More than 650 telecom providers signed a letter to commissioners “to ensure” the FCC and Congress “have clear and unambiguous notice of our collective concerns with the ‘regression analysis'-based caps” on USF support (http://xrl.us/bngrm9). A NTCA spokeswoman said the letter was an industry-wide effort in which several national and state associations, other groups and individual members “all reached out collectively to raise the visibility of this issue among policy makers in Washington.” The commission has received eight waiver petitions dealing with support reductions, of which one has been granted interim relief, a spokesman said. The commission also got two expedited waiver petitions dealing with boundary data, which it granted.
Federal Universal Service Fund
The FCC's Universal Service Fund (USF) was created by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to fund programs designed to provide universal telecommunications access to all U.S. citizens. All telecommunications providers are required to contribute a percentage of their end-user revenues to the Fund, which the FCC allocates for four core programs: 1. Connect America Fund, which subsidizes telecom providers for the increased costs of offering services to customers in rural and remote areas 2. Lifeline, which directly subsidizes low-income households to help pay for the cost of phone and internet service 3. Rural Health Care, which subsidizes health care providers to offer broadband telehealth services that can connect rural patients and providers with specialists located farther away 4. E-Rate, which subsidizes rural and low-income schools and libraries for internet and telecommunications costs The Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) administers the USF on behalf of the FCC, but requires Congressional approval for its actions. Many states also operate their own universal service funds, which operate independently from the federal program.
Of the dozens of comments filed this week in response to the FCC’s rulemaking on USF contribution reform, there was little agreement about whether to stick with a revenue-based system for assessing contribution fees, to move to a system that uses connections or numbers, or even whether to assess fees on broadband service. The only universal sentiment that might be teased out of the plethora of comments filed is that, as AT&T put it, the current system is “dysfunctional.” Carriers differed, but generally supported a modified revenue-based system, while VoIP providers preferred a connections-based system.
The FCC’s plans for special access reform became a prominent issue during a House Communications Subcommittee hearing Tuesday where members queried the commissioners on a broad spectrum of regulatory issues. Chairman Julius Genachowski conceded that the current framework for special access is “not working” but said the commission lacks the necessary data to determine how exactly it should be reformed.
Special access reform and FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s initial push for a vote on an order rejecting AT&T and Windstream pricing flexibility petitions are expected to be key areas for questions July 10 when commissioners are scheduled to appear before the House Communications Subcommittee for an oversight hearing. Other likely topics include USF/intercarrier compensation reform, progress on a voluntary incentive auction of broadcast spectrum and other spectrum issues, the Verizon Wireless/cable AWS deals and privacy regulations, said government and industry officials.
NASUCA passed resolutions Monday addressing the need for telecom regulation at a time when many states throughout the last year have embraced the industry-backed trend of deregulation. At its mid-year meeting in Charleston, S.C. the organization adopted firm stances on such controversial topics as VoIP regulatory oversight.
House appropriators voted to cut FCC FY13 funding 5 percent to $323 million, during an Appropriations Committee markup Wednesday. The bill, which now awaits consideration on the House floor, gives the FCC $24 million less funding than the agency’s FY13 request of $347 million. The committee removed a provision that would have prevented the FCC from implementing its requirement for broadcasters to post political file information online.
The FCC fined a company $1.7 million for “willfully or repeatedly failing to contribute fully” to the universal service, North American Numbering Plan, and local number portability funds; failing to pay regulatory fees when due; and filing inaccurate form 499s (http://xrl.us/bnb54d). The Florida-based telecom provider, Telseven, sold a service allowing consumers to obtain information about recently disconnected or out-of-service toll free numbers. Telseven charged a “Federal Universal Service Fund charge” and an “administrative recovery fee” to consumers, but according to the Universal Service Administrative Co., Telseven hadn’t made any USF payments since November 2007, and owed over $1 million in “delinquent USF contributions.” Telseven filed for bankruptcy in April and its website indicates it is no longer providing telecom services. Our efforts to reach Telseven for comment were unsuccessful.
*June 18 American Consumer Institute panel on “looming spectrum crunch,” noon, 2103 Rayburn building -- steve@theamericanconsumer.org
Senate Indian Affairs Committee members urged FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn to consider how proposed reforms of the Universal Service Fund could negatively affect rural and native communities, during a hearing Thursday. In particular, lawmakers took issue with the hurdles and cost of the FCC’s waiver process for telecommunications companies that cannot adjust to the USF reforms.
The FCC Wireline Bureau Thursday granted four petitions seeking temporary waivers of a June 1 deadline to implement new Lifeline eligibility rules (http://xrl.us/bm9yxb). The bureau gave USTelecom a six-month extension for 13 of the states indicated in its petition, as well as the eligible telecom carriers in those states that rely on the state to sign someone up for Lifeline. It also granted extensions for California to transition to a new third-party vendor and enable collection of partial Social Security information and dates of birth; and to Oregon and Colorado, which need to change their state laws to reflect new federal rules.