Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 11363 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter II 

[Docket ID ED–2013–OESE–0159; CFDA 

Number: 84.215G] 

Proposed Priorities, Requirement, and 

Definitions—Innovative Approaches to 

Literacy (IAL) Program 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education (Department). 

ACTION: Proposed priorities, 

requirement, and definitions. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

proposes priorities, a requirement, and 

definitions under the IAL program. The 

Assistant Secretary may use the 

priorities, requirement, and definitions 

for competitions in fiscal year (FY) 2014 

and later years. We take this action to 

ensure IAL projects will be supported, 

at a minimum, by evidence of strong 

theory, and to focus Federal financial 

assistance on projects that serve rural 

local educational agencies (LEAs). 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before March 31, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

or via postal mail, commercial delivery, 

or hand delivery. We will not accept 

comments submitted by fax or by email 

or those submitted after the comment 

period. To ensure that we do not receive 

duplicate copies, please submit your 

comments only once. In addition, please 

include the Docket ID at the top of your 

comments. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

www.regulations.gov to submit your 

comments electronically. Information 

on using Regulations.gov, including 

instructions for accessing agency 

documents, submitting comments, and 

viewing the docket, is available on the 

site under ‘‘Are you new to the site?’’ 

• Postal Mail, Commercial Delivery, 

or Hand Delivery: If you mail or deliver 

your comments about these proposed 

regulations, address them to David 

Moore Miller, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

room 3E241, Washington, DC 20202– 

6200. 

Privacy Note: The Department’s policy is 

to make all comments received from 

members of the public available for public 

viewing in their entirety on the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov. 

Therefore, commenters should be careful to 

include in their comments only information 

that they wish to make publicly available. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melvin Graham, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

room 3E334, Washington, DC 20202– 

6200. Telephone: (202) 260–8268 or by 

email: melvin.graham@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

notice. To ensure that your comments 

have maximum effect in developing the 

notice of final priorities, requirement, 

and definitions, we urge you to identify 

clearly the specific proposed priority, 

requirement, or definition that each 

comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Order 12866 

and its overall requirement of reducing 

regulatory burden that might result from 

these proposed priorities, requirement, 

and definitions. Please let us know of 

any further ways we could reduce 

potential costs or increase potential 

benefits while preserving the effective 

and efficient administration of the 

program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about these proposed regulations by 

accessing Regulations.gov. You may also 

inspect the comments in person in room 

3E241 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC between 8:30 a.m. and 

4:00 p.m., Washington, DC time, 

Monday through Friday of each week 

except Federal holidays. Please contact 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. Assistance to 

Individuals with Disabilities in 

Reviewing the Rulemaking Record: On 

request we will provide an appropriate 

accommodation or auxiliary aid to an 

individual with a disability who needs 

assistance to review the comments or 

other documents in the public 

rulemaking record for this notice. If you 

want to schedule an appointment for 

this type of accommodation or auxiliary 

aid, please contact the person listed 

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the IAL program is to support highquality projects designed to develop and 

improve literacy skills for children and 

students from birth through 12th grade 

within the attendance boundaries of 

high-need LEAs and schools. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7243– 

7243b. 

Proposed Priorities: 

This notice contains two proposed 

priorities. 

Proposed Priority 1—High-quality 

plan for innovative approaches to 

literacy that include book distribution, 

childhood literacy activities, or both, 

and that is supported, at a minimum, by 

evidence of strong theory (as defined in 

34 CFR 77.1(c)). 

Background: 

We have developed a priority that 

describes the components of a highquality plan and the level of evidence of 

effectiveness most appropriate for the 

IAL program. 

The components of a high-quality 

plan include a description of how the 

activity improves literacy in early 

childhood, improves students’ reading 

ability, motivates older children to read, 

or teaches children and students to read. 

The plan must also include a 

description of the populations to be 

served, key goals and activities, the 

rationale for the activities chosen, 

timeline for the project, parties 

responsible for implementing the 

project, and the credibility of the plan. 

The Secretary published final 

regulations in the Federal Register on 

August 13, 2013 (78 FR 49338), that 

include a description of four levels of 

evidence for the Department to use in 

determining the potential effectiveness 

of proposed projects. 

Considering that the new regulations 

were established, in part, to provide 

incentives and opportunities to build 

the body of evidence of effectiveness in 

education, and considering the wide 

range of new and innovative approaches 

possible under the IAL program, we 

have determined that the most 

appropriate level of evidence for the IAL 

program is strong theory. 

While there exists evidence in the 

field to support a higher level of 

evidence for the IAL program, we 

selected strong theory in order to 

broaden the evidence base by 

supporting innovative and new ideas, as 

well as to empower applicants to 

propose activities and approaches that 

have shown evidence of promise or 

effectiveness anecdotally or in theory, 

but that have not yet been included in 

a published research study or not met 

the requirements of a higher level of 

evidence. 

The final regulations also note the 

importance of applicants proposing 

project evaluations that increase the 

level of evidence of the proposed 

project’s effectiveness. In order to 

provide opportunities for applicants to 

build the body of evidence of 

effectiveness in education, we will 

include a related selection criterion that 

encourages applicants to incorporate 

evaluation designs that will, if wellimplemented, produce evidence of 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11364 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

promise for future projects. Evidence of 

promise is a more rigorous level of 

evidence than strong theory. 

Proposed Priority: 

To meet this priority, applicants must 

submit a plan that is supported by 

evidence of strong theory, including a 

rationale for the proposed process, 

product, strategy, or practice and a 

corresponding logic model (as defined 

in 34 CFR 77.1(c)). 

The applicant must submit a plan 

with the following information: 

(a) a description of the proposed book 

distribution, childhood literacy 

activities, or both, that are designed to 

improve the literacy skills of children 

and students by one or more of the 

following— 

(1) promoting early literacy and 

preparing young children to read; 

(2) developing and improving 

students’ reading ability; 

(3) motivating older children to read; 

and 

(4) teaching children and students to 

read. 

(b) the age or grade spans of children 

and students from birth through 12th 

grade to be served within the attendance 

boundaries of high-need LEAs (as 

defined in this notice); 

(c) a detailed description of the key 

goals, the activities to be undertaken, 

the rationale for those activities, the 

timeline, the parties responsible for 

implementing the activities, and the 

credibility of the plan (as judged, in 

part, by the information submitted as 

evidence of strong theory); and 

(d)(i) a description of how the 

proposed project is supported by strong 

theory; and (ii) the corresponding logic 

model (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)). 

Proposed Priority 2—Serving Rural 

LEAs 

Background: 

Rural school districts often lack the 

personnel and resources needed to 

compete effectively for Federal 

competitive grants. Therefore, we wish 

to establish a priority to better enable 

eligible rural applicants to compete 

effectively for IAL funds. 

Proposed Priority: 

To meet this priority, an applicant 

must propose a project designed to 

provide high-quality literacy 

programming, or distribute books, or 

both, to students served by a rural LEA 

(as defined in this notice). 

Types of Priorities: 

When inviting applications for a 

competition using one or more 

priorities, we designate the type of each 

priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Proposed Requirement: 

Background: 

The IAL program is guided by the 

Senate report that accompanied the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 

(S. Rep. no. 113–71, at 173 (2013)). 

According to that report, funds made 

available under the IAL program are for 

competitive awards to national not-forprofit organizations (NNPs) or school 

libraries. 

School libraries generally do not have 

the capacity to manage Federal grants 

independently of the schools and 

districts they serve. We believe LEAs are 

better equipped to compete for, and 

meet the requirements of, Federal grants 

than are school libraries. Therefore, 

school libraries should coordinate with 

their LEAs in competing for IAL funds. 

Proposed Requirement: 

The Assistant Secretary proposes the 

following requirement for this program. 

We may apply this requirement in any 

year in which this program is in effect. 

Eligibility: To be considered for an 

award under this competition, an 

applicant must be one of the following: 

(1) A high-need LEA (as defined in this 

notice); (2) an NNP (as defined in this 

notice) that serves children and students 

within the attendance boundaries of one 

or more high-need LEAs; (3) a 

consortium of NNPs that serve children 

and students within the attendance 

boundaries of one or more high-need 

LEAs; (4) a consortium of high-need 

LEAs; or (5) a consortium of one or more 

high-need LEAs and one or more NNPs 

that serve children and students within 

the attendance boundaries of one or 

more high-need LEAs. 

Proposed Definitions: 

Background: 

Six important terms associated with 

this program are not defined in the 

authorizing statute, applicable 

regulations, or EDGAR. 

Proposed Definitions: 

The Assistant Secretary proposes the 

following definitions for this program. 

We may apply one or more of these 

definitions in any year in which this 

program is in effect. 

College- and career-ready standards 

means content standards for 

kindergarten through 12th grade that 

build towards college and career 

readiness by the time of high school 

graduation. A State’s college- and 

career-ready standards must be either 

(1) standards that are common to a 

significant number of States; or (2) 

standards that are approved by a State 

network of institutions of higher 

education, which must certify that 

students who meet the standards will 

not need remedial course work at the 

postsecondary level. 

Comprehensive statewide literacy 

plan means a plan (which may be a 

component or modification of the plan 

submitted under the Striving Readers 

Comprehensive Literacy formula grant 

program, CFDA 84.371B) that addresses 

the literacy and language needs of 

children from birth through 12th grade, 

including English Learners and students 

with disabilities; aligns literacy policies, 

resources, and practices; contains clear 

instructional goals; and sets high 

expectations for all students and student 

subgroups. 

High-need local educational agency 

(High-need LEA) means an LEA, 

including a charter school or Stateadministered school that is considered 

an LEA under State law, in which at 

least 25 percent of the students aged 0– 

17 in the geographic area served by the 

LEA (or, in the case of a charter school 

that is an LEA, at least 25 percent of the 

students enrolled in the school) are from 

families with incomes below the 

poverty line based on the most recent 

satisfactory data available from the U.S. 

Census Bureau at the time a notice 

inviting applications is published. 

National not-for-profit (NNP) 

organization means an agency, 

organization, or institution owned and 

operated by one or more corporations or 

associations whose net earnings do not 

benefit, and cannot lawfully benefit, any 

private shareholder or entity. In 

addition, it means, for the purposes of 

this program, an organization of 

national scope that is supported by staff 

or affiliates at the State and local levels, 

who may include volunteers, and that 

has a demonstrated history of effectively 

developing and implementing literacy 

activities. Note: A local affiliate of an 

NNP does not meet the definition of 

NNP. Only a national agency, 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 11365 

organization, or institution is eligible to 

apply as an NNP. 

Rural local educational agency (Rural 

LEA) means an LEA that is eligible 

under the Small Rural School 

Achievement program (SRSA) or the 

Rural and Low-Income School (RLIS) 

program authorized under Title VI, Part 

B of the ESEA at the time of application. 

Universal design for learning (UDL) 

means a scientifically valid framework 

for guiding educational practice that (i) 

provides flexibility in the ways 

information is presented, in the ways 

students respond or demonstrate 

knowledge and skills, and in the ways 

students are engaged; and (ii) reduces 

barriers in instruction, provides 

appropriate accommodations, supports, 

and challenges, and maintains high 

achievement expectations for all 

students, including students with 

disabilities and students who are 

English Learners. 

Final Priorities, Requirement, and 

Definitions: 

We will announce the final priorities, 

requirement, and definitions in a notice 

in the Federal Register. We will 

determine the final priorities, 

requirement, and definitions after 

considering responses to this notice and 

other information available to the 

Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities, requirements, definitions, or 

selection criteria, subject to meeting 

applicable rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use one or more of these priorities, 

requirement, and definitions we invite 

applications through a notice in the Federal 

Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

proposed regulatory action is 

‘‘significant’’ and, therefore, subject to 

the requirements of the Executive order 

and subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

defines a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

as an action likely to result in a rule that 

may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local or tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

stated in the Executive order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this proposed 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

13563, which supplements and 

explicitly reaffirms the principles, 

structures, and definitions governing 

regulatory review established in 

Executive Order 12866. To the extent 

permitted by law, Executive Order 

13563 requires that an agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing these proposed 

priorities, requirement, and definitions 

only on a reasoned determination that 

their benefits would justify their costs. 

In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, we selected 

those approaches that would maximize 

net benefits. Based on the analysis that 

follows, the Department believes that 

this regulatory action is consistent with 

the principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to the program contact person 

listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11366 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: February 24, 2014. 

Deborah Delisle, 

Assistant Secretary for Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04490 Filed 2–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[GN Docket No. 13–5; WC Docket Nos. 10– 

90, 13–97, FCC 14–5] 

Technology Transitions; Connect 

America Fund; Numbering Policies for 

Modern Communications 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal 

Communications Commission 

(Commission) seeks comment on a 

number of discrete issues relating to the 

rural broadband experiments and on the 

appropriate budget and funding to 

support initiatives for the ongoing need 

for research into the future of telephone 

numbering. The purpose of these 

experiments is to speed market-driven 

technological transitions and 

innovations by preserving the core 

statutory vales that exist today. 

DATES: Comments are due on or before 

March 31, 2014 and reply comments are 

due on or before April 14, 2014. If you 

anticipate that you will be submitting 

comments, but find it difficult to do so 

within the period of time allowed by 

this document, you should advise the 

contact listed below as soon as possible. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by either WC Docket No. 10– 

90 or WC Docket No. 13–97, 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexander Minard, Wireline 

Competition Bureau, (202) 418–0428 or 

TTY: (202) 418–0484 for WC Docket No. 

10–90, Robert Cannon, Office of 

Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, 

(202) 418–2421 for WC Docket No. 13– 

97. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

synopsis of the Commission’s Further 

Notice of Proposed Rulemakings 

(FNPRM’s) in WC Docket Nos. 10–90; 

13–97 FCC 14–5, adopted on January 30, 

2014 and released on January 31, 2014. 

The full text of this document is 

available for public inspection during 

regular business hours in the FCC 

Reference Center, Room CY–A257, 445 

12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 

20554. Or at the following Internet 

address: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_

public/attachmatch/FCC-14-5A1.pdf. 

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 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 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. Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (WC Docket No. 10–90) 

1. In the Technology Transitions 

Order and Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (Order), adopted 

concurrently with these FNPRM’s, the 

Commission kick started the process for 

a diverse set of experiments and data 

collection initiatives that will allow the 

Commission and the public to evaluate 

how customers are affected by the 

historic technology transitions that are 

transforming our nation’s voice 

communications services—from a 

network based on time-division 

multiplexed (TDM) circuit-switched 

voice services running on copper loops 

to an all-Internet Protocol (IP) network 

using copper, co-axial cable, wireless, 

and fiber as physical infrastructure. In 

this FNPRM, the Commission seeks 

comment on a number of discrete issues 

relating to rural broadband experiments. 

The final rules that were adopted 

concurrently with these FNPRM’s are 

published elsewhere in this issue of the 

Federal Register. 

A. Budget for Rural Broadband 

Experiments 

2. The Commission intends to provide 

funding for experiments to extend 

modern networks in rural, high-cost 

areas without increasing the overall size 

of the universal service fund. The USF/ 

ICC Transformation Order, 76 FR 73830, 

November 29, 2011, directed Universal 

Service Administrative Company 

(USAC) to collect $4.5 billion annually 

for the Connect America Fund, and, to 

the extent disbursements in a given year 

are less than collections, deposit the 

excess in a broadband reserve account. 

Because annual disbursements have 

been less than $4.5 billion to date, and 

funds have accumulated in the reserve 

account, a limited amount of funding 

could be awarded for experiments in 

2014 from the reserve account without 

exceeding the overall $4.5 billion 

annual budget for the Connect America 

Fund. The Commission proposes that a 

limited amount of these unallocated 

funds be made available for experiments 

in any part of the country, whether 

served by an incumbent price cap 

carrier or rate-of-return carrier. Utilizing 

these unallocated funds for rural 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS