[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39966-39970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17794]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 non-confidential 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 non-
confidential 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

[[Page 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 rate-of-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' non-confidential 
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

[[Page 39968]]

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 
Rate-of-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 non-confidential 
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

[[Page 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 small-business 
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

0
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.

0
2. Amend Sec.  54.313 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:


Sec.  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 Sec.  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

[[Page 39970]]

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-business-as 
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