
32
See AT&T PRA Comments at 20-21; Letter from Fred Baker, Fellow, and Russ Gyurek, Director, Cisco Systems 
Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket No. 14-28 (Nov. 2, 2015) (Cisco Ex Parte) at 2; Letter from 
Steven F. Morris, Vice President and General Counsel, NCTA, to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, FCC, GN Docket 
No. 14-28 (Nov. 25, 2015) (NCTA Ex Parte) at 2.
broadband service”
33
in each geographic area in which the service has a distinctive set of network 
performance metrics (operational area).  We expect that operational areas will be determined by the 
technology used and by network management practices, and that many fixed BIAS providers will have a 
single operational area for each broadband service offered.  
For mobile BIAS, the 2015 Open Internet Order stated that, “with the exception of small 
providers, mobile broadband providers can be expected to have access to reliable actual data on 
performance of their networks representative of the geographic area in which the consumer is purchasing 
service – through their own or third-party testing – that would be the source of the disclosure” of actual 
network performance.
34
  Mobile BIAS performance may vary based on a BIAS provider’s access to 
spectrum in various geographic areas.
35
  We therefore clarify that mobile BIAS providers with access to 
reliable actual data on network performance may meet this requirement by disclosing actual performance 
metrics for each Cellular Market Area (CMA) in which the service is offered, as further described 
below.
36
  
Disclosure of Expected Network Performance Metrics.  BIAS providers are also required to 
disclose expected download and upload speeds, latency, and packet loss.
37
  We clarify that there is no 
corresponding requirement to disclose different expected network performance metrics in different 
geographic areas.  However, to ensure that information regarding performance is accurate and sufficient 
for consumers to make informed choices, expected network performance disclosed for a geographic area 
should not exceed actual network performance in that geographic area.
Peak Usage Periods.  The 2015 Open Internet Order stated the Commission’s expectation that 
network performance would be measured “during times of peak usage”.
38
  Some commenters asked 
whether times of peak usage would need to vary by geographic area, e.g. according to whether the area is 
dominantly commercial or residential.
39
  We clarify that peak usage periods may be based solely on the 
local time zone.
40
  We further clarify that BIAS providers retain flexibility to determine the appropriate 
peak usage periods for their network performance metrics but must disclose the peak usage periods 
chosen for such disclosures. 
B. Guidance for BIAS Providers using the Measuring Broadband America Safe Harbor.  
Fixed BIAS Network Performance. Participation in the Measuring Broadband America (MBA) 
program remains a safe harbor for fixed BIAS providers in meeting the requirement to disclose actual 
network performance.
41
  As a result, fixed BIAS providers may disclose their results from the MBA 
program, for each service for which the program provides network performance metrics, as a sufficient 
                                                     
33
See supra Part I.A (discussing service tiers).
34
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
35
See, e.g., Andrea Goldsmith, Wireless Communications 505-527 (2005).
36
See infra Parts I.B, I.C.
37
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5673-74, paras. 165-166.
38
Id. at 5674, para. 166.
39
See ATT PRA Comments at 25-27; CTIA PRA Comments at 24-25.
40
See 2015 Fixed MBA Report at 32 (defining the peak usage period for the 2015 Fixed MBA Report as between 
7:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. local time).
41
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674-75, n.411.
representation of actual download and upload speeds, actual latency, and actual packet loss of those 
services.
42
  
Mobile BIAS Network Performance.  The 2015 Open Internet Order stated that the MBA 
program could at the appropriate time be declared a safe harbor for mobile BIAS providers in meeting the 
requirement to disclose actual network performance.
43
  The MBA program has been measuring mobile 
BIAS performance since November 2013.
44
  We anticipate that the MBA program will publish its first 
Mobile Broadband Report in 2016 for those services for which it has a sufficient national sample size.  
The program will provide, at a minimum, network performance metrics for each such service for each 
CMA in which the program has a sufficient CMA sample size, and additional sets of these network 
performance metrics aggregated among sets of other CMAs.
45
  Today, we establish that mobile BIAS 
providers may disclose their results from the mobile MBA program as a sufficient disclosure of actual 
download and upload speeds, actual latency, and actual packet loss of a service
46
if the results satisfy the 
above sample size criteria and if the MBA program has provided CMA-specific network performance 
metrics of the service in CMAs with an aggregate population of at least one half of the aggregate 
population of the CMAs in which the service is offered.
C. Guidance for BIAS Providers not using the Measuring Broadband America Safe Harbor.  
Fixed BIAS Network Performance. As initially articulated in the 2011 Advisory Guidance, fixed 
BIAS providers not using the MBA safe harbor may disclose actual network performance metrics based 
on the MBA methodology, “internal testing; consumer speed test data; or other data regarding network 
performance, including reliable, relevant data from third-party sources.”
47
  In the 2015 Open Internet 
Order, the Commission explained that disclosed actual network performance metrics should be based on 
measurements during peak usage periods.
48
It also explained that any of these methodologies may be used 
                                                     
42
See 2011 Advisory Guidance, 26 FCC Rcd at 9414-9415.  Fixed BIAS providers should inform the MBA program 
for each broadband service offered if there is more than one operational area so that the MBA program may provide
separate sets of network performance metrics as needed.  The safe harbor is available only for those services for 
which the program provides network performance metrics, which is subject to the program’s policies regarding the 
minimum number of subscribers to a service and the minimum number of panelists in a service.
43
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
44
See Press Release, FCC, Fact Sheet: FCC Unveils New, Free Speed Test App to Empower Consumers with U.S. 
Mobile Broadband Performance Information (Nov. 14, 2013), https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-unveils-mobile-
broadband-speed-test-app-empower-consumers.
45
See 2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, n.410 (“In any event, we expect that mobile broadband 
providers’ disclosure of actual performance data will be based on accepted industry practices and principles of 
statistical validity.”).  The Chief Technologist, with consultation of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau and 
the Office of Engineering and Technology, will determine policies regarding sufficient national and CMA sample 
sizes.
46
There is no requirement to disclose different expected network performance metrics in different geographical 
areas.  For instance, a mobile BIAS provider may choose to advertise a single set of network performance metrics 
nationally, providing the advertised expected performance does not exceed the actual network performance in each 
CMA in which the MBA program has provided CMA-specific metrics, and does not exceed the aggregate actual
network performance in each set of other CMAs.  Alternatively, it may choose to advertise one set of network 
performance metrics in some CMAs and another set in other CMAs, provided that each such advertisement similarly 
does not exceed the actual network performance in the corresponding geographical areas.  See supra Part 1.A.
47
2011 Advisory Guidance 26 FCC Rcd at 9414-15.
48
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
as the basis for measurement of actual download and upload speeds, actual latency, and actual packet 
loss, provided that the methodology be disclosed and be grounded in commonly accepted principles of 
scientific research, good engineering practices, and transparency.
49
Mobile BIAS Network Performance.  Commenters note that there is a tradeoff between the likely 
per capita cost incurred to obtain performance metrics in a geographic area and the population density in 
that geographic area.
50
  We interpret the requirement for disclosures of actual speed, latency, and packet 
loss to “be reasonably related to the performance the consumer would likely experience in the geographic 
area in which the consumer is purchasing service”
51
to be satisfied by sufficient disclosures of aggregate 
actual network performance in low population density areas.  Specifically, mobile BIAS providers that, 
instead of taking advantage of the MBA safe harbor, measure network performance by their own or third-
party testing may disclose performance metrics for each CMA in which the service is offered, except that 
actual network performance may be aggregated among CMAs with a population density below 250 
people per square mile.
52
Routes. The Transparency Rule requires a BIAS provider to disclose “accurate information 
regarding the network management practices, performance, and commercial terms of its broadband 
Internet access services sufficient for consumers to make informed choices regarding use of such services 
and for content, application, service, and device providers to develop, market, and maintain Internet 
offerings.”
53
  The routes over which network performance metrics are measured should thus be chosen to 
accurately represent the actual network performance experienced by consumers within the designated 
geographic area.  The 2010 Open Internet Order noted that “our rules apply only as far as the limits of a 
broadband provider’s control over the transmission of data to or from its broadband customers”.
54
  The 
2015 Open Internet Order noted that “congestion may originate beyond the broadband provider’s 
network and the limitations of a broadband provider’s knowledge of some of these performance 
[metrics]”.
55
  Therefore, a sufficient representation of actual network performance of the service may be 
obtained from measurements of speed, latency, and packet loss on a representative sampling of routes 
between end users and the points of interconnection with edge providers or other networks. Fixed BIAS 
providers may, for example, measure speed, latency, and packet loss between measurement clients in
broadband modems and measurement servers that are located in close proximity to the links on which 
traffic is exchanged with edge providers or other networks.  As an alternative to placing measurement 
clients in broadband modems, a fixed BIAS provider may place measurement clients in access networks, 
provided that this internal testing accurately measures performance metrics in a manner that represents the 
performance experienced by consumers of the service.  Mobile BIAS providers may, for example,
achieve a representative sampling of end users by running measurement clients on end-user devices (e.g., 
                                                     
49
Id. at 5675, n.412.  
50
See AT&T PRA Comments at 16-18.
51
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 166.
52
There is no requirement to disclose different expected network performance metrics in different geographical 
areas.  For instance, a mobile BIAS provider may choose to advertise a single set of network performance metrics 
nationally, providing the advertised expected performance does not exceed the actual network performance in each 
CMA with a population density above 250 people per square mile, and does not exceed the aggregate actual 
network performance in all other CMAs.  Alternatively, it may choose to advertise one set of network performance 
metrics in some CMAs and another set in other CMAs, provided that each such advertisement similarly does not 
exceed the actual network performance in the corresponding geographical areas.  See supra Part I.A.
53
47 CFR § 8.3.
54
2010 Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17933, n.150.
55
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5675-76, para. 168.
using consumer speed test data), by placing measurement clients in locations near a representative set of 
mobile broadband consumers (e.g., by combining drive-test data with an estimate of the reduction in 
speed from drive-test locations to user locations), or by measuring performance in the network and 
estimating the relationship between this measured performance and that experienced by end users.
II. POINT OF SALE REQUIREMENT
The Transparency Rule, as adopted in the 2010 Open Internet Order,
56
  requires BIAS providers 
to disclose network management practices, performance characteristics, and commercial terms “at the 
point of sale.”
57
  As discussed in more detail below, this requirement was not modified in the 2015 Open 
Internet Order.  As the Commission has explained previously, BIAS providers are not required to provide 
hard copies of the disclosures required under the Transparency Rule at the point of sale and instead may 
direct consumers to links to online disclosures.
58
  However, for disclosures made through such links to be 
sufficient under the Transparency Rule, BIAS providers must ensure that consumers actually receive the 
information necessary to make informed decisions prior to making a final purchasing decision at all
potential points of sale, including in a store, over the phone, and online.  
Background.  During the rulemaking proceeding leading up to the adoption of the Transparency 
Rule in the 2010 Open Internet Order, some commenters raised concerns that a point of sale requirement
could be interpreted to compel distribution of physical materials at retail outlets and extensive training of 
sales employees at retail outlets as well as at telephone and Internet sales centers that may be operated by 
BIAS providers or other third parties.  The Commission addressed those concerns in the 2010 Open 
Internet Order by stating that “broadband providers must, at a minimum, prominently display or provide 
links to disclosures on a publicly available, easily accessible website that is available to current and 
prospective end users and edge providers.”
59
The Commission further explained that “broadband 
providers may be able to satisfy the transparency rule through a single disclosure.”
60
In the 2011 Advisory Guidance, the Commission’s Office of General Counsel and Enforcement 
Bureau issued joint guidance on the Transparency Rule, including how the point of sale requirement 
should be interpreted.
61
  The 2011 Advisory Guidance states that the 2010 Open Internet Order does not 
require distribution of disclosure materials in hard copy, or extensive training of sales employees to 
provide the disclosures themselves.
62
  It also states that BIAS providers can comply with the point of sale 
requirement by “directing prospective customers at the point of sale, orally and/or prominently in writing, 
to a web address at which the required disclosures are clearly posted and appropriately updated.”
63
The text of the Transparency Rule, upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court in Verizon v. FCC,
64
was not 
changed in the 2015 Open Internet Order.  The 2015 Open Internet Order, however, reconfirms that the 
Transparency Rule requires “at a minimum, the prominent display of disclosures on a publicly available 
                                                     
56
2010 Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17936-41, paras. 53-61.
57
2010 Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17940, para. 57.
58
2011 Advisory Guidance, 26 FCC Rcd at 9413-14.
59
2010 Open Internet Order, 25 FCC Rcd at 17939-40, paras. 57-58 & n.186 (“[W]e expect that broadband 
providers will make disclosures in a manner accessible by people with disabilities.”).
60
Id. at 17940, para. 58.
61
2011 Advisory Guidance, 26 FCC Rcd at 9411.
62
Id. at 9413.
63
Id. at 9414.
64
See Verizon v. FCC, 740 F.3d 623.
website and disclosure of relevant information.”
65
  While the Commission made some enhancements to 
the disclosures required under the rule in the 2015 Open Internet Order, the requirements relating to point 
of sale disclosures were not modified.
66
    
In response to the PRA Notice,
67
several commenters expressed concern about perceived changes 
to the point of sale disclosure requirements.
68
  Specifically, these commenters point to language in a 
footnote in the 2015 Open Internet Order, which states that:
[b]roadband providers must actually disclose information required for consumers 
to make an “informed choice” regarding the purchase or use of broadband services 
at the point of sale. It is not sufficient for broadband providers simply to provide a 
link to their disclosures.
69
This language apparently raised concerns that the Commission intended to eliminate the option 
for BIAS providers to provide point of sale disclosures by directing prospective customers to a web 
address and that providers would be required under the enhanced Transparency Rule to print and 
distribute paper materials at every point of sale location.
70
  According to these commenters, such a 
disclosure requirement would be unduly burdensome, particularly for prepaid wireless services because 
there is little space available on packaging containing prepaid devices and services.
71
  These commenters 
contend that wireless BIAS providers cannot reasonably be expected to present all or even a portion of the 
detailed disclosures required by the Commission under the Transparency Rule on packaging.
72
  CTIA 
notes that mobile BIAS providers often rely on multiple, distinct sales channels (e.g., online outlets, 
carrier stores, big box stores, small retail shops, independent dealers, and call centers)
73
to sell their 
products and services, and that each of these channels likely would have different systems and processes 
that would need to be modified in order to comply with a requirement to distribute hard copies of all 
disclosures.
74
    
Discussion.  We clarify that in the 2015 Open Internet Order, the Commission did not change the 
requirement that disclosures required under the Transparency Rule be prominently displayed “on a 
publicly available website” and made at the point of sale, nor did the Commission eliminate the 
permissibility of making disclosures at the point of sale by directing consumers to a website link.
75
  
The Commission’s statement that “it is not sufficient for broadband providers simply to provide a 
                                                     
65
Id. at 5677, para. 171.
66
Id. at 5672-79, paras. 162-175.
67
PRA Notice, 80 Fed. Reg. 29000.
68
See, e.g., CTIA PRA Comments at 6, AT&T PRA Comments at 17.
69
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5677, n.424 (emphasis added).
70
AT&T PRA Comments at 35, CTIA PRA Comments at 10, USTelecom PRA Comments at 11.
71
Id.
72
CTIA PRA Comments at 20.
73
Id. USTelecom also states that “typical providers have multiple point of sale channels including store fronts 
(provider-owned and other retail outlets such as Best Buy and Wal-Mart), call centers, and website. To bar notice by 
a website link to customers who seek service via website or telephone, in particular, would add considerable layers 
and cost to the disclosure process.”  USTelecom PRA Comments at 15.  
74
USTelecom PRA Comments at 15.
75
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5677, para. 171; 2011 Advisory Guidance, 26 FCC Rcd at 9413.
link to their disclosures” was intended to explain that, while disclosures may be made via a link to a 
website, for those disclosures to be meaningful, BIAS providers must ensure that consumers actually 
receive any Open Internet-related information that is relevant to their purchasing decision at all potential 
points of sale, including in a store, over the phone, and online.  BIAS providers should ensure that their 
point of sale disclosure methods actually lead potential customers to the relevant disclosure information 
so that informed purchasing decisions can be made by those customers.  
Safe Harbor for Form of Disclosure to Consumers.  In the 2015 Open Internet Order, the 
Commission determined that there should be a voluntary safe harbor for the format and nature of the
disclosures to consumers required under the Transparency Rule. To take advantage of the safe harbor, a 
BIAS provider must provide a consumer-focused, standalone disclosure.
76
The Commission tasked the 
Consumer Advisory Committee with developing and recommending a disclosure format.
77
  The safe 
harbor disclosure format was approved by the relevant Bureaus and publicly released on April 4, 2016.
78
Accordingly, a BIAS provider that wishes to qualify for the safe harbor must use the safe harbor format 
for disclosures made at the point of sale, but also may choose not to take advantage of the safe harbor.  
Thus, a provider may choose to make the disclosures in the safe harbor format at retail outlets and ensure 
that consumers have access to disclosures in that format at the other various points of sale. 
-FCC-
                                                     
76
2015 Open Internet Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 5680, para. 179.
77
Id. at 5680-81, paras. 179-180.
78
Consumer and Governmental Affairs, Wireline Competition, and Wireless Telecommunications Bureaus Approve 
Open Internet Broadband Consumer Labels, GN Docket No. 14-28, Public Notice, DA 16-357 (CGB/WCB/WTB 
2015) (Consumer Broadband Label Notice).