Federal Universal Service Fund

Competitive telecommunications providers increasingly are serving rural towns but they are not going to surrounding areas where providing service costs more, said a study of universal service funding sponsored by four telecommunications companies that operate in rural areas. Competition in small towns boosts the need for Universal Service Fund (USF) support in surrounding areas because it cuts incumbent phone companies’ ability to ease financial burdens by averaging, consultants Balhoff & Rowe said in the report. CenturyTel, Consolidated Communications, Embarq and Windstream filed the study with the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, now studying ways to improve the universal service program. The four companies serve small and midsized communities nationwide. The study, based on Texas Universal Service Fund operations, concluded that competitors “appear unlikely to offer services” in outlying areas soon, with significant potential effects on the universal service program. “Competitors are making the financially rational choice to avoid serving high-cost areas altogether, but carriers of last resort, like the four sponsors of the study, are compelled to serve the areas outside rural towns -- often at a significant loss,” the companies said in a release. With increased competition in towns taking lines from rural incumbents, “internal cross- subsidy systems” used to average costs “will prove inadequate,” the study said. “Historically, policymakers have relied at least in part on monopoly-based support systems founded on internal company cross-subsidies to maintain affordable rates in uneconomic service areas,” the study said. “Those internal cross-subsidy systems almost certainly will prove inadequate to cope with emerging competitive patterns.” A wireless industry representative, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the study did not provide data on wireless costs or coverage patterns, relying mainly on data about cable and competitive wireline overbuilders.

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) faced a heaping plateful of telecom resolution proposals at its summer meeting in New York City, set to open Sunday, July 22. Proposed resolutions address Universal Service Fund (USF) reform, VoIP number use, broadband over power lines, wireless termination fees, the digital television transition and IP relay fraud.

The FCC should impose the proposed temporary cap on subsidies to competitive carriers from the high-cost Universal Service Fund (USF), several members of Congress said in letters to the FCC the past few weeks. The letters came as wireless carriers worked the Hill seeking political support for encouraging the FCC to tweak a May 1 Federal- State Joint Board proposal to place an interim cap on funding for competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (CETC), who mostly are wireless providers. Most lawmakers writing the FCC said consumers will see higher costs without the cap.

Consumers will face rising phone bills unless the Federal-State Joint Board imposes a cap on the Universal Service Fund (USF) high-cost support for competitive eligible telecommunication carriers (CETCs), said Sen. Robert Casey, D-Pa. In a letter sent to the FCC Friday, Casey said the fund’s growth is due to subsidies for wireless carriers. Without a cap, USF funding will rise as much as $500 million this year, Casey said. Pennsylvania paid $124.9 million more into the fund than carriers received in 2006, he said. “It is a major concern that without a freeze on CETC support distributions, Pennsylvania’s net contributor role to the federal USF will greatly increase.”

To encourage rural broadband deployment, the FCC should redistribute rural wireless Universal Service Fund (USF) subsidies, Qwest said Wednesday. The Bell filed a plan with the FCC to alter the USF to bring broadband to unserved areas without raising USF fees and surcharges shown on phone bills. The plan would divert money from wireless competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (CETCs) by distributing CETC subsidies per household instead of per connection. About $1 billion of the $4 billion “high-cost” portion of the USF goes to wireless CETCs, but half of wireless customers are on family plans, averaging three lines per household, said Steve Davis, Qwest public policy senior vice president. A per-household system would free funds for use in upping broadband deployment, he said.

Five telecom groups back the Federal-State Joint Board’s proposal to cap universal support to competitive eligible telecom carriers (CETCs), they told Senate Commerce Committee leaders in a June 25 letter. A cap “is a necessary first step toward comprehensive reform of the Universal Service Fund (USF),” said the International Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance, Western Telecommunications Alliance, National Telecommunications and Cooperative Association, USTelecom and OPASTCO. During 2001-2006, CETC support ballooned $15 million yearly to nearly $1 billion, the groups said, while funding for incumbent carriers has remained flat since 2003. CETC funding burdens consumers, the groups argued, adding that the money “is being spent inefficiently” by underwriting multiple wireless carriers vying to serve the same geographic areas.

The House today (Wednesday) is set to debate an appropriations bill (HR-2829) that would give the FCC $2 million to design a program explaining the shift from analog to digital TV. The FCC originally sought $1.5 million, but the Financial Services Subcommittee upped the sum out of concern about “low” public awareness about the transition. The overall bill could face a veto, since it contains provisions dealing with pay raises for members of Congress.

Arguments against capping universal service subsidies to competitive carriers are based on “short-term self interest rather than long-term public interest,” OPASTCO told the FCC. “Excessive growth in the High-Cost program that is threatening its sustainability is attributable solely to competitive ETCs,” said OPASTCO in reply comments on the cap proposal. On the other hand, extending the interim cap to all rural telecom companies would “seriously threaten” wireline rural carriers, OPASTCO said. “At greatest risk would be continued service to subscribers in the most remote and highest-cost regions that may not have other reliable service options,” said the group, which represents wireline LECs.

A revived net neutrality debate could block passage of telecom bills gaining momentum this Congress, Rep. Boucher (D-Va.) told Pike and Fischer’s Broadband Policy Summit Thurs. In the “hiatus” on major legislative activity, network operators and content providers should be talking, he said. Citing discussions with both sides, Boucher said he thinks there’s “potential common ground” and that the issue should be resolved.

Wireline and wireless carriers lined up on opposite sides as comments accumulated Wed. at the FCC on capping USF subsidies to competitive rural carriers. The cap was recommended by the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service as an interim measure to slow the rampant growth of the Universal Service Fund. But the recommendation to apply it only to competitive eligible telecom carriers (CETCs), generally wireless carriers, has created a sharp division among rural carriers.