NAB and tech industry groups still don’t agree on proposals to expand the base of regulatory fee payors, according to reply comments filed in 21-190 by Monday’s deadline. “It is inconceivable that Congress would prefer to see small broadcasters struggle to provide service to their local communities so they can subsidize massive technology companies,” said NAB. The FCC doesn’t have the authority to charge fees to companies it doesn’t regulate, said TechFreedom: “Especially after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in West Virginia v. EPA, an administrative agency can’t undertake new regulations just because it’s a good idea -- they must be grounded in clear statutory authority.” In the short term, the FCC should exempt broadcasters from paying for the costs of the USF and for Media Bureau full-time equivalents connected with broadband policy, and cap the fee increases for broadcasters in the current draft order at 5%, said NAB. A group of 53 broadcasters said the agency should credit application fees against regulatory fees. “Cherry-picking one type of regulatee to exclude from contributing their share of the Commission’s indirect costs would threaten the administrability of the regulatory fee program as a whole,” said CTIA. The FCC “lacks legal authority to add a new regulatory fee category for broadband internet service providers,” said the Wireless ISP Association. The agency should develop a reduced fee category for small satellites and charge an interim fee in the meantime, said Spaceflight and Turion Space. “It is essential to the development" of the on-orbit services industry, "and not premature, that the Commission act now so that regulatory fees developed for traditional" non-geostationary satellite orbit "are not imposed on OOS missions,” said Spaceflight. The Satellite Industry Association disagreed: “The record supports the Commission’s conclusion that OOS services are still too immature for their own regulatory fee category at this time,” said SIA. “An interim regulatory fee schedule as suggested by Spaceflight is unnecessary.”
Industry disagreed whether the FCC should consider an Alternative Connect America Cost Model (ACAM) Broadband Coalition proposal to extend the program through increased deployment obligations in exchange for additional funding (see 2205190023). Some sought to expand eligibility to carriers receiving other high-cost USF support, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 10-90. Others said the FCC should defer new high-cost support until programs funded through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act are completed.
The Texas Public Utilities Commission “will comply” with the Austin state Court of Appeals’ June 30 order to “fully fund” the state’s USF, a spokesperson for Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) emailed us. TPUC approved an increase Thursday in the USF surcharge to 24% from the previous 3.3%, effective Aug. 1 (see 2207140060). The hike was a response to the Court of Appeals’ ruling on a lawsuit by rural LEC associations Texas Telephone Association and Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative. The court agreed with TTA and TSTC that a 2020 TPUC increase in the USF surcharge to 6.4% violated the state’s constitution and utility and administrative procedure laws (see 2207010045). Abbott vetoed a bill last year to revamp TUSF by adding VoIP providers to the contribution base (see 2106210048). The legislature meets every two years and will return in January.
The Texas Public Utility Commission quietly approved a whopping increase to the Texas USF surcharge Thursday. Texas will raise the TUSF revenue-based surcharge to 24% from 3.3% on Aug. 1, commissioners decided on unanimous consent, without discussion, at a livestreamed meeting. Legislators could provide relief soon, said state Sen. Drew Springer (R) in an interview. Industry and a consumer advocate supported broad TUSF contribution changes.
Texas commissioners will weigh increasing the state USF surcharge to 24% from 3.3% at Thursday's meeting, the Texas Public Utility Commission said Wednesday. The Texas USF (TUSF) revenue-based surcharge would increase effective Aug. 1, said a memo in docket 50796-58. The PUC attributed the increase to reduction of intrastate voice revenue. “Currently, the fund is losing $10 to $11 million per month and the fund currently is in arrears $192 million,” it said. “Additionally, this fiscal year the commission is completing rate of return adjustments for some small and rural ILECs to increase their support payments, which could add an additional $18 million in expenditures per year.” A state court said last month the Texas PUC violated the state’s constitution and utility and administrative procedure laws when in June 2020 it chose not to increase the surcharge to fully fund TUSF (see 2207120028).
Making one monthly Texas USF payment to AMA TechTel Communications doesn’t satisfy a court order to pay full amounts owed from Dec. 1, 2021, the CLEC said Monday at the 3rd District Texas Court of Appeals in Austin. Texas disagreed last week it must pay retroactively to make up the difference of reduced payments (see 2207080032). Texas tries to “preempt an inquiry into what this Court’s order commands,” responded AMA in case 03-21-00597-CV. “They have failed on the facts and the law.” The Texas Public Utility Commission paid $1.34 million, but the full amount owed, dating back to December, is about $8.59 million, said AMA. The PUC is scheduled to consider a TUSF assessment item at its Thursday meeting.
Texas doesn’t have to retroactively pay Texas USF (TUSF) support it kept from AMA TechTel Communications due to insufficient available funding, Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) said Thursday. The 3rd District Texas Court of Appeals in Austin ordered the PUC June 30 to pay full amounts owed (see 2206300045). Paxton told the appeals court AMA on July 5 received a full monthly payment for June of about $1.34 million but now is asking a lower court to order the PUC to pay all support owed since Dec. 1. The court didn’t “unlawfully require retroactive payments,” the AG said. It could take until at least mid-September before the PUC can make full payments to all TUSF recipients, Paxton said. “The TUSF presently lacks sufficient money to pay all amounts owed from the fund,” so the PUC would first have to raise the assessment rate and wait until enough revenue accrued before it could pay, said Paxton. He noted the PUC has an item on TUSF assessment on this Thursday’s meeting agenda. AMA didn’t comment Friday. In a separate, similar case, the appeals court ruled June 30 that the PUC violated the state’s constitution and utility and administrative procedure laws when it chose not to fully fund TUSF (see 2207010045).
NARUC should press states and the federal government to lower barriers, including through increased funding and awareness campaigns, to enrollment in the affordable connectivity program, Telecom Committee member Crystal Rhoades said in an interview Thursday. The Nebraska Public Service Commission’s lone Democrat said she doesn’t expect controversy over her proposed resolution, which is up for vote at NARUC’s July 17-20 policy summit in San Diego (see 2207060037). However, Next Century Cities Senior Policy Counsel Ryan Johnston raised concerns that the draft omits local governments’ key role in raising awareness.
T-Mobile asked the FCC to pause new high-cost USF programs until programs funded through the American Rescue Plan Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act have been implemented, in a meeting with Wireline Bureau and Office of Economics and Analytics staff (see 2203180062). The carrier also met with an aide to Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, said an ex parte filing posted Wednesday in docket 21-476. The new funding "largely overlaps" with the goals of the high-cost programs and is "equivalent to more than two decades' worth of support, T-Mobile said. There's also "no need for immediate contributions reform" if new support is paused, T-Mobile said, noting "recurring appropriations" for programs like the affordable connectivity program would "more efficiently distribute the burdens of the USF to different stakeholders and appropriately account for the shared benefits to society of expanded connectivity." Absent direct appropriations, the carrier said it backed assessing "network capacity usage" or "revenues generated over USF-funded networks."
The biggest apparent policy cut in the FCC’s wireless resiliency rules released Wednesday (see 2207060070) overrules objections by the Competitive Carriers Association and NTCA that the rules shouldn’t apply to small providers. The order creates the mandatory disaster response initiative (MDRI), replacing the industry’s wireless voluntary network resiliency cooperative framework.