83 FR 2075 - Bridging the Digital Divide for Low-Income Consumers, Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, Telecommunications Carriers Eligible for Universal Service Support
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 10 (January 16, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 10 (January 16, 2018)
| Page Range | 2075-2085 | |
| FR Document | 2018-00152 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 10 (Tuesday, January 16, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 2075-2085] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-00152] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 54 [WC Docket Nos. 17-287, 11-42, 09-197; FCC 17-155] Bridging the Digital Divide for Low-Income Consumers, Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, Telecommunications Carriers Eligible for Universal Service Support AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) takes a fresh look at the Commission's Lifeline program and makes changes to the Lifeline rules to ensure that the program can more effectively and efficiently help close the digital divide for low- income consumers, while minimizing the contributions burden on ratepayers by tackling waste, fraud, and abuse. DATES: Effective February 15, 2018, except for Sec. 54.411, which will become effective March 19, 2018, and Sec. Sec. 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 which contain information collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB. The Federal Communications Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of those rules awaiting OMB approval. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodie Griffin, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7400 or TTY: (202) 418-0484. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order in WC Docket Nos. 17-287, 11-42, 09-197; FCC 17-155, adopted on November 16, 2017 and released on December 1, 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/db1201/FCC-17-155A1.pdf. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and Notice of Inquiry (NOI) that was adopted concurrently with the Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, Memorandum Opinion and Order are published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. I. Introduction 1. This Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order takes a series of steps to address ongoing areas of concern in the Lifeline program to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. Specifically, the Orders target enhanced Lifeline support to residents of rural areas on Tribal lands, establish mapping resources to identify rural Tribal lands, require independent certification of residency on rural Tribal lands, and direct enhanced support to facilities-based providers. In addition, this document makes changes to increase Lifeline benefit portability by eliminating the port freezes for voice and broadband internet access services. This document also clarifies that ``premium Wi-Fi'' and other similar networks of Wi-Fi- delivered broadband internet access service do not qualify as mobile broadband under the Lifeline program rules. Together, the Orders target enhanced Lifeline support for Tribal lands to support the deployment of modern communications networks, promote consumer choice within the program, and remove uncertainty and streamline our rules regarding the application of Lifeline support and eligibility for Lifeline reimbursement. II. Fourth Report and Order 2. In this Fourth Report and Order, the Commission adopts several reforms to our Tribal Lifeline policies to increase the availability and affordability of high-quality communications services on Tribal lands. The Commission first targets enhanced Lifeline support on Tribal lands to residents of rural areas on Tribal lands. Since 2000, the Lifeline and Link Up programs have provided an enhanced subsidy of up to an additional $25 per month for service provided to qualified residents of Tribal lands, and a Link Up reduction of up to $100 for the cost to initiate supported service for qualifying residents of Tribal lands. This targeted support is in recognition of not only the low income levels but also the particularly poor connectivity on many Tribal lands. When it adopted the enhanced Lifeline Tribal subsidy, the Commission noted that the ``unavailability or unaffordability of telecommunications service on Tribal lands is at odds with our statutory goal of ensuring access to such services to `[c]onsumers in all regions of the Nation, including low-income consumers,''' and explained that the added Lifeline and Link Up support would help lead to the deployment of more robust networks. While the Commission provided the enhanced support as a discount on services, that support was focused to most efficiently encourage ``investment and deployment'' in facilities, especially since all Lifeline providers in the program at the time were facilities-based. Because of an overly-broad definition of the geographic areas eligible for the enhanced subsidy, however, many areas where this enhanced subsidy is currently available are not lacking in either voice or broadband networks. To remedy this, the Commission refines its approach to target enhanced Lifeline support to residents of rural areas on Tribal lands. Focusing the enhanced subsidy for Tribal lands on rural areas is consistent with the enhanced subsidy's purpose and will ensure that the Fund is better directed toward the residents of Tribal lands who typically have the least choice for communications services. 3. The Commission believes that targeting enhanced support toward rural, facilities-based providers is consistent with the intent of the 2000 Tribal Order, 65 FR 47883, August 4, 2000. While the 2000 Tribal Order referenced reducing the costs of [[Page 2076]] telecommunications services, it specifically premised the support on the idea that enhanced support would incentivize providers to ``deploy telecommunications facilities in areas that previously may have been regarded as high risk and unprofitable.'' The Commission's creation of an enhanced Lifeline benefit in the 2000 Tribal Order both reduced telecommunications costs and supported the deployment of networks because, at the time, all ETCs were facilities-based. (The Commission did not forbear from the Act's facilities-based requirements at all until 2005.) While the Commission must consider and address appropriate distinctions between support for facilities-based and non-facilities- based providers, the Commission does so in a way that continues to follow the principles identified in the 2000 Tribal Order and Sections 214 and 254 of the Act. (See U.S.C. 214(e) and 254(b)(3).) 4. To identify rural areas on Tribal lands, the Commission adopts the definition of ``rural'' used in the E-rate program rules, which define ``urban'' as ``an urbanized area or urban cluster area with a population equal to or greater than 25,000.'' The Commission defines all other areas as ``rural.'' (47 CFR 54.505(b)(3).) In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, 80 FR 42669, July 17, 2015, the Commission asked for comment on ``what level of density'' and at ``what level of geographic granularity'' it should define such rural areas. Shortly thereafter, the Commission began consultations with Tribal Nations regarding the Lifeline proposals that the Commission sought comment on in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM. After consideration of the comments, including comments by numerous Tribal stakeholders, and evaluation of the practicality of implementation, the Commission believes this definition will reasonably identify the Tribal areas the Commission intends to benefit from additional Lifeline funding. Accordingly, the Commission amends Sec. Sec. 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 of the Lifeline program rules and directs the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) to develop a tool that will allow Lifeline service providers to determine whether a subscriber residing on Tribal lands resides in a rural area according to this definition. USAC shall update this tool pursuant to the same update schedule used for the E-rate rurality tool. 5. Selection of the E-rate program's ``rural'' definition is based on consideration of the record and matters of administrative efficiency. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on focusing enhanced support to those Tribal lands with lower population densities. Specifically, the Commission sought comment on ``focus[ing] enhanced support only on areas of low population density that are likely to lack the facilities necessary to serve subscribers.'' The Commission also sought comment on the approach taken by the United States Department of Agriculture's Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), which excludes from eligibility residents of towns or cities in Oklahoma with populations of 10,000 or more, and sought comment on whether the Commission ``should implement a similar approach that excludes urban areas on Tribal lands from receiving enhanced Tribal support.'' Some commenters expressed concerns with a population density approach, but provided alternative density- based proposals ranging from limiting enhanced support to areas with fewer than 10,000 people and a county population density of less than 125 people per square mile, (Navajo Nation Telecommunications Regulatory Commission Comments at 12-13.) or ``only to Tribal lands that are located outside of a Metropolitan Statistical Area and that have less than 100 persons per square mile.'' (Smith Bagley Inc., Comments at 16) These proposals are more restrictive than the E-rate program's definition of rural. Other commenters opposed limiting the enhanced Tribal subsidy based on population density. The Commission disagrees with those commenters because their path would preserve the status quo of providing enhanced support to Lifeline subscribers on Tribal lands in densely populated areas where service providers already have sufficient incentive to deploy broadband facilities as in non- Tribal areas. 6. The Commission agrees that focusing enhanced support on less- dense areas will improve the Tribal support mechanism and better serve the goals of enhanced Tribal Lifeline support to incent deployment in areas that need it most and to increase the affordability of Lifeline services for Tribal lands residents. Based on the record, however, the Commission declines to adopt a population-density threshold to identify the Tribal areas that are eligible for enhanced Tribal support. Instead, the Commission takes an approach similar to the approach used by the FDPIR and use the E-rate program definition of ``rural'' to identify Tribal areas that are eligible for enhanced Lifeline support. This approach provides consistency between the E-rate and Lifeline programs. In addition, the Commission's definition of ``rural'' in the E-rate program serves the goals of enhanced Tribal Lifeline support by focusing enhanced support where communications services are more costly. As explained in the 2014 E-rate Order, 80 FR 5961, February 4, 2015, the Commission adopted the current E-rate program definition of ``rural'' after numerous parties demonstrated that a narrower definition would result in an urban classification for numerous schools and libraries in small towns and remote areas where E-rate supported services are more costly. Using the E-rate definition of ``rural'' to identify Tribal areas that are eligible for enhanced support would ensure that the enhanced support is available for Tribal lands in these small towns and remote areas where supported services are more costly. Further, the E-rate definition of ``rural'' is less restrictive than the alternative population density-based methodologies proposed by Smith Bagley and the Navajo Nation Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. 7. The Commission also concludes that identifying less-dense areas by using the same definition of ``rural'' as the E-rate program (which was adopted in December 2014 and implemented for E-rate Funding Year 2015) will allow for more accurate, efficient administration by USAC. The Commission expects that consistency between the two USF programs will simplify the urban/rural determinations for carriers and eligible households. Specifically, standard program definitions of rurality would allow USAC to develop master data sources and simplify the development and updating of service provider tools for identifying addresses that qualify for enhanced support. The Commission therefore declines to adopt commenters' proposals to create an entirely new definition of rurality based directly on the number of persons per square mile in a particular geographic area. Those proposals would create unnecessary administrative difficulties and uncertainty for Lifeline providers, which the Commission believes would in turn create confusion and fewer choices for eligible low-income consumers. 8. The Commission also concludes that the provision of enhanced support in more densely populated Tribal lands, such as large cities (e.g., Tulsa, Oklahoma or Reno, Nevada), is inconsistent with the Commission's primary purpose of the enhanced support. (Despite being ``The Biggest Little City in the World,'' Reno, NV has a population of 446,154 and, according to Form 477 data, 97.5% percent of the [[Page 2077]] population in its county have access to fixed broadband speeds of at least 25 Mbps/3 Mbps. Tulsa, OK has a population of 637,215 and 100% percent of the population in its county has access to fixed broadband speeds of at least 25 Mbps/3 Mbps. See Fixed Broadband Deployment Data, Deployment (last visited Oct. 24, 2017), https://www.fcc.gov/maps/fixed-broadband-deployment-data/.) When the Commission first adopted enhanced support on Tribal lands, it noted that ``unlike in urban areas where there may be a greater concentration of both residential and business customers, carriers may need additional incentives to serve Tribal lands that, due to their extreme geographic remoteness, are sparsely populated and have few businesses.'' That remains too true today. Approximately 98 percent of Americans in urban areas already have access to fixed broadband internet access service at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps, including residents of both Tulsa and Reno. (See Fixed Broadband Deployment Data, Deployment (last visited Oct. 24, 2017), https://www.fcc.gov/maps/fixed-broadband-deployment-data/.) Directing enhanced support to Tribal lands in urban areas is unlikely to materially increase the deployment of facilities in such areas and, therefore, risks wasting scarce program resources. In contrast, rural Americans, particularly those residing on Tribal lands, are much less likely to have access to high-speed internet access services, with Commission data showing that 63 percent of Americans living on rural, Tribal lands lack access to fixed broadband services at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps, making enhanced support more likely to incentivize deployment to serve low-income, rural residents on Tribal lands. (See Fixed Broadband Deployment Data, Deployment (last visited Oct. 24, 2017), https://www.fcc.gov/maps/fixed-broadband-deployment-data/.) This policy supports our view that enhanced Tribal support should be targeted to rural areas where the need is greatest. 9. The Commission next identifies mapping resources that can be used to locate ``Tribal lands'' under our rules. These maps can then be intersected with the maps delineating rural areas in order to create a map showing where enhanced Tribal lands Lifeline support is available. The Commission directs USAC to make these mapping resources available to providers. 10. Section 54.400(e) of our rules defines Tribal lands to include any federally recognized Indian tribe's reservation, pueblo, or colony (including former reservations in Oklahoma); Alaska Native regions established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act; Indian allotments; Hawaiian Home Lands held in trust for Native Hawaiians pursuant to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act; and ``. . . any land designated as such by the Commission for purposes of this subpart.'' Before 2015, the Commission had not established any mapping resources to provide ready access to the boundaries of these Tribal lands. 11. The geographic areas described in Sec. 54.400(e) of the Lifeline program rules correspond with the map of Hawaiian Home Lands maintained by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), the U.S. Census Bureau's American Indians and Alaska Natives Map, the Oklahoma Historical Map 1870-1890, as amended by the Commission to include the Cherokee Outlet, and the Alaska Native regions established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. (See 85 Stat. 688.) 12. To assist carriers and subscribers, the Commission identifies specific maps of these Tribal lands. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission interpreted the term ``former reservations in Oklahoma'' to establish boundaries for Tribal lands in the Lifeline program for residents in Oklahoma. The Commission and USAC later provided a map and shapefile for carriers to use in determining whether their customers reside on Tribal lands in Oklahoma. The Commission believes making this map available has successfully given clarity to providers and subscribers about the boundaries of Tribal lands in Oklahoma. The Commission thus believes providing additional maps and data, including in shapefile format, is appropriate for the other Tribal lands listed in Sec. 54.400(e) of the Commission's rules. By providing carriers the information they need to quickly and accurately determine if an enrolling customer qualifies for enhanced support under the Lifeline rules, these maps and data will help prevent waste, fraud, and abuse in the program. These maps and data will also help Lifeline providers avoid situations in which the provider improperly requests enhanced Tribal support for customers who self-certified their Tribal residence but did not actually reside on Tribal lands. 13. The Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1921 (42 Stat. 108.) delineated the boundaries of ``Hawaiian Home Lands'' and tasked the DHHL with maintaining those boundaries, along with the responsibility of promulgating rules under that Act. As part of its responsibilities, the DHHL makes available a map and shapefile that precisely defines the geographic areas within the state of Hawaii considered ``Hawaiian Home Lands.'' Using this map will assist both Lifeline providers and consumers. Likewise, the Census Bureau maintains a map of every ``federally recognized Indian tribe's reservation, pueblo, or colony,'' called the American Indian and Alaska Native Areas Map. (See 47 CFR 54.400(e).) This map, and its accompanying shapefile, comports with the data sources the Commission uses regularly and will also provide clear guidance for Lifeline providers and consumers. 14. In light of these identified mapping resources, as well as the expected need for a reasonable transition period, the Commission directs USAC to prepare a map and the corresponding shapefiles to delineate the areas on which subscribers may receive enhanced Lifeline support for rural Tribal lands. USAC shall make this map and data available at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of this Order's rule changes for enhanced Lifeline support on Tribal lands. If, in the future, any of the sources identified in this section issue updated maps or shapefiles, the Commission directs USAC to make an updated map and the underlying data available within a reasonable time period but no later than ninety (90) days after the updated map or shapefile is issued. 15. The Commission also directs USAC to incorporate the map discussed above in its administration and implementation of the National Lifeline Accountability Database (NLAD) and National Eligibility Verifier (NV). 16. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on requiring additional evidence of Tribal residency beyond the current self-certification requirement and placing the obligation to confirm Tribal residency with the Lifeline provider. To see that enhanced Lifeline support for rural Tribal lands is actually directed to subscribers who verifiably reside on Tribal lands, the Commission now establishes that only subscribers whose residential address or location is shown to fall within the boundary of the enhanced Tribal Lifeline map discussed above may receive enhanced support. Previously, the Commission had permitted providers to accept subscribers' self- certifications that they reside on Tribal lands according to the Commission's Lifeline rules, which made the program vulnerable to fraud and abuse and resulted in a $2 million settlement with one provider for claiming enhanced Tribal support for [[Page 2078]] subscribers who did not reside on Tribal lands. The Commission finds that the provision of maps delineating the boundaries of areas eligible for enhanced Tribal Lifeline support will give consumers and providers a more effective and simpler means of determining rural Tribal residency, thereby eliminating the need for reliance on self- certification. Accordingly, going forward, Lifeline providers will be required to independently verify and document subscribers' rural Tribal residency according to the map and data sources identified above. An ETC may seek enhanced reimbursement only for subscribers whose residential address is located within the bounds of that map. 17. In response to the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, some commenters urged the Commission to continue to permit consumers to self-certify their residence on Tribal lands. Commenters supporting this approach argue that there is no evidence of abuse of the self-certification mechanism, and eliminating self-certification would only increase subscriber costs. However, the Commission has recently found concrete evidence of abuse of the self-certification mechanism, resulting in improper payments that had to be reclaimed through an enforcement proceeding. (See Blue Jay Wireless, LLC, Order, 31 FCC Rcd 7603 (EB 2016).) In that instance, a Lifeline provider relied on subscriber self-certifications to improperly enroll several thousand customers as residents of Tribal lands, and continued to do so even after being informed that it was apparently over-claiming enhanced Tribal support. The Commission also finds that providing a map against which providers can verify eligibility for enhanced Tribal support provides greater certainty to providers and consumers alike, and thus eliminates questions about how to handle a consumer's self-certification if that consumer seems to reside outside Tribal lands. 18. The Commission concludes that a process by which providers determine enhanced eligibility by comparing the subscriber's residential address to data sources delineating rural Tribal lands is a more accurate method of verifying that a subscriber is entitled to enhanced Tribal reimbursement. If a subscriber does not reside within the bounds of the map that the Commission now provides, permitting that subscriber to receive reimbursement by simply certifying that she or he lives on Tribal lands leaves the program open to improper payments, waste, and possibly fraud and abuse. 19. The Commission is also sensitive to Tribal residences that have not been assigned conventional addresses and instead use descriptive addresses that are not recognized by the U.S. Postal Service. For those residences, a Lifeline subscriber may provide a descriptive address when enrolling in the program. A provider enrolling a subscriber with a descriptive residential address in a state where the National Verifier is not responsible for eligibility determinations must retain records documenting compliance with the program rules, including the rules the Commission amends in this Order limiting enhanced Lifeline support to rural Tribal lands and removing subscriber self-certification of Tribal lands residency. Accordingly, the Commission reminds providers that they must retain the documentation demonstrating how the provider determined that a subscriber with a descriptive address resides on rural Tribal lands to claim the enhanced Tribal Lifeline support. For example, as providers do today to verify the accuracy of consumers' self-certification, providers may note if a subscriber has a ZIP code that is entirely located in an area eligible for enhanced support, or may record the latitude and longitude of the subscriber's residence to compare against a map identifying areas eligible for enhanced support. The Commission directs USAC to develop a process for subscribers with descriptive addresses who reside on Tribal lands for use in the National Verifier, and to make public the steps in that process to better inform providers about acceptable methods of determining whether such subscribers are eligible for enhanced support. 20. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission sought comment on limiting enhanced Tribal Lifeline support to facilities-based service providers, just as the Commission in 2012 had limited enhanced Tribal Link Up support to facilities-based service providers that also received high-cost support. The Commission now concludes that such a limitation is appropriate. Accordingly, the Commission amends Sec. 54.403(a)(3) of the Lifeline program rules to effectuate this change. 21. The Commission finds that last-mile facilities are critical to deploying, maintaining, and building voice- and broadband-capable networks on Tribal lands and Lifeline funds are more efficiently spent when supporting such networks. When the Lifeline discount is applied to a consumer's bill for a facilities-based service, those funds go directly toward the cost of providing that service, including provisioning, maintaining, and upgrading that provider's facilities. Since the introduction of enhanced Tribal and Link Up support in 2000, facilities-based providers have used that support to construct and upgrade networks on Tribal lands. 22. In contrast, Lifeline funds disbursed to non-facilities-based providers will still lower the cost of the consumer's service, but cannot directly support the provider's network because the provider does not have one. When the Commission eliminated Link Up support for non-facilities-based carriers on Tribal lands in 2012, it noted that at least one wireless reseller ``has received approximately a million in Link Up support for two months in 2011 on Tribal lands in [Oklahoma] without building infrastructure''--contravening the purposes of the enhanced support. And in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission explained, ``Lifeline program data show that two-thirds of enhanced Tribal support goes to non-facilities based providers, and it is unclear whether the support is being used to deploy facilities in Tribal areas''--which contravened the Commission's express ``desire to use enhanced support to incent the deployment of facilities on Tribal lands.'' 23. For the purposes of the Lifeline program, to enforce our revised Sec. 54.403(a)(3), the Commission limits enhanced Tribal support to (1) fixed or mobile wireless facilities-based Lifeline service provided on Tribal lands with wireless network facilities covering all or a portion of the relevant Lifeline ETC's service area on Tribal lands; and (2) facilities-based fixed broadband or voice telephony service provided through the ETC's ownership or a long-term lease of last-mile wireline loop facilities capable of providing Lifeline service to all or a portion of the ETC's service area on Tribal lands. For purposes of enhanced Lifeline support, a fixed wireless provider must, consistent with FCC Form 477 instructions, provision or equip a broadband wireless channel to the end-user premises over licensed or unlicensed spectrum, while a mobile wireless provider must hold usage rights under a spectrum license or a long-term spectrum leasing arrangement along with wireless network facilities that that can be used to provide wireless voice and broadband services. (The Commission considers a long-term spectrum leasing arrangement as long-term de facto transfer spectrum leasing arrangements as defined and identified in 47 CFR 1.9003 and 1.9030, and long- [[Page 2079]] term spectrum manager leasing arrangements as defined and identified in 47 CFR 1.9003 and 1.9020(e).) For wireline providers, the Commission considers a ``long-term lease'' as an indefeasible right of use (IRU) of 10 years or more over the last-mile facility in question. The Commission has found that IRUs carry many of the same indicia of control as full ownership and therefore are considered fully owned facilities in other regulatory contexts. 24. The Commission concludes that, in the Lifeline program, an ETC's use of tariffed and un-tariffed special access services, resold services offered pursuant to sections 251(b) and (c), commercially available resold services, or unbundled network elements (UNEs) does not demonstrate that the service is ``facilities-based'' because such services do not reflect investment in broadband-capable networks in the service area by the ETC. Previously, the Commission found that competitors' use of incumbent local exchange carrier (LEC) special access services is not relevant to whether there is sufficient facilities-based competition in a market to justify forbearance from the incumbent LEC's obligation to provide UNEs. Additionally, UNEs themselves are only available in those cases where competitors are ``impaired'' without access--that is, UNEs are available to competitive carriers for those network components that a ``reasonably efficient'' competitor would not likely be able to construct on its own and without which market entry would likely be uneconomic. 25. If an ETC offers service using its own as well as others' facilities in its service area on rural Tribal lands, it may only receive enhanced support for the customers it serves using its own last-mile facilities. The Commission finds this definition is technology-neutral as between fixed and mobile services. 26. For many of the same reasons the Commission limited Link Up support to facilities-based carriers on Tribal lands, the Commission finds that limiting enhanced Lifeline support to facilities-based service provided to subscribers residing on Tribal lands will focus the enhanced support toward those providers directly investing in voice- and broadband-capable networks on rural Tribal lands. The Commission finds that this result comports with the Act's direction to the Commission to base its policies on the principle that ``low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and high cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and information services . . . that are reasonably comparable to those services provided in urban areas. . . .'' (47 U.S.C. 254(b)(3).) Directing enhanced Lifeline funds to facilities-based services makes those services more affordable and competitive for low-income consumers and also encourages investment that will ultimately provide more robust networks and higher quality service on rural Tribal lands. Doing so also ensures that the payments Lifeline providers receive from the Fund to serve rural Tribal lands will be reinvested in the ``provision, maintenance, and upgrading'' of facilities in those areas. (47 U.S.C. 254(e).) A number of Tribal Nations, Tribally-owned Lifeline providers, and other Lifeline providers agree with this decision and favor limiting enhanced support to providers with facilities, arguing that it will ensure that the enhanced subsidies reach the Tribal lands and residences that have never been connected and will support those network facilities already constructed. 27. The Commission disagrees with parties who argue that resellers' purchase of wholesale services from carriers that own facilities increases the incentive of those carriers to deploy and maintain their networks. Resellers offer little evidence beyond their own assertions that funneling Lifeline enhanced support funding through middle men will spur facilities-based carriers to invest in their rural, Tribal networks. Moreover, even if revenue from resellers marginally increases the ability and incentive of other providers to deploy or maintain facilities, the Commission concludes that this benefit is outweighed by our need to prudently manage Fund expenditures. Indeed, these resellers cannot explain how passing only a fraction of funds through to facilities-based carriers will mean more investment in rural Tribal areas than ensuring that facilities-based carriers receive 100 percent of the support. The Commission concludes that providing the enhanced support to Lifeline providers deploying, building, and maintaining critical last mile infrastructure is a more appropriate way to support the expansion of voice- and broadband-capable networks on Tribal lands. (The Commission reminds all ETCs that they may not discontinue Lifeline service to any community they serve without first relinquishing their ETC designation after the approval of the designation (state or federal) commission. See 47 U.S.C. 214(e)(4).) 28. To ensure compliance with this requirement and prevent potential waste, fraud, and abuse, the Commission directs USAC to take appropriate measures to verify that any ETC claiming enhanced rural Tribal support satisfies the facilities requirement outlined in this section prior to disbursing the enhanced support. 29. The Commission also clarifies that the ``facilities-based'' standard it describes bears only on whether the Lifeline provider is eligible to receive enhanced rural Tribal support. Whether a provider is ``facilities-based'' under the Act for purposes of seeking a Lifeline-only ETC designation and must obtain approval for a compliance plan to take advantage of blanket forbearance from the facilities requirement is unaffected by this standard and remains the same. (See 47 U.S.C. 214(e)(1)(A) (requiring ETCs to offer service ``either using its own facilities or a combination of its own facilities and resale of another carrier's services'').) 30. To ensure all impacted parties have sufficient time to make the necessary changes adopted in this Fourth Report and Order, the Commission provides a transition period. The changes made in this Fourth Report and Order for enhanced Lifeline support on Tribal lands shall be effective 90 days after the Wireline Competition Bureau announces that the Commission has received approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the new information collection requirements in this Fourth Report and Order subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13, or on August 1, 2018, whichever date occurs later. The Commission directs ETCs to notify, in writing, any customers who are currently receiving enhanced support who will no longer be eligible for enhanced support as a result of the changes in this Order. This notice must be sent no more than 30 days after the announcement of PRA approval. (Or, if the Commission has not received approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the new information collection requirements in this Order subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), once OMB approval has been received.) This notice must inform any impacted customers that they will not receive the enhanced Lifeline discount beginning 90 days after the announcement of PRA approval or on August 1, 2018, whichever occurs later, and that customers residing on rural Tribal lands who are currently receiving service from a non-facilities-based provider have the option of switching their Lifeline benefit to a facilities-based provider to continue receiving enhanced rural Tribal support. The notice must also detail the ETC's offerings for Lifeline subscribers who are not eligible for enhanced support. [[Page 2080]] III. Order on Reconsideration 31. By this Order, the Commission eliminates the port freeze for voice and broadband internet access services found in Sec. 54.411 of the Commission's rules. The Commission takes this action in response to significant concerns regarding the port freeze raised in Petitions for Reconsideration and other recent filings in the docket. In the 2016 Lifeline Order, 81 FR 33026, May 24, 2016, the Commission codified port freezes lasting 12 months for broadband internet access service and 60 days for voice telephony service. After reconsideration of certain findings in the 2016 Lifeline Order, the Commission now eliminates the Lifeline port freeze for voice and broadband internet access service. 32. The Commission established the extended port freeze for broadband internet access service ``[t]o facilitate market entry for Lifeline-supported BIAS [broadband internet access service] offerings, provide additional consumer benefits, and encourage competition'' by ``allowing broadband providers the security of a longer term relationship with subscribers. . . .'' Since the Commission adopted these requirements, multiple parties have filed Petitions for Reconsideration raising a variety of concerns regarding the port freeze rule. Petitioners argue that the port freeze requirements adversely impact consumers by restricting consumer choice and the record lacks evidence that demonstrates new entrants were or are having difficulty entering the Lifeline market. Petitioners also argue that the port freeze requirements were imposed without adequate notice, as required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA); and raise concerns regarding the challenges ETCs will face from an administrative perspective in attempting to comply with the 12-month port freeze requirement. Because the Commission grants the petitions for reconsideration on other grounds below, it does not address the APA and administrative burden arguments here. Additionally, since implementation of the port freeze rule, other parties have raised concerns regarding the alleged improper invocation of consumer port freezes by certain Lifeline providers, which limits consumer choice, especially with regard to the 12-month port freeze for broadband service. 33. The Commission agrees with arguments raised by Petitioners and others that the disadvantages to consumers of the port freeze rule, in practice, outweigh the anticipated advantages; accordingly, the Commission eliminates the codified Lifeline benefit port freeze for voice and broadband internet access service. (See 47 CFR 54.411.) The Commission concludes that restricting the ability of Lifeline consumers to transfer their Lifeline benefit between service providers ultimately disadvantages Lifeline consumers. Such a restriction limits Lifeline consumers' ability to seek more competitive offerings and obtain those services that best meet their needs. In addition, restricting consumers' ability to transfer their Lifeline benefit will not promote competitive service offerings and, in fact, may diminish providers' motivation to provide higher quality service after enrolling a Lifeline-supported broadband subscriber, because the provider is assured a 12-month commitment from the subscriber. The Commission also agrees that the record evidence does not clearly support the view that a 12-month port freeze is necessary to ease market entry, and indeed can discourage new providers from entering the Lifeline market or a new geographical area because a significant portion of Lifeline subscribers would not be able to transfer their benefit to otherwise compelling new services offerings. Nor does the Commission believe that the 60-day port freeze for voice services adopted in the 2016 Lifeline Order, while leading to these disadvantages, is effective in furthering its desired goals. 34. In general, parties that filed in support of a longer port freeze argued that carriers will be willing to make more significant investments as a result of longer term customer-carrier relationships and that a longer port freeze will discourage consumers from ``flipping.'' Indeed, several carriers decry ``flipping'' and explain how consumer churn makes it harder for carriers to recover their costs, including the costs of free phones. But flipping and consumer churn are not unique to the Lifeline marketplace, and companies have repeatedly turned to voluntary agreements (such as contracts) and alternative business models (such as prepaid plans) to address such concerns without the federal government artificially limiting consumer choice. In addition, the Commission notes that the primary intent of the Lifeline program is to provide a discount on service rather than devices. To the extent that providing discounted or free devices incentivizes consumers to engage in flipping, that outcome primarily results from a service provider's own marketing practices. The Commission also notes that supporters of the port freeze generally did not assert the 12-month port freeze was needed to address impediments to entering the market. 35. The Commission disagrees with those commenters who contend that removing the 12-month broadband internet access service port freeze will reduce provider participation in the Lifeline program and make it ``impossible to meet the Commission's minimum service standards and handset requirements at a cost that is affordable for low-income consumers.'' (Joint Lifeline ETC Respondents' Opposition at 7-8.) The Commission adopted minimum service standards after considering the record and concluding that minimum service standards are not unduly burdensome. Affordability was an important factor in adopting minimum service standards, and the standards the Commission adopted struck ``a balance between the demands of affordability and reasonable comparability.'' While the Commission considered concerns raised by some providers that they would not be able to offer services that meet the minimum standards, the Commission ultimately concluded that allowing the Lifeline benefit to be used on services that do not meet minimum service standards would lead to the type of ``second class'' service that the minimum service standards are meant to eliminate. Furthermore, prior to the 2016 Lifeline Order, the shorter USAC- administered 60-day benefit port freeze for voice service did not drive providers out of the program. Indeed, the Commission is now acting in response to requests from Lifeline providers to eliminate or shorten the port freeze due to the administrative burdens associated with compliance. 36. The Commission codified the port freeze in part because it anticipated that consumers would benefit from greater choice and innovative service offerings as a result. In addition, the Commission envisioned benefits would accrue to consumers from a longer term relationship with their service providers. Since the implementation of the port freeze, the Commission has been presented with evidence, however, that it has not delivered the consumer benefits the Commission envisioned when it codified the requirement, but instead has incented certain providers to enroll consumers in offerings that provide little meaningful residential broadband access while locking in their Lifeline benefit with that provider for the following 12 months. These providers have used the port freeze to prevent customer churn, asserting that the service falls within the 12-month port freeze timeframe, even when [[Page 2081]] offering plans with only 10 MB of guaranteed mobile cellular data. As a result, although the port freeze rule has in some instances resulted in longer term relationships as anticipated, any benefits have come at the expense of consumers who find themselves trapped in low-quality plans for a full year. Parties such as Consumer Action and the National Consumers League have urged the Commission ``to stop the abuse of the so-called `port freeze' rule, which is now being used to limit consumer choice and access to true broadband service and broadband-suitable devices.'' Because implementation of the port freeze has not, on balance, resulted in the anticipated benefits to Lifeline consumers and instead appears to have harmed consumers, the Commission now determines that this rule should be eliminated. The Commission also finds that retaining existing customers' port freezes would hinder consumer choice without leading or having led to improved offerings for consumers, and so the Commission declines to continue subscribers' existing port freezes. 37. Finally, the Commission clarifies the application of the Commission's rolling recertification rule in the absence of the port freeze rule and the port freeze exceptions. (47 CFR 54.410(f).) For purposes of rolling recertification, the subscriber's service initiation date is twelve months from the date of the most recent transfer or enrollment with the subscriber's current service provider, and recertification will be required every twelve months thereafter. 38. These changes to Sec. 54.411 of the Commission's rules will become effective 60 days after publication of this Order in the Federal Register. 39. To ensure that qualifying low-income Americans receive quality, affordable Lifeline-supported broadband service, the Commission revises its rules concerning the application of Lifeline support. Section 54.403(b)(1) of the Commission's rules requires ETCs ``that charge federal End User Common Line charges or equivalent federal charges'' to apply federal Lifeline support to waive such charges for Lifeline subscribers. (47 CFR 54.403(b)(1).) The rule is silent, however, on the application of Lifeline support for subscribers receiving the Lifeline benefit for broadband internet access service, either in a bundle with qualifying voice telephony service or on a standalone basis, which does not have an End User Common Line charge. The Commission hereby clarifies that Sec. 54.403(b)(1) of the Commission's rules only applies to subscribers receiving Lifeline-supported standalone voice telephony service or a bundled offering where the ETC is requesting reimbursement from the Lifeline program for the voice telephony component of the bundle. 40. USTelecom has filed a petition for reconsideration requesting, in relevant part, that the Commission eliminate Sec. 54.403(b) of the Commission's rules to resolve the rule's ambiguity with regard to Lifeline-supported broadband internet access service. USTelecom argues that broadband internet access service does not have a federal End User Common Line charge or intrastate service, creating confusion as to how ETCs may comply with Sec. 54.403(b) of the Commission's rules when the customer is receiving Lifeline-supported broadband internet access service. No parties filed in opposition to USTelecom's petition on this issue. 41. The Commission declines to eliminate the rule, as requested by USTelecom, so that ETCs seeking reimbursement for Lifeline voice telephony service, either on a standalone basis or in a bundle, will continue to apply the Lifeline discount to the EUCL. Instead the Commission now modifies Sec. 54.403(b)(1) to clarify that this rule only applies to subscribers receiving standalone voice telephony service or a bundled offering where the ETC is requesting reimbursement from the Lifeline program for the voice telephony component of the bundle. By not addressing whether and how Sec. 54.403(b)(1) applies to Lifeline-supported broadband internet access service, the rule causes unnecessary uncertainty for ETCs and may result in less affordable offerings for subscribers without any corresponding benefit for Lifeline subscribers. This revision of Sec. 54.403(b)(1) also comports with the longstanding Commission goal of simplifying administration of the Lifeline program and reflecting current marketplace conditions. Accordingly, the Commission amends Sec. 54.403(b)(1) to clarify that ETCs are only required to apply the Lifeline discount to the End User Common Line charge or equivalent federal charges where the ETC is receiving Lifeline support for that subscriber's voice telephony service. 42. The 2016 Lifeline Order modified Sec. 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to require the National Verifier, where it is responsible for determining subscriber eligibility or conducting recertification, to provide a copy of the subscriber's certification to the provider. (47 CFR 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), (e).) The Commission now resolves an apparent conflict in our rules and alters Sec. 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) of the Commission's rules to eliminate the requirement that the National Verifier provide copies of certifications to ETCs where the National Verifier is responsible for eligibility determinations. 43. USTelecom filed a petition for reconsideration requesting, in relevant part, modifications to Sec. 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) of the Commission's rules to properly reflect the 2016 Lifeline Order's intent with regard to the National Verifier. USTelecom argues that the text of the rule is in direct conflict with the 2016 Lifeline Order's language and intent. The 2016 Lifeline Order states: ``[t]he National Verifier will retain eligibility information collected as a result of the eligibility determination process'' and that ``Lifeline providers will not be required to retain eligibility documentation for subscribers who have been determined eligible by the National Verifier.'' However, Sec. 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) require Lifeline providers to retain eligibility documentation and certifications even when the National Verifier was responsible for the enrollment process. USTelecom adds that the cost and burden to providers of maintaining duplicative subscriber eligibility information from the National Verifier are unsupported by any ``sound policy basis.'' Further, USTelecom argues the rule may actually subvert program goals of ``. . . `ensur[ing] that the National Verifier will incorporate robust privacy and data security best practices in its creation and operation of the National Verifier.' '' No parties filed in opposition to USTelecom's petition on this issue. 44. The Commission now modifies Sec. 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to clarify that where the National Verifier is responsible for the consumer's initial eligibility determination or recertification, the National Verifier is not required to deliver copies of those certifications to the ETC. The Commission finds that this amendment to the rules is consistent with the goals of the National Verifier to ease burdens on Lifeline providers while improving privacy and security for consumers applying to participate in the program. This amendment also brings Sec. 54.410 of the Commission's rules in line with the Commission's stated intent in the 2016 Lifeline Order that Lifeline providers would not be required to retain eligibility documentation for eligibility determinations made by the National Verifier. Additionally, the Commission agrees with USTelecom that requiring Lifeline providers to maintain duplicative subscriber enrollment documentation presents unnecessary [[Page 2082]] risk to the privacy and security of subscriber information. IV. Memorandum Opinion and Order 45. To fully realize the Commission's objectives of providing Lifeline-support for broadband services, the Commission provides clarity to ensure that service providers claiming Lifeline support for broadband service actually provide Lifeline customers with the level of broadband service intended in the 2016 Lifeline Order. In February 2017, the Wireline Competition Bureau solicited public comment on a TracFone Wireless, Inc. (TracFone) request for clarification regarding Sec. Sec. 54.408 and 54.411 of the Commission's rules. The Commission now removes any uncertainty in the record with respect to whether certain Wi-Fi technologies qualify for Lifeline reimbursement by clarifying that broadband internet access delivered via Wi-Fi is not eligible for reimbursement as mobile broadband under the Lifeline program rules, and the Commission reiterates that mobile broadband service eligible for Lifeline reimbursement must be provided on a network using at least 3G (Third Generation) mobile technologies. The Commission also clarifies that a provider does not directly serve a customer with fixed broadband service under the Lifeline rules if that customer cannot access the services at their residential address and, therefore, Wi-Fi offerings like the ``premium Wi-Fi'' service described in the record also do not qualify for Lifeline support as fixed broadband service offerings. 46. In its request for clarification, TracFone sought clarification regarding the types of service that meet the minimum service standards for Lifeline-supported mobile broadband and qualify for the twelve- month benefit port freeze. In response, several commenters expressed concerns that interpreting the minimum service standards for Lifeline- eligible mobile broadband to allow for Wi-Fi-delivered broadband as described in the request would inhibit the Commission's goal of supporting quality service to low-income consumers, while others supported an interpretation of the Commission's rules that would permit Lifeline support for ``premium Wi-Fi'' access offerings. 47. The Commission clarifies that ``premium Wi-Fi'' and other similar networks of Wi-Fi-delivered broadband internet access service do not qualify as mobile broadband under the Lifeline program rules. (See 47 CFR 54.400 et seq.) In the 2016 Lifeline Order, the Commission focused on ``mobile network technologies'' and mobile service offerings over different generations of mobile technologies in adopting rules for Lifeline-eligible mobile broadband service. (See 47 CFR 54.408(b)(2)(i).) Against this backdrop, the Commission established minimum service standards, including minimum 3G (Third Generation mobile network) speeds, to qualify for Lifeline support. There is no evidence in the record that Wi-Fi-only technology, as deployed today, is a ``mobile technology'' or one of the ``generations'' of mobile technologies, as contemplated by the Commission in the 2016 Lifeline Order. Further, nothing in the record demonstrates that Wi-Fi, including ``premium Wi-Fi,'' as deployed today, should be treated as an industry accepted generation of mobile technology. 48. The Commission also disagrees with Telrite that the use of the term ``3G'' in the Sec. 54.408(b)(2)(i) of the Commission's rules was only intended as a proxy for a particular minimum network speed threshold and not a generation of mobile technology. In the 2016 Lifeline Order, the Commission's discussion makes it clear that it was incorporating industry mobile technology generations, and that 3G was not just a proxy for a speed threshold. The Commission, for example, stated that ``[f]or the mobile broadband minimum service standard for speed, it relies on Form 477 data while also incorporating industry mobile technology generation (i.e., 3G, 4G).'' 49. Unlike Wi-Fi, mobile networks provide ubiquitous mobility with large service area coverage. Wi-Fi access, however, can be a complement to a consumer's primary broadband service. Lifeline-eligible mobile broadband requires a mobile service provided through 3G mobile broadband technologies or subsequent and superior generations of mobile broadband technologies. Accordingly, the rules governing Lifeline support for a ``mobile broadband service'' contemplate not just a minimum of ``3G'' mobile network threshold speeds, but also a mobile network. (47 U.S.C. 153(33) (defining ``mobile service''); 47 CFR 20.3 (same).) As noted above, mobile networks, unlike current Wi-Fi networks, provide ubiquitous mobility within a large service area. Was the Commission to interpret the minimum service standard otherwise, an ETC could offer any fixed service with an arguably fast-enough speed, limit it to serve end users primarily using mobile devices, and claim that such a service was in fact ``mobile'' broadband because it offers speeds faster than ``3G.'' As a result, the section establishing Lifeline minimum service standards for fixed broadband service would have no meaningful application, because ETCs could simply offer the much lower data allowances permitted under the mobile broadband standards, supplement that amount with Wi-Fi-delivered data, and receive the same Lifeline support amount. (See 47 CFR 54.408(b)(1).) 50. The Commission also clarifies that a provider does not directly serve a customer with fixed broadband service under the Lifeline rules if that customer cannot access the service at their residential address. (See 47 CFR 54.407(a) (``Universal service support for providing Lifeline shall be provided directly to an eligible telecommunications carrier based on the number of actual qualifying low-income customers it serves directly as of the first day of the month.'')) The 2016 Lifeline Order contemplates Lifeline-supported fixed broadband service as a residential service. A service that, for example, purports to offer Lifeline-supported fixed broadband service but only provides customers with access to hotspots that a qualifying low-income subscriber cannot access from their own residence undermines the Commission's requirement that carriers directly provide service to receive reimbursement. A review of the Wi-Fi service disputed in the record before us indicates that the iPass network used to provide the premium Wi-Fi service keeps customers connected in ``hotels, airports, and other business venues,'' trains, airplanes, and convention centers, and in many towns only includes hotspots at establishments with pre- existing free public Wi-Fi offerings, like McDonald's, Burger King, and Walmart. (See The iPass Global Wi-Fi Network, iPass (last visited Oct. 24, 2017), https://www.ipass.com/mobile-network/. See also, e.g., iPass hotspot locations in Indianola, Iowa, and Forrest City, Arkansas, https://hotspot-finder.ipass.com/united-states/indianola-iowa, https://hotspot-finder.ipass.com/united-states/forrest-city-arkansas (last visited Oct. 24, 2017).) Some commenters indicated that these hot spot locations are ``likely to be of little use to most Lifeline customers'' because few of the hot spots are located in low-income residential areas, and the hot spot locations ``may not be common areas in which Lifeline customers would find themselves trying to utilize their Lifeline supported [broadband internet access service].'' (TracFone Wireless Reply at 7 & n. 12; Public Utility Division of Oklahoma Comments at 4.) TracFone also states that based on its sample testing for one Florida ZIP [[Page 2083]] Code, ``[l]ess than one percent of the 10,223 Lifeline households within that ZIP Code reside within areas covered by iPass hotspots'' and that nine of the twelve iPass hot spots within that ZIP Code ``are located inside business locations (typically, restaurants and hotels, and only available to patrons of those businesses).'' Accordingly, these types of premium Wi-Fi services would be functionally inaccessible to many Lifeline consumers and, thus, offering such services does not directly serve a Lifeline customer with fixed broadband service as required by Sec. 54.407(a) of the Lifeline rules. V. Procedural Matters A. Paperwork Reduction Act 51. The Fourth Report and Order contains new 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 revised information collection requirements contained in this proceeding. In addition, the Commission notes that pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, the Commission previously sought specific comment on how it might further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. 52. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) included an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM in WC Docket Nos. 11-42, 09-197, 10-90. The Commission sought written public comment on the proposals in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, including comment on the IRFA. This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) conforms to the RFA. 53. The Commission is required by section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, to promulgate rules to implement the universal service provisions of section 254. The Lifeline program was implemented in 1985 in the wake of the 1984 divestiture of AT&T. On May 8, 1997, the Commission adopted rules to reform its system of universal service support mechanisms so that universal service is preserved and advanced as markets move toward competition. Since the 2012 Lifeline Reform Order, 77 FR 12952, March 2, 2012, the Commission has acted to address waste, fraud and abuse in the Lifeline program and improved program administration and accountability. In this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order (Order), the Commission takes steps to focus Lifeline program support to effectively and efficiently bridge the digital divide for low-income consumers while minimizing the contributions burden on ratepayers. The Commission resolves questions regarding enhanced Lifeline support for Tribal lands, which were raised in the 2015 Lifeline Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking but left unaddressed by the 2016 Lifeline Order. The Commission resolves Petitions for Reconsideration to improve competition and efficiency in the Lifeline program. The Commission enables competition and empower Lifeline consumers by increasing their ability to switch their Lifeline benefit to a new provider. The Commission also clarifies how Lifeline providers should apply the Lifeline discount to service offerings that include Lifeline-supported broadband internet access service. 54. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA generally defines the term ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one that: (1) Is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 28.2 million small businesses, according to the SBA. A ``small organization'' is generally ``any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.'' 55. Small Entities, Small Organizations, Small Governmental Jurisdictions. Our 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. As of 2016, according to the SBA, there were 28.8 million small businesses in the U.S., which represented 99.9 percent of all businesses in the United States. Additionally, a ``small organization is generally any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field.'' Nationwide, as of 2014, there were approximately 2,131,200 small organizations. Finally, the term ``small governmental jurisdiction'' is defined generally as ``governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand''. U.S. Census Bureau data published in 2012 indicates 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. 56. A number of our rule changes will result in additional reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance requirements for small entities. For all of those rule changes, the Commission has determined that the benefit the rule change will bring for the Lifeline program outweighs the burden of the increased requirement/s. Other rule changes decrease reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance requirements for small entities. The Commission has noted the applicable rule changes below impacting small entities. 57. Compliance burdens. All of the rules the Commission implements impose some compliance burdens on small entities by requiring them to become familiar with the new rules to comply with them. For several of the new rules the burden of becoming familiar with the new rule in order to comply with it is the only additional burden the rule imposes. 58. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant, specifically small business, alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): ``(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 and reporting requirements under the rule for such 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 such small entities.'' 59. This rulemaking could impose minimal additional burdens on small entities. In this Order, the Commission [[Page 2084]] modifies certain Lifeline rules to target funding to areas where it is most needed. In developing these rules, the Commission worked to ensure the burdens associated with implementing these rules would be minimized for all service providers, including small entities. In taking this action, the Commission considered potential impacts on service providers, including small entities. The Commission considered alternatives to the rulemaking changes that increase projected reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements for small entities, including alternatives on how to define ``rural'' for purposes of describing rural Tribal lands and how the Commission and USAC could provide mapping resources to help small entities identify with certainty areas that are eligible for enhanced support. In developing our rules related to Tribal benefits, the Commission carefully crafted the requirements to be easier on all service providers and determined that a specific carve-out for small businesses was not necessary. 60. No commenters specifically offered alternatives to the changes made in this Order. Further, given the narrow and targeted scope of the changes being made no alternative readily presents itself to limit the burdens on small business or organizations. The identified increase in burden is minimal and outweighed by the advantages in combating waste, fraud, and abuse in the program. VII. Ordering Clauses 61. Accordingly, it is ordered, that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1 through 4, 201 through 205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 254, and 403, and Sec. 1.2 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.2, this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order is adopted effective thirty (30) days after the publication of this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order, in the Federal Register, except to the extent provided herein and expressly addressed below. 62. It is further ordered, that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1 through 4, 201 through 205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 254, and 403, part 54 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 54, is amended as described in the following Final Rules, and such rule amendments to Sec. Sec. 54.403(b) and 54.410 of the Commission's rules shall be effective thirty (30) days after the publication of this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order in the Federal Register. 63. It is further ordered, that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1 through 4, 201 through 205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 254, and 403, that the removal and reservation of Sec. 54.411 of the Commission's rules shall be effective sixty (60) days after the publication of this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order in the Federal Register. 64. It is further ordered, that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1 through 4, 201 through 205, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 254, and 403, part 54 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 54, is amended as described in the following Final Rules, and such rule amendments to Sec. Sec. 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 of the Commission's rules are subject to the PRA and shall be effective ninety (90) days after announcement in the Federal Register of OMB approval of the subject information collection requirements or on August 1, 2018, whichever occurs later. 65. It is further ordered that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-5 and 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-155 and 254, and Sec. 1.429 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.429, the Petition for Reconsideration filed by United States Telecom Association on June 23, 2016 and the Petition for Reconsideration/Clarification of NTCA--The Rural Broadband Association and WTA--Advocates for Rural Broadband are granted to the extent described above. 66. It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Reconsideration, and Memorandum Opinion and Order to Congress and to the Government Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A). 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, Office of the Secretary. Final Rule 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 unles otherwise noted. 0 2. Amend Sec. 54.403 by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(1) to read as follows: Sec. 54.403 Lifeline support amount. * * * * * (a) * * * (3) Tribal lands support amount. Additional federal Lifeline support of up to $25 per month will be made available to a eligible telecommunications carrier providing facilities-based Lifeline service to an eligible resident of Tribal lands, as defined in Sec. 54.400(e), if the subscriber's residential location is rural, as defined in Sec. 54.505(b)(3)(i) and (ii), and the eligible telecommunications carrier certifies to the Administrator that it will pass through the full Tribal lands support amount to the qualifying eligible resident of Tribal lands and that it has received any non-federal regulatory approvals necessary to implement the required rate reduction. (b) Application of Lifeline discount amount. (1) Eligible telecommunications carriers that charge federal End User Common Line charges or equivalent federal charges must apply federal Lifeline support to waive the federal End User Common Line charges for Lifeline subscribers if the carrier is seeking Lifeline reimbursement for eligible voice telephony service provided to those subscribers. Such carriers must apply any additional federal support amount to a qualifying low-income consumer's intrastate rate, if the carrier has received the non-federal regulatory approvals necessary to implement the required rate reduction. Other eligible telecommunications carriers must apply the federal Lifeline support amount, plus any additional support amount, to reduce the cost of any generally available residential service plan or package offered by such carriers that provides at least one supported service as described in Sec. 54.101(a), and charge [[Page 2085]] Lifeline subscribers the resulting amount. * * * * * 0 3. Amend Sec. 54.410 by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to read as follows: Sec. 54.410 Subscriber eligibility determination and certification. * * * * * (b) * * * (2) * * * (ii) If a state Lifeline administrator or other state agency is responsible for the initial determination of a subscriber's eligibility, a copy of the subscriber's certification that complies with the requirements set forth in paragraph (d) of this section. * * * * * (c) * * * (2) * * * (ii) If a state Lifeline administrator or other state agency is responsible for the initial determination of a subscriber's eligibility, a copy of the subscriber's certification that complies with the requirements set forth in paragraph (d) of this section. * * * * * (e) State Lifeline administrators or other state agencies that are responsible for the initial determination of a subscriber's eligibility for Lifeline must provide each eligible telecommunications carrier with a copy of each of the certification forms collected by the state Lifeline administrator or other state agency for that carrier's subscribers. * * * * * Sec. 54.411 [Removed and Reserved] 0 4. Remove and reserve Sec. 54.411. 0 5. Revise Sec. 54.413 to read as follows: Sec. 54.413 Link Up for rural Tribal lands. (a) For purposes of this subpart, the term ``Tribal Link Up'' means an assistance program for eligible residents of Tribal lands, if the subscriber's location is rural, as defined in Sec. 54.505(b)(3)(i) and (ii), seeking telecommunications service from a telecommunications carrier that is receiving high-cost support on rural Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart D of this part, that provides: (1) A 100 percent reduction, up to $100, of the customary charge for commencing telecommunications service for a single telecommunications connection at a subscriber's principal place of residence imposed by an eligible telecommunications carrier that is also receiving high-cost support on rural Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart D of this part. For purposes of this subpart, a ``customary charge for commencing telecommunications service'' is the ordinary charge an eligible telecommunications carrier imposes and collects from all subscribers to initiate service with that eligible telecommunications carrier. A charge imposed only on qualifying low- income consumers to initiate service is not a customary charge for commencing telecommunications service. Activation charges routinely waived, reduced, or eliminated with the purchase of additional products, services, or minutes are not customary charges eligible for universal service support; and (2) A deferred schedule of payments of the customary charge for commencing telecommunications service for a single telecommunications connection at a subscriber's principal place of residence imposed by an eligible telecommunications carrier that is also receiving high-cost support on rural Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart D of this part, for which the eligible resident of rural Tribal lands does not pay interest. The interest charges not assessed to the eligible resident of rural Tribal lands shall be for a customary charge for connecting the telecommunications service of up to $200 and such interest charges shall be deferred for a period not to exceed one year. (b) An eligible resident of rural Tribal lands may receive the benefit of the Tribal Link Up program for a second or subsequent time only for otherwise qualifying commencement of telecommunications service at a principal place of residence with an address different from the address for which Tribal Link Up assistance was provided previously. 0 5. Amend Sec. 54.414 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: Sec. 54.414 Reimbursement for Tribal Link Up. * * * * * (b) In order to receive universal support reimbursement for providing Tribal Link Up, eligible telecommunications carriers must use the maps made available by the Administrator to determine an eligible resident of rural Tribal lands' initial eligibility for Tribal Link Up. Eligible telecommunications carriers must obtain a certification form from each eligible resident of Tribal lands that complies with Sec. 54.410 prior to enrolling him or her in Tribal Link Up. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018-00152 Filed 1-12-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2075
§ 1230.400 [Amended] effective March 19, 2018, and streamline our rules regarding the
■ 2. Amend § 1230.400 by: §§ 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 application of Lifeline support and
■ a. In paragraphs (a), (b), and (e), which contain information collection eligibility for Lifeline reimbursement.
removing ‘‘$19,246’’ and adding in its requirements that have not been
II. Fourth Report and Order
place ‘‘$19,639’’ each place it appears. approved by OMB. The Federal
■ b. In paragraphs (a), (b), and (e), Communications Commission will 2. In this Fourth Report and Order,
removing ‘‘$192,459’’ and adding in its publish a document in the Federal the Commission adopts several reforms
Register announcing the effective date to our Tribal Lifeline policies to
place ‘‘$196,387’’ each place it appears.
of those rules awaiting OMB approval. increase the availability and
Appendix A to Part 1230 [Amended] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
affordability of high-quality
Jodie Griffin, Wireline Competition communications services on Tribal
■ 3. Amend appendix A to part 1230 by: lands. The Commission first targets
■ a. Removing ‘‘$19,246’’ and adding in Bureau, (202) 418–7400 or TTY: (202)
enhanced Lifeline support on Tribal
its place ‘‘$19,639’’ each place it 418–0484.
lands to residents of rural areas on
appears. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Tribal lands. Since 2000, the Lifeline
■ b. Removing ‘‘$192,459’’ and adding summary of the Commission’s Fourth and Link Up programs have provided an
in its place ‘‘$196,387’’ each place it Report and Order, Order on enhanced subsidy of up to an additional
appears. Reconsideration, and Memorandum $25 per month for service provided to
Opinion and Order in WC Docket Nos. qualified residents of Tribal lands, and
PART 2554—PROGRAM FRAUD CIVIL 17–287, 11–42, 09–197; FCC 17–155,
REMEDIES ACT REGULATIONS a Link Up reduction of up to $100 for
adopted on November 16, 2017 and the cost to initiate supported service for
released on December 1, 2017. The full qualifying residents of Tribal lands.
■ 4. The authority citation for part 2554
text of this document is available for This targeted support is in recognition
continues to read as follows:
public inspection during regular of not only the low income levels but
Authority: Pub. L. 99–509, Secs. 6101– business hours in the FCC Reference
6104, 100 Stat. 1874 (31 U.S.C. 3801–3812);
also the particularly poor connectivity
Center, Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street on many Tribal lands. When it adopted
42 U.S.C. 12651c–12651d.
SW, Washington, DC 20554 or at the the enhanced Lifeline Tribal subsidy,
§ 2554.1 [Amended] following internet address: http:// the Commission noted that the
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_ ‘‘unavailability or unaffordability of
■ 5. Amend § 2554.1 by removing
Business/2017/db1201/FCC-17- telecommunications service on Tribal
‘‘$10,957’’ in paragraph (b) and adding
155A1.pdf. The Notice of Proposed lands is at odds with our statutory goal
in its place ‘‘$11,181.’’
Rulemaking (NPRM) and Notice of of ensuring access to such services to
Dated: January 5, 2018. Inquiry (NOI) that was adopted ‘[c]onsumers in all regions of the
Tim Noelker, concurrently with the Fourth Report Nation, including low-income
General Counsel. and Order, Order on Reconsideration, consumers,’’’ and explained that the
[FR Doc. 2018–00558 Filed 1–12–18; 8:45 am] Memorandum Opinion and Order are added Lifeline and Link Up support
BILLING CODE 6050–28–P published elsewhere in this issue of the would help lead to the deployment of
Federal Register. more robust networks. While the
I. Introduction Commission provided the enhanced
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS support as a discount on services, that
1. This Fourth Report and Order, support was focused to most efficiently
COMMISSION
Order on Reconsideration, and encourage ‘‘investment and
47 CFR Part 54 Memorandum Opinion and Order takes deployment’’ in facilities, especially
a series of steps to address ongoing areas since all Lifeline providers in the
[WC Docket Nos. 17–287, 11–42, 09–197; of concern in the Lifeline program to
FCC 17–155]
program at the time were facilities-
prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. based. Because of an overly-broad
Bridging the Digital Divide for Low- Specifically, the Orders target enhanced definition of the geographic areas
Income Consumers, Lifeline and Link Lifeline support to residents of rural eligible for the enhanced subsidy,
Up Reform and Modernization, areas on Tribal lands, establish mapping however, many areas where this
Telecommunications Carriers Eligible resources to identify rural Tribal lands, enhanced subsidy is currently available
for Universal Service Support require independent certification of are not lacking in either voice or
residency on rural Tribal lands, and broadband networks. To remedy this,
AGENCY: Federal Communications direct enhanced support to facilities- the Commission refines its approach to
Commission. based providers. In addition, this target enhanced Lifeline support to
ACTION: Final rule. document makes changes to increase residents of rural areas on Tribal lands.
Lifeline benefit portability by Focusing the enhanced subsidy for
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal eliminating the port freezes for voice Tribal lands on rural areas is consistent
Communications Commission and broadband internet access services. with the enhanced subsidy’s purpose
(Commission) takes a fresh look at the This document also clarifies that and will ensure that the Fund is better
Commission’s Lifeline program and ‘‘premium Wi-Fi’’ and other similar directed toward the residents of Tribal
makes changes to the Lifeline rules to networks of Wi-Fi-delivered broadband lands who typically have the least
ensure that the program can more internet access service do not qualify as choice for communications services.
effectively and efficiently help close the mobile broadband under the Lifeline 3. The Commission believes that
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
digital divide for low-income program rules. Together, the Orders targeting enhanced support toward
consumers, while minimizing the target enhanced Lifeline support for rural, facilities-based providers is
contributions burden on ratepayers by Tribal lands to support the deployment consistent with the intent of the 2000
tackling waste, fraud, and abuse. of modern communications networks, Tribal Order, 65 FR 47883, August 4,
DATES: Effective February 15, 2018, promote consumer choice within the 2000. While the 2000 Tribal Order
except for § 54.411, which will become program, and remove uncertainty and referenced reducing the costs of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/1.svg)
![2076 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
telecommunications services, it to those Tribal lands with lower addition, the Commission’s definition of
specifically premised the support on the population densities. Specifically, the ‘‘rural’’ in the E-rate program serves the
idea that enhanced support would Commission sought comment on goals of enhanced Tribal Lifeline
incentivize providers to ‘‘deploy ‘‘focus[ing] enhanced support only on support by focusing enhanced support
telecommunications facilities in areas areas of low population density that are where communications services are
that previously may have been regarded likely to lack the facilities necessary to more costly. As explained in the 2014
as high risk and unprofitable.’’ The serve subscribers.’’ The Commission E-rate Order, 80 FR 5961, February 4,
Commission’s creation of an enhanced also sought comment on the approach 2015, the Commission adopted the
Lifeline benefit in the 2000 Tribal Order taken by the United States Department current E-rate program definition of
both reduced telecommunications costs of Agriculture’s Food Distribution ‘‘rural’’ after numerous parties
and supported the deployment of Program on Indian Reservations demonstrated that a narrower definition
networks because, at the time, all ETCs (FDPIR), which excludes from eligibility would result in an urban classification
were facilities-based. (The Commission residents of towns or cities in Oklahoma for numerous schools and libraries in
did not forbear from the Act’s facilities- with populations of 10,000 or more, and small towns and remote areas where
based requirements at all until 2005.) sought comment on whether the E-rate supported services are more
While the Commission must consider Commission ‘‘should implement a costly. Using the E-rate definition of
and address appropriate distinctions similar approach that excludes urban ‘‘rural’’ to identify Tribal areas that are
between support for facilities-based and areas on Tribal lands from receiving eligible for enhanced support would
non-facilities-based providers, the enhanced Tribal support.’’ Some ensure that the enhanced support is
Commission does so in a way that commenters expressed concerns with a available for Tribal lands in these small
continues to follow the principles population density approach, but towns and remote areas where
identified in the 2000 Tribal Order and provided alternative density-based supported services are more costly.
Sections 214 and 254 of the Act. (See proposals ranging from limiting Further, the E-rate definition of ‘‘rural’’
U.S.C. 214(e) and 254(b)(3).) enhanced support to areas with fewer is less restrictive than the alternative
4. To identify rural areas on Tribal than 10,000 people and a county population density-based methodologies
lands, the Commission adopts the population density of less than 125 proposed by Smith Bagley and the
definition of ‘‘rural’’ used in the E-rate people per square mile, (Navajo Nation Navajo Nation Telecommunications
program rules, which define ‘‘urban’’ as Telecommunications Regulatory Regulatory Commission.
‘‘an urbanized area or urban cluster area Commission Comments at 12–13.) or 7. The Commission also concludes
with a population equal to or greater ‘‘only to Tribal lands that are located that identifying less-dense areas by
than 25,000.’’ The Commission defines outside of a Metropolitan Statistical using the same definition of ‘‘rural’’ as
all other areas as ‘‘rural.’’ (47 CFR Area and that have less than 100 the E-rate program (which was adopted
54.505(b)(3).) In the 2015 Lifeline persons per square mile.’’ (Smith Bagley in December 2014 and implemented for
FNPRM, 80 FR 42669, July 17, 2015, the Inc., Comments at 16) These proposals E-rate Funding Year 2015) will allow for
Commission asked for comment on are more restrictive than the E-rate more accurate, efficient administration
‘‘what level of density’’ and at ‘‘what program’s definition of rural. Other by USAC. The Commission expects that
level of geographic granularity’’ it commenters opposed limiting the consistency between the two USF
should define such rural areas. Shortly enhanced Tribal subsidy based on programs will simplify the urban/rural
thereafter, the Commission began determinations for carriers and eligible
population density. The Commission
consultations with Tribal Nations households. Specifically, standard
disagrees with those commenters
regarding the Lifeline proposals that the program definitions of rurality would
because their path would preserve the
Commission sought comment on in the allow USAC to develop master data
status quo of providing enhanced
2015 Lifeline FNPRM. After sources and simplify the development
support to Lifeline subscribers on Tribal
consideration of the comments, and updating of service provider tools
lands in densely populated areas where
including comments by numerous for identifying addresses that qualify for
service providers already have sufficient
Tribal stakeholders, and evaluation of enhanced support. The Commission
incentive to deploy broadband facilities
the practicality of implementation, the therefore declines to adopt commenters’
as in non-Tribal areas.
Commission believes this definition will proposals to create an entirely new
reasonably identify the Tribal areas the 6. The Commission agrees that definition of rurality based directly on
Commission intends to benefit from focusing enhanced support on less- the number of persons per square mile
additional Lifeline funding. dense areas will improve the Tribal in a particular geographic area. Those
Accordingly, the Commission amends support mechanism and better serve the proposals would create unnecessary
§§ 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 of goals of enhanced Tribal Lifeline administrative difficulties and
the Lifeline program rules and directs support to incent deployment in areas uncertainty for Lifeline providers,
the Universal Service Administrative that need it most and to increase the which the Commission believes would
Company (USAC) to develop a tool that affordability of Lifeline services for in turn create confusion and fewer
will allow Lifeline service providers to Tribal lands residents. Based on the choices for eligible low-income
determine whether a subscriber residing record, however, the Commission consumers.
on Tribal lands resides in a rural area declines to adopt a population-density 8. The Commission also concludes
according to this definition. USAC shall threshold to identify the Tribal areas that the provision of enhanced support
update this tool pursuant to the same that are eligible for enhanced Tribal in more densely populated Tribal lands,
update schedule used for the E-rate support. Instead, the Commission takes such as large cities (e.g., Tulsa,
an approach similar to the approach
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
rurality tool. Oklahoma or Reno, Nevada), is
5. Selection of the E-rate program’s used by the FDPIR and use the E-rate inconsistent with the Commission’s
‘‘rural’’ definition is based on program definition of ‘‘rural’’ to identify primary purpose of the enhanced
consideration of the record and matters Tribal areas that are eligible for support. (Despite being ‘‘The Biggest
of administrative efficiency. In the 2015 enhanced Lifeline support. This Little City in the World,’’ Reno, NV has
Lifeline FNPRM, the Commission sought approach provides consistency between a population of 446,154 and, according
comment on focusing enhanced support the E-rate and Lifeline programs. In to Form 477 data, 97.5% percent of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/2.svg)
![2078 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
subscribers who did not reside on Tribal 19. The Commission is also sensitive that service, including provisioning,
lands. The Commission finds that the to Tribal residences that have not been maintaining, and upgrading that
provision of maps delineating the assigned conventional addresses and provider’s facilities. Since the
boundaries of areas eligible for instead use descriptive addresses that introduction of enhanced Tribal and
enhanced Tribal Lifeline support will are not recognized by the U.S. Postal Link Up support in 2000, facilities-
give consumers and providers a more Service. For those residences, a Lifeline based providers have used that support
effective and simpler means of subscriber may provide a descriptive to construct and upgrade networks on
determining rural Tribal residency, address when enrolling in the program. Tribal lands.
thereby eliminating the need for A provider enrolling a subscriber with 22. In contrast, Lifeline funds
reliance on self-certification. a descriptive residential address in a disbursed to non-facilities-based
Accordingly, going forward, Lifeline state where the National Verifier is not providers will still lower the cost of the
providers will be required to responsible for eligibility consumer’s service, but cannot directly
independently verify and document determinations must retain records support the provider’s network because
subscribers’ rural Tribal residency documenting compliance with the the provider does not have one. When
according to the map and data sources program rules, including the rules the the Commission eliminated Link Up
identified above. An ETC may seek Commission amends in this Order support for non-facilities-based carriers
enhanced reimbursement only for limiting enhanced Lifeline support to on Tribal lands in 2012, it noted that at
subscribers whose residential address is rural Tribal lands and removing least one wireless reseller ‘‘has received
located within the bounds of that map. subscriber self-certification of Tribal approximately a million in Link Up
17. In response to the 2015 Lifeline lands residency. Accordingly, the support for two months in 2011 on
FNPRM, some commenters urged the Commission reminds providers that Tribal lands in [Oklahoma] without
Commission to continue to permit they must retain the documentation building infrastructure’’—contravening
consumers to self-certify their residence demonstrating how the provider the purposes of the enhanced support.
on Tribal lands. Commenters supporting determined that a subscriber with a And in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the
this approach argue that there is no descriptive address resides on rural Commission explained, ‘‘Lifeline
evidence of abuse of the self- Tribal lands to claim the enhanced program data show that two-thirds of
certification mechanism, and Tribal Lifeline support. For example, as enhanced Tribal support goes to non-
eliminating self-certification would only providers do today to verify the facilities based providers, and it is
accuracy of consumers’ self- unclear whether the support is being
increase subscriber costs. However, the
certification, providers may note if a used to deploy facilities in Tribal
Commission has recently found
subscriber has a ZIP code that is entirely areas’’—which contravened the
concrete evidence of abuse of the self-
located in an area eligible for enhanced Commission’s express ‘‘desire to use
certification mechanism, resulting in
support, or may record the latitude and enhanced support to incent the
improper payments that had to be
longitude of the subscriber’s residence deployment of facilities on Tribal
reclaimed through an enforcement
to compare against a map identifying lands.’’
proceeding. (See Blue Jay Wireless, LLC, 23. For the purposes of the Lifeline
areas eligible for enhanced support. The
Order, 31 FCC Rcd 7603 (EB 2016).) In program, to enforce our revised
Commission directs USAC to develop a
that instance, a Lifeline provider relied § 54.403(a)(3), the Commission limits
process for subscribers with descriptive
on subscriber self-certifications to enhanced Tribal support to (1) fixed or
addresses who reside on Tribal lands for
improperly enroll several thousand mobile wireless facilities-based Lifeline
use in the National Verifier, and to make
customers as residents of Tribal lands, service provided on Tribal lands with
public the steps in that process to better
and continued to do so even after being wireless network facilities covering all
inform providers about acceptable
informed that it was apparently over- or a portion of the relevant Lifeline
methods of determining whether such
claiming enhanced Tribal support. The ETC’s service area on Tribal lands; and
subscribers are eligible for enhanced
Commission also finds that providing a (2) facilities-based fixed broadband or
support.
map against which providers can verify 20. In the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the voice telephony service provided
eligibility for enhanced Tribal support Commission sought comment on through the ETC’s ownership or a long-
provides greater certainty to providers limiting enhanced Tribal Lifeline term lease of last-mile wireline loop
and consumers alike, and thus support to facilities-based service facilities capable of providing Lifeline
eliminates questions about how to providers, just as the Commission in service to all or a portion of the ETC’s
handle a consumer’s self-certification if 2012 had limited enhanced Tribal Link service area on Tribal lands. For
that consumer seems to reside outside Up support to facilities-based service purposes of enhanced Lifeline support,
Tribal lands. providers that also received high-cost a fixed wireless provider must,
18. The Commission concludes that a support. The Commission now consistent with FCC Form 477
process by which providers determine concludes that such a limitation is instructions, provision or equip a
enhanced eligibility by comparing the appropriate. Accordingly, the broadband wireless channel to the end-
subscriber’s residential address to data Commission amends § 54.403(a)(3) of user premises over licensed or
sources delineating rural Tribal lands is the Lifeline program rules to effectuate unlicensed spectrum, while a mobile
a more accurate method of verifying that this change. wireless provider must hold usage rights
a subscriber is entitled to enhanced 21. The Commission finds that last- under a spectrum license or a long-term
Tribal reimbursement. If a subscriber mile facilities are critical to deploying, spectrum leasing arrangement along
does not reside within the bounds of the maintaining, and building voice- and with wireless network facilities that that
map that the Commission now provides,
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
broadband-capable networks on Tribal can be used to provide wireless voice
permitting that subscriber to receive lands and Lifeline funds are more and broadband services. (The
reimbursement by simply certifying that efficiently spent when supporting such Commission considers a long-term
she or he lives on Tribal lands leaves networks. When the Lifeline discount is spectrum leasing arrangement as long-
the program open to improper applied to a consumer’s bill for a term de facto transfer spectrum leasing
payments, waste, and possibly fraud facilities-based service, those funds go arrangements as defined and identified
and abuse. directly toward the cost of providing in 47 CFR 1.9003 and 1.9030, and long-
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/4.svg)
![2080 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
III. Order on Reconsideration Commission eliminates the codified generally did not assert the 12-month
31. By this Order, the Commission Lifeline benefit port freeze for voice and port freeze was needed to address
eliminates the port freeze for voice and broadband internet access service. (See impediments to entering the market.
broadband internet access services 47 CFR 54.411.) The Commission 35. The Commission disagrees with
concludes that restricting the ability of those commenters who contend that
found in § 54.411 of the Commission’s
Lifeline consumers to transfer their removing the 12-month broadband
rules. The Commission takes this action
Lifeline benefit between service internet access service port freeze will
in response to significant concerns
providers ultimately disadvantages reduce provider participation in the
regarding the port freeze raised in
Lifeline consumers. Such a restriction Lifeline program and make it
Petitions for Reconsideration and other
limits Lifeline consumers’ ability to seek ‘‘impossible to meet the Commission’s
recent filings in the docket. In the 2016
more competitive offerings and obtain minimum service standards and handset
Lifeline Order, 81 FR 33026, May 24,
those services that best meet their requirements at a cost that is affordable
2016, the Commission codified port
needs. In addition, restricting for low-income consumers.’’ (Joint
freezes lasting 12 months for broadband
consumers’ ability to transfer their Lifeline ETC Respondents’ Opposition
internet access service and 60 days for at 7–8.) The Commission adopted
voice telephony service. After Lifeline benefit will not promote
competitive service offerings and, in minimum service standards after
reconsideration of certain findings in considering the record and concluding
the 2016 Lifeline Order, the Commission fact, may diminish providers’
motivation to provide higher quality that minimum service standards are not
now eliminates the Lifeline port freeze unduly burdensome. Affordability was
for voice and broadband internet access service after enrolling a Lifeline-
supported broadband subscriber, an important factor in adopting
service. minimum service standards, and the
32. The Commission established the because the provider is assured a 12-
month commitment from the subscriber. standards the Commission adopted
extended port freeze for broadband struck ‘‘a balance between the demands
internet access service ‘‘[t]o facilitate The Commission also agrees that the
record evidence does not clearly of affordability and reasonable
market entry for Lifeline-supported comparability.’’ While the Commission
BIAS [broadband internet access support the view that a 12-month port
freeze is necessary to ease market entry, considered concerns raised by some
service] offerings, provide additional providers that they would not be able to
consumer benefits, and encourage and indeed can discourage new
providers from entering the Lifeline offer services that meet the minimum
competition’’ by ‘‘allowing broadband standards, the Commission ultimately
providers the security of a longer term market or a new geographical area
because a significant portion of Lifeline concluded that allowing the Lifeline
relationship with subscribers. . . .’’ benefit to be used on services that do
Since the Commission adopted these subscribers would not be able to transfer
their benefit to otherwise compelling not meet minimum service standards
requirements, multiple parties have would lead to the type of ‘‘second class’’
filed Petitions for Reconsideration new services offerings. Nor does the
Commission believe that the 60-day port service that the minimum service
raising a variety of concerns regarding standards are meant to eliminate.
the port freeze rule. Petitioners argue freeze for voice services adopted in the
2016 Lifeline Order, while leading to Furthermore, prior to the 2016 Lifeline
that the port freeze requirements Order, the shorter USAC-administered
adversely impact consumers by these disadvantages, is effective in
furthering its desired goals. 60-day benefit port freeze for voice
restricting consumer choice and the service did not drive providers out of
record lacks evidence that demonstrates 34. In general, parties that filed in the program. Indeed, the Commission is
new entrants were or are having support of a longer port freeze argued now acting in response to requests from
difficulty entering the Lifeline market. that carriers will be willing to make Lifeline providers to eliminate or
Petitioners also argue that the port more significant investments as a result shorten the port freeze due to the
freeze requirements were imposed of longer term customer-carrier administrative burdens associated with
without adequate notice, as required relationships and that a longer port compliance.
under the Administrative Procedure Act freeze will discourage consumers from 36. The Commission codified the port
(APA); and raise concerns regarding the ‘‘flipping.’’ Indeed, several carriers freeze in part because it anticipated that
challenges ETCs will face from an decry ‘‘flipping’’ and explain how consumers would benefit from greater
administrative perspective in attempting consumer churn makes it harder for choice and innovative service offerings
to comply with the 12-month port freeze carriers to recover their costs, including as a result. In addition, the Commission
requirement. Because the Commission the costs of free phones. But flipping envisioned benefits would accrue to
grants the petitions for reconsideration and consumer churn are not unique to consumers from a longer term
on other grounds below, it does not the Lifeline marketplace, and companies relationship with their service
address the APA and administrative have repeatedly turned to voluntary providers. Since the implementation of
burden arguments here. Additionally, agreements (such as contracts) and the port freeze, the Commission has
since implementation of the port freeze alternative business models (such as been presented with evidence, however,
rule, other parties have raised concerns prepaid plans) to address such concerns that it has not delivered the consumer
regarding the alleged improper without the federal government benefits the Commission envisioned
invocation of consumer port freezes by artificially limiting consumer choice. In when it codified the requirement, but
certain Lifeline providers, which limits addition, the Commission notes that the instead has incented certain providers
consumer choice, especially with regard primary intent of the Lifeline program is to enroll consumers in offerings that
to the 12-month port freeze for to provide a discount on service rather provide little meaningful residential
than devices. To the extent that broadband access while locking in their
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
broadband service.
33. The Commission agrees with providing discounted or free devices Lifeline benefit with that provider for
arguments raised by Petitioners and incentivizes consumers to engage in the following 12 months. These
others that the disadvantages to flipping, that outcome primarily results providers have used the port freeze to
consumers of the port freeze rule, in from a service provider’s own marketing prevent customer churn, asserting that
practice, outweigh the anticipated practices. The Commission also notes the service falls within the 12-month
advantages; accordingly, the that supporters of the port freeze port freeze timeframe, even when
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/6.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2081
offering plans with only 10 MB of telephony service or a bundled offering requirement that the National Verifier
guaranteed mobile cellular data. As a where the ETC is requesting provide copies of certifications to ETCs
result, although the port freeze rule has reimbursement from the Lifeline where the National Verifier is
in some instances resulted in longer program for the voice telephony responsible for eligibility
term relationships as anticipated, any component of the bundle. determinations.
benefits have come at the expense of 40. USTelecom has filed a petition for 43. USTelecom filed a petition for
consumers who find themselves trapped reconsideration requesting, in relevant reconsideration requesting, in relevant
in low-quality plans for a full year. part, that the Commission eliminate part, modifications to § 54.410(b)(2)(ii),
Parties such as Consumer Action and § 54.403(b) of the Commission’s rules to (c)(2)(ii), and (e) of the Commission’s
the National Consumers League have resolve the rule’s ambiguity with regard rules to properly reflect the 2016
urged the Commission ‘‘to stop the to Lifeline-supported broadband Lifeline Order’s intent with regard to the
abuse of the so-called ‘port freeze’ rule, internet access service. USTelecom National Verifier. USTelecom argues
which is now being used to limit argues that broadband internet access that the text of the rule is in direct
consumer choice and access to true service does not have a federal End User conflict with the 2016 Lifeline Order’s
broadband service and broadband- Common Line charge or intrastate language and intent. The 2016 Lifeline
suitable devices.’’ Because service, creating confusion as to how Order states: ‘‘[t]he National Verifier
implementation of the port freeze has ETCs may comply with § 54.403(b) of will retain eligibility information
not, on balance, resulted in the the Commission’s rules when the collected as a result of the eligibility
anticipated benefits to Lifeline customer is receiving Lifeline-supported determination process’’ and that
consumers and instead appears to have broadband internet access service. No ‘‘Lifeline providers will not be required
harmed consumers, the Commission parties filed in opposition to to retain eligibility documentation for
now determines that this rule should be USTelecom’s petition on this issue. subscribers who have been determined
eliminated. The Commission also finds 41. The Commission declines to
eligible by the National Verifier.’’
that retaining existing customers’ port eliminate the rule, as requested by
However, § 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii),
freezes would hinder consumer choice USTelecom, so that ETCs seeking
and (e) require Lifeline providers to
without leading or having led to reimbursement for Lifeline voice
retain eligibility documentation and
improved offerings for consumers, and telephony service, either on a
certifications even when the National
so the Commission declines to continue standalone basis or in a bundle, will
Verifier was responsible for the
subscribers’ existing port freezes. continue to apply the Lifeline discount
enrollment process. USTelecom adds
37. Finally, the Commission clarifies to the EUCL. Instead the Commission
that the cost and burden to providers of
the application of the Commission’s now modifies § 54.403(b)(1) to clarify
maintaining duplicative subscriber
rolling recertification rule in the that this rule only applies to subscribers
receiving standalone voice telephony eligibility information from the National
absence of the port freeze rule and the
service or a bundled offering where the Verifier are unsupported by any ‘‘sound
port freeze exceptions. (47 CFR
ETC is requesting reimbursement from policy basis.’’ Further, USTelecom
54.410(f).) For purposes of rolling
the Lifeline program for the voice argues the rule may actually subvert
recertification, the subscriber’s service
telephony component of the bundle. By program goals of ‘‘. . . ‘ensur[ing] that
initiation date is twelve months from
not addressing whether and how the National Verifier will incorporate
the date of the most recent transfer or
§ 54.403(b)(1) applies to Lifeline- robust privacy and data security best
enrollment with the subscriber’s current
service provider, and recertification will supported broadband internet access practices in its creation and operation of
be required every twelve months service, the rule causes unnecessary the National Verifier.’ ’’ No parties filed
thereafter. uncertainty for ETCs and may result in in opposition to USTelecom’s petition
38. These changes to § 54.411 of the less affordable offerings for subscribers on this issue.
Commission’s rules will become without any corresponding benefit for 44. The Commission now modifies
effective 60 days after publication of Lifeline subscribers. This revision of § 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to
this Order in the Federal Register. § 54.403(b)(1) also comports with the clarify that where the National Verifier
39. To ensure that qualifying low- longstanding Commission goal of is responsible for the consumer’s initial
income Americans receive quality, simplifying administration of the eligibility determination or
affordable Lifeline-supported broadband Lifeline program and reflecting current recertification, the National Verifier is
service, the Commission revises its rules marketplace conditions. Accordingly, not required to deliver copies of those
concerning the application of Lifeline the Commission amends § 54.403(b)(1) certifications to the ETC. The
support. Section 54.403(b)(1) of the to clarify that ETCs are only required to Commission finds that this amendment
Commission’s rules requires ETCs ‘‘that apply the Lifeline discount to the End to the rules is consistent with the goals
charge federal End User Common Line User Common Line charge or equivalent of the National Verifier to ease burdens
charges or equivalent federal charges’’ to federal charges where the ETC is on Lifeline providers while improving
apply federal Lifeline support to waive receiving Lifeline support for that privacy and security for consumers
such charges for Lifeline subscribers. subscriber’s voice telephony service. applying to participate in the program.
(47 CFR 54.403(b)(1).) The rule is silent, 42. The 2016 Lifeline Order modified This amendment also brings § 54.410 of
however, on the application of Lifeline § 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to the Commission’s rules in line with the
support for subscribers receiving the require the National Verifier, where it is Commission’s stated intent in the 2016
Lifeline benefit for broadband internet responsible for determining subscriber Lifeline Order that Lifeline providers
access service, either in a bundle with eligibility or conducting recertification, would not be required to retain
qualifying voice telephony service or on to provide a copy of the subscriber’s eligibility documentation for eligibility
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
a standalone basis, which does not have certification to the provider. (47 CFR determinations made by the National
an End User Common Line charge. The 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), (e).) The Verifier. Additionally, the Commission
Commission hereby clarifies that Commission now resolves an apparent agrees with USTelecom that requiring
§ 54.403(b)(1) of the Commission’s rules conflict in our rules and alters Lifeline providers to maintain
only applies to subscribers receiving § 54.410(b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) of the duplicative subscriber enrollment
Lifeline-supported standalone voice Commission’s rules to eliminate the documentation presents unnecessary
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/7.svg)
![2082 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
risk to the privacy and security of service offerings over different service standards for fixed broadband
subscriber information. generations of mobile technologies in service would have no meaningful
adopting rules for Lifeline-eligible application, because ETCs could simply
IV. Memorandum Opinion and Order
mobile broadband service. (See 47 CFR offer the much lower data allowances
45. To fully realize the Commission’s 54.408(b)(2)(i).) Against this backdrop, permitted under the mobile broadband
objectives of providing Lifeline-support the Commission established minimum standards, supplement that amount with
for broadband services, the Commission service standards, including minimum Wi-Fi-delivered data, and receive the
provides clarity to ensure that service 3G (Third Generation mobile network) same Lifeline support amount. (See 47
providers claiming Lifeline support for speeds, to qualify for Lifeline support. CFR 54.408(b)(1).)
broadband service actually provide There is no evidence in the record that 50. The Commission also clarifies that
Lifeline customers with the level of Wi-Fi-only technology, as deployed a provider does not directly serve a
broadband service intended in the 2016 today, is a ‘‘mobile technology’’ or one customer with fixed broadband service
Lifeline Order. In February 2017, the of the ‘‘generations’’ of mobile under the Lifeline rules if that customer
Wireline Competition Bureau solicited technologies, as contemplated by the cannot access the service at their
public comment on a TracFone Commission in the 2016 Lifeline Order. residential address. (See 47 CFR
Wireless, Inc. (TracFone) request for Further, nothing in the record 54.407(a) (‘‘Universal service support
clarification regarding §§ 54.408 and demonstrates that Wi-Fi, including for providing Lifeline shall be provided
54.411 of the Commission’s rules. The ‘‘premium Wi-Fi,’’ as deployed today, directly to an eligible
Commission now removes any should be treated as an industry
uncertainty in the record with respect to telecommunications carrier based on the
accepted generation of mobile number of actual qualifying low-income
whether certain Wi-Fi technologies technology.
qualify for Lifeline reimbursement by customers it serves directly as of the
48. The Commission also disagrees
clarifying that broadband internet access first day of the month.’’)) The 2016
with Telrite that the use of the term
delivered via Wi-Fi is not eligible for Lifeline Order contemplates Lifeline-
‘‘3G’’ in the § 54.408(b)(2)(i) of the
reimbursement as mobile broadband supported fixed broadband service as a
Commission’s rules was only intended
under the Lifeline program rules, and residential service. A service that, for
as a proxy for a particular minimum
the Commission reiterates that mobile example, purports to offer Lifeline-
network speed threshold and not a
broadband service eligible for Lifeline supported fixed broadband service but
generation of mobile technology. In the
reimbursement must be provided on a only provides customers with access to
2016 Lifeline Order, the Commission’s
network using at least 3G (Third discussion makes it clear that it was hotspots that a qualifying low-income
Generation) mobile technologies. The incorporating industry mobile subscriber cannot access from their own
Commission also clarifies that a technology generations, and that 3G was residence undermines the Commission’s
provider does not directly serve a not just a proxy for a speed threshold. requirement that carriers directly
customer with fixed broadband service The Commission, for example, stated provide service to receive
under the Lifeline rules if that customer that ‘‘[f]or the mobile broadband reimbursement. A review of the Wi-Fi
cannot access the services at their minimum service standard for speed, it service disputed in the record before us
residential address and, therefore, Wi-Fi relies on Form 477 data while also indicates that the iPass network used to
offerings like the ‘‘premium Wi-Fi’’ incorporating industry mobile provide the premium Wi-Fi service
service described in the record also do technology generation (i.e., 3G, 4G).’’ keeps customers connected in ‘‘hotels,
not qualify for Lifeline support as fixed 49. Unlike Wi-Fi, mobile networks airports, and other business venues,’’
broadband service offerings. provide ubiquitous mobility with large trains, airplanes, and convention
46. In its request for clarification, service area coverage. Wi-Fi access, centers, and in many towns only
TracFone sought clarification regarding however, can be a complement to a includes hotspots at establishments
the types of service that meet the consumer’s primary broadband service. with pre-existing free public Wi-Fi
minimum service standards for Lifeline- Lifeline-eligible mobile broadband offerings, like McDonald’s, Burger King,
supported mobile broadband and requires a mobile service provided and Walmart. (See The iPass Global Wi-
qualify for the twelve-month benefit through 3G mobile broadband Fi Network, iPass (last visited Oct. 24,
port freeze. In response, several technologies or subsequent and superior 2017), https://www.ipass.com/mobile-
commenters expressed concerns that generations of mobile broadband network/. See also, e.g., iPass hotspot
interpreting the minimum service technologies. Accordingly, the rules locations in Indianola, Iowa, and Forrest
standards for Lifeline-eligible mobile governing Lifeline support for a ‘‘mobile City, Arkansas, https://hotspot-
broadband to allow for Wi-Fi-delivered broadband service’’ contemplate not just finder.ipass.com/united-states/
broadband as described in the request a minimum of ‘‘3G’’ mobile network indianola-iowa, https://hotspot-
would inhibit the Commission’s goal of threshold speeds, but also a mobile finder.ipass.com/united-states/forrest-
supporting quality service to low- network. (47 U.S.C. 153(33) (defining city-arkansas (last visited Oct. 24,
income consumers, while others ‘‘mobile service’’); 47 CFR 20.3 (same).) 2017).) Some commenters indicated that
supported an interpretation of the As noted above, mobile networks, these hot spot locations are ‘‘likely to be
Commission’s rules that would permit unlike current Wi-Fi networks, provide of little use to most Lifeline customers’’
Lifeline support for ‘‘premium Wi-Fi’’ ubiquitous mobility within a large because few of the hot spots are located
access offerings. service area. Was the Commission to in low-income residential areas, and the
47. The Commission clarifies that interpret the minimum service standard hot spot locations ‘‘may not be common
‘‘premium Wi-Fi’’ and other similar otherwise, an ETC could offer any fixed areas in which Lifeline customers
networks of Wi-Fi-delivered broadband would find themselves trying to utilize
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
service with an arguably fast-enough
internet access service do not qualify as speed, limit it to serve end users their Lifeline supported [broadband
mobile broadband under the Lifeline primarily using mobile devices, and internet access service].’’ (TracFone
program rules. (See 47 CFR 54.400 et claim that such a service was in fact Wireless Reply at 7 & n. 12; Public
seq.) In the 2016 Lifeline Order, the ‘‘mobile’’ broadband because it offers Utility Division of Oklahoma Comments
Commission focused on ‘‘mobile speeds faster than ‘‘3G.’’ As a result, the at 4.) TracFone also states that based on
network technologies’’ and mobile section establishing Lifeline minimum its sample testing for one Florida ZIP
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/8.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2083
Code, ‘‘[l]ess than one percent of the competition. Since the 2012 Lifeline which represented 99.9 percent of all
10,223 Lifeline households within that Reform Order, 77 FR 12952, March 2, businesses in the United States.
ZIP Code reside within areas covered by 2012, the Commission has acted to Additionally, a ‘‘small organization is
iPass hotspots’’ and that nine of the address waste, fraud and abuse in the generally any not-for-profit enterprise
twelve iPass hot spots within that ZIP Lifeline program and improved program which is independently owned and
Code ‘‘are located inside business administration and accountability. In operated and not dominant in its field.’’
locations (typically, restaurants and this Fourth Report and Order, Order on Nationwide, as of 2014, there were
hotels, and only available to patrons of Reconsideration, and Memorandum approximately 2,131,200 small
those businesses).’’ Accordingly, these Opinion and Order (Order), the organizations. Finally, the term ‘‘small
types of premium Wi-Fi services would Commission takes steps to focus Lifeline governmental jurisdiction’’ is defined
be functionally inaccessible to many program support to effectively and generally as ‘‘governments of cities,
Lifeline consumers and, thus, offering efficiently bridge the digital divide for towns, townships, villages, school
such services does not directly serve a low-income consumers while districts, or special districts, with a
Lifeline customer with fixed broadband minimizing the contributions burden on population of less than fifty thousand’’.
service as required by § 54.407(a) of the ratepayers. The Commission resolves U.S. Census Bureau data published in
Lifeline rules. questions regarding enhanced Lifeline 2012 indicates that there were 89,476
support for Tribal lands, which were local governmental jurisdictions in the
V. Procedural Matters raised in the 2015 Lifeline Further United States. The Commission
A. Paperwork Reduction Act Notice of Proposed Rulemaking but left estimates that, of this total, as many as
unaddressed by the 2016 Lifeline Order. 88,761 entities may qualify as ‘‘small
51. The Fourth Report and Order
The Commission resolves Petitions for governmental jurisdictions.’’ Thus, the
contains new information collection
Reconsideration to improve competition Commission estimates that most
requirements subject to the Paperwork and efficiency in the Lifeline program. governmental jurisdictions are small.
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public The Commission enables competition 56. A number of our rule changes will
Law 104–13. It will be submitted to the and empower Lifeline consumers by result in additional reporting,
Office of Management and Budget increasing their ability to switch their recordkeeping, or compliance
(OMB) for review under section 3507(d) Lifeline benefit to a new provider. The requirements for small entities. For all
of the PRA. OMB, the general public, Commission also clarifies how Lifeline of those rule changes, the Commission
and other federal agencies will be providers should apply the Lifeline has determined that the benefit the rule
invited to comment on the revised discount to service offerings that change will bring for the Lifeline
information collection requirements include Lifeline-supported broadband program outweighs the burden of the
contained in this proceeding. In internet access service. increased requirement/s. Other rule
addition, the Commission notes that 54. The RFA directs agencies to changes decrease reporting,
pursuant to the Small Business provide a description of and, where recordkeeping, or compliance
Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public feasible, an estimate of the number of requirements for small entities. The
Law 107–198, the Commission small entities that may be affected by Commission has noted the applicable
previously sought specific comment on the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA rule changes below impacting small
how it might further reduce the generally defines the term ‘‘small entities.
information collection burden on small entity’’ as having the same meaning as 57. Compliance burdens. All of the
business concerns with fewer than 25 the terms ‘‘small business,’’ ‘‘small rules the Commission implements
employees. organization,’’ and ‘‘small governmental impose some compliance burdens on
52. As required by the Regulatory jurisdiction.’’ In addition, the term small entities by requiring them to
Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended ‘‘small business’’ has the same meaning become familiar with the new rules to
(RFA), the Federal Communications as the term ‘‘small business concern’’ comply with them. For several of the
Commission (Commission) included an under the Small Business Act. A small new rules the burden of becoming
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis business concern is one that: (1) Is familiar with the new rule in order to
(IRFA) of the possible significant independently owned and operated; (2) comply with it is the only additional
economic impact on a substantial is not dominant in its field of operation; burden the rule imposes.
number of small entities by the policies and (3) satisfies any additional criteria 58. The RFA requires an agency to
and rules proposed in the 2015 Lifeline established by the Small Business describe any significant, specifically
FNPRM in WC Docket Nos. 11–42, 09– Administration (SBA). Nationwide, small business, alternatives that it has
197, 10–90. The Commission sought there are a total of approximately 28.2 considered in reaching its proposed
written public comment on the million small businesses, according to approach, which may include the
proposals in the 2015 Lifeline FNPRM, the SBA. A ‘‘small organization’’ is following four alternatives (among
including comment on the IRFA. This generally ‘‘any not-for-profit enterprise others): ‘‘(1) the establishment of
Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis which is independently owned and differing compliance or reporting
(FRFA) conforms to the RFA. operated and is not dominant in its requirements or timetables that take into
53. The Commission is required by field.’’ account the resources available to small
section 254 of the Communications Act 55. Small Entities, Small entities; (2) the clarification,
of 1934, as amended, to promulgate Organizations, Small Governmental consolidation, or simplification of
rules to implement the universal service Jurisdictions. Our actions, over time, compliance and reporting requirements
provisions of section 254. The Lifeline may affect small entities that are not under the rule for such small entities;
program was implemented in 1985 in
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
easily categorized at present. The (3) the use of performance rather than
the wake of the 1984 divestiture of Commission therefore describes here, at design standards; and (4) an exemption
AT&T. On May 8, 1997, the Commission the outset, three comprehensive small from coverage of the rule, or any part
adopted rules to reform its system of entity size standards that could be thereof, for such small entities.’’
universal service support mechanisms directly affected herein. As of 2016, 59. This rulemaking could impose
so that universal service is preserved according to the SBA, there were 28.8 minimal additional burdens on small
and advanced as markets move toward million small businesses in the U.S., entities. In this Order, the Commission
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/9.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 10 / Tuesday, January 16, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 2085
Lifeline subscribers the resulting subpart, a ‘‘customary charge for DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
amount. commencing telecommunications
* * * * * service’’ is the ordinary charge an Fish and Wildlife Service
■ 3. Amend § 54.410 by revising
eligible telecommunications carrier
imposes and collects from all 50 CFR Part 17
paragraphs (b)(2)(ii), (c)(2)(ii), and (e) to
read as follows: subscribers to initiate service with that [Docket No. FWS–HQ–ES–2017–0081;
eligible telecommunications carrier. A 4500090024]
§ 54.410 Subscriber eligibility charge imposed only on qualifying low-
determination and certification. income consumers to initiate service is RIN 1018–BC54
* * * * * not a customary charge for commencing
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(b) * * * telecommunications service. Activation
and Plants; Taxonomical Update for
(2) * * * charges routinely waived, reduced, or
Orangutan
(ii) If a state Lifeline administrator or eliminated with the purchase of
other state agency is responsible for the additional products, services, or AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
initial determination of a subscriber’s minutes are not customary charges Interior.
eligibility, a copy of the subscriber’s eligible for universal service support; ACTION: Direct final rule.
certification that complies with the and
requirements set forth in paragraph (d) (2) A deferred schedule of payments SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
of this section. of the customary charge for commencing Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
* * * * * telecommunications service for a single revised taxonomy of the orangutan
(c) * * * telecommunications connection at a under the Endangered Species Act of
(2) * * * subscriber’s principal place of residence 1973, as amended (Act). When we listed
(ii) If a state Lifeline administrator or imposed by an eligible the orangutan in 1970, the listed entity
other state agency is responsible for the telecommunications carrier that is also included all orangutans in the genus
initial determination of a subscriber’s receiving high-cost support on rural Pongo. At that time, the scientific
eligibility, a copy of the subscriber’s Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart D of community recognized one species
certification that complies with the this part, for which the eligible resident (Pongo pygmaeus) in the genus Pongo,
requirements set forth in paragraph (d) of rural Tribal lands does not pay which consisted of two subspecies (P.
of this section. interest. The interest charges not pygmaeus pygmaeus and P. p. abelii).
assessed to the eligible resident of rural However, the orangutan has recently
* * * * *
Tribal lands shall be for a customary been reclassified as belonging to two
(e) State Lifeline administrators or
charge for connecting the distinct species: P. pygmaeus and P.
other state agencies that are responsible
telecommunications service of up to abelii. Therefore, we are revising the
for the initial determination of a
$200 and such interest charges shall be List of Endangered and Threatened
subscriber’s eligibility for Lifeline must
deferred for a period not to exceed one Wildlife to reflect the current
provide each eligible
year. scientifically accepted taxonomy and
telecommunications carrier with a copy
(b) An eligible resident of rural Tribal nomenclature of the orangutan. Because
of each of the certification forms
lands may receive the benefit of the all orangutans in the genus Pongo are
collected by the state Lifeline
Tribal Link Up program for a second or already included under the original
administrator or other state agency for
subsequent time only for otherwise listing of Pongo pygmaeus as
that carrier’s subscribers.
qualifying commencement of endangered under the Act, the newly
* * * * * telecommunications service at a recognized taxonomic species is
§ 54.411 [Removed and Reserved] principal place of residence with an considered part of the original listed
address different from the address for entity, and this technical correction
■ 4. Remove and reserve § 54.411.
which Tribal Link Up assistance was does not alter the regulatory protections
■ 5. Revise § 54.413 to read as follows: provided previously. afforded to the orangutan. For the same
§ 54.413 Link Up for rural Tribal lands. ■ 5. Amend § 54.414 by revising
reason, if other Pongo species emerge
(a) For purposes of this subpart, the paragraph (b) to read as follows: due to future taxonomic revisions to
term ‘‘Tribal Link Up’’ means an further subdivide the genus Pongo, they
assistance program for eligible residents
§ 54.414 Reimbursement for Tribal Link would be encompassed by the original
Up. listing and this technical correction.
of Tribal lands, if the subscriber’s
location is rural, as defined in * * * * * DATES: This rule is effective April 16,
(b) In order to receive universal 2018 without further action, unless we
§ 54.505(b)(3)(i) and (ii), seeking
support reimbursement for providing receive significant scientific information
telecommunications service from a
Tribal Link Up, eligible that provides strong justifications as to
telecommunications carrier that is
telecommunications carriers must use why this rule should not be adopted or
receiving high-cost support on rural
the maps made available by the why it should be changed on or before
Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart D of
Administrator to determine an eligible February 15, 2018. If we receive
this part, that provides:
resident of rural Tribal lands’ initial significant scientific information
(1) A 100 percent reduction, up to
eligibility for Tribal Link Up. Eligible regarding this taxonomic change for the
$100, of the customary charge for
telecommunications carriers must orangutan, we will publish a timely
commencing telecommunications
obtain a certification form from each withdrawal of this rule in the Federal
service for a single telecommunications
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
eligible resident of Tribal lands that Register.
connection at a subscriber’s principal
complies with § 54.410 prior to
place of residence imposed by an ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
enrolling him or her in Tribal Link Up.
eligible telecommunications carrier that by one of the following methods:
is also receiving high-cost support on * * * * * • Electronically: Go to the Federal
rural Tribal lands, pursuant to subpart [FR Doc. 2018–00152 Filed 1–12–18; 8:45 am] eRulemaking Portal: http://
D of this part. For purposes of this BILLING CODE 6712–01–P www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Jan 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\16JAR1.SGM 16JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_2085/page/11.svg)
Document Created: 2018-01-13 02:02:33
Document Modified: 2018-01-13 02:02:33
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | Effective February 15, 2018, except for Sec. 54.411, which will become effective March 19, 2018, and Sec. Sec. 54.403(a)(3), 54.413, and 54.414 which contain information collection requirements that have not been approved by OMB. The Federal Communications Commission will publish a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective date of those rules awaiting OMB approval. | |
| Contact | Jodie Griffin, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7400 or TTY: (202) 418-0484. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 2075 | |
| CFR Associated | Communications 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