Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Federal-State Joint Board on
Universal Service
Hopi Telecommunications, Inc.
Petition for Designation as an 
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier for the
Hopi Reservation in Arizona
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CC Docket No. 96-45
ORDER
Adopted:  January 31, 2007 Released:  January 31, 2007
By the Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau:  
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Order, we grant Hopi Telecommunications, Inc.s (Hopi) request to be designated as 
an eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) on the Hopi Reservation and on a small portion of the Navajo 
Reservation in Arizona1 pursuant to section 214(e)(6) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the 
Act).2  Hopi, a tribally-owned wireline carrier, seeks ETC designation in the study area where it purchased
three local exchanges of CenturyTel of the Southwest (CenturyTel), a rural incumbent local exchange, to 
provide telecommunications services to areas, including underserved and unserved areas, on tribal lands.  
Applying the Commissions two-step analysis for ETC designations for tribal lands, we first conclude that 
the Commission has jurisdiction to determine whether Hopi should be designated an eligible 
telecommunications carrier. We also conclude that Hopi has satisfied the statutory eligibility requirements 
of section 214(e)(1) to be designated an ETC on the Reservation in Arizona.3
 
  
1 We refer to the Hopi and Navajo reservations collectively as the Reservation throughout this Order.
2 Hopi Telecommunications, Inc. Petition for Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier, CC Docket 
No. 96-45 (filed Feb. 21, 2006) (Hopi Petition or Petition).  On February 22, 2006, Hopi filed Appendices B (signed 
Verification) and C (Anti-Drug Abuse Certification) to the Petition.  Letter from David Cosson, Counsel for Hopi
Telecommunications, Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, CC Docket No. 
96-45, filed Feb. 22, 2006 (Appendix B and Appendix C, respectively).  On February 23, 2006, Hopi filed a Section 
254(e) Certification, attesting that all universal service support funds will be used for the purpose for which they are 
intended.  Letter from Brent Kennedy, General Manager, Hopi Telecommunications, Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, 
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, CC Docket No. 96-45, filed Feb. 23, 2006 (Section 254(e) 
Certification).
3 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(1).
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
2
II. BACKGROUND
A. Jurisdiction to Designate ETCs on Tribal Lands 
2. Section 254(e) of the Act provides that only an eligible telecommunications carrier 
designated under section 214(e) shall be eligible to receive specific Federal universal service support.4  
Pursuant to section 214(e)(1), a common carrier designated as an ETC must offer and advertise the
services supported by the federal universal service mechanisms throughout the designated service area.5  
Section 214(e)(2) of the Act gives state commissions the primary responsibility for performing ETC 
designations.6 Section 214(e)(6) directs the Commission, upon request, to designate as an ETC a 
common carrier providing telephone exchange service and exchange access that is not subject to the 
jurisdiction of a State commission.7 Under section 214(e)(6), the Commission may, with respect to an 
area served by a rural telephone company, and shall, in all other cases, designate more than one common 
carrier as an ETC for a designated service area, consistent with the public interest, convenience, and 
necessity, so long as the requesting carrier meets the requirements of section 214(e)(1).8 Before 
designating an additional ETC for an area served by a rural telephone company, the Commission must 
determine that the designation is in the public interest.9 The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) has 
delegated authority to perform ETC designations.10
3. The Act is silent, however, on how to determine whether a state commission lacks 
jurisdiction, who makes the jurisdictional determination, and what to do if two entities  for example, a 
state and a tribe  both assert jurisdiction over the same telecommunications carrier.  Therefore, in the 
Twelfth Report and Order, the Commission established that carriers serving tribal lands may first petition 
the Commission for a determination on whether the state has jurisdiction over the carrier.11 Under this 
framework, we undertake a two-step analysis.  First, we determine whether a carrier providing service on 
  
4 47 U.S.C.  254(e).
5 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(1).
6 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(2); see Promoting Deployment and Subscribership in Unserved Areas, Including Tribal and 
Insular Areas, CC Docket No. 96-45, Twelfth Report and Order, Memorandum Opinion and Order, and Further 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 12208, 12255, para. 93 (2000) (Twelfth Report and Order).
7 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(6).  See, e.g., Virginia Cellular, LLC Petition for Designation as an Eligible 
Telecommunications Carrier for the Commonwealth of Virginia, CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 19 FCC Rcd 1563 (2004) (Virginia Cellular Order); Highland Cellular, Inc. Petition for Designation as an 
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier for the Commonwealth of Virginia, CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum 
Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 6422 (2004) (Highland Cellular Order).
8 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(6).
9 Id.
10 See Procedures for FCC Designation of Eligible Telecommunications Carriers Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of 
the Communications Act, CC docket No. 96-45, Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd 22947, 22948 (1997) (Section 214(e)(6) 
Public Notice).  The Wireline Competition Bureau was previously named the Common Carrier Bureau.
11 Promoting Deployment and Subscribership in Unserved and Underserved Areas, Including Tribal and Insular 
Areas, Smith Bagley, Inc., Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Telephone Authority, Western Wireless Corporation, 
Wyoming, Cellco Partnership d/b/a/ Bell Atlantic Mobile, Inc., Petitions for Designation as an Eligible 
Telecommunications Carrier and for Related Waivers to Provide Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Twelfth 
Report and Order, Memorandum Opinion and Order, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd 
12208, 12265, paras. 115-27 (2000) (Twelfth Report and Order), affd Promoting Deployment and Subscribership in 
Unserved and Underserved Areas, Including Tribal and Insular Areas, CC Docket No. 96-45, Twenty-Fifth Order 
on Reconsideration, Report and Order, Order, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 18 FCC Rcd 10958, 
10964,  n.28 (2003) (Tribal Recon. Order).  
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
3
tribal lands is subject to the jurisdiction of a state commission or whether it is subject to a tribal authority 
given the tribal interests involved.  Second, if the carrier is not subject to the jurisdiction of a state 
commission, we consider the merits of the carriers request to be designated as an ETC.  
B. Commission Requirements for ETC Designation
4. An ETC petition must contain the following:  (1) a certification and brief statement of 
supporting facts demonstrating that the petitioner is not subject to the jurisdiction of a state commission; 
(2) a certification that the petitioner offers or intends to offer all services designated for support by the 
Commission pursuant to section 254(c) of the Act; (3) a certification that the petitioner offers or intends 
to offer the supported services either using its own facilities or a combination of its own facilities and 
resale of another carriers services; (4) a description of how the petitioner advertise[s] the availability of 
[supported] services and the charges therefore using media of general distribution; and (5) if the 
petitioner meets the definition of a rural telephone company pursuant to section 3(37) of the Act, an 
identification of the petitioners study area, or, if the petitioner is not a rural telephone company, a 
detailed description of the geographic service area for which it requests an ETC designation from the 
Commission.12
5. In the ETC Designation Order, released March 17, 2005, the Commission generally 
affirmed its earlier holdings and adopted additional requirements for ETC designation proceedings in 
which the Commission acts pursuant to section 214(e)(6) of the Act.13 Specifically, consistent with the 
recommendation of the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, the Commission found that an 
ETC applicant must demonstrate:  (1) a commitment and ability to provide services, including providing 
service to all customers within its proposed service area; (2) how it will remain functional in emergency 
situations; (3) that it will satisfy consumer protection and service quality standards; (4) that it offers local 
usage comparable to that offered by the incumbent LEC; and (5) an understanding that it may be required 
to provide equal access if all other ETCs in the designated service area relinquish their designations 
pursuant to section 214(e)(4) of the Act.14 These additional requirements are mandatory for all ETCs 
designated by the Commission.15 ETCs already designated by the Commission or ETC applicants that 
submitted applications prior to the effective date of the ETC Designation Order are required to make such 
showings in their annual certification filings.16
  
12 See Procedures for FCC Designation of Eligible Telecommunications Carriers Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of 
the Communications Act, CC Docket No. 96-45, Public Notice, 12 FCC Rcd 22947, 22948-49 (1997) (Section 
214(e)(6) Public Notice); 47 U.S.C.  3(37).  
13 See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Report and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 6371 
(2005) (ETC Designation Order); see also Virginia Cellular, LLC Petition for Designation as an Eligible 
Telecommunications Carrier for the Commonwealth of Virginia, CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 19 FCC Rcd 1563, 1564, 1565, 1575-76, 1584-85, paras. 1, 4, 27, 28, 46 (2004) (Virginia Cellular); 
Highland Cellular, Inc. Petition for Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier for the Commonwealth 
of Virginia, CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 6422, 6438, paras. 1, 33 (2004) 
(Highland Cellular).
14 See ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6380, para. 20, citing Federal-State Joint Board on Universal 
Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Recommended Decision, 19 FCC Rcd 4259, para. 5 (2004) (Recommended 
Decision).  
15 47 C.F.R.  54.202(a).
16 See id; 47 C.F.R.  54.202(c).
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
4
C. The Hopi Petition for ETC Designation on the Hopi and Navajo Reservations in 
Arizona
6. Hopi acquired the study area consisting of the three local exchanges of CenturyTel, a 
rural incumbent local exchange company.17 The study area covers the Hopi Reservation and a small 
portion of the Navajo Reservation in Arizona.18 Hopi filed a petition requesting that the Commission 
grant it ETC designation concurrent with the closure of its Asset Purchase Agreement with CenturyTel.19  
With the closure of the Asset Purchase Agreement on June 1, 2006, Hopi states that it is the incumbent 
LEC and a rural telephone company as defined by the Act.20  Hopi must be designated an ETC in order 
to be eligible to receive universal service support, including high cost support that CenturyTel was 
previously receiving.
7. Hopi contends that it is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Arizona Corporation 
Commission (Arizona Commission).21  Hopi states that it is a tribal corporation wholly owned by and 
subject to the jurisdiction of the Hopi Tribe, a federally-recognized Indian Tribe.22  Hopi also states that it 
will only provide service on the tribal lands and points out that the Commission has exercised jurisdiction 
over other tribally-owned carriers operating on tribal lands in Arizona.23
8. The Commission sought comment on the Hopi Petition.24 The National Tribal 
Telecommunications Association (NTTA) and the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of 
Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO) filed comments in support of the Petition.25  
Significantly, the Arizona Commission did not comment.
III. DISCUSSION
9. As discussed in detail below, we conclude that it is appropriate for the Commission to 
exercise jurisdiction over the Hopi Petition for ETC designation. We also find that Hopi has satisfied the 
  
17 Letter from David Cosson, Counsel for Hopi Telecommunications, Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission, CC Docket No. 96-45, filed Sept. 29, 2006 (Purchase Closure Ex Parte Letter).  
Hopi closed the purchase of the assets and subscriber base of CenturyTel of the Southwest on June 1, 2006.  Id. 
18 Hopi Petition at 2.  The three exchanges are Keams Canyon, Kykotsmovi, and Polacca.  Id.; see Purchase Closure 
Ex Parte Letter.
19 Hopi Petition at 2; see Purchase Closure Ex Parte Letter.    
20 See Hopi Petition at 2.  
21 Id. 
22 Id.
23 See id. at 3 and n.6 (citing Designation of Fort Mohave Telecommunications, Inc., Gila River 
Telecommunications, Inc., San Carlos Telecommunications, Inc., and Tohono OOdham Utility Authority as Eligible 
Telecommunications Carriers Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of the Communications Act, AAD/USB File No. 98-28, 
Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 4547 (Wireline Comp. Bur. 1998)); see also Petition of Saddleback 
Communications for Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of the 
Communications Act, CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 22433 (Wireline 
Comp. Bur. 1998).
24 See Parties are Invited to Comment on the Petition of Hopi Telecommunications, Inc. for Designation as an 
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier in the Hopi and Navajo Reservations in the State of Arizona, CC Docket No. 
96-45, Public Notice, DA 06-615 (rel. March 17, 2006).
25 See generally NTAA Comments, CC Docket No. 96-45, filed April 6, 2006; OPASTCO Comments, CC Docket 
No. 96-45, filed April 6, 2006.
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
5
statutory requirements for ETC eligibility under section 214(e)(1) of the Act.  The service area for Hopis 
ETC designation is defined as the study area of the rural incumbent LEC CenturyTel on the Hopi and 
Navajo Reservations, consisting of the Keams Canyon, Kykotsmovi, and Polacca local exchanges.
A. Jurisdiction
10. In the Twelfth Report and Order, the Commission established the framework for the ETC 
designation process under section 214(e)(6) of the Act for carriers serving tribal lands.26 The 
Commission concluded that a carrier seeking ETC designation on tribal lands may petition the 
Commission without first seeking designation from the state commission.27 The carrier must notify the 
state commission by providing copies of its petition to the state commission.28 The Commission places
the petition on public notice, establishing a comment and reply period, and sends the public notice to the 
state commission to ensure that the state commission is properly noticed.29 Under this framework, the 
carrier has the burden to prove that it is not subject to the jurisdiction of the state commission.30  
11. The determination of whether the Commission has jurisdiction to consider an ETC 
petition for service on tribal lands is greatly informed by the participation of the tribe and the state 
commission or other state authorities.31 We are mindful that some state commissions will not object to 
the Commissions jurisdiction over designation of carriers serving tribal lands.32 Significantly, Hopi is a 
tribally-owned carrier operating only on tribal lands.33  
12. We find that Hopi has made a prima facie showing that the Commission has jurisdiction 
for designation of Hopi as an ETC on the Hopi Reservation and a small portion of the Navajo Nation
Reservation.  Under the framework established in the Twelfth Report and Order, Hopi filed its petition 
with the Commission and simultaneously served a copy on the Arizona Commission.34 In its Petition, 
Hopi asserts that the Commission has jurisdiction to consider the ETC designation petition because Hopi 
is a tribally-owned wireline carrier operating on tribal lands.35 Further, the Arizona Commission has not 
asserted jurisdiction in this matter.  Finally, we have previously found that the Commission has 
  
26 Twelfth Report and Order, 15 FCC Rcd at 12265-12269, paras. 115-127. In the Twelfth Report and Order, the 
Commission noted that the legislative history of section 214(e)(6) made clear that the class of carriers covered by 
this provision was dominated by tribally-owned carriers, although certainly not limited to these.  Id. at 12261, 
para. 106.
27 Id. at 12266, para. 120.
28 Id.   
29 Id.
30 Id.
31 Id. at 12268, para. 124.
32 Id.
33 Hopi Petition at 2.
34 Letter from David Cosson, Counsel for Hopi Telecommunications, Inc., to Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary, Federal 
Communications Commission, CC Docket No. 96-45, filed Oct. 3, 2006 (attaching signed Certificate of Service 
certifying service of the Petition on Feb. 21, 2006 via U.S. Mail, first-class postage pre-paid, to Arizona Corporation 
Commission, Utilities Division ).
35 See Hopi Petition at 2.
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
6
jurisdiction to designate tribally-owned carriers operating on tribal lands in Arizona.36  We, therefore, find 
that the Commission has jurisdiction to consider Hopis request for ETC designation.
B. Analysis of Hopis Petition for Designation as an ETC
13. Having determined that we have jurisdiction over the Hopi Petition, we now examine 
whether Hopi satisfies the requirements of section 214 of the Act for the requested service area on the 
Hopi and Navajo Reservations.  As explained below, we find that Hopi, a tribally-owned wireline carrier,
meets the requirements of sections 214(e)(1) and (e)(6) of the Act.  We therefore designate Hopi as an 
ETC for the requested service area.  
1. Offering and Advertising the Supported Services
14. Offering the Services Designated for Support.  Hopi has demonstrated through the 
required certifications and related filings that it now offers, or will offer upon obtaining designation as an 
ETC, the services supported by the federal universal mechanisms.  With the June 1, 2006 closure of the 
Asset Purchase Agreement, Hopi is authorized to provide wireline service in the requested service area.37
Hopi certifies that it now provides or will provide throughout its designated service area the services and 
functionalities enumerated in section 54.101(a) of the Commissions rules.38 Hopi also certifies that, in 
compliance with the Commissions Lifeline rules, it will make available and advertise enhanced Lifeline 
and Link-up services to qualifying low-income consumers.39 Hopi has also committed to serve unserved 
or underserved areas.40
15. Hopi has committed to meet consumer protection and service quality standards as 
required by the ETC Designation Order.  Although not subject to the jurisdiction of the Arizona 
Commission, Hopi has adopted consumer protection standards in its local exchange tariff that satisfy 
current Arizona Commission rules.41 Hopi also commits to provide:  (1) annual reporting of unfulfilled 
service requests and of consumer complaints per 1,000 lines; (2) specific commitments to provide service 
  
36 See Designation of Fort Mohave Telecommunications, Inc., Gila River Telecommunications, Inc., San Carlos 
Telecommunications, Inc., and Tohono OOdham Utility Authority as Eligible Telecommunications Carriers 
Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of the Communications Act, AAD/USB File No. 98-28, Memorandum Opinion and 
Order, 13 FCC Rcd 4547 (Com. Carrier  Bur. 1998); see also Petition of Saddleback Communications for 
Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier Pursuant to Section 214(e)(6) of the Communications Act, 
CC Docket No. 96-45, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 22433 (Com. Carrier Bur. 1998).  The 
Arizona Commission recognizes that it has no jurisdiction over utility services provided by Indian tribes on the 
reservation, if the tribe asserts jurisdiction; however, it has found jurisdiction over nontribally-owned carriers 
seeking ETC designation on tribal lands.  Compare Petition of Saddleback Communications for Designation as an 
Eligible Telecommunications Carrier, CC Docket No. 96-45, Attach. G, filed June 2, 1998 to Public Notice Smith 
Bagley, Inc. Petitions to Redefine the Service Area of Table Top Telephones Company on Tribal Lands Within the 
State of Arizona, CC Docket No. 96-45, 16 FCC Rcd 7559 (Com. Car. Bur. 2001).
37 See Hopi Petition at 2; Purchase Closure Ex Parte Letter.
38 Id. at 3-4.
39 Id. at 5-10.
40 See id. at 12.
41 Id. at 15.
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
7
to requesting customers in the area for which it is designated; and (3) specific commitments to improve its 
network.42
16. Offering the Supported Services Using a Carriers Own Facilities.  Hopi has 
demonstrated that it satisfies the requirement of section 214(e)(1)(A) of the Act that it will offer the 
supported services using either its own facilities or a combination of its own facilities and resale of 
another carriers services.43  Hopi states that it intends to provide the supported services using the existing 
network infrastructure purchased from CenturyTel.44
17. Advertising Supported Services.  Hopi has demonstrated that it satisfies the requirement 
of section 214(e)(1)(B) of the Act to advertise the availability of the supported services and related 
charges using media of general distribution, including radio, newspaper, and press releases.45  Hopi points 
out that, as a tribally-owned wireline carrier, it will work closely with the agencies of the tribal 
government to inform the public of its service.46  Hopi also has committed to specific methods to 
publicize the availability of Lifeline and Link-up services, such as personal outreach coordinated through 
tribal liaisons, advertising in the offices of social service agencies, and advertising via bill inserts and its 
website to provide information to those people most likely to qualify for Lifeline and Link-Up benefits.47  
Thus, Hopi plans to use advertising to ensure that consumers within its designated service area are fully 
informed of its universal service offering.
2. Public Interest Analysis
18. As explained below, we conclude that it is consistent with the public interest, 
convenience, and necessity to designate Hopi as an ETC for the requested service area that is served by 
the rural incumbent LEC, CenturyTel.  We conclude that Hopi has satisfied its burden of proof in 
establishing that its universal service offering in the service area will provide benefits to rural 
consumers.48  
19. Prior to designating an ETC pursuant to section 214(e)(6) of the Act, the Commission 
determines whether such designation is in the public interest.49 In the ETC Designation Order, the 
Commission adopted one set of criteria for evaluating the public interest for ETC designations for both 
rural and non-rural areas.50  In determining the public interest, the benefits of increased consumer choice 
  
42 See 47 C.F.R.  54.209; Virginia Cellular, 19 FCC Rcd at 1584-85, para. 46; see also Hopi Petition at 11-15.  
Hopi has provided detailed information on how it will use universal service support to expand its service throughout 
the requested service area.  See id. at 11-14.    
43 See Hopi Petition at 11-14.
44 Id.
45 Id. at 6; 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(1)(B).
46 See Hopi Petition at 4.
47 Id. at 5-8.
48 See Virginia Cellular, 19 FCC Rcd at 1574-75, para. 26; Highland Cellular, 19 FCC Rcd at 6431, para. 20.
49 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(6); 47 C.F.R.  54.202(c).  See ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6388-6396, paras. 40-
57; Virginia Cellular Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 1575, para. 27; Highland Cellular Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 6431-32, para. 
21.  In determining whether the public interest is served in an ETC petition, the Commission places the burden on 
the ETC applicant.  ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6390, para. 44.
50 ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6389-90, paras. 42-43.   A carrier creamskims when it serves only the 
least expensive customers, thereby undercutting the incumbent LECs ability to provide service throughout the 
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
8
and the unique advantages and disadvantages of the applicants service offering are considered.51 As the 
Commission noted in the ETC Designation Order, however, the same factors may be analyzed differently 
or may warrant a different outcome depending on the specifics of the proposed service area and whether it 
is rural or non-rural.52  In particular, the creamskimming analysis is limited to designations in rural 
service areas.53 Thus, when an ETC applicant seeks designation below the study area of a rural telephone 
company, a creamskimming analysis is conducted to compare the population density of the wire centers 
in which the ETC applicant seeks designation against that of the wire centers in the study area in which 
the ETC applicant does not seek designation.54
20. We find that Hopis universal service offering will provide a variety of benefits to 
consumers, including providing upgraded capacity and service to unserved areas.  Hopi states that the 
network of CenturyTel is currently at capacity and not available to serve some portions of the service 
area.55 Hopi states that universal service support will enable Hopi to construct facilities that, according to 
Hopi, may not otherwise be built on the Reservation, and thus enable additional services to be available to 
consumers on the Reservation.56
21. In addition, Hopi will also use support to offer a basic universal service package to 
subscribers who are eligible for Lifeline support.57  Hopi has committed to provide service to any 
requesting customers within its designated service area.58  Hopi also will offer a local calling plan that 
includes unlimited local calling among the three exchanges, which is the same as offered by CenturyTel.59  
22. Hopi has also made service quality commitments as required by the ETC Designation 
Order, including compliance with applicable consumer protection and service quality standards.60  
Likewise, Hopi has committed to report annually to the Commission on the number of complaints per 
1,000 lines and how many requests for service from potential customers were unfulfilled.61 In addition, 
Hopis commitments to use a combination of various media channels to advertise its service offerings 
satisfy section 214(e)(1)(B) of the Act.62 As the Commission has stated previously, because an ETC 
receives universal service only to the extent that it serves customers, strong economic incentives exist, in 
      
entire study area.  See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 96-45, 12 
FCC Rcd 8776, 8881-82, para. 189 (1997).
51 47 C.F.R.  54.202(c).  
52 Id. at 6390, para. 43.
53 ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6390, para. 42.
54 Id. at 6392-95, paras. 48-53. 
55 See Hopi Petition at 11.
56 See id. at 13-14.
57 See id. at 5.
58 See id. at 11-13. 
59 Id. at 15.
60 Id. at 15; see ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6384, para. 28.  
61 Hopi Petition at 11-15; see ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6402, para. 69.
62 Hopi Petition at 11.  
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
9
addition to the statutory obligation, for Hopi to advertise its universal service offering in its designated 
area.63
23. Finally, because Hopi has purchased the assets of CenturyTel and is seeking designation 
for CenturyTels entire study area, we are not concerned about creamskimming.  Rural creamskimming 
occurs when competitors seek to serve only the low-cost, high revenue customers in a rural telephone 
companys study area.64  Hopi is not seeking to do this here.  Thus, we find that designation of Hopi, a 
tribally-owned wireline carrier, as an ETC on the Reservation is in the public interest.
3. Designated Service Area
24. Under section 214(e)(1), a carrier designated as an ETC is eligible to receive universal 
service support throughout the service area for which the designation is received.65 We conclude that 
Hopis service area is the study area of the rural incumbent LEC CenturyTel on the Hopi and Navajo 
Reservations, consisting of the Keams Canyon, Kykotsmovi, and Polacca local exchanges.66 We 
therefore designate Hopi as an ETC on the Reservation in the requested area previously served by the 
rural telephone company, CenturyTel of the Southwest.  
4. Regulatory Oversight
25. We note that Hopi is required under section 254(e) of the Act to use high-cost support 
only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services for which the support is 
intended and must, under sections 54.313 and 54.314 of the Commissions rules, certify annually that it 
is in compliance with this requirement.67  In its Petition, Hopi certified to the Commission that, consistent 
with sections 54.313 and 54.314 of the Commissions rules, all federal high-cost support will be used 
only for the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services for which the support is 
intended pursuant to section 254(e) of the Act in the area for which Hopi is designated as an ETC.68  
Furthermore, because Hopi is a tribally-owned wireline rural incumbent LEC, we find good cause exists
to make the ETC designation effective as of the date of closure of the Purchase Asset Agreement.  This is 
necessary to ensure that universal service support payments are not interrupted solely because of the 
acquisition of certain CenturyTel assets by Hopi.  We direct Hopi to make all required filings with the 
Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) under Parts 36, 54, and 69 of the Commissions 
rules so that it may be eligible to receive high-cost support from the date of closure of the Purchase Asset 
Agreement.69 To the extent necessary, we extend the applicable ETC filing deadlines for 60 days from 
the release of the Order so that Hopi may make the necessary filings.70 We also direct USAC to work 
with Hopi as necessary for Hopi to make the required filings with USAC.  
  
63 See Virginia Cellular Order, 19 FCC Rcd at 1574, para. 25.
64 See Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, CC Docket No. 96-45, Recommended Decision, 12 FCC Rcd 
87, 180, para. 172 (1996).  
65 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(1).
66 See Hopi Petition at 3.  Hopi requests that its service area be designated as the geographic area included in 
CenturyTels study area.  Id. at n.3.
67 47 U.S.C.  254(e); 47 C.F.R.  54.313, 54.314.
68 See Hopi Petition at 17; February 23, 2006 Ex Parte, Attach. at 1.
69 See generally 47 C.F.R. Parts 36, 54, and 69.
70 Generally, the Commission may waive its rules for good cause shown.  See 47 C.F.R.  1.3.  The Commission 
may exercise its discretion to waive a rule where the particular facts make strict compliance inconsistent with the 
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
10
26. Hopi has committed to meeting each of the criteria required by the ETC Designation 
Order and will annually submit information detailing how it has satisfied the criteria.71  These records and 
documentation must be filed with the Commission and the Universal Service Administrative Company 
(USAC) on October 1 of each year, beginning October 1, 2007.72  As noted above, Hopi has also 
committed to providing applicable consumer protection and service quality standards.73
27. We find that reliance on Hopis commitments is reasonable and consistent with the public 
interest, the Act, and the Fifth Circuit decision in Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC.74 We 
conclude that fulfillment of these additional reporting requirements will further the Commissions goal of 
ensuring that Hopi satisfies its obligation under section 214(e) of the Act to provide supported services 
throughout its designated service area.75
28. We note that the Commission may institute an inquiry on its own motion to examine any 
ETCs records and documentation to ensure that the high-cost support it receives is being used only for 
the provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and services in the areas where it is designated as 
an ETC.76  Hopi is required to provide such records and documentation to the Commission and USAC 
upon request.  We further emphasize that, if Hopi fails to fulfill the requirements of the Act, the 
Commissions rules, or the terms of this Order after it begins receiving universal service support, the 
Commission may exercise its authority to revoke Hopis ETC designation.77 The Commission also may 
assess forfeitures for violations of Commission rules and orders.78
C. Anti-Drug Abuse Act Certification
29. Pursuant to section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, no applicant is eligible for 
any new, modified, or renewed instrument of authorization from the Commission, including 
authorizations issued pursuant to section 214 of the Act, unless the applicant certifies that neither it, nor 
any party to its application, is subject to a denial of federal benefits, including Commission benefits.79  
      
public interest.  See Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (Northeast 
Cellular). In addition, the Commission may take into account considerations of hardship, equity, or more effective 
implementation of overall policy on an individual basis.  See WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 
1969), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1027 (1972); Northeast Cellular, 897 F.2d at 1166.  Waiver of the Commissions rules 
is therefore appropriate only if special circumstances warrant a deviation from the general rule, and such deviation 
will serve the public interest.  For all of the reasons discussed above, we find good cause to waive the applicable 
ETC filing deadlines, including those that may have expired from June 1, 2006, until the release date of this Order.
71 See Hopi Petition at 11.  
72 See ETC Designation Order, 20 FCC Rcd at 6401-2, paras. 68-69.
73 Hopi Petition at 15; see supra paras. 15 and 21.
74 Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel v. FCC, 183 F.3d 393, 417-18 (5th Cir. 1999).
75 47 U.S.C.  214(e).
76 47 U.S.C.  220, 403; 47 C.F.R.  54.313, 54.314.  
77 See Declaratory Ruling, 15 FCC Rcd at 15174, para. 15.  See also 47 U.S.C.  254(e).
78 See 47 U.S.C.  503(b).
79 21 U.S.C.  862; 47 C.F.R.  1.2002(a).  Section 1.2002(b) provides that a party to the application shall include:  
(1) If the applicant is an individual, that individual; (2) If the applicant is a corporation or unincorporated 
association, all officers, directors, or persons holding 5% or more of the outstanding stock or shares (voting/and or 
non-voting) of the petitioner; and (3) If the applicant is a partnership, all non-limited partners and any limited 
partners holding a 5% or more interest in the partnership.  47 C.F.R.  1.2002(b); see Section 214(e)(6) Public 
Notice, 12 FCC Rcd at 22949. 
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-459
11
Hopi has provided a certification consistent with the requirements of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988.80  
We find that Hopis certification satisfies the requirements of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, as 
codified in sections 1.2001-1.2003 of the Commissions rules.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
30. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority contained in section 
214(e)(6) of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C.  214(e)(6), and pursuant to authority delegated 
in sections 0.91, 0.291, 1.3 and 54.722(a) of the Commissions rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, 1.3, and 
54.722(a), Hopi Telecommunications, Inc. IS DESIGNATED AN ELIGIBLE 
TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER, effective as of June 1, 2006, for portions of its licensed service 
area on the Hopi and Navajo Nation Reservations in Arizona, to the extent described herein. 
31. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 5(c), 201, 202 and 254 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  151, 154(i), 155(c), 201, 202, and 254, and 
sections 0.91, 0.291, and 1.3 of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.91, 0.291, and 1.3, the ETC filing
deadlines required by to Parts 36, 54, and 69 of the Commissions rules, 47 C.F.R. Parts 36, 54, and 69, 
ARE WAIVED, to the extent described herein, for 60 days from the date of this Order so that Hopi 
Telecommunications, Inc. may be eligible to receive high-cost support from June 1, 2006.
32. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Hopi Telecommunications, Inc. SHALL SUBMIT
additional information pursuant to section 54.209 of the Commissions rules, 47 C.F.R.  54.209, no later 
than October 1, 2007, as part of its annual reporting requirements.
33. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order SHALL BE TRANSMITTED by 
the Wireline Competition Bureau to the Arizona Corporation Commission and to the Universal Service 
Administrative Company.
34. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to section 1.103 of the Commissions rules, 
47 C.F. R.  1.103, this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Thomas J. Navin
Chief
Wireline Competition Bureau
  
80 See Hopi Petition at 17, App. C.