82_FR_22997 82 FR 22901 - Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime

82 FR 22901 - Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 96 (May 19, 2017)

Page Range22901-22903
FR Document2017-10099

In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) grants the Petition for Reconsideration filed by NTCA--The Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) of the Commission's Rate-of-Return Reform Order with respect to the average per-location, per-project construction limitation on universal service support provided for in the Rate-of-Return Reform Order. Amending the rule as described below will encourage carriers to plan cost-effective broadband deployment projects that include higher-cost locations, while maintaining adequate incentives for the efficient use of universal service funds.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 96 (Friday, May 19, 2017) 
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 96 (Friday, May 19, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22901-22903]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10099]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 54

[WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 14-58, CC Docket No. 01-92; FCC 17-36]


Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, 
Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) grants the Petition for Reconsideration filed by NTCA--The 
Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) of the Commission's Rate-of-Return 
Reform Order with respect to the average per-location, per-project 
construction limitation on universal service support provided for in 
the Rate-of-Return Reform Order. Amending the rule as described below 
will encourage carriers to plan cost-effective broadband deployment 
projects that include higher-cost locations, while maintaining adequate 
incentives for the efficient use of universal service funds.

DATES: Effective June 19, 2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Minard, Wireline Competition 
Bureau, (202) 418-0428 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order 
on Reconsideration in WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 14-58, CC Docket No. 01-92; 
FCC 17-36, adopted on April 20, 2017 and released on April 21, 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/db0421/FCC-17-36A1.pdf.

I. Order on Reconsideration

    1. By this Order, the Commission grants the Petition for 
Reconsideration filed by NTCA of the Commission's Rate-of-Return Reform 
Order, 81 FR 24282, April 25, 2016, with respect to the average per-
location, per-project construction limitation on universal service 
support provided for in the Rate-

[[Page 22902]]

of-Return Reform Order. The Commission finds that amending the rule as 
described below will encourage carriers to plan cost-effective 
broadband deployment projects that include higher-cost locations, while 
maintaining adequate incentives for the efficient use of universal 
service funds.
    2. In the Rate-of-Return Reform Order, the Commission adopted a 
Capital Investment Allowance to limit universal service reimbursement 
of capital expenses associated with very high-cost locations, with a 
goal of preserving funds for more efficient projects with deployment to 
a greater number of lower-cost locations. As part of the Capital 
Investment Allowance, the Commission adopted a rule precluding carriers 
from seeking universal service support for all capital expenses 
associated with any construction project with average per-location 
costs above a company-specific ``Maximum Average Per-Location 
Construction Project Limitation.''
    3. NTCA seeks reconsideration of how the construction limitation is 
applied. NTCA contends that disallowing all costs associated with a 
construction project will cause carriers to exclude certain locations 
to reduce the average per-location cost of the project, with the 
possible consequence of permanently ``stranding'' some locations 
without broadband-capable service. For example, if a carrier subject to 
a $10,000 average per-location limitation developed a project costing 
$105,000 to serve 10 locations (i.e., with an average cost per-location 
served of $10,500), the cost of the entire project would be disallowed. 
The carrier might instead exclude a handful of the highest cost 
locations to bring the average per-location cost below the threshold. 
Once excluded, however, there may not be a subsequent project that 
deploys service to those locations as efficiently as the first project 
and, as a result, the location may never receive broadband-capable 
service.
    4. NTCA therefore requests that the rule disallow, for the purpose 
of seeking universal service support, only the portion of a project's 
expenses that exceed the average per-location threshold. In the example 
above, where the $10,500 average per-location cost of the project 
exceeds the carrier's $10,000 Maximum Average Per Location Construction 
Project Loop Plant Investment Limitation, the carrier would report 
$100,000 (i.e., $10,000 per location) for universal service support 
purposes and exclude $5,000 (i.e., the amount in excess of $10,000 per 
location). In that case, a carrier might elect to deploy service to the 
highest-cost locations without prejudice to its ability to receive 
universal service support for the project, up to the amount of the 
average per-location cap.
    5. Upon reconsideration, the Commission agrees that wholly 
disallowing costs associated with projects exceeding the construction 
limitation could have the effect of preventing deployment to some 
locations that a carrier might otherwise choose to serve. As the 
Commission noted in adopting the Capital Investment Allowance, 
``[a]lthough it is the Commission's goal to ensure broadband deployment 
throughout all areas, finite universal service resources must be used 
where they are most needed.'' NTCA's proposed solution is to retain the 
average per-location construction limitation as a maximum amount 
includable for universal service support purposes in connection with a 
construction project. The Commission finds that this solution 
adequately preserves two critical Commission interests: First, 
promoting efficient use of universal service funds to maximize the 
number of high-cost locations with broadband-capable facilities, and 
second, enabling some locations to be efficiently included within 
another deployment project (when they might otherwise be denied service 
altogether). The Commission therefore grants NTCA's petition with 
respect to the construction limitation.

II. Procedural Matters

    6. Paperwork Reduction Act. This document does not contain new or 
modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, 
it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden 
for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to 
the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, 
see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
    7. Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification. The Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires that a regulatory 
flexibility analysis be prepared for rulemaking proceedings, unless the 
agency certifies that ``the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally 
defines ``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 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).
    8. In this Order on Reconsideration, the Commission amends the 
construction project limitation within the Capital Investment Allowance 
to permit carriers to report, for universal service purposes, capital 
expenses per location up to the established per-location per project 
limit, rather than disallowing all capital expenses associated with 
construction projects in excess of the limit. This project-specific 
limitation provides a reasonable upper limit on the amount of per-
location capital expenses associated with a carrier's new construction 
project that the Commission expects will rarely be exceeded. Moreover, 
to the extent that this rule change has a significant economic impact 
on any small carriers, the rule change will provide such carries 
additional flexibility to undertake new construction projects that 
exceed the limit without risk of losing all universal service support 
associated with the project. Because the Commission anticipates that 
this rule will not affect a substantial number of carriers, the 
Commission does not anticipate that it will affect a substantial number 
of small entities. Therefore, the Commission certifies that the 
requirements of this Order on Reconsideration will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The Commission will send a copy of the Order on Reconsideration 
including a copy of this final certification to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    9. Congressional Review Act. The Commission will send a copy of 
this Order on Reconsideration to Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

III. Ordering Clauses

    10. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority 
contained in sections 1 through 4, 214(e)(6), and 254 of the 
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 214(e)(6), 254, and 
pursuant section 1.429 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.429, the 
Petition for Reconsideration filed by NTCA on January 3, 2017 is 
granted to the extent indicated above and this Order on Reconsideration 
is adopted, effective thirty (30) days after publication of the text or 
summary thereof in the Federal Register.

[[Page 22903]]

    11. It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of 
this Order on Reconsideration to Congress and the Government 
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
    12. It is further ordered that pursuant to section 1.427 of the 
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.427, this Order shall be effective 30 days 
after publication of the text or summary thereof in the Federal 
Register.

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.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.

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.  54.303 by revising paragraph (f) introductory text to 
read as follows:


Sec.  54.303  Eligible Capital Investment and Operating Expenses.

* * * * *
    (f) Construction allowance adjustment. Notwithstanding any other 
provisions of this section, a rate-of-return carrier must exclude from 
the data it submits for the purposes of obtaining high-cost support 
under subpart K or subpart M of this part the amount of Loop Plant 
Investment associated with a new construction project that exceeds the 
Maximum Average Per Location Construction Project Limitation for that 
project as determined by the Administrator according to the following 
formula:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-10099 Filed 5-18-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 22901 Effective date Date certain authorization/cancellation federal Community Current effective State and location of sale of assistance no No. map date flood insurance longer available in community in SFHAs Glendora, City of, Tallahatchie County 280210 April 9, 1974, Emerg; September 27, 1985, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Marks, City of, Quitman County ............ 280140 March 4, 1974, Emerg; September 4, 1985, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Quitman County, Unincorporated Areas 280207 March 4, 1974, Emerg; September 4, 1985, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Sumner, Town of, Tallahatchie County 280194 January 28, 1974, Emerg; September 4, ......do ............... Do. 1985, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Tutwiler, Town of, Tallahatchie County 280197 January 28, 1974, Emerg; September 1, ......do ............... Do. 1986, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Webb, Town of, Tallahatchie County .... 280213 May 3, 1975, Emerg; August 1, 1986, Reg; ......do ............... Do. May 16, 2017, Susp. South Carolina: Chester County, Unincorporated Areas 450047 August 20, 1975, Emerg; July 5, 1982, Reg; ......do ............... Do. May 16, 2017, Susp. Lancaster, City of, Lancaster County .... 450121 December 7, 1973, Emerg; July 5, 1982, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Lancaster County, Unincorporated 450120 July 3, 1975, Emerg; January 6, 1983, Reg; ......do ............... Do. Areas. May 16, 2017, Susp. Tega Cay, City of, York County ............ 450036 N/A, Emerg; January 28, 2009, Reg; May ......do ............... Do. 16, 2017, Susp. York County, Unincorporated Areas ..... 450193 June 18, 1975, Emerg; November 4, 1981, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Region VII Iowa: Anita, City of, Cass County ................... 190048 April 11, 1975, Emerg; June 17, 1986, Reg; ......do ............... Do. May 16, 2017, Susp. Cass County, Unincorporated Areas ..... 190852 August 25, 1975, Emerg; September 1, ......do ............... Do. 1986, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Fonda, City of, Pocahontas County ...... 190483 May 26, 2010, Emerg; May 1, 2011, Reg; ......do ............... Do. May 16, 2017, Susp. Griswold, City of, Cass County ............. 190346 October 26, 1976, Emerg; May 1, 1987, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Marne, City of, Cass County ................. 190348 September 11, 2008, Emerg; January 6, ......do ............... Do. 2011, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. Massena, City of, Cass County ............. 190349 January 15, 2008, Emerg; January 6, 2011, ......do ............... Do. Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp. *do = Ditto. Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension. Dated: May 4, 2017. ACTION: Final rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Michael M. Grimm, summary of the Commission’s Order on Assistant Administrator for Mitigation, SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Reconsideration in WC Docket Nos. 10– Federal Insurance and Mitigation Communications Commission 90, 14–58, CC Docket No. 01–92; FCC Administration, Department of Homeland (Commission) grants the Petition for 17–36, adopted on April 20, 2017 and Security, Federal Emergency Management Reconsideration filed by NTCA—The released on April 21, 2017. The full text Agency. of this document is available for public Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) of [FR Doc. 2017–10161 Filed 5–18–17; 8:45 am] inspection during regular business the Commission’s Rate-of-Return BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Reform Order with respect to the hours in the FCC Reference Center, average per-location, per-project Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW., construction limitation on universal Washington, DC 20554, or at the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS service support provided for in the Rate- following Internet address: http:// COMMISSION of-Return Reform Order. Amending the transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_ rule as described below will encourage Business/2017/db0421/FCC-17- 47 CFR Part 54 carriers to plan cost-effective broadband 36A1.pdf. deployment projects that include I. Order on Reconsideration [WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58, CC Docket higher-cost locations, while maintaining No. 01–92; FCC 17–36] adequate incentives for the efficient use 1. By this Order, the Commission of universal service funds. grants the Petition for Reconsideration nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, Developing filed by NTCA of the Commission’s DATES: Effective June 19, 2017. a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Rate-of-Return Reform Order, 81 FR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 24282, April 25, 2016, with respect to Regime Alexander Minard, Wireline the average per-location, per-project AGENCY:Federal Communications Competition Bureau, (202) 418–0428 or construction limitation on universal Commission. TTY: (202) 418–0484. service support provided for in the Rate- VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:45 May 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM 19MYR1

22902 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations of-Return Reform Order. The cost locations without prejudice to its (1) Is independently owned and Commission finds that amending the ability to receive universal service operated; (2) is not dominant in its field rule as described below will encourage support for the project, up to the of operation; and (3) satisfies any carriers to plan cost-effective broadband amount of the average per-location cap. additional criteria established by the deployment projects that include 5. Upon reconsideration, the Small Business Administration (SBA). higher-cost locations, while maintaining Commission agrees that wholly 8. In this Order on Reconsideration, adequate incentives for the efficient use disallowing costs associated with the Commission amends the of universal service funds. projects exceeding the construction construction project limitation within 2. In the Rate-of-Return Reform Order, limitation could have the effect of the Capital Investment Allowance to the Commission adopted a Capital preventing deployment to some permit carriers to report, for universal Investment Allowance to limit universal locations that a carrier might otherwise service purposes, capital expenses per service reimbursement of capital choose to serve. As the Commission location up to the established per- expenses associated with very high-cost noted in adopting the Capital location per project limit, rather than locations, with a goal of preserving Investment Allowance, ‘‘[a]lthough it is disallowing all capital expenses funds for more efficient projects with the Commission’s goal to ensure associated with construction projects in deployment to a greater number of broadband deployment throughout all excess of the limit. This project-specific lower-cost locations. As part of the areas, finite universal service resources limitation provides a reasonable upper Capital Investment Allowance, the must be used where they are most limit on the amount of per-location Commission adopted a rule precluding needed.’’ NTCA’s proposed solution is capital expenses associated with a carriers from seeking universal service to retain the average per-location carrier’s new construction project that support for all capital expenses construction limitation as a maximum the Commission expects will rarely be associated with any construction project amount includable for universal service exceeded. Moreover, to the extent that with average per-location costs above a support purposes in connection with a this rule change has a significant company-specific ‘‘Maximum Average construction project. The Commission economic impact on any small carriers, Per-Location Construction Project finds that this solution adequately the rule change will provide such Limitation.’’ preserves two critical Commission carries additional flexibility to 3. NTCA seeks reconsideration of how interests: First, promoting efficient use undertake new construction projects the construction limitation is applied. of universal service funds to maximize that exceed the limit without risk of NTCA contends that disallowing all the number of high-cost locations with losing all universal service support costs associated with a construction broadband-capable facilities, and associated with the project. Because the project will cause carriers to exclude second, enabling some locations to be Commission anticipates that this rule certain locations to reduce the average efficiently included within another per-location cost of the project, with the will not affect a substantial number of deployment project (when they might possible consequence of permanently carriers, the Commission does not otherwise be denied service altogether). ‘‘stranding’’ some locations without anticipate that it will affect a substantial The Commission therefore grants broadband-capable service. For number of small entities. Therefore, the NTCA’s petition with respect to the example, if a carrier subject to a $10,000 Commission certifies that the construction limitation. average per-location limitation requirements of this Order on developed a project costing $105,000 to II. Procedural Matters Reconsideration will not have a serve 10 locations (i.e., with an average 6. Paperwork Reduction Act. This significant economic impact on a cost per-location served of $10,500), the document does not contain new or substantial number of small entities. cost of the entire project would be modified information collection The Commission will send a copy of the disallowed. The carrier might instead requirements subject to the Paperwork Order on Reconsideration including a exclude a handful of the highest cost Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public copy of this final certification to the locations to bring the average per- Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small location cost below the threshold. Once does not contain any new or modified Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C. excluded, however, there may not be a information collection burden for small 605(b). subsequent project that deploys service business concerns with fewer than 25 9. Congressional Review Act. The to those locations as efficiently as the employees, pursuant to the Small Commission will send a copy of this first project and, as a result, the location Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Order on Reconsideration to Congress may never receive broadband-capable Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. and the Government Accountability service. 3506(c)(4). Office pursuant to the Congressional 4. NTCA therefore requests that the 7. Final Regulatory Flexibility Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). rule disallow, for the purpose of seeking Certification. The Regulatory Flexibility III. Ordering Clauses universal service support, only the Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires portion of a project’s expenses that that a regulatory flexibility analysis be 10. Accordingly, it is ordered that, exceed the average per-location prepared for rulemaking proceedings, pursuant to the authority contained in threshold. In the example above, where unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule sections 1 through 4, 214(e)(6), and 254 the $10,500 average per-location cost of will not have a significant economic of the Communications Act of 1934, 47 the project exceeds the carrier’s $10,000 impact on a substantial number of small U.S.C. 151–154, 214(e)(6), 254, and Maximum Average Per Location entities.’’ The RFA generally defines pursuant section 1.429 of the Construction Project Loop Plant ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.429, the Investment Limitation, the carrier meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’ Petition for Reconsideration filed by nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES would report $100,000 (i.e., $10,000 per ‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small NTCA on January 3, 2017 is granted to location) for universal service support governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the extent indicated above and this purposes and exclude $5,000 (i.e., the the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same Order on Reconsideration is adopted, amount in excess of $10,000 per meaning as the term ‘‘small business effective thirty (30) days after location). In that case, a carrier might concern’’ under the Small Business Act. publication of the text or summary elect to deploy service to the highest- A small business concern is one which: thereof in the Federal Register. VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:45 May 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM 19MYR1

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 22903 11. It is further ordered that the Federal Communications Commission. § 54.303 Eligible Capital Investment and Commission shall send a copy of this Marlene H. Dortch, Operating Expenses. Order on Reconsideration to Congress Secretary. * * * * * and the Government Accountability (f) Construction allowance Final Rules Office pursuant to the Congressional adjustment. Notwithstanding any other Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). For the reasons discussed in the provisions of this section, a rate-of- preamble, the Federal Communications return carrier must exclude from the 12. It is further ordered that pursuant Commission amends 47 CFR part 54 as data it submits for the purposes of to section 1.427 of the Commission’s follows: obtaining high-cost support under rules, 47 CFR 1.427, this Order shall be subpart K or subpart M of this part the effective 30 days after publication of the PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE amount of Loop Plant Investment text or summary thereof in the Federal associated with a new construction Register. ■ 1. The authority citation for part 54 project that exceeds the Maximum continues to read as follows: Average Per Location Construction List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54 Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, Project Limitation for that project as Communications common carriers, 205, 214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 determined by the Administrator Health facilities, Infants and children, unless otherwise noted. according to the following formula: Internet, Libraries, Reporting and ■ 2. Amend § 54.303 by revising * * * * * recordkeeping requirements, Schools, paragraph (f) introductory text to read as [FR Doc. 2017–10099 Filed 5–18–17; 8:45 am] Telecommunications, Telephone. follows: BILLING CODE 6712–01–P nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES VerDate Sep<11>2014 14:45 May 18, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM 19MYR1


Document Created: 2018-11-08 08:48:06
Document Modified: 2018-11-08 08:48:06
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionRules and Regulations
ActionFinal rule.
DatesEffective June 19, 2017.
ContactAlexander Minard, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-0428 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.
FR Citation82 FR 22901 
CFR AssociatedCommunications Common Carriers; Health Facilities; Infants and Children; Internet; Libraries; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Schools; Telecommunications and Telephone
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR