Senate Public Works Committee ranking member Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., filed the Rural Broadband Protection Act (S-4126) Tuesday in a bid to change FCC vetting rules for participants in USF high-cost programs. The measure would require the FCC to “initiate a rulemaking proceeding to establish a vetting process” for USF high-cost applicant ISPs, including requiring them to provide “sufficient detail and documentation for the Commission to ascertain that the applicant possesses the technical capability, and has a reasonable plan, to deploy the proposed network.” The FCC would be required to evaluate new applications based on “reasonable and well-established technical standards,” including those the commission adopted for its Form 477 Data Program “for purposes of entities that must report broadband availability coverage.” Meetings with “small rural service providers and state and local officials in West Virginia … made it abundantly clear the FCC needs congressional direction to ensure taxpayer money is being used properly to fund broadband deployment in rural areas,” Capito said in a statement. “By verifying that providers can actually deliver on the promises made to bring high-speed internet to specific areas, we can maximize the influx of broadband dollars.” Capito’s office cited support from NTCA CEO Shirley Bloomfield.
Public Knowledge urged the FCC to create a USF device voucher program and modify the Lifeline program to be a successor to the affordable connectivity program, in a call with an aide to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. “The lack of a device is one of the biggest barriers to connectivity -- and those impacted are primarily low-income or marginalized,” said a filing posted Friday in docket 21-476. “Over half of low-income Lifeline households don't own a computer or tablet. Many more may share just one device amongst a whole household, forcing families to make difficult choices about who can connect at any given time.”
E-rate groups and industry broadly rejected the FCC’s proposal to establish a centralized online bidding portal for the E-rate program, as expected (see 2112070053). Groups asked the agency to abandon the NPRM, saying the record doesn’t reflect a need for such a change to E-rate, in comments posted Thursday in docket 21-455.
Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) members voted unanimously to grant a motion deferring discussion on Alaska USF matters during a virtual meeting Wednesday (see 2204130061). Despite voting in favor, Chairman Robert Pickett noted he had “some very strong reservations” about doing so: “I think there are some things that would be helpful, but they’ll just have to come out at a later date.” Also adopted was an order to establish a comment period of 30 days, 20 for replies, on RCA staff and Alaska Remote Carrier Coalition proposals.
T-Mobile misled the California Public Utilities Commission with false statements about its CDMA shutdown and should pay nearly $5.3 million for violating the commission rule 1.1, ruled CPUC Administrative Law Judges Karl Bemesderfer and Robert Mason Monday. The decision in docket A.18-07-011 will become final in about a month if no party appeals and no commissioner requests review. While penalizing T-Mobile for statements made to the commission, the CPUC rejected a Dish petition last month to modify the state commission’s April 2020 T-Mobile/Sprint OK (see 2203170072). T-Mobile "falsely represented that there would be a three-year customer migration period (2020-2023)" for Sprint customers to T-Mobile and Boost Mobile customers to Dish Network, the ALJs wrote. Saying that offense was serious, the ALJs said they scaled back the penalty in consideration of recent T-Mobile/Dish talks to resolve their dispute. The CPUC relied on various T-Mobile representations about "a three-year migration period, which were made on the record and under oath,” when it included that migration timeline in its order approving the deal, the ALJs said. "At no time prior to announcing that it planned to end the migration period" Dec. 31 "did T-Mobile alert the Commission and DISH that the various representations quoted above had been misinterpreted." They said it was "telling that, except for T-Mobile, the Commission and all other parties to the proceeding came away from” a Dec. 5, 2019, hearing “with the understanding that the migration period would be three years.” The ALJs rejected “T-Mobile’s attempt to whitewash” Chief Technology Officer Neville Ray’s testimony at a September 2021 hearing (see 2109210040 and 2109200065), saying “T-Mobile’s efforts to deny these promises and its expressed intent to shut down its CDMA network prior to the completion of the three-year migration period have misled the Commission.” T-Mobile suggested it was “nothing more than a misunderstanding that does not rise to the level of a Rule 1.1 violation,” but that argument is “factually and legally incorrect," since T-Mobile never tried to correct the record, they said. T-Mobile didn’t comment Tuesday. In a separate matter, the carrier disagreed Monday with the CPUC seeking up to $230 million in possible fines for subsidiary MetroPCS failing to remit California USF payments for prepaid phone service (see 2204250049).
The Oklahoma USF (OUSF) administrator expects to seek a 34% increase to the connections-based surcharge, to about $1.53, said Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC) Telecom Coordinator Mark Argenbright at a virtual workshop Tuesday. Increased support is needed to fulfill demand from transferring remaining support in the former high-cost fund to OUSF, increased demand for primary OUSF support, and an ongoing funding deficit for previously granted support, said a document displayed at the meeting. Oklahoma implemented connections-based contribution in November. Other states that adopted the method have had unstable surcharges, and the possible Oklahoma increase might show the same happening here, said Director-State Regulatory Benjamin Aron. If the OCC had kept a revenue-based method, the surcharge would have jumped to more than 17%, from about 6.3% before the commission shifted to connections, noted Argenbright. The OCC aims to propose statutory language to shift OUSF’s mission to broadband in time for the 2023 legislative session, he said. It’s an odd time to repurpose USF for broadband, considering so much federal money is flowing into the state, said Aron. It seems premature to talk about writing a OUSF bill to support broadband without a better understanding of what will happen with federal dollars, agreed Bill Bullard, attorney for Consolidated Communications and other rural LECs. The OUSF administrator is "sensitive" to other sources of broadband funding and gets that coordination will be needed with the newly formed state broadband council, said Argenbright: Talks to develop an OUSF revamp bill should continue.
MetroPCS faces up to $230 million in possible fines for failing to remit California USF payments for prepaid phone service, the California Public Utilities Commission said Friday. The CPUC ordered an investigation into whether T-Mobile’s Metro violated the state’s 2014 Prepaid Act. The agency said the carrier failed to remit the full amount of surcharges and user fees paid by customers in 2017 and 2018 for state public purpose programs that support low-income and disadvantaged consumers. CPUC staff tried to collect, but Metro claims it owes nothing, the agency said. A related 2017 lawsuit brought by MetroPCS (see 1811060005) is pending in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco (case 3:17-cv-05959-JD). The company challenged the Prepaid Act and related CPUC resolutions imposing surcharges as unlawful and preempted. The district court agreed with Metro in a 2018 decision, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded in August 2020. The district court case awaits a new trial date and is scheduled for a case management conference May 12, the CPUC said. "This is a longstanding dispute with the CPUC that Metro has been litigating in federal court for well over four years," a T-Mobile spokesperson said. "We ... are confident in our position based on federal law. Metro has remitted and continues to remit surcharges to the Commission consistent with federal law and in a manner that is non-discriminatory to its prepaid customers."
The Oregon Public Utility Commission will open a rulemaking to update state USF rules. Commissioners voted 3-0 Tuesday to adopt staff's recommendation in docket AR 649. Telecom industry groups gave mixed reviews last month to the PUC’s plan to adopt a CostQuest model to decide the size of the Oregon USF (OUSF) starting Jan. 1 (see 2203310040). Deciding to issue an NPRM is merely a “jumping-off point” for the rulemaking, reminded Chair Megan Decker at Tuesday’s virtual PUC meeting. The PUC signed a contract earlier in the week to use a CostQuest model, said PUC senior telecom analyst Nicola Peterson. But the proposed NPRM is a framework to move forward while allowing input, she said. "I don't think putting it off is going to help make it an easier process." The Oregon Telecommunications Association doesn’t want to open a rulemaking that says the PUC will use a model when it doesn’t yet understand the model’s potential results, said OTA attorney Rick Finnigan: The PUC should take more time. "This is important and we need to get it right," he said. The Oregon Cable Telecommunications Association supports moving forward because it thinks the proposed framework is “flexible enough” to let parties work with the model, said Davis Wright’s Mark Trinchero. Commissioner Mark Thompson supported moving forward, while sympathizing with OTA’s concerns. “It is resonating with me that it feels a little weird to ... adopt a rule that says we're going to use a cost model when there seems to be concerns that we really don't know what that cost model is going to produce.” Commissioner Letha Tawney said she sees “outs” for the commission if “this goes off the rails.” Concerned parties should proactively engage, she said.
Arizona could modify state USF into a rural-focused fund to expand broadband, said Smith Bagley in comments Monday at the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC). "A narrowly tailored state universal service fund may be uniquely qualified to understand and address specific local needs in a manner that large temporary federal grant programs cannot.” The ACC could, through a rulemaking, amend Arizona USF rules “to create a rural universal service fund similar to the fund created by the New Mexico Public Utilities Commission,” it said in docket T-00000A-20-0336. Smith Bagley provides wireless and wireline service to tribes in remote parts of Arizona, but some areas in that territory remain unserved, and the company's voice, 3G and 4G networks "cannot be upgraded to 5G without substantial additional investment in wireless equipment and middle-mile fiber connections to its towers,” it said. "In areas with poor demographics and sparse population density (often less than ten people per square mile) there is no business plan supporting these additional investments without assistance from either a universal service mechanism or a grant program specifically designed to encourage investment.” Smith Bagley disagreed with Frontier Communications that the fund should be limited to voice. Tuscon Electric Power and UNS Electric on Friday supported using AUSF for “broadband development in rural and tribal communities, especially those that may be impacted by coal plant closures.” ACC Chairwoman Lea Marquez Peterson sought comments from tribes and cooperatives after only telecom companies commented initially on a possible AUSF update (see 2203280052).
The FCC Wireline Bureau released a set of best practices for domestic Communications Act Section 214 applicants seeking approval for transactions including a transfer of USF high-cost obligations, per a public notice Tuesday. The bureau "has recently received higher volumes" of such applications, it said, and recommended applicants include certain information to "expedite the timely acceptance ... and minimize the need for supplemental filings." Such information includes a list of all USF high cost support received that would be transferred, information about whether any entities are eligible telecom carriers, how a transfer may affect an entity's Connect America Fund Phase II or Rural Digital Opportunity Fund support, cost study areas to be transferred, and whether any entities currently participating in Lifeline, the emergency broadband benefit program, or affordable connectivity program would continue to do so.