Carriers resisted a California Public Utilities Commission staff proposal to apply a utility affordability framework to telecom services through the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF). Don't adopt a staff proposal to apply affordability metrics to essential communications services “because the purpose of this proceeding should be to develop the metrics, not apply them,” AT&T commented Monday in docket R.18-07-006: The CPUC "lacks jurisdiction to set prices for wireless and broadband services” and consumers can get affordable broadband through the new federal affordable connectivity program. California lacks wireless jurisdiction and the CPUC addresses affordability through the state LifeLine program, said CTIA: competition keeps wireless service cheap. Applying the staff proposal "to communications services that are not rate-regulated telecommunications services would run counter to the Staff’s goal to bridge the digital divide,” said the California Cable and Telecommunications Association. "The Commission has expressly abstained from regulating the intrastate rates of nearly all competitive voice service providers” and “is precluded by law from regulating broadband prices, which are controlled by a competitive market.” CalTel and other small rural LECs agreed the agency lacks broadband authority. Limit using the metrics “to informing consumers in the Commission’s annual affordability report” and in the commission’s LifeLine proceeding, they said. Communications services mostly aren't rate-regulated, but the CPUC should consider affordability when providers submit merger and other kinds of applications, commented the Center for Accessible Technology. Applying an affordability framework could help the CPUC identify broadband projects for state funding, said the National Diversity Coalition. The Utility Reform Network agreed with CPUC staff that CASF could benefit from incorporating affordability metrics, but added that the commission should incorporate the framework in all of its communications decision-making processes. The agency should revise its proposal so the metric is used to “analyze affordability generally” rather than set prices for low-income broadband plans, said the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office.
FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks will vote “later this week” on draft affordable connectivity program rules, funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, he said during an Information Technology Industry Council webinar Tuesday. “I expect a lot from this program going forward” (see 2201070060). ACP rules must be finalized within 60 days of the law's enactment, which is Friday.
The FCC should approve rules that allow emergency broadband benefit enrollees to easily migrate to the new affordable connectivity program (ACP), CTIA representatives told an aide to Commissioner Nathan Simington. “An affirmative customer opt-in process for ACP,” as proposed in a public notice, “is likely to lead to large-scale de-enrollment of eligible households, which would disserve the program’s goals,” said a filing posted Monday in docket 21-450. Ensure “that a broad cross-section of broadband providers continues to participate in the program, ensuring competition and multiple options,” CTIA urged.
The FCC released draft rules for the affordable connectivity program Friday, with few changes for providers and guidance for emergency broadband benefit households transitioning to the new program. Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel released the draft for feedback "given the importance of this program to consumers," she said: “Congress gave the FCC a very short window to stand up" the ACP "and working with a hyper-accelerated schedule during the holidays, we’ve proven that we are up to the task with this draft." The FCC wouldn't adopt a uniform opt-in requirement for EBB households transitioning to ACP but instead offer a "hybrid approach." Households that wouldn't experience a bill change wouldn't be required to opt in. Those with a "willingness and an ability to pay for broadband" would need to provide consent if they may end up with a bill due to the benefits drop. Households that haven't said they would or could pay must opt in. The draft would keep the same definition of "household" used in Lifeline and EBB. Household eligibility was updated to meet certain statutory changes. Recognizing some eligible households "may experience difficulty accessing or navigating the National Verifier on their own, and may require assistance to complete and submit an application," the draft would require the Wireline Bureau and Universal Service Administrative Co. to do a "one-year test pilot for granting trusted access to the National Verifier for purposes of assisting customers with applying" for ACP. Few changes would be made to the requirements for providers. Providers would need to establish that they offer broadband services to end users before seeking to participate, rather than before December 2020. The FCC was "persuaded by comments not to collect broadband internet service plan information during the election process," the draft said. Similar to the Lifeline program, providers would be prohibited from offering or giving enrollment representatives or direct supervisors compensation based on the number of households that apply or enroll in ACP. The draft cites a recent Office of Inspector General advisory raising concerns about potential misconduct by sales agents. Non-usage de-enrollment rules would mirror the Lifeline program's rules. The FCC received a mixed response on whether "any internet service offering" should include legacy and grandfathered plans. The final rules would include those plans and any that a provider "currently offers to new customers." It further clarified that the requirement "does not require that providers offer such legacy or grandfathered plans to other customers, including ACP-eligible customers, that are not already on such plans." Providers would have 60 days after the final rules are published in the Federal Register to complete any necessary changes to ensure ACP can be applied to "all generally available and currently sold plans." Providers would also be allowed to include taxes and other government fees in the "actual amount charged to a household." The draft would not impose minimum service standards. Smartphones and cellphones would still be excluded. Providers are allowed to perform credit checks only if it's unrelated to the program. Providers would be prohibited from upselling or downselling services. A Further NPRM would also seek comment on implementing an up to $75 enhanced monthly benefit for households in high-cost areas and how to establish its outreach grant program. Comments would be due 30 days after FR publication, 45 days for replies, in docket 21-450. Also released Friday was a public notice allowing ex parte presentations until Jan. 11. Presentations must be filed by Jan. 12.
Treasury’s final rule on broadband projects’ eligibility for the $350 billion in state and local funding from the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act backtracks from earlier proposed restrictions that would have allowed it only in areas without 25/3 Mbps (see 2105100060), the department and telecom lawyers said. The earlier proposed rules got mixed reaction (see 2107160063). The “final rule expands eligible areas for investment by requiring recipients to invest in projects designed to provide service to households and businesses with an identified need for additional broadband infrastructure investment, which would include but not be limited to a lack of broadband service reliably delivering certain speeds,” Treasury said in the final rule submitted to the Federal Register. Potential acceptable “examples of need include lack of access to a connection that reliably meets or exceeds symmetrical 100 Mbps download and upload speeds, lack of affordable access to broadband service, or lack of reliable broadband service.” Treasury added a requirement that recipients participate in the FCC affordable connectivity program or provide access to comparably affordable service (see 2201050043). The final rule “continues to encourage recipients to prioritize support for broadband networks owned, operated by, or affiliated with local governments, nonprofits, and cooperatives.” It maintains language requiring projects to be capable of 100 Mbps symmetrical and 100/20 Mbps where symmetrical isn’t practical due to topography The rule takes effect April 1.
A draft FCC NPRM would require ISPs to disclose certain information to consumers through a broadband label, if approved during the agency's January meeting, said a fact sheet Thursday (see 2201050057). Other drafts include an order updating the E-rate program's rules to ensure tribal libraries' access to the program, an order updating political programming rules, an NPRM updating equipment authorization rules, and an order resolving "pending issues" on white space spectrum.
With enrollment now open for the FCC’s affordable connectivity program and the transition from the emergency broadband benefit program underway, some consumer advocacy groups told us they're concerned that EBB-enrolled households could face a bill shock or lose their benefit entirely if required to affirmatively opt in to receive the new benefit. Several questions remain because the FCC hasn't issued rules for the new program and the higher subsidy amount is set to end March 1.
Allow bulk Wi-Fi purchasers to certify to a service provider that its affordable connectivity program discount "has been passed through fully to multiple households" without having to send the households a bill, said Rhode Island nonprofit One Neighborhood Builders in comments posted Tuesday in docket 21-450. The group offers free Wi-Fi to low-income households through the Ocean State Higher Education Economic Development and Administrative Network, which leases fiber cables owned by Cox. Allowing OSHEAN to pay for the internet cost without sending users a bill would "make the ACP funds more accessible for unconnected households without burdening small nonprofits and households with additional paperwork," it said. The group said the change could lead to "several hundred households" signing up for ACP. The FCC didn't allow reimbursement during the emergency broadband benefit program in cases where a household "does not pay a fee for the service, either to the provider or a bulk purchaser/aggregator, but the fee is paid by another entity."
The FCC Wireline Bureau granted a request by more than a dozen groups to extend the comment period for its notice of inquiry on a report on the future of USF, said an order Tuesday in docket 21-476 (see 2112220051). The bureau said the record would "benefit from commenters having had the opportunity to further monitor the commission’s implementation of the affordable connectivity program and NTIA’s implementation of broadband programs." Comments are now due by Feb. 17, replies by March 17.
The FCC "has authority to prescribe minimum service standards" in the affordable connectivity program, said an Adtran letter last week in docket 21-450 (see 2112090061). The company disagreed with CTIA that "[no] commenter favoring selective restrictions on eligible households’ right to apply their benefit to the broadband service of their choice explains how such restrictions could be justified under the statute, and indeed no such justification exists." Adtran's reply backed MSS for fixed broadband.