Utah USF rule changes took effect Saturday, said a Public Service Commission notice Wednesday on docket 21-R008-04. The Utah Rural Telecom Association supported changes earlier this month and nobody filed opposition (see 2112160058). The changes included establishing an $18 per line monthly broadband subsidy for low-income customers and setting a standard $25 per line monthly rate to be imputed to rate-of-return regulated providers for wholesale consumer broadband-only loops, up from the current weighted $8.97 average.
Reject USF's Q1 contribution factor and set it at zero, said Consumers' Research, Cause Based Commerce and others in comments posted Wednesday in FCC docket 96-45 (see 2112130050). It's "an unconstitutional tax raised and spent by an unaccountable federal agency," the groups said, asking the agency to "do the same for all future proposed Universal Service contribution factors due to the illegality of this entire scheme and process." Consumers' Research challenged the Q4 contribution factor in October (see 2110050056).
Legislation was proposed to require the FCC to launch a rulemaking to expand USF's contribution base. Reps. Joe Neguse, D-Colo.; Kat Cammack, R-Fla.; Lizzie Fletcher, D-Texas; Jack Bergman, R-Mich.; Diana DeGette, D-Colo.; and Angie Craig, D-Minn., introduced a House version of the Reforming Broadband Connectivity Act (S-3236) that was introduced in November. HR-6314 would require the FCC to do a study assessing USF's contribution base and open a proceeding to revise the contribution system. NTCA endorsed it. "There isn't anyone who doesn't think" the contribution system is "antiquated," said WTA Senior Vice President-Government/Industry Affairs Derrick Owens.
Industry and advocacy groups are preparing comments by the Jan. 18 deadline for an FCC notice of inquiry on its report to Congress on the future of USF (see 2112160074). The document is due by August on the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s impact on existing programs and what they should look like moving forward.
CTIA asked a 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel to reconsider a Kentucky 911 case. Earlier this month, the 6th Circuit said the U.S. District Court of Eastern Kentucky erred in concluding that a Kentucky 911 law conflicts with and is preempted by the 2018 federal Wireless Telecom Tax and Fee Collection Fairness Act (see 2112030060). The wireless association asked the original 6th Circuit panel Friday to rehear or, “at minimum,” vacate the district court opinion, “decline to definitively address these questions of law, and permit the district court on remand to address these issues in the first instance.” The appeals judges “took too narrow a view of the federal interests that would be obstructed should Kentucky be permitted to impose these special burdens on Lifeline participation,” CTIA wrote. “The panel left unaddressed a few key arguments CTIA made that illuminate the ‘full purposes’ of Congress under the Communications Act” and the wireless tax fairness law “to safeguard federal universal service funds,” it said.
Disagreement continued between inmate calling service providers and advocates on the ICS rate-making process, in replies posted Monday in docket 12-375 (see 2109290074). Permanent caps “should be substantially lower than the current interim caps,” said the Prison Policy Initiative, asking the FCC to “prioritize the issue of USF relief for ICS customers.” PPI finds “that facility size does not correlate to costs and should be considered by the FCC as a rebuttal to the ICS providers’ argument that size impacts costs,” said 33 organizations led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Make a list of ancillary fees that can and can’t be charged to ICS users, said NCIC. The fee caps the FCC previously adopted “have been subverted by certain ICS providers,” it said. All security and surveillance costs “are not inextricably intertwined with telecom costs,” said Worth Rises. Global Tel*Link said they’re “an integral part of ICS.” Consider a "brief pause" on additional reform to "allow for the collection of accurate and reliable data," said Pay Tel. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates backed comments opposing security and surveillance costs being included in the rate-setting process. Require providers refund account holders after inactivity or an incarcerated person’s release, said the Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, United Church of Christ and Public Knowledge. The record “unanimously confirms the commission’s legal authority under Section 225 of the [Communications] Act extends to incarcerated people with disabilities,” said deaf and hard of hearing advocates led by Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. ICS providers and facilities “can readily provide modern forms of TRS, including VRS,” the groups said. ZP Better Together recommended a registration system for VRS providers to create an account to provide services to a correctional facility.
The Utah Rural Telecom Association supported state USF changes in comments Thursday at the Public Service Commission. Draft rules may take effect Jan. 1 (see 2111150065). One proposed change to establish an $18 per line monthly broadband subsidy for low-income customers “will have a significant positive impact on the affordability of broadband in rural Utah,” the association said in docket 21-R008-04. Setting a standard $25 per line monthly rate to be imputed to rate-of-return regulated providers for wholesale consumer broadband-only loops, up from the current weighted average rate of $8.97, will ensure consistency among rate-of-return carriers and help preserve Utah USF, it said.
The FCC wants comments by Jan. 18, replies by Jan. 31, in docket 21-476 on its report to Congress on the future of the USF, said a notice of inquiry listed in Thursday's Daily Digest. The report was mandated by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The NOI seeks comment on how the law's new broadband funding impacts existing USF programs and on "improving its effectiveness in achieving the universal service goals for broadband." It also seeks comment on USF's contribution factor and any recommendations the commission should make to Congress for legislative action. Commissioner Brendan Carr was the only commissioner to release a statement, saying USF is "stuck in a death spiral." Carr again said Big Tech should pay into USF (see 2106010041).
California Public Utilities Commissioners voted 5-0 to deny LTD Broadband the application approval it needed to get about $187.5 million in Rural Digital Opportunities Fund (RDOF) support over 10 years. At a virtual meeting Thursday, commissioners also by unanimous consent cleared multiple California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) grants that LTD and others said partially overlapped areas where they won RDOF support (see 2112140019, 2112090011 and 2112080046). The CPUC got more comments Wednesday on a plan to shift to connections-based state USF contributions.
Judges grilled a Public Utility Commission attorney on why the PUC thought it could stop fully funding Texas USF (TUSF). At a livestreamed hearing Wednesday, the 3rd Texas District Court of Appeals in Austin heard an appeal by the Texas Telephone Association (TTA), Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (TSTCI), Lumen and Windstream (case 03-21-00294-CV). The rural telcos are challenging the Travis County District Court in Austin dismissing their lawsuit against the PUC for not raising the TUSF surcharge on consumer bills to fully fund USF (see 2107130041). Gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke (D) supported the lawsuit Tuesday.