Fabric Challenge Response Codes

1.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the BSL you sought to add and its associated attributes from your challenge submission have been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

1.1         The address provided for the challenge is a duplicate.

All of the addresses associated with locations in the Fabric must be unique.  Your challenge attempted to add a new location with an address that already exists in the Fabric and therefore could not be accepted.  When you attempt to add a new record, make sure the submitted location’s address does not exist elsewhere in the Fabric.  If it does, and you still want to submit your Type 1 challenge, you can submit a separate challenge to change the existing, duplicate address via a type 2 challenge.  Submit the type 2 challenge within the same bulk challenge file as the type 1 challenge to add new the Fabric location.

1.2         The address provided for the challenge could not be validated using multiple address sources.

Addresses provided with challenges are checked against various address sources (e.g., the National Address Database (NAD), commercial address sources, assessor sources and/or USPS-certified Coding Accuracy Support System (CASS) software).  If the address provided with a type 1 challenge cannot be validated using any of these sources, then the challenge is not accepted.

1.3         BSL confirmed: The geographic coordinates for the challenge intersect with the footprint of an existing BSL.

The coordinates of the location point associated with the challenge falls on or within a close distance of the footprint of a BSL that is already in the Fabric.  Prior geospatial analysis of this challenge record against existing Fabric location records would help identify this circumstance prior to challenge submission.

1.4         The challenge attempts to add another BSL within an "entity” boundary (e.g., college, military installation, prison), inconsistent with the FCC definition of a BSL.

The coordinates of the location point associated with the challenge fall within the boundary or parcel of a Community Anchor Institution (CAI) entity, such as a college, prison, or military base.  While there are often many structures within such entity boundaries, including group quarters, under the FCC’s rules, these boundaries are typically represented by as a single location point in the Fabric.  Therefore, a challenge to add additional location points within such a boundary cannot be accepted.

1.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process required for this location.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support adding this new BSL to the Fabric.  A common reason for this outcome is that the most current imagery used for review does not show a structure or signs of construction at or near the location of your challenge.

1.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge was approved as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.   Your challenge duplicated information that was accepted as part of the other challenge.

1.7         The challenge attempted to add another BSL to a single-location parcel inconsistent with the FCC definition of a BSL.

Under the FCC's rules for the Fabric, only one structure on certain, single-location parcels can be identified as the BSL.  Your challenge attempted to add a location to a single-location parcel that already has a Fabric BSL and therefore could not be accepted.  If you believe the wrong structure on the parcel is identified as the BSL or the location of the BSL on the parcel is incorrect, you may file a type 5 challenge to change the geographic coordinates of the existing BSL. 

1.8         The geographic coordinates provided with the challenge are not on or near a structure or are on or very close to a road.

One of the criteria for adding a location to the Fabric is that the location you wish to add must fall within, or be very close to, the footprint of a structure that is not already a BSL.  Another is that the point cannot fall within close proximity of a road centerline.  Your type 1 challenge did not meet one (or both) of those two criteria.  Note that simply geocoding an address can result in points that are in or very close to a road, in which case additional geospatial analysis of the point would be necessary to have it result in a successful type 1 challenge.

1.9         The challenge duplicates the lat-lon coordinates from another challenge.

Every location in the Fabric must have a unique latitude-longitude combination.  Because the coordinates of the location you attempted to add to the Fabric duplicate the coordinates of another challenge in your filing, your location could not be added to the Fabric.  If you believe the unit count associated with an existing Fabric location is wrong, consider submitting a challenge to update the unit_count attribute rather than a type 1 challenge to add a new record for an individual unit in the structure.

1.11       The challenge duplicates the primary address from another challenge.

All of the addresses associated with locations in the Fabric must be unique.  Your challenge attempted to add a new location with an address that was submitted for a location in another challenge and therefore could not be accepted. 

1.12       The challenge did not pass the manual review process required for this location.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support adding this new BSL to the Fabric.  A common reason for this outcome is that the most current imagery used for review does not show a structure or signs of construction at or near the location of your challenge.

1.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

1.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

1.23       BSL confirmed: The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already added the BSL included in your challenge to the most current version of the Fabric.

1.24       The challenge was not accepted because at least 80% of all challenges for this FRN in this round did not pass the automated Fabric checks.

A series of automated checks are run on Fabric challenge data, and the failure of a challenge record to pass particular automated checks are covered in other response codes.  If you submitted one or multiple large bulk challenge submissions, and at least 80% of all of the challenges in those submissions (for this FRN and this round) did not pass the automated Fabric checks, then all of the records in those submission have not been accepted and are marked with this code.

1.25       The challenge was not accepted because a large number of challenges from a random sample of all challenges requiring manual review for this FRN in this round did not pass manual review.

Type 1 and 6 challenges that pass the automated Fabric checks (see Response Code 1.24 above) then undergo manual review.  If your entity submitted a large volume of challenges that required manual review this round, then a manual review of a random sample of all of those challenges was tested.  A sufficient percentage of the sample did not pass manual review and, as a result, the remaining challenges were not given further consideration for inclusion in the Fabric.  If you submitted other challenge types (2 through 5) that passed automated review, those were advanced for further processing.

2.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the primary address for this location has been updated in the most recent version of the Fabric to reflect the address provided in your challenge.

2.1      The address provided for the challenge is a duplicate of an address included in the Fabric data, including secondary addresses.

All of the addresses associated with locations in the Fabric must be unique.  The address associated with your challenge already exists in the Fabric and therefore could not be accepted.  When you are attempting to change the address for an existing location, make sure the challenge record’s address does not exist elsewhere in the Fabric.  If it does, and you still want to submit your challenge, submit the type 2 challenge within the same challenge bulk file as the type 1 challenge to add new the Fabric location.

2.2         The address provided for the challenge could not be validated using multiple address sources.

Addresses provided with challenges are checked against various address sources (e.g., the National Address Database (NAD), commercial address sources, assessor sources and/or USPS-certified Coding Accuracy Support System (CASS) software).  If the address provided with a type 2 challenge cannot be validated using any of these sources, then the challenge is not accepted.

2.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support changing the primary address for this Fabric location.

2.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

2.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

2.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

2.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

3.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the unit count for this location has been updated in the most recent version of the Fabric to reflect the value provided in this challenge.

3.1         The challenge impermissibly attempted to change the unit count for a non-BSL or location within an “entity” boundary (e.g., college, military installation, prison).

The challenge attempted to change the unit count for a location that represents a Community Anchor Institution (CAI) entity, such as a college or military base.  While there are often many structures within the boundaries of such entity parcels, under the FCC’s rules, these boundaries are typically represented by as a single location point with a unit count of 1 in the Fabric.  Therefore, a challenge to change the unit count of CAI entity boundary locations cannot be accepted.

3.2         The unit count provided for the challenged location exceeds expectations.

If the unit count associated with a Fabric location is incorrect, the FCC encourages parties to submit challenges to update the count.  However, upper bound thresholds have been put in place to prevent changes to the unit count that are unrealistic.  For example, if the current unit count is 5 or less, the growth is capped at 2.  For current counts between 5 and 10, growth is capped at 50%.  For current counts greater than 10, growth is capped at 25%.

3.3         The FCC has accepted the challenge but capped the unit count increase at “5.”

If the unit count associated with a Fabric location is incorrect, the FCC encourages parties to submit challenges to update the count.  However, upper bound thresholds have been put in place to prevent changes to the unit count that are unrealistic.  When there is no evidence of a multi-tenant structure, the total increase in the unit count is capped at 5.

3.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support the changing the unit count for this Fabric location.

3.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

3.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

3.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

3.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

4.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the building type for this location has been updated in the most recent version of the Fabric to reflect the value provided in this challenge.

4.1         The challenge impermissibly attempted to change the building type code for a location within an “entity” boundary (e.g., college, military installation, prison).

The challenge attempted to change the building type code for a location that represents a Community Anchor Institution (CAI) entity, such as a college or military base.  While there are often many structures within the boundaries of such entity parcels, under the FCC’s rules, these boundaries are typically represented by as a single location point with a single building type code in the Fabric.  Therefore, a challenge to change the building type of CAI entity boundary locations cannot be accepted.

4.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support the changing the building type for this Fabric location.

4.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

4.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

4.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

4.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

5.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the latitude-longitude coordinates for this location have been updated in the most recent version of the Fabric to reflect the value provided in this challenge.

5.1         The challenge impermissibly attempted to change the geographic coordinates for a location within an “entity” boundary (e.g., college, military installation, prison).

The challenge attempted to change the coordinates of a location that represents an entire Community Anchor Institution (CAI) entity boundary, such as a college or military base.  While there are often many structures within the boundaries of such entity parcels, under the FCC’s rules, these boundaries are typically represented by as a single location point in the Fabric that falls somewhere within the boundary.  Therefore, a challenge to change the coordinates of that location point is considered moot and is not accepted.

5.2         The challenge impermissibly attempted to move the challenged location outside of the parcel boundaries for the Fabric record.

A Fabric location can only be moved within the boundary of its current parcel.  Your challenge attempted to move the location outside the parcel boundary.  The parcel boundaries used in establishing each version of the Fabric are aggregated from various underlying sources and updated periodically.  If you believe the parcel boundary associated with this location may be incorrect, it may be best to wait for the next version of the Fabric for potential parcel boundary updates to be incorporated.

5.3         The challenge impermissibly attempted to move the challenged location to an existing Fabric record.

This challenge was not accepted because the destination point falls on the building footprint of a location that is already in the Fabric. 

5.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support the requested move of this Fabric location.

5.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

5.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

5.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

5.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

6.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the BSL status or flag for this location has been updated to ‘False’ in the most recent version of the Fabric.

6.1         The challenge impermissibly attempted to update the status of a location within an “entity” boundary (e.g., college, military installation, prison).

A Community Anchor Institution (CAI) represented by an entity boundary is typically represented as a single location in the Fabric.  Any type 6 challenges within this parcel will be rejected.  While there are often many structures on such a parcel, the processes governing how the Fabric is constructed generally allow for a single location to represent the entire CAI.

6.2         Rejected due to filer’s prior challenge to add the location being accepted.

This challenge was rejected because the entity that sought to remove the location previously submitted a successful challenge to add the location.

6.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support labeling this Fabric location as not broadband serviceable.

6.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

6.7         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support labeling this Fabric location as not broadband serviceable.

6.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

6.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

6.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

6.24       The challenge was not accepted because at least 80% of all challenges for this FRN in this round did not pass the automated Fabric checks.

A series of automated checks are run on Fabric challenge data, and the failure of a challenge record to pass particular automated checks are covered in other response codes.  If you submitted one or multiple large bulk challenge submissions, and at least 80% of all of the challenges in those submissions (for this FRN and this round) did not pass the automated Fabric checks, then all of the records in those submission have not been accepted and are marked with this code.

6.25       The challenge was not accepted because a large number of challenges from a random sample of all challenges requiring manual review for this FRN in this round did not pass manual review.

Type 1 and 6 challenges that pass the automated Fabric checks (see Response Code 6.24 above) then undergo manual review.  If your entity submitted a large volume of challenges that required manual review this round, then a manual review of a random sample of all of those challenges was tested.  A sufficient percentage of the sample did not pass manual review and, as a result, the remaining challenges were not given further consideration for inclusion in the Fabric.  If you submitted other challenge types (2 through 5) that passed automated review, those were advanced for further processing.

7.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the supplemental address provided for the location in this challenge has been added to the secondary address file for the most recent version of the Fabric.

7.1         The address provided for the challenge is a duplicate of an address included in the Fabric data, including secondary addresses.

All of the addresses associated with locations in the Fabric, including secondary addresses, must be unique.  Your challenge attempted to add a supplemental address that already exists in the Fabric and therefore could not be accepted.  When you attempt to add a supplemental address, make sure the address does not exist elsewhere in the Fabric.  If it does, and you still want to submit your type 1 challenge, you can submit a separate challenge to change the existing, duplicate address via a type 2 challenge.  Submit the type 2 challenge within the same bulk challenge file as the type 1 challenge to add new the Fabric location.

7.2         The address provided for the challenge could not be validated using multiple address sources.

Addresses provided with challenges are checked against various address sources (e.g., the National Address Database (NAD), commercial address sources, assessor sources and/or USPS-certified Coding Accuracy Support System (CASS) software).  If the address provided with a type 7 challenge cannot be validated using any of these sources, then the challenge is not accepted.

7.5         The challenge did not pass the manual review process.

Your challenge was manually reviewed using street or aerial imagery, and the manual review did not support adding this address as a supplemental address for the given Fabric location.

7.6         The challenge duplicated a previously accepted challenge.

The information provided for this challenge has been accepted as part of another challenge that has been incorporated into the most recent version of the Fabric.

7.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

7.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

7.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions).  One of those steps or updating processes already made the update included in this challenge, and the updates are reflected in the most current version of the Fabric.

8.0         The FCC has accepted the challenge.

The challenge has been approved, and the supplemental address provided for the location in this challenge has been removed from the secondary address file for the most recent version of the Fabric.

8.1      The challenge was rejected because it attempted to remove a primary address.

Challenge category code 8 is to remove a secondary address from the Fabric dataset.  This challenge attempted to remove an address that is the primary address associated with a BSL, rather than a secondary address.

8.21       The challenge was withdrawn.

The challenge was not processed because it was withdrawn by the challenger.

8.22       The challenge was rejected per staff adjudication.

The FCC, in consultation with CostQuest, decided that the challenge could not be accepted based on a reason not covered by the other challenge response codes.

8.23       The challenge was overtaken by new data as reflected in updated Fabric.

In addition to reviewing challenges, the FCC and CostQuest undertake several steps to update the Fabric prior to releasing a new Fabric version twice a year (see https://help.bdc.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/12382207389083-Changes-to-the-Fabric-between-Versions). The challenge was overtaken by those steps and updating processes, which resulted in either the location that was the subject of the challenge being removed from the Fabric, the secondary address becoming the primary address for the BSL, or a determination that the secondary address does not exist.

Was this article helpful?
0 out of 0 found this helpful

Articles in this section

Video Resources
Key Reference Documents
BDC User Guide and Data Specifications
Form 477 Resources
Get Help