The Oklahoma Corporation Commission seeks more state USF comments by Nov. 15 in docket 201800066-PUD, the agency said Monday. Verizon resisted using Oklahoma USF money for broadband, in comments earlier this month (see 1910110059).
USTelecom sought clarification from the FCC and Universal Service Administrative Co. about how USF compliance might be called into question if participants in the high cost universal broadband portal edit their broadband mapping data as geocoding technologies improve. USTelecom said "a change to the fourth digit of a geocoded decimal (representing a change in accuracy of about 10 meters) would be a workable demarcation point for determining a change that required a deletion." Deleting and resubmitting a location would erase the year a broadband location was originally deployed, it said. "If a carrier 'deleted' a number of locations for a certain year and then those same locations were re-uploaded in the HUBB with a different deployment year, it could retroactively call into question the carrier's compliance." USTelecom with members AT&T, CenturyLink, Consolidated, Frontier and Windstream met with USAC and the FCC Wireline Bureau staff Wednesday, and the association said, posted Monday in docket 10-90, it "understood that if the carrier had previously met a deployment year's milestone, and then, by virtue of 'deleting' and resubmitting locations with better geocodes, fell under the milestone for a particular year," there would be no penalty "as long as the cumulative number of locations submitted to date for the life of the program remained above the current threshold."
FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr wants more healthcare providers to contribute to a docket on a proposed Connected Care pilot program before it moves from NPRM to order. Carr touted the pilot Thursday at a Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition conference.
USF stakeholders should make more improvements to broadband mapping, especially before the FCC begins awarding some $20 billion over about 10 years in the next version of its USF high-cost fund. That's the consensus in Q&A with us at a Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition panel (see 9:45 a.m.) Thursday and from audience members. Stakeholders targeted telcos, which some said don't always know down to a small-geographic level what areas they serve with internet service, and the FCC. The commission has been improving its mapping, working with others in the federal government including the Rural Utilities Service, said RUS Assistant Administrator-Telecom Programs Chad Parker.
Public interest and labor advocacy groups including Public Knowledge and Communications Workers of America oppose an FCC proposal to place an overall budget cap on its USF programs (see 1906030059), "Abandon this proceeding and focus its attention on strengthening the USF, rather than exhausting time and resources on a proposal that runs counter to the USF's mission and Congress' intent," they asked, posted Tuesday in docket 06-122.
State Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service members asked the FCC to expand the contribution base for federal USF programs to include a fee on broadband internet access service, filing in docket 96-45 Tuesday. Commissioners Chris Nelson of South Dakota, Sally Talberg of Michigan and Stephen Bloom of Oregon recommend "a connections-based assessment on residential services and an expanded revenues-based assessment on business services." Having different contribution methodologies for residential and business services is "equitable and nondiscriminatory," they said. Under a new contribution mechanism, the FCC would assess fees on businesses that use virtual private network services, video conferencing, web conferencing, unified communications and business wireless broadband access services. For residential customers, a separate fee should be assessed for voice and broadband connections, they proposed. "A connections-based mechanism will provide stability for the Commission, administrative efficiency for carriers, and transparency for customers." About 50 percent of USF support would come from residential connections, and an initial surcharge for wireline, wireless and broadband would be 55 to 60 cents per connection, they suggested. The state commissioners recommend the FCC establish a firm budget for each of the four USF programs "with those budgets not growing any more than the Consumer Price Index for any given year." They want the FCC to "take specific steps to assure the continued viability of state universal service mechanisms promoted by Congress." It's "up to the FCC to determine what to do with the State Members’ recommendation," emailed South Dakota's Nelson (R), the joint board's state chair. "It became clear to the State Members that it was not going to be possible to get a recommendation from the full joint board, so we moved forward with this release of our work product." The other state Joint Board members didn't comment right away. The contribution factor for this quarter is a record 25 percent (see 1909130003). Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel this summer asked the states to raise their concerns about needed action on revisions to the USF contribution mechanism and not wait for an FCC rulemaking (see 1907110020). Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who chairs the Joint Board, opposes a fee on broadband access or use (see 1906250011). His office didn't comment now. "The filing is very interesting, and we are looking at it closely," said Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition Executive Director John Windhausen.
Just banning Huawei and other Chinese equipment makers will have limited effect in making 5G networks more secure, said former FCC Public Safety Bureau Chief David Simpson at the Hudson Institute. “China has engaged in some if its most significant and successful attacks not through Chinese infrastructure.” Others warned Tuesday 5G means additional risks.
Verizon resisted allowing the use of Oklahoma USF money for broadband, in comments posted Thursday at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission in docket 201800066-PUD. “Using the OUSF to support broadband would raise potential legal concerns over assessing intrastate services to fund interstate information services over which the Commission has no regulatory authority,” the carrier said. “And before the Legislature even considers expanding the OUSF to fund broadband, it should wait until the FCC fully implements its [Connect America Fund] and revised Lifeline programs, as well as the new Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, all of which are intended to support broadband deployment and adoption in states including Oklahoma.” A better idea would be to use appropriated state general funds for broadband, like New York and Massachusetts did, Verizon said. Increasing state Lifeline contributions from 2 cents per month per subscriber to $10 per month in areas that don’t qualify for federal enhanced support, and $1 per month per subscriber in tribal areas that do qualify, could “substantially increase the size of OUSF,” so the Oklahoma agency should first study the possible fiscal impact, Verizon said.
The FCC authorized more than $61.8 million in USF support for its sixth round Connect America Fund auctions. Providers in California, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington and Wyoming will begin receiving funds later this month to help expand broadband access to nearly 22,000 unserved homes and businesses, said Thursday's public notice on docket 10-90.
A USTelecom executive and a former FCC adviser debated net neutrality and a recent decision from the U.S Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Court on The Communicators scheduled to be televised this weekend on C-SPAN and available online Friday. Patrick Halley, USTelecom senior vice president-advocacy and regulatory, and Gigi Sohn, a former aide to then-Chairman Tom Wheeler, discussed Chevron, Brand X, state vs. federal jurisdiction over broadband, and other details. Halley noted that the court ruled the FCC was within its discretion to regulate broadband as an information service, and while the court said the FCC can't expressly pre-empt state laws on the matter, "it would be an over-reach to say states can write their own laws," especially as much of internet use is interstate, not intrastate. Sohn suggested the FCC has abdicated its authority to regulate the broadband market: "The court was really clear: If an agency lacks authority, it can't then tell a state it can't regulate." Sohn was not suggesting states would have an easy time, but nor will industry, in determining when states can regulate over issues of net neutrality: "It will be case by case. It won't be a slam dunk." With the recent court decision, states will test the boundaries, she said, "and to me that argues for a federal law." Halley "completely" agreed with the need for a federal law, and said the sides likely agree on the concept of net neutrality as well. "The best answer for all of this is a federal, modern national framework that provides the net neutrality protection" that most consumers and businesses want. When it comes to one of the issues that the court remanded to the FCC, on how it will regulate broadband in the USF Lifeline program, the court said only that the agency did not sufficiently address the matter in its arguments, Halley said, not that it lacks such authority. Last week, the court upheld most of a 2017 FCC net neutrality repeal but remanded several matters to the FCC for clarification (see 1910010018).