Few Implementation Challenges Expected With EBB to ACP Transition

“The first challenge is the tight turnaround of transitioning the program” given the upcoming holidays and changes that need to be made internally at the FCC and the Universal Service Administrative Co., said National Digital Inclusion Alliance Policy Director Amy Huffman. Conveying all the changes will be “one of the biggest challenges,” said Public Knowledge Senior Policy Counsel Jenna Leventoff.

Another potential challenge is the changing eligibility criteria for households, said Next Century Cities Policy Counsel-Federal Programs Ryan Johnston. In EBB, households could claim eligibility if they participated in a provider’s COVID-19 relief program or reported a substantial loss of income during the pandemic. “Those people need to get recertified under different eligibility criteria, and they have those 60 days to do that,” Johnston said, “but our concern is that either that’s not going to be made clear to them … or they’re just not going to understand how that process works.” EBB-enrolled households will also be able to keep their up to $50 monthly subsidy during that 60-day period before receiving the $30 monthly discount.

The FCC is "engaging in conversations with all those in the current [EBB] ecosystem" so participating households "know what to expect over the coming months," emailed a spokesperson. "As we found with the EBB program, trusted community outreach partners are critical to building trust in new federally supported programs, and we plan to build on those lessons learned as we prepare for [ACP's] launch," she said: "Staff is also working closely with USAC to prepare its systems for the transition, and all stakeholders to develop the rules for the new program."

Requiring EBB-enrolled households to opt in to ACP is “a huge problem,” said National Lifeline Association attorney John Heitmann. The infrastructure law addressed the transition by saying EBB households that also qualify for ACP “shall continue to have access to an affordable service offering," but it doesn’t “contemplate consumers dropping out because they failed to opt in,” Heitmann said: “The better course is [a] notice subject to opt out.” Others pushed back on such a requirement. It’s going to take some messaging to convey the opt-in requirement, Leventoff said, but “I would be very hesitant to leave low-income consumers with an unexpected bill that they can’t afford.”

A question for EBB providers participating in ACP is whether they will have enough time to notify consumers, said NTCA Director-Industry Affairs Brian Ford. “It’s not a simple push a couple buttons in the billing system to get that out,” Ford said, adding that the FCC could help by allowing providers to tie the notices with their billing cycles rather than requiring it be done by a specific day. Another uncertainty is whether the FCC and USAC have addressed verification systems on a permanent basis, Ford said.

The FCC sought comment on whether it should "[interpret] the one-time connected device reimbursement restriction to prevent providers from claiming a device reimbursement in [ACP] for a household that received a reimbursable connected device in the EBB program.” Access to devices in low-income households is “a huge problem,” Leventoff said, so it “makes sense to allow them to get another device discount.” Whatever the FCC decides to do is “not just dependent on what makes for good policy, but also what the statute allows and how people want to interpret it,” said Free Press General Counsel Matt Wood. The commission will also have to grapple with the statutory requirement that it ensures participating providers aren’t upselling or engaging in “unreasonable and unjust behaviors,” Wood said.

Low-income consumers "overwhelmingly" chose wireless services through EBB, emailed CTIA Senior Vice President-Regulatory Affairs Scott Bergmann. The FCC "can build on this experience by allowing ACP subscribers to select the services and devices of their choosing," Bergmann said: "We look forward to working with the commission to ensure a smooth transition for existing EBB consumers and flexibility for providers as they work to implement the new program.”

The program’s name change may be confusing for some households participating in EBB, Huffman said, but it’s a “good and necessary change” because it shifts the program away from being an emergency-based program. There may be some hesitancy for EBB-enrolled households to switch to ACP, but “I think with the new name it definitely seems like it's going to be a lot more stable, and I think that will encourage people to sign up,” Johnston said. Education and outreach about the various changes need to “simultaneously be stood up as the programmatic changes are taking effect,” Huffman said (see 2111090063).