39966 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

Retail Ground or applicable Package 

Services price is applied. 

* * * * * 

9.0 Exchanges and Refunds 

* * * * * 

9.2 Postage and Fee Refunds 

* * * * * 

9.2.3 Full Refund 

A full refund (100%) may be made 

when: 

* * * * * 

[Revise the first sentence of item l to 

read as follows:] 

l. If a First-Class Mail, First-Class 

Package Service—Retail, First-Class 

Package Service, USPS Retail Ground or 

Package Services mailpiece is torn or 

defaced during USPS handling so that 

the addressee or intended delivery point 

cannot be identified. * * * 

* * * * * 

609 Filing Indemnity Claims for Loss 

or Damage 

1.0 General Filing Instructions 

* * * * * 

1.4 When to File 

File claims as follows: 

* * * * * 

b. Lost Articles: Customers must file a 

claim within the time limits in the chart 

below. 

Mail Type or Service 

* * * * * 

[Revise the sixth line item to read as 

follows:] 

APO/FPO/DPO Insured Mail and 

registered Mail (Priority Mail, FirstClass Mail, First-Class Package 

Service—Retail, SAM, or PAL) 

* * * * * 

700 Special Standards 

703 Nonprofit USPS Marketing Mail 

and Other Unique Eligibility 

1.0 Nonprofit USPS Marketing Mail 

* * * * * 

1.9 Mailing While Application 

Pending 

* * * * * 

1.9.2 Postage Record 

[Revise the text of 1.9.2 to read as 

follows:] 

While an application, or confirmation 

of authorization, is pending postage 

must be paid at applicable First-Class 

Mail, First-Class Package Service— 

Retail, or Priority Mail prices, or at 

applicable USPS Marketing Mail prices. 

The USPS records the difference 

between postage paid at regular USPS 

Marketing Mail prices and the postage 

that would have been paid at Nonprofit 

USPS Marketing Mail prices. No record 

is kept if postage is paid at First-Class 

Mail, First-Class Package Service— 

Retail, or Priority Mail prices. 

1.9.3 Refund 

* * * No refund is made: 

* * * * * 

[Revise the text of item b to read as 

follows:] 

b. If postage was paid at First-Class 

Mail, First-Class Package Service— 

Retail, or Priority Mail prices. 

* * * * * 

We will publish an appropriate 

amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect 

these changes. 

Stanley F. Mires, 

Attorney, Federal Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17799 Filed 8–22–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 54 

[WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58; FCC 17– 

87] 

Connect America Fund, ETC Annual 

Reports and Certifications 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, by 

eliminating several rules that are either 

duplicative of other reporting 

requirements or are simply no longer 

necessary, the Federal Communications 

Commission (Commission) streamlines 

the annual reporting requirements for 

eligible telecommunications carriers 

(ETCs) that receive high-cost universal 

service support. The Commission also 

re-emphasizes the importance of 

providing the public with access to nonconfidential information filed by ETCs, 

and it directs the Universal Service 

Administrative Company (USAC) to 

work closely with state and Tribal 

governments and other stakeholders to 

improve public access to the 

information that ETCs will continue to 

file. 

DATES: Effective September 22, 2017. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Alexander Minard, Wireline 

Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7400 or 

TTY: (202) 418–0484. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Report 

and Order in WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 

14–58; FCC 17–87, adopted on July 6, 

2017 and released on July 7, 2017. 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://

transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_

Business/2017/db0714/FCC-17- 

87A1.pdf 

I. Report and Order 

1. In this Report and Order, by 

eliminating several rules that are either 

duplicative of other reporting 

requirements or are simply no longer 

necessary, the Commission streamlines 

the annual reporting requirements for 

eligible telecommunications carriers 

(ETCs) that receive high-cost universal 

service support. The Commission also 

re-emphasizes the importance of 

providing the public with access to nonconfidential information filed by ETCs, 

and it directs the Universal Service 

Administrative Company (USAC) to 

work closely with state and Tribal 

governments and other stakeholders to 

improve public access to the 

information that ETCs will continue to 

file. In doing so, the Commission 

reduces ETCs’ regulatory burdens while 

strengthening the tools for program 

oversight in furtherance of its goal of 

protecting the high cost universal 

support program against waste, fraud, 

and abuse. 

2. Discussion. Based on the record 

before us, the Commission finds that it 

can eliminate all elements of the 

Commission’s annual high-cost 

reporting rules on which it sought 

comment without compromising its 

ability to monitor whether ETCs are 

using high-cost universal service 

support for its intended purpose. The 

Commission agrees with the vast 

majority of commenters that note 

‘‘reporting obligations should be 

effectively and efficiently tailored to 

monitoring ETCs’ modified service 

obligations.’’ At the same time, the 

Commission reiterates the importance of 

providing access to non-confidential 

information to the public and to states, 

U.S. Territories, and Tribal 

governments. 

3. Network outage reporting. First, 

because the Commission’s Network 

Outage Reporting System (NORS) 

already collects detailed outage 

information, and does so in a more 

timely fashion than the FCC Form 481, 

the Commission eliminates the rule 

requiring that ETCs’ annual reports 

include detailed information about any 

outages affecting voice service for at 

least 30 minutes that they have 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 39967 

experienced in the prior calendar year. 

Moreover, given the sensitive nature of 

this data to both national security and 

commercial competitiveness, most ETCs 

seek confidential treatment of their 

outage reporting. Centralizing the 

Commission’s collection of outage 

information in NORS will reduce the 

burden on ETCs of filing multiple 

requests for confidential treatment for 

the same information. It will also allow 

USAC to make more of an ETC’s Form 

481 data publicly available. 

4. Most commenters support 

eliminating this duplicative 

requirement. The Commission disagrees 

with those commenters that suggest that 

reporting this information imposes no 

additional costs on carriers. Even if a 

carrier has information on outages 

readily available, preparing and 

submitting duplicative documentation 

entails costs. The Commission also 

disagrees with suggestions that, because 

some states have deregulated 

telecommunications services in their 

states, the Commission should retain 

certain federal reporting requirements. 

Because carriers already have a federal 

obligation to file this information 

through NORS, the Commission finds it 

inappropriate to continue to require 

carriers to incur additional costs solely 

to provide states with this information 

directly where the Commission has 

determined it is unnecessary for its own 

high-cost universal service oversight. To 

the extent that state agencies want 

network outage information for their 

own purposes, they can, and some do, 

obtain such information through their 

own mechanisms. 

5. Unfulfilled service requests. 

Second, the Commission eliminates the 

requirement that ETCs report the 

number of service requests they receive 

but do not fulfill. The underlying 

purpose of this rule when adopted was 

to allow the Commission to monitor 

rate-of-return carriers’ progress in 

deploying broadband pursuant to the 

reasonable request standard. Based on 

the Commission’s implementation, 

however, it finds that the rule as written 

is not appropriately tailored to further 

the goal. Absent uniform and clear 

standards for how individual carriers 

evaluate such requests, the data 

reported cannot support any meaningful 

evaluation. In the Rate-of-Return Reform 

Order, 81 FR 24282, April 25, 2016, the 

Commission replaced the reasonable 

request standard, the primary reason the 

Commission originally adopted this 

reporting requirement, with defined 

broadband obligations. Thus, now most 

high-cost recipients—particularly rateof-return carriers regardless of whether 

they elected to receive model-based 

support or remain on the reformed 

support mechanisms—have specific 

broadband deployment obligations that 

the Commission will be able to monitor 

through their annual submission of 

information about the exact locations to 

which they built in the prior calendar 

year. Even if the Commission provided 

ETCs with additional guidance, this 

objective metric is a more efficient way 

to measure compliance than reporting 

unfulfilled requests, which requires a 

subjective determination as to whether 

to include the data. The Commission 

therefore eliminates this specific 

reporting requirement for all ETCs. 

6. Most commenters support this 

outcome. As with the other reporting 

requirements the Commission is 

eliminating, and for the same reasons, 

the Commission disagrees with those 

commenters that argue that reporting 

this information imposes no additional 

costs and that the Commission should 

continue collecting this information for 

the use of state commissions. In the 

Rate-of-Return Reform Order, the 

Commission directed USAC to provide 

the public access to ETCs’ nonconfidential location information and 

develop an online map that will enable 

the public to visualize service 

availability. Because the Commission 

believes the information USAC will 

make available online will be more 

useful to the public and equally useful 

to state commissions, the Commission 

also declines to modify the requirement, 

as one commenter suggests. 

7. Complaint reporting. Third, the 

Commission eliminates the obligation 

that ETCs annually report the number of 

complaints per 1,000 subscribers for 

voice and broadband services. 

Consumers who have complaints about 

ETCs can file complaints with the 

Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) or 

with states. CGB collects detailed 

information from each complainant, 

including the location and nature of the 

complaint. The Commission’s 

experience to date is that the high-level 

complaint data currently collected on 

Form 481 is not as useful as the detailed 

data already collected by CGB through 

the complaint process, in part because 

the Form 481 data do not currently 

contain information about individual 

complaints. The Commission therefore 

eliminates this reporting requirement 

and direct the Wireline Competition 

Bureau (WCB) to consult with CGB to 

ensure that the Commission collects the 

necessary complaint data to adequately 

measure the performance of carriers 

receiving universal service funding. 

8. Most commenters support 

elimination of this duplicative 

requirement. Again, the Commission 

disagrees with commenters who argue 

that reporting this information entails 

no additional costs, and that the 

Commission should continue collecting 

this information for the use of state 

commissions. One commenter expresses 

support for clarifying terms to make the 

information more useful; however, the 

Commission finds that its existing 

collection of detailed information from 

consumer complaints filed with CGB is 

sufficient for its oversight purposes. 

9. Pricing information. Fourth, the 

Commission eliminates the obligation of 

ETCs to report annually information 

regarding the pricing of their voice and 

broadband service offerings. As 

implemented in FCC Form 481, ETCs 

are required to submit information 

regarding their voice rates as of January 

1 of each year, and separately list rates 

for each wire center to the extent the 

rates vary, as well as indicate whether 

service is provided on a flat rate, 

measured or metered basis. For 

broadband offerings, ETCs must 

separately list each service offering that 

meets or exceeds the Commission’s 

minimum requirements and, if they do 

not have uniform rates across the study 

area, report each rate for individual 

exchanges. The net result is a detailed 

worksheet with multiple rates listed for 

each wire center. 

10. As a practical matter, the 

Commission has not made sufficient use 

of this pricing data to support its 

continued collection. The Commission 

primarily relies on the urban rate survey 

to develop annually the reasonable 

comparability benchmarks for both 

voice and broadband services, and 

annual certifications from providers that 

their rates do not exceed those 

benchmarks. The Commission therefore 

concludes that the public interest would 

be served by discontinuing this 

particular information collection. 

11. Most commenters support 

removing this reporting requirement. 

The Commission disagrees again with 

commenters arguing that reporting this 

information requires no additional 

costs, and that the Commission should 

continue collecting this information for 

the use of state commissions. One 

commenter suggests that carriers only 

report what is needed to show 

compliance with the ‘‘reasonable 

comparability’’ benchmark; as noted 

above, the Commission finds that it 

already requires submission of what is 

needed to show compliance with that 

benchmark through the urban rate 

survey and annual certifications. 

12. Service quality certification. Fifth, 

the Commission eliminates the 

requirement that an ETC certify its 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
39968 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

compliance with applicable service 

quality standards and consumer 

protection rules. Given that ETCs have 

an independent obligation to comply 

with all applicable service quality 

standards and consumer protection 

rules, the Commission finds that this 

certification is unnecessary for its 

oversight of ETCs. Any failure to 

comply with rules and requirements can 

be pursued regardless of whether a 

certification of compliance with those 

rules has been made. Both the 

Commission and USAC already have 

sufficient authority to investigate, audit, 

and pursue recovery of high-cost 

support for violation of program rules. 

13. Commenters generally support 

eliminating this requirement. For the 

same reasons as stated above, the 

Commission again disagrees with 

commenters suggesting that providing 

this certification would not entail any 

additional costs, and that the 

Commission should continue collecting 

these certifications for states’ own 

oversight purposes. 

14. Filing of duplicate FCC Forms 481. 

Finally, contingent upon USAC’s 

completion of the rollout of an online 

portal for recipients of high cost 

services, the Commission will no longer 

require ETCs to file duplicate copies of 

Form 481 with the FCC and with states, 

U.S. Territories, and/or Tribal 

governments beginning in 2018. In the 

Rate-of-Return Reform Order, the 

Commission directed USAC to ‘‘timely 

publish through electronic means all 

non-confidential high-cost data in open, 

standardized, electronic formats, 

consistent with the principles of the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

Open Data Policy,’’ and directed WCB 

‘‘to work with USAC to put appropriate 

protections in place for ETCs to seek 

confidential treatment of a limited 

subset of the information. Entities, such 

as states and Tribal governments, which 

already have access to confidentially 

filed information for ETCs[ ] within their 

jurisdiction, will continue to have 

access to such information through the 

online database.’’ If USAC completes 

the rollout of its online portal after the 

2018 Form 481 filing date, the 

Commission will no longer require ETCs 

to file duplicate copies of Form 481 

beginning in 2019. The Commission 

concludes that centralizing all filing 

requirements with USAC would benefit 

state and Tribal governments by 

reducing the need to sort through, in 

some cases, dozens of paper documents 

containing the same information as 

what will be available more readily 

through an online tool. The Commission 

reiterates to USAC the importance of 

working closely with state and Tribal 

governments and other stakeholders to 

provide the public with easy access to 

non-confidential data filed by ETCs. 

15. Only two states and no Tribal 

governments raised concerns regarding 

this proposal. Those commenters argue 

that it would be burdensome for states 

to actively seek ETCs’ reported 

information from USAC. As others note, 

it is likely less burdensome for a state 

commission to log onto USAC’s system 

and access carriers’ reports than for 

ETCs, especially small companies, to 

submit their reports to the commissions 

in states in which they operate. 

Nonetheless, in light of state 

commenters’ concerns, the Commission 

directs USAC to work with states and 

Tribal governments to facilitate their 

access to carriers’ submitted data. Other 

commenters generally express support 

for removing the duplicate filing 

requirement, although several 

commenters expressed some concern 

about access to ETCs’ confidential data 

provided through USAC’s new online 

system. However, as the Commission 

explained in the Rate-of-Return Reform 

Order, ‘‘[e]ntities, such as states and 

Tribal governments, which already have 

access to confidentially filed 

information for ETCs[ ] within their 

jurisdiction, will continue to have 

access to such information through the 

online database’’; entities without such 

access will not newly gain access to 

confidential information. In light of 

those commenters’ concerns, the 

Commission reiterates its direction to 

USAC to ensure appropriate protections 

for ETCs seeking confidential treatment 

of specific information, pursuant to 

Section 0.459 of the Commission’s rules, 

and to make public the non-confidential 

data it receives. USAC’s publishing of 

non-confidential data will improve the 

public’s access to the data without 

compromising the confidentiality of 

sensitive information. 

16. At this time, the Commission 

declines to eliminate any other ETC 

reporting requirements. Other 

information the Commission requires 

ETCs to report is necessary to enable it 

to fulfill its oversight responsibilities 

and to protect against waste, fraud, and 

abuse. Notwithstanding, the 

Commission will continue to evaluate 

its reporting requirements to identify 

other requirements that the Commission 

may be able to streamline or eliminate 

at a future point. 

17. This document contains modified 

information collection requirements 

subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act 

of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104–13. It 

will be submitted to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review under Section 3507(d) of the 

PRA. OMB, the general public, and 

other Federal agencies will be invited to 

comment on the new or modified 

information collection requirements 

contained in this proceeding. In 

addition, we note that pursuant to the 

Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 

2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(4), we previously sought 

specific comment on how the 

Commission might further reduce the 

information collection burden for small 

business concerns with fewer than 25 

employees. In this present document, 

the Commission has assessed the effects 

that might affect small businesses, 

which includes most businesses with 

fewer than 25 employees, in the Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 

below. 

18. As required by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) as 

amended, an Initial Regulatory 

Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) was 

incorporated in the Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking adopted in March 

2016 (Rate-of-Return Reform FNPRM, 81 

FR 21511, April 12, 2016). The 

Commission sought written public 

comment on the proposals in the Rateof-Return Reform FNPRM, including 

comment on the IRFA. The Commission 

did not receive any relevant comments 

in response to this IRFA. This Final 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) 

conforms to the RFA. 

19. In this Report and Order, the 

Commission streamlines the annual 

reporting requirements for eligible 

telecommunications carriers (ETCs) that 

receive high-cost universal service 

support by eliminating several rules that 

are either duplicative of other reporting 

requirements or are simply no longer 

necessary. The Commission also 

reinforces the importance of providing 

the public with access to nonconfidential information filed by ETCs 

and direct the Universal Service 

Administrative Company (USAC) to 

work closely with state and Tribal 

governments and other stakeholders to 

improve public access to the 

information that ETCs will continue to 

file. In doing so, the Commission 

reduces ETCs’ regulatory burden while 

strengthening the tools for program 

oversight in furtherance of its goal of 

protecting the high cost universal 

support program against waste, fraud, 

and abuse. 

20. 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 adopted herein. The 

RFA generally defines the term ‘‘small 

entity’’ as having the same meaning as 

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


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 39969 

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 smallbusiness concern’’ is one which: (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). 

21. Small Businesses, Small 

Organizations, Small Governmental 

Jurisdictions. The Commission’s actions, 

over time, may affect small entities that 

are not easily categorized at present. 

The Commission therefore describes 

here, at the outset, three comprehensive 

small entity size standards that could be 

directly affected herein. First, while 

there are industry specific size 

standards for small businesses that are 

used in the regulatory flexibility 

analysis, according to data from the 

SBA’s Office of Advocacy, in general a 

small business is an independent 

business having fewer than 500 

employees. These types of small 

businesses represent 99.9% of all 

businesses in the United States which 

translates to 28.8 million businesses. 

Next, the type of small entity described 

as 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 2007, there were 

approximately 1,621,215 small 

organizations. Finally, the small entity 

described as a ‘‘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.’’ U.S. Census 

Bureau data published in 2012 indicate 

that there were 89,476 local 

governmental jurisdictions in the 

United States. The Commission 

estimates that, of this total, as many as 

88,761 entities may qualify as ‘‘small 

governmental jurisdictions.’’ Thus, the 

Commission estimates that most 

governmental jurisdictions are small. 

22. The Report and Order does not 

impose any specific reporting, 

recordkeeping, or compliance 

requirements for entities, including 

small entities. Instead, by removing 

certain reporting requirements, the 

Report and Order streamlines existing 

reporting requirements. In particular, 

the Report and Order eliminates ETCs’ 

obligations to report (1) network outage 

information; (2) unfulfilled service 

requests; (3) the number of complaints 

received by an ETC per 1,000 

subscribers for both voice and 

broadband services; and (4) pricing for 

voice and broadband services. The 

Report and Order also eliminates the 

requirement that an ETC certify its 

compliance with applicable service 

quality standards and consumer 

protection rules, as well as the 

requirement that ETCs must file 

duplicate copies of Form 481 with the 

FCC and with states, U.S. Territories, 

and/or Tribal governments. 

23. The RFA requires an agency to 

describe any significant alternatives that 

it has considered in reaching its 

proposed approach, which may include 

(among others) the following four 

alternatives: (1) The establishment of 

differing compliance or reporting 

requirements or timetables that take into 

account the resources available to small 

entities; (2) the clarification, 

consolidation, or simplification of 

compliance or reporting requirements 

under the rule for small entities; (3) the 

use of performance, rather than design, 

standards; and (4) an exemption from 

coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, 

for small entities. The Commission has 

considered all of these factors 

subsequent to receiving substantive 

comments from the public and 

potentially affected entities. The 

Commission has considered the 

economic impact on small entities, as 

identified in comments filed in response 

to the Rate-of-Return Reform FNPRM 

and its IRFA, in reaching its final 

conclusions and taking action in this 

proceeding. 

24. In the Rate-of-Return Reform 

FNPRM, the Commission sought 

comment on whether to eliminate or 

modify several ETC reporting 

requirements. In the Report and Order, 

the Commission ultimately declined to 

modify any of the requirements, as some 

commenters suggest. Instead, as 

explained above, the Report and Order 

completely eliminates certain reporting 

requirements. Thus, the Report and 

Order does not impose any economic 

impact on affected entities, including 

small entities, but only reduces the 

burdens those entities face. The 

Commission further notes in the Report 

and Order that it will continue to 

evaluate its reporting requirements to 

identify other requirements that the 

Commission may be able to streamline 

or eliminate. 

25. The Commission will send a copy 

of the Report and Order, including this 

FRFA, in a report to be sent to Congress 

and the Government Accountability 

Office pursuant to the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). In 

addition, the Commission will send a 

copy of the Report and Order, including 

the FRFA, to the Chief Counsel for 

Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration. A copy of the Report 

and Order and FRFA (or summaries 

thereof) will also be published in the 

Federal Register. 

26. Accordingly, it is ordered, 

pursuant to the authority contained in 

sections 1, 2, 4(i), 201–206, 214, 218– 

220, 251, 252, 254, 256, 303(r), 332, 403, 

and 405 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), 155, 201–206, 

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

332, 403, 405, 1302, that this Report and 

Order is adopted, effective thirty (30) 

days after publication of the text or 

summary thereof in the Federal 

Register. 

27. It is further ordered that part 54 

of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR part 

54 is amended as set forth below, and 

such rule amendments shall be effective 

immediately upon announcement in the 

Federal Register of OMB approval. 

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54 

Communications common carriers, 

Health facilities, Infants and children, 

Internet, Libraries, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Schools, 

Telecommunications, Telephone. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Katura Jackson, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer. 

Final Rules 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Federal Communications 

Commission amends 47 CFR part 54 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), 155, 201, 

205, 214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 

unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Amend § 54.313 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 54.313 Annual reporting requirements 

for high-cost recipients. 

(a) Any recipient of high-cost support 

shall provide the following: 

(1) Certification that the carrier is able 

to function in emergency situations as 

set forth in § 54.202(a)(2); 

(2) A certification that the pricing of 

the company’s voice services is no more 

than two standard deviations above the 

applicable national average urban rate 

for voice service, as specified in the 

most recent public notice issued by the 

Wireline Competition Bureau and 

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau; 

(3) A certification that the pricing of 

a service that meets the Commission’s 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
39970 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 23, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

broadband public interest obligations is 

no more than the applicable benchmark 

to be announced annually in a public 

notice issued by the Wireline 

Competition Bureau, or is no more than 

the non-promotional price charged for a 

comparable fixed wireline service in 

urban areas in the states or U.S. 

Territories where the eligible 

telecommunications carrier receives 

support; 

(4) The recipient’s holding company, 

operating companies, affiliates, and any 

branding (a ‘‘dba,’’ or ‘‘doing-businessas company’’ or brand designation), as 

well as universal service identifiers for 

each such entity by Study Area Codes, 

as that term is used by the 

Administrator. For purposes of this 

paragraph, ‘‘affiliates’’ has the meaning 

set forth in section 3(2) of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended; 

(5) To the extent the recipient serves 

Tribal lands, documents or information 

demonstrating that the ETC had 

discussions with Tribal governments 

that, at a minimum, included: 

(i) A needs assessment and 

deployment planning with a focus on 

Tribal community anchor institutions; 

(ii) Feasibility and sustainability 

planning; 

(iii) Marketing services in a culturally 

sensitive manner; 

(iv) Rights of way processes, land use 

permitting, facilities siting, 

environmental and cultural preservation 

review processes; and 

(v) Compliance with Tribal business 

and licensing requirements. Tribal 

business and licensing requirements 

include business practice licenses that 

Tribal and non-Tribal business entities, 

whether located on or off Tribal lands, 

must obtain upon application to the 

relevant Tribal government office or 

division to conduct any business or 

trade, or deliver any goods or services 

to the Tribes, Tribal members, or Tribal 

lands. These include certificates of 

public convenience and necessity, 

Tribal business licenses, master 

licenses, and other related forms of 

Tribal government licensure. 

(6) The results of network 

performance tests pursuant to the 

methodology and in the format 

determined by the Wireline Competition 

Bureau, Wireless Telecommunications 

Bureau, and Office of Engineering and 

Technology. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–17794 Filed 8–22–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES