12784 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology 

Transfer and Advancement Act 

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal 

agencies to evaluate existing technical 

standards when developing a new 

regulation. To comply with NTTAA, 

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary 

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available 

and applicable when developing 

programs and policies unless doing so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. The EPA 

believes that VCS are inapplicable to 

this action. Today’s action does not 

require the public to perform activities 

conducive to the use of VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994), establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

We have determined that this 

proposed rule, if finalized, will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it proposes to approve Stateadopted emission limits for all affected 

populations without having any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any population, including any 

minority or low-income population. 

This proposed rule does not impose any 

new mandates, because EGUs in 

Nebraska are subject to the requirements 

of the Transport Rule independently of 

this proposed action. See 76 FR 82219, 

for an analysis of the implications of 

Executive Order 12898 in relation to 

EPA’s proposed rule, ‘‘Regional Haze: 

Revisions to Provisions Governing 

Alternatives to Source-Specific Best 

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) 

Determinations, Limited SIP 

Disapprovals, and Federal 

Implementation Plans’’ (December 30, 

2011). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Visibility, Interstate transport of 

pollution, Regional haze, Best available 

control technology. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: February 15, 2012. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

Title 40, chapter I, of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart CC—Nebraska 

2. Sections 52.1430–52.1434 remain 

reserved. 

3. Section 52.1435 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1435 Visibility protection. 

(a) The requirements of section 169A 

of the Clean Air Act are not met because 

the plan does not include approvable 

measures for meeting the requirements 

of 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and 51.308(e) for 

protection of visibility in mandatory 

Class I Federal areas. 

(b) Best Available Retrofit Technology 

for SO2 at Nebraska Public Power 

District, Gerald Gentleman Units 1 and 

2. The requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(e) 

with respect to emissions of SO2 from 

Nebraska Public Power District, Gerald 

Gentleman Units 1 and 2 are satisfied by 

§ 52.1429. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4991 Filed 3–1–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 03–109, 12–23, and 

CC Docket No. 96–45; FCC 12–11] 

Lifeline and Link Up Reform and 

Modernization, Advancing Broadband 

Availability Through Digital Literacy 

Training 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) seeks further focused 

comment on a number of issues related 

to the Lifeline program, including 

establishing an eligibility database, 

advancing broadband availability 

through digital literacy training, limiting 

section 251 resale of Lifeline-supported 

services, establishing a permanent 

support amount for voice service 

support, reforming Lifeline and Link Up 

support on Tribal lands, adding Women, 

Infants and Children (WIC) to the list of 

qualifying programs for Lifeline, 

establishing eligibility for homeless 

veterans, determining whether ETCs 

should be required to apply the Lifeline 

discount on all of their voice and data 

packages, examining whether the 

Commission should further clarify the 

own facilities requirement, determining 

whether ILECs should have the ability 

to opt out of the Lifeline program as 

well as whether the record retention 

requirement should be lengthened from 

three years to ten years. 

DATES: Comments are due April 2, 2012 

reply comments are due May 1, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 

03–109, 12–23, and CC Docket No. 96– 

45; FCC 12–11, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Web Site: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. 

For detailed instructions for 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12785 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kimberly Scardino, Wireline 

Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7400 or 

TTY: (202) 418–0484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Further 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(FNPRM) in WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 03– 

109, 12–23, and CC Docket No. 96–45; 

FCC 12–11, adopted January 31, 2012 

and released February 6, 2012. There 

was also a companion document 

released with this item. The complete 

text of this document is available for 

inspection and copying during normal 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–A257, 

Washington, DC 20554. The document 

may also be purchased from the 

Commission’s duplicating contractor, 

Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 

378–3160 or (202) 863–2893, facsimile 

(202) 863–2898, or via the Internet at 

http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is also 

available on the Commission’s Web site 

at http://www.fcc.gov. 

Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. 

D Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 

D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. 

Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

D All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St. SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 

must be held together with rubber bands 

or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 

must be disposed of before entering the 

building. 

D Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

D U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington DC 20554. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (tty). 

I. Introduction 

1. In this Order, we comprehensively 

reform and begin to modernize the 

Universal Service Fund’s Lifeline 

program (Lifeline or the program). 

Building on recommendations from the 

Federal-State Joint Board on Universal 

Service (Joint Board), proposals in the 

National Broadband Plan, input from 

the Government Accountability Office 

(GAO), and comments received in 

response to the Commission’s March 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the 

reforms adopted in this Order 

substantially strengthen protections 

against waste, fraud, and abuse; improve 

program administration and 

accountability; improve enrollment and 

consumer disclosures; initiate 

modernization of the program for 

broadband; and constrain the growth of 

the program in order to reduce the 

burden on all who contribute to the 

Universal Service Fund (USF or the 

Fund). We take these significant actions, 

while ensuring that eligible low-income 

consumers who do not have the means 

to pay for telephone service can 

maintain their current voice service 

through the Lifeline program and those 

who are not currently connected to the 

network will have the opportunity to 

benefit from the numerous 

opportunities and security that 

telephone service affords. 

2. This Order is another step in the 

Commission’s ongoing efforts to 

overhaul all USF programs to promote 

the availability of modern networks and 

the capability of all American 

consumers to access and use those 

networks. Consistent with previous 

efforts, we act here to eliminate waste 

and inefficiency, increase 

accountability, and transition the Fund 

from supporting standalone telephone 

service to broadband. In June 2011, the 

Commission adopted the Duplicative 

Program Payments Order, 76 FR 38040, 

June 29, 2011, which made clear that an 

eligible consumer may only receive one 

Lifeline-supported service, established 

procedures to detect and de-enroll 

subscribers receiving duplicative 

Lifeline-supported services, and 

directed the Universal Service 

Administrative Company (USAC) to 

implement a process to detect and 

eliminate duplicative Lifeline support— 

a process now completed in 12 states 

and expanding to other states in the 

near future. Building on those efforts, 

the unprecedented reforms adopted in 

today’s Order could save the Fund up to 

an estimated $2 billion over the next 

three years, keeping money in the 

pockets of American consumers that 

otherwise would have been wasted on 

duplicative benefits, subsidies for 

ineligible consumers, or fraudulent 

misuse of Lifeline funds. 

3. These savings will reduce growth 

in the Fund, while providing telephone 

service to consumers who remain 

disconnected from the voice networks of 

the twentieth century. Moreover, by 

using a fraction of the savings from 

eliminating waste and abuse in the 

program to create a broadband pilot 

program, we explore how Lifeline can 

best be used to help low-income 

consumers access the networks of the 

twenty-first century by closing the 

broadband adoption gap. This Order 

complements the recent USF/ICC 

Transformation Order, 76 FR 76623, 

December 8, 2011, which reoriented 

intercarrier compensation and the highcost fund toward increasing the 

availability of broadband networks, as 

well as the recently launched ‘‘Connect 

to Compete’’ private-sector initiative to 

increase access to affordable broadband 

service for low-income consumers. 

4. To make the program more 

accountable, the Order establishes clear 

goals and measures and establishes 

national eligibility criteria to allow lowincome consumers to qualify for Lifeline 

based on either income or participation 

in certain government benefit programs. 

The Order adopts rules for Lifeline 

enrollment, including enhanced initial 

and annual certification requirements, 

and confirms the program’s one-perhousehold requirement. The Order 

simplifies Lifeline reimbursement and 

makes it more transparent. The 

Commission adopts a number of reforms 

to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in 

the program, including creating a 

National Lifeline Accountability 

Database to prevent multiple carriers 

from receiving support for the same 

subscribers; phasing out toll limitation 

service support; eliminating Link Up 

support except for recipients on Tribal 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

12786 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

lands that are served by eligible 

telecommunications carriers (ETCs) that 

participate in the high-cost program; 

reducing the number of ineligible 

subscribers in the program; and 

imposing independent audit 

requirements on carriers receiving more 

than $5 million in annual support. 

These reforms are estimated to save the 

Fund up to $2 billion over the next 

three years. As part of these reforms, we 

establish a savings target of $200 million 

in 2012 versus the program’s status quo 

path in the absence of reform, create a 

mechanism for ensuring that target is 

met, and put the Commission in a 

position to determine the appropriate 

budget for Lifeline in early 2013 after 

monitoring the impact of today’s 

fundamental overhaul of the program 

and addressing key issues in the 

FNPRM, including the appropriate 

monthly per-line support for the 

program. Using savings from the 

reforms, the Order establishes a 

Broadband Adoption Pilot Program to 

test and determine how Lifeline can best 

be used to increase broadband adoption 

among Lifeline-eligible consumers. We 

also establish an interim base of uniform 

support amount of $9.25 per month for 

non-Tribal subscribers to simplify 

program administration. 

II. Further Notice 

A. Eligibility Database 

5. We conclude that establishing a 

fully automated means for verifying 

consumers’ initial and ongoing Lifeline 

eligibility from governmental data 

sources would both improve the 

accuracy of eligibility determinations 

and ensure that only eligible consumers 

receive Lifeline benefits, and reduce 

burdens on consumers as well as ETCs. 

We conclude that it is important to 

speed-up adoption of a widespread, 

automated means of verifying program 

eligibility. We therefore direct the 

Bureau and USAC to take all necessary 

actions so that, as soon as possible and 

no later than the end of 2013, there will 

be an automated menas to determine 

Lifeline eligibility for, at a minimum, 

the three most common programs 

through which consumers qualify for 

Lifeline. To ensure that the Commission 

has sufficient information to implement 

such a solution, we seek focused 

comment on issues in a FNPRM. The 

Commission directs the Bureau to reach 

out to the relevant federal agencies (e.g., 

HHS and Agriculture) and their state 

counterparts to determine whether and 

to what extent program eligibility 

information can be shared among 

agencies. 

B. Digital Literacy 

6. To support broadband adoption, 

the FNPRM seeks comment on 

dedicating a certain amount of USF 

funding for four years to support formal 

digital literacy training for consumers at 

libraries and schools across the United 

States. The Commission also seeks 

comment on its statutory authority to 

use USF funds for this purpose. 

C. Resale 

7. The FNPRM proposes that only 

ETCs who provide Lifeline directly to 

subscribers will be eligible to receive 

reimbursement from the Fund. 

Moreover, the FNPRM proposes that the 

entity with the relationship with the 

end-user be required to populate the 

duplicates database with the necessary 

subscriber information. As an 

alternative to the foregoing proposals, 

the FNPRM proposes forbearing from 

the incumbent LECs’ resale obligation 

under section 251(c)(4). 

D. Lifeline Support Amounts for Voice 

Service 

8. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

number of issues, including whether to 

continue with a flat-rate of 

reimbursement, and if, so, whether the 

current interim $9.25 per line support 

amount should be made permanent. The 

FNRPM also seeks comment on and 

information for a demand estimation 

study to determine the effect of different 

support amounts on demand for the 

program. 

E. Tribal Lands Support 

9. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

whether to adopt a rule permitting 

eligible residents of Tribal lands to 

apply their allotted Tribal Lands 

discount amount to more than one 

supported service per household (e.g., a 

household would be permitted to 

‘‘split’’ their Lifeline discount between 

a wireline and a mobile phone service 

or between two mobile services and 

receive a discount off of the cost of each 

service). The FNPRM seeks comment on 

how such a rule could be administered, 

including ways to prevent waste, fraud, 

and abuse if this rule is adopted. In 

addition, the FNPRM seeks comment on 

whether the Link Up program for 

residents of Tribal lands is currently 

implemented effectively, or whether the 

program should be altered or eliminated 

given the recent reforms in high-cost 

support, including establishment of the 

Tribal Mobility Fund. 

F. WIC 

10. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

whether to include the Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program for 

Women, Infants and Children, 

administered by the Department of 

Agriculture, as a program conferring 

Lifeline eligibility upon participants. 

G. Homeless Veterans Programs 

Inclusion for Purposes of Eligibility 

11. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

measures that would enable veterans 

who lack any income (and therefore 

cannot document whether their income 

is below the income-based program 

threshold) but are not otherwise 

enrolled in a qualifying program, to 

demonstrate eligibility for Lifeline. The 

FNPRM asks whether additional 

measures should be implemented to 

ensure program access while limiting 

waste, fraud and abuse in situations 

where an eligible veteran has no 

documentation of income. 

H. Mandatory Application of Lifeline 

Discount to Bundled Service Offerings 

12. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

whether to require ETCs to permit 

subscribers to apply their Lifeline 

discount to any bundle that includes a 

voice component. The FNPRM also 

seeks comment on whether there should 

be any limitations on this requirement 

(e.g., should ETCs be obligated to offer 

a Lifeline discount on all of their service 

plans, including premium plans and 

packages that contain services other 

than voice and broadband, such as 

video). 

I. ‘‘Own Facilities’’ Requirements 

13. The FNPRM seeks further 

comment on whether the Commission 

should consider any additional 

requirements for a carrer to receive 

support if that carrier does not own 

network assets or meet the requirements 

of section 214(e)(1)(A). Specifically, the 

FNPRM seeks comment on whether the 

Commission should amend its rules to 

clarify the term ‘‘combination of its own 

facilities’’ with respect to the facilities a 

carrier must own and use to provide 

USF supported services. The FNPRM 

also asks for comment on whether there 

should be a minimum combination of 

facilities that the carrier should own 

and use in order to qualify as a 

facilities-based ETC under section 

254(e)(1)(A). 

J. Eligible Telecommunications Carrier 

Requirements 

14. The FNPRM seeks comment on 

whether incumbent LECs can choose 

whether to participate in the Lifeline 

program. In addition, the FNPRM seeks 

comment on whether the program 

should move to a voucher-based system. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12787 

K. Record Retention Requirements 

15. The FNRPM proposes to amend 

the current three year record retention 

requirement to a ten year requirement. 

III. Procedural Matters 

A. Filing Requirements 

16. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of 

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 

1.419, interested parties may file 

comments and reply comments on or 

before the dates indicated on the first 

page of this document. Comments may 

be filed using the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System 

(ECFS). See Electronic Filing of 

Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 

63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. 

D Electronic Filers: Comments may be 

filed electronically using the Internet by 

accessing the ECFS: http:// 

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 

D Paper Filers: Parties who choose to 

file by paper must file an original and 

one copy of each filing. If more than one 

docket or rulemaking number appears in 

the caption of this proceeding, filers 

must submit two additional copies for 

each additional docket or rulemaking 

number. Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

D All hand-delivered or messengerdelivered paper filings for the 

Commission’s Secretary must be 

delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 

12th St. SW., Room TW–A325, 

Washington, DC 20554. The filing hours 

are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries 

must be held together with rubber bands 

or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes 

must be disposed of before entering the 

building. 

D Commercial overnight mail (other 

than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail 

and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 

East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, 

MD 20743. 

D U.S. Postal Service first-class, 

Express, and Priority mail must be 

addressed to 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20554. 

People with Disabilities: To request 

materials in accessible formats for 

people with disabilities (braille, large 

print, electronic files, audio format), 

send an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 

the Consumer & Governmental Affairs 

Bureau at 202–418–0530 (voice), 202– 

418–0432 (tty). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis 

17. The Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (FNPRM) contains 

proposed new information collection 

requirements subject to the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public 

Law 104–13. The proposed 

requirements will be submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). The Commission, as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

burdens, invites the OMB, general 

public, and other Federal agencies to 

comment on the information collection 

requirements contained in this 

document, as required by PRA. In 

addition, pursuant to the Small 

Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, 

we seek specific comment on how we 

might ‘‘further reduce the information 

collection burden for small business 

concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 

C. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

18. As Required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act if 1980, as amended 

(RFA), the Commission has prepared 

this Initial Regulatory Flexibility 

analysis (IRFA) of the possible 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities by 

the policies and rules proposed in this 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(FNPRM). Written comments are 

requested on this IRFA. Comments must 

be identified as responses to the IRFA 

and must be filed by the deadlines for 

comments on the FNPRM. The 

Commission will send a copy of the 

FNPRM, including this IRFA, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration (SBA). In 

addition, the FNPRM and IRFA (or 

summaries thereof) will be published in 

the Federal Register. 

A. Need for, and Objectives of, the 

Proposed Rulemaking 

19. The FNPRM seeks comment on a 

variety of issues relating to the 

comprehensive reform and 

modernization of the Universal Service 

Fund’s Lifeline program. As discussed 

in the Order accompanying the FNPRM, 

the Commission believes that such 

reform will strengthen protections 

against waste, fraud, and abuse; improve 

program administration and 

accountability; improve enrollment and 

consumer disclosures; modernize the 

program for broadband; and constrain 

the growth of the program. In proposing 

these reforms, the Commission seeks 

comment on various reporting, 

recordkeeping, and other compliance 

requirements that may apply to all 

carriers, including small entities. We 

seek comment on any costs and burdens 

on small entities associated with the 

proposed rules, including data 

quantifying the extent of those costs or 

burdens. 

20. This FNPRM is one of a series of 

rulemaking proceedings designed to 

implement the National Broadband 

Plan’s (NBP) vision of improving and 

modernizing the universal service 

programs. In this FNPRM, we propose 

and seek comment on comprehensive 

reforms to the universal service lowincome support mechanism. 

21. Specifically, we propose and seek 

comment on the following eight reforms 

and modernizations that may be 

implemented in funding year 2012 (July 

1, 2012–June 30, 2013). 

22. In the FNPRM, we recommend the 

creation of a centralized database for 

online certification and verification on 

Lifeline consumers’ eligibility to 

participate in the low-income program. 

In the FNPRM, we seek comment on the 

methods of creating the database 

including whether, how, and with what 

information ETCs should populate the 

eligibility database. 

23. Additionally, we seek comment 

on establishing a digital literacy training 

program, and specifically, we seek 

comment on what entities are best 

suited to provide such training (i.e., 

schools and libraries), including ETCs. 

24. As part of the effort to reduce 

waste, fraud, and abuse in the program, 

the Commission proposes to allow only 

ETCs with a direct relationship with the 

end-user Lifeline subscriber to seek 

reimbursement from the Fund. In 

addition we propose that the ETC with 

the direct relationship with the end-user 

be responsible for populating the 

duplicates database. How would this 

proposal affect entities economically? 

We seek comment on the matter. We 

seek comment on procedures that 

should be implemented to ensure that 

Lifeline wholesalers are not seeking 

Fund reimbursement for resold Lifeline 

offerings including self-certification, 

record keeping, and audit requirements. 

We also seek comment on which ETC, 

the wholesaler or the reseller, should be 

responsible for complying with the 

other certification and verification 

requirements in the Order. Compliance 

with the proposed rule would require 

current Lifeline resellers who are not 

designated ETCs to either (1) obtain ETC 

designation or (2) purchase Lifeline for 

resale at wholesale rates and be 

prevented from seeking Fund 

reimbursement. As an alternative, we 

seek comment on whether the 

Commission should forbear, on its own 

motion, on incumbent LECs’ obligation 

to resell Lifeline services. In addition, 

we seek comment on how, if at all, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

12788 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

incumbent LECs would be required to 

amend tariffs to separate the amount of 

the Lifeline subsidy from the wholesale 

price of the underlying Lifeline service 

being resold. We seek further comment 

on how the proposed rule would impact 

existing contractual relationships 

between incumbent LECs and Lifeline 

resellers. 

25. In the Order, we establish an 

interim amount of $9.25 per month for 

Lifeline reimbursement. In the FNPRM, 

we seek comment on whether the 

interim reimbursement amount of $9.25 

is appropriate and should be made 

permanent. We also seek comment on 

how to best determine a flat rate of 

reimbursement. In furtherance of that, 

we seek comment on the best method of 

obtaining the necessary information to 

perform a demand estimation study. 

Finally, we seek comment on whether 

the discount should be reduced over 

time as voice becomes a secondary 

application compared to broadband 

service. 

26. In the FNPRM, we seek comment 

on whether to adopt a rule permitting 

eligible residents of Tribal lands to 

apply their allotted Tribal Lands 

discount amount to more than one 

supported service per household (e.g., a 

household would be permitted to 

‘‘split’’ their Lifeline discount between 

a wireline and a mobile phone service 

and receive a discount off of the cost of 

each service). The Commission seeks 

comment on how such a rule could be 

administered and how to prevent waste, 

fraud, and abuse if this rule is adopted. 

27. The Commission seeks comment 

in the FNPRM on whether to include 

three additional programs in its 

eligibility criteria: the Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program for 

Women, Infants and Children, 

administered by the Department of 

Agriculture; the Veterans Benefits 

Administration-Veterans Health 

Administration Special Outreach and 

Benefits Assistance program; and the 

Healthcare for Homeless Veterans 

program. 

28. The Commission seeks comment 

regarding mandatory application of the 

Lifeline discount to bundled service 

offerings. Specifically, we seek 

comment on whether to require ETCs to 

permit subscribers to apply their 

Lifeline discount to any bundle that 

includes a voice component and 

whether there should be any limitations 

on this requirement. We ask whether 

there should be limitations on this 

potential requirement, should such a 

rule be adopted. Should ETCs be 

obligated to offer a Lifeline discount on 

all of their service plans, including 

premium plans and packages that 

contain services other than voice and 

broadband? We also seek comment on 

various implementation issues regarding 

any such rule (i.e., would Lifeline 

subscribers face loss of voice service 

based on their inability to pay the 

entirety of a bundled service bill; can 

carriers limit Lifeline consumers’ use of 

premium services). 

29. Finally, we propose to update our 

rules to extend the retention period for 

Lifeline documentation, including 

subscriber-specific eligibility 

documentation, from three years to at 

least ten years, because the current 

requirements are inadequate for 

purposes of litigation under the False 

Claims Act. 

B. Legal Basis 

30. The Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, including publication of 

proposed rules, is authorized under 

sections 1, 2, 4(i)–(j), 201(b), 254, 257, 

303(r), and 503 of the Communications 

Act of 1934, as amended, and section 

706 of the Telecommunications Act of 

1996, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 

154(i)–(j), 201(b), 254, 257, 303(r), 503, 

and 1302. 

C. Description and Estimate of the 

Number of Small Entities to Which the 

Proposed Rules Will Apply 

31. The RFA directs agencies to 

provide a description of and, where 

feasible, an estimate of the number of 

small entities that may be affected by 

the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA 

generally defines the term ‘‘small 

entity’’ as having the same meaning as 

the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small 

organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental 

jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term 

‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning 

as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ 

under the Small Business Act. A small 

business concern is one that: (1) Is 

independently owned and operated; (2) 

is not dominant in its field of operation; 

and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 

established by the Small Business 

Administration (SBA). Nationwide, 

there are a total of approximately 29.6 

million small businesses, according to 

the SBA. A ‘‘small organization’’ is 

generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise 

which is independently owned and 

operated and is not dominant in its 

field.’’ Nationwide, as of 2002, there 

were approximately 1.6 million small 

organizations. The term ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdiction’’ is defined 

generally as ‘‘governments of cities, 

towns, townships, villages, school 

districts, or special districts, with a 

population of less than fifty thousand.’’ 

Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate 

that there were 87,525 local 

governmental jurisdictions in the 

United States. We estimate that, of this 

total, 84,377 entities were ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdictions.’’ Thus, we 

estimate that most governmental 

jurisdictions are small. 

1. Wireline Providers 

32. Incumbent Local Exchange 

Carriers (Incumbent LECs). Neither the 

Commission nor the SBA has developed 

a small business size standard 

specifically for incumbent local 

exchange services. The appropriate size 

standard under SBA rules is for the 

category Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers. Under that size standard, such 

a business is small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. Census Bureau data 

for 2007, which now supersede data 

from the 2002 Census, show that there 

were 3,188 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 

fewer and 44 firms had had employment 

of 1,000 or more. According to 

Commission data, 1,307 carriers 

reported that they were incumbent local 

exchange service providers. Of these 

1,307 carriers, an estimated 1,006 have 

1,500 or fewer employees and 301 have 

more than 1,500 employees. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that most providers of local 

exchange service are small entities that 

may be affected by the rules and 

policies proposed in the Notice. Thus 

under this category and the associated 

small business size standard, the 

majority of these incumbent local 

exchange service providers can be 

considered small providers. 

33. Competitive Local Exchange 

Carriers (Competitive LECs), 

Competitive Access Providers (CAPs), 

Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and 

Other Local Service Providers. Neither 

the Commission nor the SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard specifically for these service 

providers. The appropriate size standard 

under SBA rules is for the category 

Wired Telecommunications Carriers. 

Under that size standard, such a 

business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 

employees. Census Bureau data for 

2007, which now supersede data from 

the 2002 Census, show that there were 

3,188 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 

fewer and 44 firms had had employment 

of 1,000 employees or more. Thus under 

this category and the associated small 

business size standard, the majority of 

these Competitive LECs, CAPs, SharedTenant Service Providers, and Other 

Local Service Providers can be 

considered small entities. According to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12789 

Commission data, 1,442 carriers 

reported that they were engaged in the 

provision of either competitive local 

exchange services or competitive access 

provider services. Of these 1,442 

carriers, an estimated 1,256 have 1,500 

or fewer employees and 186 have more 

than 1,500 employees. In addition, 17 

carriers have reported that they are 

Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and 

all 17 are estimated to have 1,500 or 

fewer employees. In addition, 72 

carriers have reported that they are 

Other Local Service Providers. Seventy 

of which have 1,500 or fewer employees 

and two have more than 1,500 

employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that most 

providers of competitive local exchange 

service, competitive access providers, 

Shared-Tenant Service Providers, and 

Other Local Service Providers are small 

entities that may be affected by rules 

adopted pursuant to the Notice. 

34. Interexchange Carriers. Neither 

the Commission nor the SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard specifically for providers of 

interexchange services. The appropriate 

size standard under SBA rules is for the 

category Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers. Under that size standard, such 

a business is small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. Census Bureau data 

for 2007, which now supersede data 

from the 2002 Census, show that there 

were 3,188 firms in this category that 

operated for the entire year. Of this 

total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 

fewer, and 44 firms had had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus under this category and the 

associated small business size standard, 

the majority of these Interexchange 

carriers can be considered small 

entities. According to Commission data, 

359 companies reported that their 

primary telecommunications service 

activity was the provision of 

interexchange services. Of these 359 

companies, an estimated 317 have 1,500 

or fewer employees and 42 have more 

than 1,500 employees. Consequently, 

the Commission estimates that the 

majority of interexchange service 

providers are small entities that may be 

affected by rules adopted pursuant to 

the Notice. 

35. Operator Service Providers (OSPs). 

Neither the Commission nor the SBA 

has developed a small business size 

standard specifically for operator 

service providers. The appropriate size 

standard under SBA rules is the 

category Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers. Under that size standard, such 

a business is small if it has 1,500 or 

fewer employees. Under that size 

standard, such a business is small if it 

has 1,500 or fewer employees. Census 

Bureau data for 2007, which now 

supersede 2002 Census data, show that 

there were 3,188 firms in this category 

that operated for the entire year. Of the 

total, 3,144 had employment of 999 or 

fewer, and 44 firms had had 

employment of 1,000 employees or 

more. Thus under this category and the 

associated small business size standard, 

the majority of these interexchange 

carriers can be considered small 

entities. According to Commission data, 

33 carriers have reported that they are 

engaged in the provision of operator 

services. Of these, an estimated 31 have 

1,500 or fewer employees and 2 have 

more than 1,500 employees. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that the majority of OSPs are 

small entities that may be affected by 

our proposed action. 

36. Local Resellers. The SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard for the category of 

Telecommunications Resellers. Under 

that size standard, such a business is 

small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 

firms provided resale services during 

that year. Of that number, 1,522 

operated with fewer than 1,000 

employees and one operated with more 

than 1,000. Thus under this category 

and the associated small business size 

standard, the majority of these local 

resellers can be considered small 

entities. According to Commission data, 

213 carriers have reported that they are 

engaged in the provision of local resale 

services. Of these, an estimated 211 

have 1,500 or fewer employees and two 

have more than 1,500 employees. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that the majority of local 

resellers are small entities that may be 

affected by rules adopted pursuant to 

the Notice. 

37. Toll Resellers. The SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard for the category of 

Telecommunications Resellers. Under 

that size standard, such a business is 

small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

Census data for 2007 show that 1,523 

firms provided resale services during 

that year. Of that number, 1,522 

operated with fewer than 1,000 

employees and one operated with more 

than 1,000. Thus under this category 

and the associated small business size 

standard, the majority of these resellers 

can be considered small entities. 

According to Commission data, 881 

carriers have reported that they are 

engaged in the provision of toll resale 

services. Of these, an estimated 857 

have 1,500 or fewer employees and 24 

have more than 1,500 employees. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that the majority of toll 

resellers are small entities that may be 

affected by our action. 

38. Pre-paid Calling Card Providers. 

Neither the Commission nor the SBA 

has developed a small business size 

standard specifically for pre-paid calling 

card providers. The appropriate size 

standard under SBA rules is for the 

category Telecommunications Resellers. 

Under that size standard, such a 

business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 

employees. Census data for 2007 show 

that 1,523 firms provided resale services 

during that year. Of that number, 1,522 

operated with fewer than 1,000 

employees and one operated with more 

than 1,000. Thus under this category 

and the associated small business size 

standard, the majority of these pre-paid 

calling card providers can be considered 

small entities. According to Commission 

data, 193 carriers have reported that 

they are engaged in the provision of prepaid calling cards. Of these, an 

estimated all 193 have 1,500 or fewer 

employees and none have more than 

1,500 employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that the majority 

of pre-paid calling card providers are 

small entities that may be affected by 

rules adopted pursuant to the Notice. 

2. Wireless Carriers and Service 

Providers 

39. Below, for those services subject 

to auctions, the Commission notes that, 

as a general matter, the number of 

winning bidders that qualify as small 

businesses at the close of an auction 

does not necessarily represent the 

number of small businesses currently in 

service. Also, the Commission does not 

generally track subsequent business size 

unless, in the context of assignments or 

transfers, unjust enrichment issues are 

implicated. 

40. Wireless Telecommunications 

Carriers (except Satellite). Since 2007, 

the Census Bureau has placed wireless 

firms within this new, broad, economic 

census category. Prior to that time, such 

firms were within the now-superseded 

categories of ‘‘Paging’’ and ‘‘Cellular and 

Other Wireless Telecommunications.’’ 

Under the present and prior categories, 

the SBA has deemed a wireless business 

to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer 

employees. For the category of Wireless 

Telecommunications Carriers (except 

Satellite), Census data for 2007, which 

supersede data contained in the 2002 

Census, show that there were 1,383 

firms that operated that year. Of those 

1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 

employees, and 15 firms had more than 

100 employees. Thus under this 

category and the associated small 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

12790 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

business size standard, the majority of 

firms can be considered small. 

Similarly, according to Commission 

data, 413 carriers reported that they 

were engaged in the provision of 

wireless telephony, including cellular 

service, Personal Communications 

Service (PCS), and Specialized Mobile 

Radio (SMR) Telephony services. Of 

these, an estimated 261 have 1,500 or 

fewer employees and 152 have more 

than 1,500 employees. Consequently, 

the Commission estimates that 

approximately half or more of these 

firms can be considered small. Thus, 

using available data, we estimate that 

the majority of wireless firms can be 

considered small. 

41. Wireless Communications 

Services. This service can be used for 

fixed, mobile, radiolocation, and digital 

audio broadcasting satellite uses. The 

Commission defined ‘‘small business’’ 

for the wireless communications 

services (WCS) auction as an entity with 

average gross revenues of $40 million 

for each of the three preceding years, 

and a ‘‘very small business’’ as an entity 

with average gross revenues of $15 

million for each of the three preceding 

years. The SBA has approved these 

definitions. The Commission auctioned 

geographic area licenses in the WCS 

service. In the auction, which 

commenced on April 15, 1997 and 

closed on April 25, 1997, seven bidders 

won 31 licenses that qualified as very 

small business entities, and one bidder 

won one license that qualified as a small 

business entity. 

42. Satellite Telecommunications 

Providers. Two economic census 

categories address the satellite industry. 

The first category has a small business 

size standard of $15 million or less in 

average annual receipts, under SBA 

rules. The second has a size standard of 

$25 million or less in annual receipts. 

43. The category of Satellite 

Telecommunications ‘‘comprises 

establishments primarily engaged in 

providing telecommunications services 

to other establishments in the 

telecommunications and broadcasting 

industries by forwarding and receiving 

communications signals via a system of 

satellites or reselling satellite 

telecommunications.’’ Census Bureau 

data for 2007 show that 512 Satellite 

Telecommunications firms that operated 

for that entire year. Of this total, 464 

firms had annual receipts of under $10 

million, and 18 firms had receipts of 

$10 million to $24,999,999. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that the majority of Satellite 

Telecommunications firms are small 

entities that might be affected by our 

action. 

44. The second category, i.e. ‘‘All 

Other Telecommunications’’ comprises 

‘‘establishments primarily engaged in 

providing specialized 

telecommunications services, such as 

satellite tracking, communications 

telemetry, and radar station operation. 

This industry also includes 

establishments primarily engaged in 

providing satellite terminal stations and 

associated facilities connected with one 

or more terrestrial systems and capable 

of transmitting telecommunications to, 

and receiving telecommunications from, 

satellite systems. Establishments 

providing Internet services or voice over 

Internet protocol (VoIP) services via 

client-supplied telecommunications 

connections are also included in this 

industry.’’ For this category, Census 

Bureau data for 2007 show that there 

were a total of 2,383 firms that operated 

for the entire year. Of this total, 2,347 

firms had annual receipts of under $25 

million and 12 firms had annual 

receipts of $25 million to $49,999,999. 

Consequently, the Commission 

estimates that the majority of All Other 

Telecommunications firms are small 

entities that might be affected by our 

action. 

45. Common Carrier Paging. The SBA 

considers paging to be a wireless 

telecommunications service and 

classifies it under the industry 

classification Wireless 

Telecommunications Carriers (except 

satellite). Under that classification, the 

applicable size standard is that a 

business is small if it has 1,500 or fewer 

employees. For the general category of 

Wireless Telecommunications Carriers 

(except Satellite), Census data for 2007, 

which supersede data contained in the 

2002 Census, show that there were 

1,383 firms that operated that year. Of 

those 1,383, 1,368 had fewer than 100 

employees, and 15 firms had more than 

100 employees. Thus under this 

category and the associated small 

business size standard, the majority of 

firms can be considered small. The 2007 

census also contains data for the 

specific category of ‘‘Paging’’ ‘‘that is 

classified under the seven-number 

North American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) code 5172101. 

According to Commission data, 291 

carriers have reported that they are 

engaged in Paging or Messaging Service. 

Of these, an estimated 289 have 1,500 or 

fewer employees, and 2 have more than 

1,500 employees. Consequently, the 

Commission estimates that the majority 

of paging providers are small entities 

that may be affected by our action. In 

addition, in the Paging Third Report and 

Order, the Commission developed a 

small business size standard for ‘‘small 

businesses’’ and ‘‘very small 

businesses’’ for purposes of determining 

their eligibility for special provisions 

such as bidding credits and installment 

payments. A ‘‘small business’’ is an 

entity that, together with its affiliates 

and controlling principals, has average 

gross revenues not exceeding $15 

million for the preceding three years. 

Additionally, a ‘‘very small business’’ is 

an entity that, together with its affiliates 

and controlling principals, has average 

gross revenues that are not more than $3 

million for the preceding three years. 

The SBA has approved these small 

business size standards. An auction of 

Metropolitan Economic Area licenses 

commenced on February 24, 2000, and 

closed on March 2, 2000. Of the 985 

licenses auctioned, 440 were sold. Fiftyseven companies claiming small 

business status won. 

46. Wireless Telephony. Wireless 

telephony includes cellular, personal 

communications services, and 

specialized mobile radio telephony 

carriers. As noted, the SBA has 

developed a small business size 

standard for Wireless 

Telecommunications Carriers (except 

Satellite). Under the SBA small business 

size standard, a business is small if it 

has 1,500 or fewer employees. 

According to the 2008 Trends Report, 

434 carriers reported that they were 

engaged in wireless telephony. Of these, 

an estimated 222 have 1,500 or fewer 

employees and 212 have more than 

1,500 employees. We have estimated 

that 222 of these are small under the 

SBA small business size standard. 

3. Internet Service Providers 

47. The 2007 Economic Census places 

these firms, whose services might 

include voice over Internet protocol 

(VoIP), in either of two categories, 

depending on whether the service is 

provided over the provider’s own 

telecommunications facilities (e.g., cable 

and DSL ISPs), or over client-supplied 

telecommunications connections (e.g., 

dial-up ISPs). The former are within the 

category of Wired Telecommunications 

Carriers, which has an SBA small 

business size standard of 1,500 or fewer 

employees. The latter are within the 

category of All Other 

Telecommunications, which has a size 

standard of annual receipts of $25 

million or less. The most current Census 

Bureau data for all such firms, however, 

are the 2002 data for the previous 

census category called Internet Service 

Providers. That category had a small 

business size standard of $21 million or 

less in annual receipts, which was 

revised in late 2005 to $23 million. The 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 42 / Friday, March 2, 2012 / Proposed Rules 12791 

2002 data show that there were 2,529 

such firms that operated for the entire 

year. Of those, 2,437 firms had annual 

receipts of under $10 million, and an 

additional 47 firms had receipts of 

between $10 million and $24,999,999. 

Consequently, we estimate that the 

majority of ISP firms are small entities. 

D. Description of Projected Reporting, 

Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 

Requirements 

48. Tribal Lands Lifeline Support. If 

we permit eligible residents of Tribal 

lands to apply their allotted Tribal 

Lands discount amount to more than 

one supported service per household, 

postpaid carriers may need to update 

their billing systems to reflect that more 

than one supported service may be 

received per Tribal household. 

Additionally, several carriers currently 

allow consumers to apply their Lifeline 

discount to the purchase of family 

shared calling plans, and, if such a rule 

were adopted, a similar billing 

functionality could be used by postpaid 

carriers serving eligible residents of 

Tribal lands. The Commission is 

continuing to evaluate the potential 

costs and benefits of this proposal and 

will take the steps necessary to mitigate 

the costs to small businesses. 

49. Mandatory Application of Lifeline 

Discount to Bundled Service Offerings. 

The FNPRM seeks comment on whether 

to require ETCs to permit subscribers to 

apply their Lifeline discount to any 

bundle that includes a voice 

component. The FNPRM also seeks 

comment on whether there should be 

any limitations on this requirement 

(e.g., should ETCs be obligated to offer 

a Lifeline discount on all of their service 

plans, including premium plans and 

packages that contain services other 

than voice and broadband, such as 

video). While we do not anticipate that 

these proposals will have an impact on 

small businesses at this time, we 

recognize that small entities may incur 

costs due to a need to update their 

internal systems to comply with the 

rule. 

50. Record Retention Requirements. 

The Commission proposes to amend 

§ 54.417 of the Commission’s rules to 

extend the retention period for Lifeline 

documentation, including subscriberspecific eligibility documentation, from 

three years to at least ten years. ETCs 

will continue to maintain 

documentation of consumer eligibility 

for at least ten years and for as long as 

the consumer receives Lifeline service 

from that ETC, even if that period 

extends beyond ten years. The amended 

recordkeeping requirement will 

continue to apply equally to all ETCs, 

all of whom are currently required to 

maintain Lifeline documentation, 

including subscriber-specific eligibility 

documentation, for at least three years. 

E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant 

Economic Impact on Small Entities, and 

Significant Alternatives Considered 

51. Eligibility database. For the period 

prior to the implementation of a 

national eligibility database, in the 

FNPRM we consider the alternative of 

having third-party administrators, as 

opposed to the ETCs, be responsible for 

verifying Lifeline consumers’ eligibility 

in the program. Accordingly, we seek 

comment on how to minimize or 

mitigate extra costs to the Fund caused 

by the selection of third-party 

administrators. 

52. Limitations on the Resale of 

Lifeline-Supported Services. As part of 

the effort to reduce waste, fraud, and 

abuse in the program, the Commission 

proposes to allow only ETCs with a 

direct relationship with the end-user 

Lifeline subscriber to seek 

reimbursement from the Fund. To the 

extent that a reseller who is not an ETC 

is receiving support from the Fund, 

there could be an economic impact 

should this change be adopted, but the 

Commission believes that the need to 

protect the Fund from abuse outweighs 

any concerns with existing carriers 

raising concerns with the economic 

impact of the proposed rule. 

Furthermore, if there is an economic 

impact from this proposal, we seek 

comment on how to minimize the 

burdens of such a requirement on small 

entities. Accordingly, we seek comment 

on the potential economic impact of 

these requirements. 

F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate or 

Conflict With Proposed Rules 

53. None. 

IV. Ordering Clauses 

54. It is further ordered that, pursuant 

to the authority contained in sections 1, 

2, 4(i), 10, 201–206, 214, 218–220, 251, 

252, 254, 256, 303(r), 332, and 403 of 

the Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, and section 706 of the 

Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 

U.S.C. 151, 152, 154(i), 160, 201–206, 

214, 218–220, 251, 252, 254, 256, 303(r), 

332, 403, 1302, and §§ 1.1 and 1.421 of 

the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.1, 

1.421, this Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking is adopted. 

55. It is further ordered that, pursuant 

to applicable procedures set forth in 

§§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s 

Rules, 47 CFR 1.415, 1.419, interested 

parties may file comments on the 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

April 2, 2012, and reply comments on 

or before May 1, 2012. 

56. It is further ordered that the 

Commission shall send a copy of this 

Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

to Congress and to the Government 

Accountability Office pursuant to the 

Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A). 

57. It is further ordered that the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference 

Information Center, shall send a copy of 

this Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, including the Initial 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the 

Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 

Business Administration. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54 

Communications common carriers, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Telecommunications, 

Telephone. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Bulah P. Wheeler, 

Deputy Manager. 

Proposed Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR 

part 54 to read as follows: 

PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE 

1. The authority citation for part 54 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 201, 205, 

214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 

unless otherwise noted. 

2. Revise § 54.417 to read as follows: 

§ 54.417 Recordkeeping requirements 

Eligible telecommunications carriers 

must maintain records to document 

compliance with all Commission and 

state requirements governing the 

Lifeline/Link Up programs for the ten 

full preceding calendar years and 

provide that documentation to the 

Commission or Administrator upon 

request. Notwithstanding the preceding 

sentence, eligible telecommunications 

carriers must maintain the 

documentation required in §§ 54.409(d) 

and 54.410(b)(3) for as long as the 

consumer receives Lifeline service from 

that eligible telecommunications carrier. 

[FR Doc. 2012–5142 Filed 3–1–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS