83_FR_27642 83 FR 27528 - The Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund, Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications

83 FR 27528 - The Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund, Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 114 (June 13, 2018)

Page Range27528-27537
FR Document2018-12625

In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) seeks comment on how best to structure the second stage of the Uniendo a Puerto Rico and Connect USVI Funds to speed longer-term efforts to rebuild fixed and mobile voice and broadband networks in the territories and harden them against future natural disasters. The Commission intends to target high-cost support over the next several years in a tailored and cost-effective manner, using competitive processes where appropriate.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27528-27537]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12625]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 54

[WC Docket Nos. 18-143, 10-90, 14-58; FCC 18-57]


The Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund, Connect 
America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission 
(Commission) seeks comment on how best to structure the second stage of 
the Uniendo a Puerto Rico and Connect USVI Funds to speed longer-term 
efforts to rebuild fixed and mobile voice and broadband networks in the 
territories and harden them against future natural disasters. The 
Commission intends to target high-cost support over the next several 
years in a tailored and cost-effective manner, using competitive 
processes where appropriate.

DATES: Comments are due on or before July 5, 2018 and reply comments 
are due on or before July 18, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be 
submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period 
of time allowed by this document, you should advise the contact listed 
in the following as soon as possible.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WC Docket Nos. 18-
143, 10-90 and 14-58, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Federal Communications Commission's website: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the instructions for submitting 
comments.
     People with Disabilities: Contact the FCC to request 
reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language 
interpreters, CART, etc.) by email: [email protected] or phone: (202) 418-
0530 or TTY: (202) 418-0432.
    For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Minard, Wireline Competition 
Bureau, (202) 418-7400 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) in WC Docket Nos. 18-143, 10-90, 
14-58; FCC 18-57, adopted on May 8, 2018 and released on May 29, 2018. 
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 St. SW, Washington, DC 20554 or at the following 
internet address: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-57A1.pdf. The Order that was adopted concurrently with the Notice is 
published elsewhere in the Federal Register.

I. Introduction

    1. Through the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund, the Commission will make 
available up to $750 million of funding to carriers in Puerto Rico, 
including an immediate infusion of $51.2 million for restoration 
efforts in 2018. Of the remainder, the Commission proposes that about 
$444.5 million would be made available over a 10-year term for fixed 
voice and broadband (an $84 million increase over current funding 
levels) and that about $254 million would be made available over a 3-
year term for 4G Long-Term Evolution (LTE) mobile voice and broadband 
(a $16.8 million increase).
    2. Through the Connect USVI Fund, the Commission will make 
available up to $204 million of funding to carriers in the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, including an immediate infusion of $13 million for restoration 
efforts in 2018. Of the remainder, the Commission proposes that about 
$186.5 million would be made available over a 10-year term for fixed 
broadband (a $21 million increase) and that about $4.4 million would be 
made available over a 3-year term for 4G LTE mobile voice and broadband 
(a $4.2 million increase).
    3. As a result of these Funds, as well as the Commission's decision 
not to offset more than $65 million in advance payments it made to 
carriers last year, it will make available up to $256 million in 
additional high-cost support for rebuilding, improving, and expanding 
broadband-capable networks in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The 
Commission seeks comment on how best to structure the second stage of 
these Funds to speed longer-term efforts to rebuild fixed and mobile 
voice and broadband networks in the territories and harden them against 
future natural disasters. The Commission intends to target high-cost 
support over the next several years in a tailored and cost-effective 
manner, using competitive processes where appropriate.

II. Notice: Stage 2 Funding for Long-Term Rebuilding

    4. The Commission recognizes that a longer-term solution is needed 
to rebuild, improve, and expand service in Puerto Rico and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands given the widespread devastation to communications 
networks caused by the hurricanes. In this Notice, the Commission 
proposes to establish second stages for the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund 
and the Connect USVI Fund--one that would make available about $699 
million through the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and about $191 million 
through the Connect USVI Fund.
    5. As background, the USF currently directs approximately $36 
million each year to fixed services in Puerto Rico and $16 million each 
year to fixed services in the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with $79.2 
million each year to mobile services in Puerto Rico and only $67,000 
each year to mobile services in the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, none 
of this funding is tied to specific, accountable build-out targets. The 
Commission now seeks comment on revisiting that spending to ensure 
there is sufficient support for the long-term

[[Page 27529]]

rebuilding of the territories and that such support is distributed in a 
cost-efficient manner.
    6. Based on the Commission's analysis, it proposes to spend up to 
an additional $126 million through the second stages of the Uniendo a 
Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund. Specifically, the 
Commission would increase funding for fixed services by $10.5 million 
per year over ten years and for mobile services by $7 million per year 
over three years to ensure that carriers have sufficient funds to 
rebuild and improve the voice and broadband-capable networks, both 
where the hurricanes destroyed existing infrastructure and in rural 
areas that have not yet been served. As result, the Uniendo a Puerto 
Rico Fund would make available about $444.5 million over a decade for 
fixed broadband (an $84 million increase over current funding levels) 
and about $254 million over 3 years for 4G LTE mobile broadband (a 
$16.8 million increase). And the Connect USVI Fund would make available 
about $186.5 million over a decade for fixed broadband (a $21 million 
increase) and about $4.4 million over a 3-year term for 4G LTE mobile 
broadband (a $4.2 million increase).
    7. The Commission expects that this support will provide meaningful 
relief to carriers in the storm-ravaged territories in a targeted and 
cost-effective manner. The Commission seeks comment on whether this 
budget is appropriate and whether additional support beyond current 
levels of high-cost support is necessary to rebuild, improve, and 
expand service in these areas. Does the Commission's proposed 
allocation of additional high-cost support between fixed and mobile 
providers accurately reflect the costs that each will face in 
restoring, improving and expanding service? The Commission also seeks 
comment on whether and how to incorporate any unclaimed restoration 
funding into its long-term plan. Commenters are requested to provide 
specific information to substantiate their views.
    8. The proposal for different terms of support for fixed and mobile 
providers reflects the Commission's distinct goals of providing longer-
term support for fixed services and restoring a competitive environment 
for mobile providers. And because the Commission's proposed long-term 
plan treats fixed and mobile services in different ways, it seeks more 
detailed comment in the following on the particulars of the plan for 
each type of service.
    9. More generally, the Commission seeks comment on how to ensure 
that service is rebuilt quickly and efficiently, while improving 
networks where feasible and protecting critical communications networks 
against future natural disasters. Recognizing that access to reliable 
communications services is essential, particularly in times of 
emergency, the Commission also explores options to expand service to 
areas that were unserved prior to the hurricanes. The Commission 
invites comment on how to balance its competing objectives of 
rebuilding and improving service, ensuring network resiliency, and 
expanding coverage. At the same time, the Commission is mindful of its 
responsibility as stewards of the USF to ensure that support is spent 
efficiently and seek comment on appropriate safeguards to ensure 
accountability. Similar to Stage 1 funding, the Commission reminds 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands that the Act prohibits the 
territories from adopting regulations related to Stage 2 funding that 
are ``inconsistent with the Commission's rules to preserve and advance 
universal service.''
    10. The long-term rebuilding, improvement, and hardening of fixed 
voice and broadband service is critical in helping Puerto Rico and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands recover from the devastation caused by the 
hurricanes. The Commission believes that authorizing up to $105 million 
in additional funds for rebuilding while distributing all high-cost 
funding for fixed networks through an incentive-based mechanism will 
best ensure that networks are rebuilt, improved, and expanded across 
the territories in an efficient manner.
    11. The Commission first notes that present circumstances require 
them to revisit the Commission's past treatment of high-cost support 
for fixed networks in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In the 
December 2014 Connect America Fund Order, 80 FR 4446, January 27, 2015, 
the Commission decided to allow price-cap carriers in insular areas to 
elect to continue receiving frozen high-cost support amounts in 
exchange for accepting tailored service obligations to be adopted at a 
later date. Although PRTC (in Puerto Rico) and Viya (in the U.S. Virgin 
Islands) elected to receive frozen support, the Commission has yet to 
establish specific service obligations for either carrier. Moreover, 
the hurricanes and their aftermath wrought havoc upon these existing 
networks--so much so that each of these carriers has claimed that 
multiples of their current annual support amounts are necessary for 
restoration and rebuilding. The Commission seeks comment on the view 
that changed circumstances require them to revisit funding for fixed 
networks in these territories. How does the fact that the Commission 
has not adopted specific CAF Phase II obligations for PRTC and Viya 
impact the reliance interests, if any, these carriers could reasonably 
have had in the status quo continuing through 2020? How should the need 
for extensive rebuilding factor into the Commission's decision? How 
should the fact that the Commission is considering the addition of 
$10.5 million in high-cost funding per year for rebuilding fixed 
networks in these territories affect its decision? And how should the 
Commission weigh the efficiency of more competitive approaches that 
could extend improved service more widely to consumers in Puerto Rico 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands against any reliance interests in 
continuing to administer frozen support as before?
    12. Given the changed circumstances, the Commission proposes to 
reconsider the existing frozen high-cost support mechanisms and replace 
them with a competitive mechanism that would allocate an additional 
$105 million to fixed networks in the territories over a decade. The 
Commission proposes to allocate these support amounts so that 
approximately 80 percent goes to the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and 
approximately 20 percent to the Connect USVI Fund. As a result, fixed 
network operators in Puerto Rico would have an opportunity to compete 
for $444.5 million over the next decade and fixed network operators in 
the U.S. Virgin Islands would have an opportunity to compete for $186.5 
million over the next decade.
    13. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. In the 
concurrently adopted Order, the Commission used the same 80-20 ratio to 
balance the difference in population between Puerto Rico and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands, the significant financial challenges faced by carriers 
in both areas, the current level of high-cost support available to 
providers, and other relevant factors. Should the Commission maintain 
that ratio for the purpose of allocating additional support? Are the 
total funding amounts appropriate for each territory given the 
rebuilding required and the improvements need to harden networks 
against future natural disasters and the expansion needed in rural 
areas? Is a ten-year term of support, which the Commission has 
repeatedly used in other high-cost programs to ensure those building 
out had sufficient time to amortize and recover their costs, 
appropriate here? How should the Commission address differences in the

[[Page 27530]]

geographic or competitive landscape in evaluating its long-term plans? 
For example, Viya is currently the only fixed provider in the U.S. 
Virgin Islands. Does that argue for requiring inter-area competition as 
the Commission does in the Connect America Fund Phase II reverse 
auction? Or is a quasi-competitive process on the U.S. Virgin Islands 
nonetheless feasible? Or should the Commission pursue some alternative 
option?
    14. The Commission also invites comment on how to best promote its 
aim of providing support quickly and efficiently to speed the 
rebuilding, improvement, and expansion of service. How can the 
Commission ensure that people living in the territories have access to 
reasonably comparable, affordable fixed voice services and broadband-
capable networks? And as stewards of the USF, the Commission seeks 
comment on how best to fulfill its commitment to fiscal responsibility 
to ensure that funds are targeted efficiently.
    15. As detailed in the following, the Commission proposes to award 
high-cost support using a competitive proposal process, similar to a 
request for proposal process. The Commission also seeks comment on 
conducting an auction, negotiating directly with ETCs, and establishing 
build-out obligations while continuing to provide frozen high-cost 
support at current levels.
    16. The Commission proposes to award fixed support through the 
Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund by evaluating 
competitive proposals submitted by carriers. This approach could be 
completed quickly and efficiently, thereby avoiding lengthy delays in 
getting critical funding to carriers. A competitive proposal process is 
a more streamlined approach than the typical Commission auction, yet 
still requires carriers to compete for support. Moreover, this option 
may better enable the Commission to determine how best to award support 
for network-hardening purposes than the auction approach.
    17. The Commission proposes that accepted proposals will receive 
support for 10 years, beginning in January 2019 and running through 
December 2028. The Commission seeks comment on whether to transition 
support, through a phase-down process, in any geographic area where the 
incumbent carrier, i.e., PRTC or Viya, did not win support based on its 
proposal. The Commission provides additional details and seek comment 
on them in the following.
    18. Eligible Providers.--The Commission proposes that only a 
provider that, according to June 2017 FCC Form 477 data, had an 
existing fixed network and provided broadband service in Puerto Rico or 
the U.S. Virgin Islands prior to the hurricanes would be eligible to 
apply to participate. The Commission seeks comment on whether 
participation should be limited to fixed providers who served at least 
some residential locations or whether providers that served only 
business locations should also be permitted to participate. The 
Commission proposes to limit participation to providers who had 
provided services before the hurricane because it believes they would 
be better equipped to rebuild and expand service as quickly as 
possible. Relatedly, the Commission also believes that existing 
providers with established track records present a smaller risk of 
defaulting on their service obligations. However, the Commission seeks 
comment on whether new entrants should also be eligible. If so, what 
particular qualifications if any should the Commission impose on them?
    19. The Commission further proposes to evaluate the financial and 
technical capabilities of the applicants through a single-stage 
application process. Doing so would minimize the amount of time it 
takes to complete the competitive proposal process and begin awarding 
support. The Commission seeks comment on whether to use instead the 
two-phase application process of the competitive bidding rules for 
universal service in Part 1, Subpart AA of the Commission's rules, as 
it has done for the CAF Phase II auction.
    20. Consistent with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and 
the Commission's rules, a provider must be designated as an ETC before 
receiving support. To the extent necessary, the Commission proposes to 
allow providers to obtain ETC designations after winning support rather 
than before participating in the competitive proposal process, similar 
to the approach it followed for the CAF Phase II auction. The 
Commission seeks comment on this approach. What methods would be 
appropriate for selecting another carrier if the winner fails to timely 
obtain an ETC designation?
    21. Eligible Areas.--Given the unique circumstances presented by 
the widespread destruction of critical infrastructure, the Commission 
proposes to make eligible all of Puerto Rico. By making the entire 
territory eligible, the Commission would eliminate the need to 
establish a challenge process and thus enable a more expeditious 
completion of the process. Doing so would also encourage applicants to 
expand service to areas that were previously unserved, in addition to 
restoring service to areas that had service before the hurricanes. 
Further, the Commission anticipates that making all of Puerto Rico 
eligible for support will increase competition, driving down the 
support amounts proposed in lower-cost areas. The Commission seeks 
comment on this approach. Similarly, the Commission proposes to make 
eligible all of the U.S. Virgin Islands and seek comment on that 
approach.
    22. Alternatively, the Commission seeks comment on whether certain 
areas should be excluded. For example, are there areas where service 
has already been rebuilt (or will be rebuilt by the end of 2018)? Are 
there areas where providing high-cost support to one carrier would 
distort the competitive market and reduce potential competitors' 
incentives to rebuild service? How can the Commission ensure 
consistency with its policy against providing funding in areas where 
there is an unsubsidized competitor? Would the ability of other 
carriers to bid for such support reduce the funding in such areas to 
only what's needed to rebuild otherwise unserved areas? Are there areas 
where support levels would be so low as to be unnecessary to rebuild 
and improve service, such as census blocks in Puerto Rico identified by 
the model as having particularly low average monthly costs? How can the 
Commission best achieve its goal of maximizing the expansion of service 
to unserved areas in addition to restoring and improving service to 
areas that had it before the hurricanes?
    23. Minimum Geographic Area.--The Commission proposes to accept 
proposals for support to satisfy specific service obligations within 
each of Puerto Rico's 78 municipios. Using municipios as the basic 
geographic area for support may allow providers to achieve economies of 
scale that would not be available if the Commission used smaller areas, 
such as Puerto Rico's over 900 barrios. On the other hand, there may be 
some risk that municipios are too large to target funding in a 
competitively neutral manner--incumbent providers with large existing 
service territories are likely more amenable to providing service over 
a wider area. The Commission seeks comment on whether using municipios 
makes sense or whether it should instead provide support on a more 
granular basis, such as by barrios, census block groups, or some other 
geographic unit.
    24. The Commission seeks comment on the appropriate minimum 
geographic area for support in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Should the 
Commission treat

[[Page 27531]]

the entire territory as one geographic area to carry out this 
initiative? Or should the Commission treat each island in the U.S. 
Virgin Islands separately for this purpose? Or would using some other 
census-defined geography such as census tract, census block group, or 
census block be more appropriate?
    25. Number of Locations in Each Geographic Area.--The Commission 
proposes to identify the number of locations in each geographic area by 
using the Connect America Cost Model (the CAM). The Commission seeks 
comment on how it can best account for the fact that people may have 
migrated from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands since the storms. 
The Commission seeks comment on what other sources of data would more 
accurately model the number of locations in each area. The Commission 
also seeks comment on whether to provide support based on only certain 
locations within each geographic area, such as those that are more 
costly to serve, and whether to exclude certain other locations from 
bidding, such as those that are less costly and therefore may not 
require high-cost support. The Commission proposes, as a condition of 
receiving support for funded locations, that a winning bidder serve all 
locations within a geographic area, not just those funded (if the 
Commission decides to fund just a subset of locations). This proposal 
comports with the Commission's decision to focus on rebuilding all 
networks and make all of Puerto Rico eligible for bidding, rather than 
only discrete areas. Alternatively, the Commission seeks comment on 
limiting the obligation only to funded locations or locations in census 
blocks identified by the model as being above a certain funding 
benchmark?
    26. Given possible changes in the number of locations post-
hurricane and the difficulties in obtaining more recent, accurate data, 
the Commission also seeks comment on whether to instead evaluate 
proposals to serve all the locations in a municipio without determining 
exactly how many locations that represents. In other words, applicants 
would commit to serve all locations in a municipio rather than to serve 
a specific number. The Commission also seeks comment on whether 
differences in municipio characteristics, such as quantity of high cost 
locations or remoteness, should lead the Commission's to attach 
different obligations to funding so as to better ensure all parts of 
the territories are provided with service.
    27. Furthermore, if the data the Commission eventually adopts 
overestimates the number of locations in an area, it seeks comment on 
what flexibility to offer winning applicants. Should the Commission, 
for example, reduce support on a pro rata basis if it lowers the number 
of locations a provider must serve, and if so, what requirements and 
limitations should the Commission establish for such reductions? Should 
the Commission consider giving providers more flexibility here than it 
has in other contexts given the facilities lost and the recent 
emigration from the territories?
    28. Reserve Prices.--The Commission proposes to use a three-step 
process to set reserve prices. First, the Commission would employ the 
cost model used to establish support for price cap carriers (the CAM) 
to calculate the average cost per location of all locations in a census 
block. Second, the Commission would set separate high-cost and 
extremely high-cost thresholds for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands to ensure the full amount of funding available to each 
territory over the ten-year period is available for obligation. Third, 
the Commission would establish a reserve price for each minimum 
geographic area based on the sum of the support amounts calculated for 
each eligible census block in that municipio. Under the proposal, WCB 
would release the reserve price and number of locations for all 
eligible areas by public notice no later than 30 calendar days before 
the application deadline to submit competitive proposals.
    29. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal, and particularly 
on the key second step. The Commission notes that the extremely high-
cost threshold here would be used to establish a per-location funding 
cap, similar to how the Commission offered rate-of-return carriers 
model-based support. How should the Commission establish the 
appropriate thresholds? The CAM established a high-cost threshold of 
$52.50 based on assumed take rates and potential average revenues per 
subscriber. Do those assumptions still hold in the context of Puerto 
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands after the hurricanes? If not, should 
the Commission lower the high-cost threshold and if so, by how much? By 
25 percent? By more? The CAM established a high-cost threshold of 
$198.60. Is that appropriate here? The Puerto Rico Telecommunications 
Regulatory Board has stated that more support needs to be directed to 
the rural parts of the island. Would that suggest setting a higher 
extremely high-cost threshold? The Commission also seeks comment on how 
to allocate funds between bringing service to locations that had never 
been served versus restoring service (potentially at a lower cost) to 
locations where service had been disrupted by the hurricanes. For 
example, the Commission has previously assigned zero support to 
locations below the high-cost threshold on the assumption that a 
business case nonetheless existed to serve such locations. Does the 
context of rebuilding networks on these islands suggest revisiting that 
assumption and assigning some funding--say 10 percent of cost--to cover 
the costs below the high-cost threshold? The Commission also seeks 
comment on how the CAM should be adjusted, if at all, to take into 
account the need for network hardening. For example, should the 
Commission assume the cost of above-ground plant will increase 10 
percent (or more) to account for such hardening before it determines 
the costs per location?
    30. Selection Process.--The Commission seeks comment on the 
appropriate time frame and format for submitting proposals. The 
Commission proposes to allow confidential proposals. Should the 
Commission unseal proposals after finishing the evaluations process for 
transparency reasons? The Commission seeks comment on whether to make 
public the submitted proposals after the evaluation process has been 
completed and winning applicants have been determined. The Commission 
seeks comment on prohibiting multiple carriers from submitting a 
proposal jointly.
    31. The Commission proposes to select winning proposals based 
primarily on price per-location served while adjusting the bids to 
consider factors including network resiliency, network deployment 
timing, and network performance. The Commission seeks comment on these 
factors and what other factors it should consider when evaluating 
proposals. Considering price as the primary factor responsibly manages 
the Fund, but the Commission recognizes the increased costs of 
deploying a storm-hardened network in Puerto Rico and the USVI. For 
instance, how should the Commission factor storm hardening proposals 
into the Commission's evaluation? Should the Commission require or 
increase the weight of bids that comply with resiliency standards like 
TIA-222-H, the most up-to-date standard for antenna supporting 
structures, with best practices promulgated by the FCC's Communications 
Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council, or with another 
industry used standard for network resiliency? Should the Commission 
establish weights to

[[Page 27532]]

account for the speed of deployment? What weight would be appropriate 
to balance costs against encouraging prompt deployment to the 
territories? Should the Commission establish weights to account for 
proposals offering ``higher speeds over lower speeds, higher usage 
allowances over lower usage allowances, and lower latency over higher 
latency''? If so, what weighting scheme would be appropriate for that 
purpose? Instead of using specific weights could the Commission define 
preferences for various characteristics in the proposals? If the 
Commission does not require proposals to identify a specific number of 
locations to serve, what factors should it consider in comparing 
proposals?
    32. How should the Commission address package bidding? For example, 
should the Commission allow package bidding? If so, what limits if any 
should the Commission put on packages (e.g., should the Commission 
require all packages to be contiguous or limit the number of minimum 
geographic areas included in the package)? If selecting two package 
bids would be the most efficient outcome even if they overlapped in a 
particular geographic area, should the Commission accept both (perhaps 
requiring the less efficient bidder to redirect support from the 
overlapped area to other unserved areas) or reject the less efficient 
package (perhaps leaving no bidder for some areas)?
    33. How should the Commission evaluate bids? Should the Commission 
direct USAC or WCB to evaluate bids? The Commission proposes directing 
the reviewer to evaluate the bids in accordance with the selection 
criteria, methodology and bidding process outlined above. Once that 
initial evaluation is complete, should the Commission make selections 
or offer feedback to applicants and allow them to return with best-and-
final offers? Or would that introduce undue discretion into the process 
or create additional administrative burdens or delays? If a 
dissatisfied applicant wants to challenge its non-selection, would 
existing appeals processes be sufficient?
    34. How should the Commission address areas without bids? One 
approach would be to invite a second round of competitive proposals, 
with the difference between bids and reserve prices in the first round 
being transferred to raise the reserve price of remaining areas (pro 
rata) in the second round. In other words, if the reserve price for 
areas won in the first round were $10 million and only $8 million was 
bid, then $2 million would be available to raise the reserve prices in 
areas remaining in the second round. The Commission seeks comment on 
this approach, including whether it would be vulnerable to potential 
gamesmanship by bidders.
    35. In addition, as a backstop, the Commission proposes to require 
the incumbent carrier to continue to provide service to any unawarded 
areas using frozen high-cost support--with corresponding service 
obligations to be determined by the Commission after the competitive 
proposal process is complete. The Commission notes that for this and 
other purposes (such as any transitional payments) it would allocate an 
incumbent carrier's existing frozen support across their service 
territory in proportion to the reserve prices the Commission initially 
set for the competitive proposal process. The Commission believes this 
backstop would place incumbent carriers in no worse a position then 
they are in today, with frozen support and accompanying service 
obligations to be determined by the Commission.
    36. Service Obligations.--In addition to voice service, the 
Commission proposes to require support recipients to offer broadband 
service meeting the following metrics: Download/upload speeds of at 
least 10/1 megabits per second (Mbps), roundtrip latency of no greater 
than 100 milliseconds (ms), and a minimum usage allowance of the higher 
of 170 GB per month or one that reflects the average usage of a 
majority of consumers, using Measuring Broadband America data or a 
similar data source.
    37. The Commission seeks comment on whether these obligations are 
appropriate. Should the Commission, for instance, require some portion 
of the areas served to receive 25/3 Mbps service? And, if so, what 
fraction would be appropriate? Should the Commission impose different 
requirements for areas based on the amount of support allocated?
    38. Further, the Commission proposes requiring each support 
recipient to offer broadband service in its supported area at rates 
that are reasonably comparable to rates offered for comparable services 
in urban areas. Rates will be considered reasonably comparable if they 
are ``at or below the applicable benchmark to be announced annually by 
public notice issued by the Wireline Competition Bureau.'' Based on the 
results of the Urban Rate Survey, the Commission sees no reason to 
adopt a different benchmark specific to Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin 
Islands. The Commission seeks comment on this approach.
    39. Deployment Milestones.--As with the CAF Phase II Auction, the 
Commission proposes that winning bidders must deploy to at least 40 
percent of locations after the third year of support, at least 60 
percent after the fourth, at least 80 percent after the fifth, and 100 
percent after the sixth year of support. The Commission seeks comment 
on whether this schedule is appropriate. The Commission also seeks 
comment on how it should track milestones if a particular number of 
locations, as already discussed, is not defined. Are there other ways 
to track progress without having to rely on location counts given the 
possible difficulty of establishing a number of locations?
    40. Oversight and Accountability Measures.--The Commission has an 
obligation to ensure that carriers receive support ``only for the 
provision, maintenance, and upgrading of facilities and service for 
which the support is intended'' as required by section 254(e) of the 
Act. The Commission has exercised its oversight obligations in a 
variety of way since inception of the fund. In the following, the 
Commission proposes various oversight and accountability measures that, 
taken together, serve the public interest by enhancing the Commission's 
ability to monitor the use of USF and ensure its use for intended 
purposes.
    41. First, the Commission proposes that support recipients must 
satisfy all reporting and certification obligations of providers 
receiving CAF Phase II auction support, including as described in 
sections 54.313 and 54.316 of the Commission's rules. The Commission 
seeks comment on this proposal. The Commission seeks comment on whether 
providers who win support must track their restoration expenditures. 
Should providers retain documentation on how much support was used for 
capital expenditures and operating expenditures? What are the 
associated burdens with retaining expenditure documentation? Would 
retention of this documentation be duplicative of records needed for 
deployment milestones?
    42. Second, the Commission proposes aligning the annual reporting 
obligations with the obligations of other rate-of-return carriers in 
the 2016 Rate-of-Return Order, 81 FR 24282, April 25, 2016, by 
requiring geocoded location reporting into the HUBB. This reporting 
obligation would require providers to submit information demonstrating 
locations the provider is reporting as broadband-enabled where the 
company is prepared to offer voice and broadband service meeting the 
requisite performance standards. Do carriers currently retain 
geolocation data for served locations? If not, what period of

[[Page 27533]]

time is needed to enable collection of geolocation data? Should the 
Commission require this data be reported for only newly deployed 
locations or all reported locations? Would annual reporting or a longer 
period more appropriately balance the reporting burden against the 
accuracy of the data? Additionally, the Commission proposes requiring 
awarded carriers to submit performance measurements in accordance with 
the requirements to be defined by the Commission. To the extent that 
awarded carriers have not participated in that proceeding, the 
Commission proposes requiring the same testing method options and 
parameters as price cap carriers.
    43. Third, the Commission proposes to carefully monitor and 
reassess the deployment obligations of the awarded support before the 
end of the fifth year. Understanding the deployment and operational 
realities of providing service in both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, the Commission believes this reassessment would be prudent to 
address any changed circumstances within the territories, whether that 
be changes in subscribership expectations due to population changes or 
future disruptive natural disasters. As the current situation 
demonstrates, the long-term planning involved in any telecommunications 
deployment decision requires a number of assumptions that may change 
dramatically over time. Would providing an opportunity for the 
Commission to reassess deployment obligations be beneficial to 
providers or cause unneeded uncertainty? Should the reassessment be 
tied to deployment milestones? For example, the reassessment would not 
be triggered if a provider is 60 percent deployed after four years, but 
would occur if a provider failed to meet the deployment obligation. 
Would it be appropriate to alter the obligations by increasing or 
decreasing the number of locations or modifying the service 
obligations?
    44. Fourth, the Commission proposes to subject awarded carriers to 
the same compliance standards as any other carrier with defined 
obligations by defining specific obligations for the support. This may 
result in a carrier that failed to meet its milestones having support 
reduced until the carrier can meet its obligations or face recovery 
actions. The Commission seeks comment on this approach.
    45. The Commission also seeks comment on whether successful 
applicants must obtain a letter of credit by way of security, as must 
winning bidders in the CAF Phase II auction. If so, how should the 
letter of credit be structured? Should it be for the full amount 
awarded, or some lesser amount that will nevertheless protect the USF? 
Should an alternative to a letter of credit be considered, such as a 
performance or payment bond?
    46. Fifth, the Commission proposes to subject all awarded carriers 
in the territories to ongoing oversight by the Commission and USAC to 
ensure program integrity and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. The 
Commission has a longstanding audit program that is continually updated 
to respond to the Commission's needs inclusive of changes in program 
requirements, new guidance from GAO and OMB, and changes in law. 
Accordingly, the Commission proposes that all awarded carriers would be 
subject to random compliance audits and other investigations to ensure 
compliance with program rules and orders. The Commission seeks comment 
on what sorts of audit procedures the Commission should undertake to 
confirm that support has been spent on allowed restoration costs. The 
Commission also seeks comment on whether there are specific 
circumstances facing carriers in the territories that require modifying 
the current audit practices.
    47. As an alternative to the competitive proposal process, the 
Commission seeks comment on using an auction for the second stages of 
the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund. The 
Commission notes that it cannot simply apply the same rules of the CAF 
Phase II Auction here because it seeks to achieve different goals. 
Among other differences, here the Commission wishes to rebuild 
networks, including in areas where a business case existed pre-
hurricane for providing service, whereas in the CAF Phase II context, 
the Commission aims to maintain and expand service where there is no 
such business case.
    48. Instead, the Commission seeks comment on using a single-round 
sealed bid auction to award support. Such an approach generally would 
award support on a per-location basis, based on the lowest price. 
Bidders would identify a per-location support price at which they are 
willing to meet Commission requirements to cover the locations in each 
eligible area they specify. Bids would then be ranked, lowest to 
highest, and support would be assigned to those areas with the lowest 
bid amounts submitted (and within each assigned area, to the lowest 
bidder), until no further bids can be accommodated under the budget. 
The terms of such an auction would otherwise largely track the terms 
for the competitive proposal process described above.
    49. The Commission seeks comment on whether the competitive 
environment in Puerto Rico is sufficiently robust to ensure an auction 
that distributes funds in a cost-effective way. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether to use an auction process to distribute funds in 
Puerto Rico, but not in the U.S. Virgin Islands, given that FCC Form 
477 data shows that Viya is currently the only fixed provider there.
    50. Are there any specific auction rules or procedures the 
Commission should consider so that an auction would not be overly 
complicated for the Commission to administer and would not overly 
burden potential bidders? Is there an auction design the Commission 
could use that would achieve its objective of maximizing consumer 
benefits? Would this approach afford the same flexibility as a 
competitive proposal process?
    51. The Commission seeks comment on whether to structure the second 
stages based on carrier-submitted proposals to rebuild, improve, and 
expand service in the territories. Such proposals would not be 
evaluated on a competitive basis, but would be the result of 
negotiation between the Commission and carriers. Given similarly unique 
circumstances, the Commission adopted a framework based on carrier 
commitments to maintain and expand the availability of service in 
Alaska.
    52. Like the competitive proposal option, through this process the 
Commission seeks to maximize the number of locations where fixed voice 
and broadband services would be available in a targeted and cost-
effective manner. As with any method of awarding of support, the 
Commission expects to hold providers accountable to use support for its 
intended purposes and to meet the deployment commitments it set.
    53. To the extent the Commission adopts this approach, it seeks 
comment on the process by which it would seek proposals, review them, 
and award support. The Commission anticipates establishing the specific 
criteria by which it would award support and measure compliance by 
Public Notice, along with a time frame for submitting proposals. The 
Commission invites comment on this approach.
    54. In the Universal Service Transformation Order, 76 FR 73830, 
November 29, 2011, the Commission allowed price cap carriers serving 
specific non-contiguous areas of the United States--including Puerto 
Rico

[[Page 27534]]

and the U.S. Virgin Islands--to maintain frozen support levels for 
those carriers if, in the Bureau's determination, certain conditions 
were met. Recognizing that these carriers faced different operating 
conditions and challenges compared to carriers in the contiguous 48 
states, the Bureau invoked its discretion. Both PRTC and Viya elected 
to continue receiving frozen support, with the Commission responsible 
for adopting specific service obligations tailored to the individual 
circumstances of each carrier.
    55. As the Commission has not yet adopted CAF II obligations for 
the frozen support that PRTC and Viya continue to receive, it seeks 
comment on whether to forego reconsidering the Commission's prior 
decisions and instead simply adopt specific service obligations to 
reflect the frozen-support amounts PRTC and Viya currently receive. If 
the Commission pursues this alternative, what obligations would be 
appropriate and feasible? Should the Commission establish particular 
expectations regarding expanding service to new areas or implementing 
more resilient networks?
    56. In the aftermath of the hurricanes, the rapid restoration of 
mobile service was critical in facilitating communications with public 
safety and civic officials and connecting families to loved ones. 
Building upon the significant restoration efforts that have taken place 
to date, the Commission seeks comment on how best to target high-cost 
support to rebuild, improve, harden, and expand mobile services in 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Commission proposes to 
make $259 million in support available to eligible facilities-based 
mobile providers over the next three years through the Uniendo a Puerto 
Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund. The Commission's goal is to 
facilitate timely recovery of mobile services within these territories 
in a cost-effective manner.
    57. The Commission notes that it has previously targeted Puerto 
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands as potential areas eligible for the 
upcoming MF-II auction. However, the Commission recognized in December 
that conditions in the territories after the hurricanes made 
establishing reliable coverage of mobile networks infeasible in the 
near term. As such, the Commission waived the filing deadline for 
mobile providers to submit 4G LTE coverage information for a period of 
180 days or until the Commission took action addressing the appropriate 
approach, given the circumstances, for providing ongoing, high-cost 
support for mobile services in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, 
whichever occurred earlier.
    58. The Commission now proposes to extend that waiver, exempt these 
mobile providers from filing this coverage information, and carve 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands out from the MF-II auction. 
Instead, the Commission proposes to supplement existing support over a 
three-year period by giving providers an additional $21 million to 
rebuild their networks after the destruction wrought by Hurricanes Irma 
and Maria and their aftermath. The Commission seeks comment on 
allocating these support amounts so that approximately 80 percent goes 
to the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and approximately 20 percent to the 
Connect USVI Fund. As a result, over the next three years, the Uniendo 
a Puerto Rico Fund would make available $254.4 million to mobile 
network operators and the Connect USVI Fund would make available $4.4 
million to mobile network operators. These territories currently face 
serious and continuing challenges in restoring their mobile 
communications capacity, and the Commission tentatively concludes that 
this additional funding will allow providers in these territories to 
repair the damage caused by the hurricanes to their wireless networks 
as well as make their networks more resilient to future natural 
disasters.
    59. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal. In the 
concurrently adopted Order, the Commission used the same 80-20 ratio to 
balance the difference in population between Puerto Rico and the U.S. 
Virgin Islands, the significant financial challenges faced by carriers 
in both areas, the current level of high-cost support available to 
providers, and other relevant factors. Should the Commission maintain 
that ratio for the purpose of allocating additional support? Are the 
total funding amounts appropriate for each territory given the 
rebuilding required and the improvements need to harden networks 
against future natural disasters and the expansion needed in rural 
areas? Is a three-year term of support appropriate here? How should the 
Commission address differences in historic universal service funding in 
evaluating its long-term plans? For example, mobile carriers in the 
U.S. Virgin Islands receive almost no funding today. Does that argue 
for allocating most of the new funding there? Or should the Commission 
redistribute all funding across both territories setting aside historic 
allocations?
    60. The Commission proposes that only providers that provided 
facilities-based mobile services in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands prior to the hurricane impacts, according to the June 2017 Form 
477 data, would be eligible to elect this new funding. The Commission 
proposes to allocate the new funding based on the number of subscribers 
(voice or broadband internet access service) each provider served as of 
June 30, 2017--similar to how the Commission calculates support in 
stage one. As an alternative, the Commission seeks comment on 
allocating all funding available for mobile network operators in the 
second stages of the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI 
Fund based on pre-hurricane subscribership. Such an approach would 
avoid any inefficiencies in the historic allocation of support among 
the islands and avoid the need for a decision ahead of time regarding 
how much in particular should go to Puerto Rico versus the U.S. Virgin 
Islands. If the Commission pursues this alternative approach, should 
the Commission set transitional funding amounts for existing recipients 
of high-cost support? In particular, should the Commission ensure that 
existing recipients receive at least two-thirds of their current mobile 
support in 2019 and at least one third in 2020?
    61. The Commission proposes that, in exchange for accepting 
additional support, each mobile provider must commit to, at minimum, a 
full restoration of its pre-hurricane coverage area, at a level of 
service that meets or exceeds the minimum standard required of 
recipients of MF-II support. Such a requirement aligns with the goal of 
MF-II to ``target universal service funding to support the deployment 
of the highest level of mobile service available today--4G LTE.'' The 
Commission tentatively concludes that, given the extent of damage in 
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, most providers will already be 
engaging in substantial rebuilding of towers and infrastructure, and 
will find it most economical to deploy 4G LTE during such restoration 
versus alternative technologies. The Commission seeks comment on 
whether this requirement is appropriate. Should the Commission instead 
require providers to rebuild their networks at a different standard? 
For example, should the Commission instead require deployment at the 
speed benchmark used to identify areas eligible for MF-II? Is there an 
alternative standard appropriate to ensure that residents of Puerto 
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands have comparable service to other areas 
of the United States? Should the Commission restrict funding to support

[[Page 27535]]

operation, deployment, and enhancement only of 4G LTE?
    62. The Commission also seeks comment on whether the Uniendo a 
Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund should include requirements 
to expand service. Are there areas, for instance, that lacked coverage 
before the hurricanes and that the Commission should nonetheless 
require providers to serve? How should such areas be identified and how 
should the Commission determine what carriers should be required to 
serve them? The Commission seeks comment on how quickly rebuilding 
could be accomplished and what milestones might be appropriate to 
complete build out. Is three years of funding for rebuilding 
appropriate? Why or why not?
    63. The Commission also seeks comment on the appropriate reporting 
requirements for support recipients. The Commission proposes to have 
any mobile providers receiving second-stage support via the Uniendo a 
Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund report twice per year on 
their coverage. Specifically, the Commission proposes that providers 
supply coverage maps using the buildout parameters the Commission will 
adopt for the MF-II auction. If the Commission adopts a different 
service requirement for funding recipients than the minimum standard 
required of recipients of MF-II support, it proposes to make 
appropriate adjustments to the reporting requirements. The Commission 
seeks comment on these proposals. The Commission also seeks comment on 
how this data should best be submitted to the Commission, such as 
through the regular Form 477 filings or some other process?
    64. As noted above, the Commission has an obligation to ensure that 
carriers receive support ``only for the provision, maintenance, and 
upgrading of facilities and service for which the support is intended'' 
as required by section 254(e) of the Act. The Commission seeks comment 
on appropriate oversight and accountability measures for carriers that 
receive additional high-cost support as proposed in this Notice. The 
Commission proposes that recipients of such funds conform to the annual 
reporting requirements the Commission adopted for MF-II. The Commission 
also proposes that all support recipients be subject generally to the 
same audit requirements as recipients of CAF-II support and all other 
high-cost support. The Commission seeks comment on whether any other 
oversight or accountability measures are appropriate. Should the 
Commission require carriers to submit one or more Milestone Reports to 
demonstrate progress on service restoration? Would it be beneficial for 
the Commission or USAC to make use of independent testing to determine 
service speed, quality, and reliability in these areas?
    65. The Commission proposes to use an auction to allocate funding 
following this three-year period, with any funding commitments 
resulting from such an auction to commence on the day following the end 
of the three-year period. The Commission seeks comment on whether the 
competitive environment in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands is 
sufficiently robust to ensure an auction that distributes funds in a 
cost-effective way and whether it makes sense from the perspective of 
administrative efficiency to hold such an auction. Can the Commission 
use the same general auction rules and same auction design for this 
auction as it will use for the MF-II auction? Are there any specific 
auction rules or procedures the Commission should consider so that an 
auction would not be overly complicated for the Commission to 
administer and would not overly burden potential bidders?
    66. If the Commission were to use an auction to allocate funding, 
how should it determine which areas would be eligible to win support in 
the auction? Should the Commission consider an area eligible if it does 
not meet the speed and technical parameters used to identify areas 
eligible for MF-II? Should the Commission adopt additional or 
alternative specifications for eligibility that would be more suitable 
for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands? For example, should an 
area be eligible if, despite meeting a certain download speed 
requirement, it does not meet certain network resiliency requirements, 
e.g. hardening to hurricane impacts? If so, what resiliency 
requirements would be appropriate? In this document, the Commission 
proposes that providers supply coverage maps using the technical 
parameters buildout parameters the Commission will adopt for the MF-II 
auction. Would that coverage information suffice for determining areas 
eligible for an auction, or is additional data required, such as a one-
time data collection using the MF-II Challenge process technical 
parameters? If so, when should the Commission collect that data to 
ensure that funding commitments can begin on schedule?
    67. Several parties have proposed that rebuilt networks be ``storm 
hardened.'' The Commission seeks comment on whether the Uniendo a 
Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund should require second-stage 
participants to improve the ability of their facilities and equipment 
to resist hurricanes and other natural disasters. If so, should the 
Commission require compliance with resiliency standards like TIA-222-H, 
the most up-to-date standard for antenna supporting structures or with 
best practices promulgated by the FCC's Communications Security, 
Reliability and Interoperability Council? Are there other industry 
standards that would help improve resistance to flooding, wind damage, 
and water damage? How should any such requirements be enforced? What 
are the expected costs of deploying a ``storm hardened'' network, and 
how should the Commission evaluate the costs and benefits of any such 
network? Should the Commission consider requiring hardening of certain 
key network assets, but not the entire network? If so, how should key 
assets be identified? Would requiring hardening only of assets 
sufficient to provide voice and basic data service be appropriate? What 
level of data service would be appropriate? Are costs associated with 
back-up power endurance, backhaul resiliency, physical infrastructure 
resiliency, recovery plans, and/or redundant or alternate network 
implementations appropriate in this context? Should the Commission 
instead allow carriers to include in their proposals how and to what 
degree they would harden their networks, and factor that information 
into the evaluation of proposals?
    68. The Commission also proposes to require second-stage 
participants to provide more detailed information to support tracking 
of recovery efforts. Although mobile carriers already provide 
information on coverage (but not signal strength, antenna alignment, 
and throughput) on a biannual basis through FCC Form 477, that 
information does not reveal the real-time status of communications 
systems in the aftermath of a disaster. Carriers currently have the 
option to provide information about the status of their infrastructure 
via the Commission's voluntary Disaster Information Reporting System 
(DIRS), and it proposes to require carriers who accept USF funding 
through the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund to 
participate in DIRS. The Commission seeks comment on this proposal and 
on the data that DIRS should seek. Would it be appropriate to require 
mobile carriers to provide coverage maps, signal strength, antenna 
alignment, and throughput on a periodic basis in DIRS? How often should 
these reports be provided? Would it be

[[Page 27536]]

appropriate to require coverage maps at a more granular boundary value, 
for example -98 dBm to reflect indoor coverage for both voice and data? 
Would it be appropriate to require carriers to include information 
about disruptions to backhaul? Should the DIRS data contain more 
information about the customers' experience with their mobile service, 
for example by including more information about the condition of 
backhaul? If so, at what intervals? What are the costs and benefits of 
requiring additional reporting? When might it be appropriate to relieve 
carriers of any enhanced reporting requirements?
    69. The Commission anticipates that any second-stage mobile 
participants in the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI 
Fund would continue to adhere to the current post-disaster resiliency 
framework for some time and seek comment on when that framework should 
and should not apply. First, are there common metrics used across 
providers to determine whether and when to open roaming capabilities? 
Should the Commission no longer expect adherence to the framework when 
coverage has been rebuilt to pre-hurricane levels? If so, should there 
be a minimum level of service associated with such coverage? 
Alternatively, would a set time period for continued adherence, such as 
one year, be more appropriate and reduce administrative burden? If so, 
what time period would be appropriate? Finally, should a similar 
framework be adopted for fixed providers?
    70. The Commission also anticipates that any second-stage 
participants in the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI 
Fund would coordinate any construction and access issues with other 
carriers and state and federal agencies to minimize duplicative 
facilities, hardening, construction, digging, and other activity. The 
Commission believes that such coordination could help rebuild service 
in these areas more quickly and efficiently. The Commission seeks 
comment on whether voluntary coordination is sufficient or if it should 
adopt specific requirements. Commenters should identify specific 
carrier obligations and a framework for coordination. If the Commission 
adopted requirements, are there any reporting obligations that would be 
appropriate to ensure cooperation?
    71. Finally, the Commission understands that much of Puerto Rico 
still lacks electrical power. Communications networks require reliable 
power to operate. The Commission seeks comment on what obligations 
providers should bear to ensure that their networks can function even 
when the electrical power grid is down. For instance, the Commission 
seeks comment on whether carriers could run their networks using energy 
sources readily available in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands 
that do not need to be shipped from elsewhere. The Commission seeks 
comment on the applicable costs of sustainable back-up power. What are 
the costs of maintaining generators on-site versus using portable 
generators? What are the costs and additional considerations of 
obtaining renewable back-up power versus traditional power methods?
    72. Finally, the Commission seeks comment on other alternatives.
    73. The Commission seeks comment on a petition filed by PRTC on 
January 19, 2018, asking the Commission to ``create a $200 million 
emergency Universal Service Fund designated to facilitate restoration 
of service in insular areas by [ETCs] in Puerto Rico.'' PRTC's request 
encompasses support for both fixed and mobile providers in Puerto Rico. 
It suggests the Commission distribute funds ``based on a percentage of 
the consumer service disruption credits provided by facilities-based 
ETCs to end user customers'' or ``in proportion to the total number of 
lines each facilities-based ETC restores during the next twelve 
months.'' The Commission seeks specific comment on whether additional 
short-term funding is necessary for Puerto Rico given the actions it 
takes in the concurrently adopted Order. If the Commission were to 
pursue such relief, how could it ensure that any funds are well spent? 
Do carriers regularly offer ``service disruption credits,'' or do 
different carriers offer different options to their consumers? And 
would such an emergency fund create a perverse incentive of rewarding 
those carriers that had greater service disruptions vis-[agrave]-vis 
those that recovered more quickly from the hurricanes?
    74. The Commission also seeks comment on the petition filed by Viya 
proposing a one-time infusion of $45 million in support to help it 
rebuild its fixed network in the U.S. Virgin Islands, the petition 
filed by Viya on October 5, 2017, that sought ``a supplemental, one-
time infusion of up to $50 million for carriers to rebuild wireless 
networks using hurricane-hardened facilities'' in the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, and the petition filed by Open Mobile seeking additional high-
cost support and an advance on its support payments. The Commission 
seeks specific comment on whether additional short-term funding is 
necessary for the U.S. Virgin Islands given the actions it takes in the 
concurrently adopted Order. If the Commission were to pursue such 
relief, how could it ensure that any funds are well spent?

III. Procedural Matters

A. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act

    75. This document contains proposed information collection 
requirements. The Commission, as part of its continuing effort to 
reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) to comment on the information collection 
requirements contained in this document, as required by the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, pursuant to the 
Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 
U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the Commission seeks specific comment on how it 
might further reduce the information collection burden for small 
business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
    76. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification. The Regulatory 
Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires that a regulatory 
flexibility analysis be prepared for rulemaking proceedings, unless the 
agency certifies that ``the rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally 
defines ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms 
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental 
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same 
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business 
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned 
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3) 
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business 
Administration (SBA).
    77. This Notice proposes annual support to rebuild, improve, and 
expand fixed and mobile services in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin 
Islands. The Notice proposes making support available to any fixed or 
mobile provider who obtains an ETC designation, using a competitive and 
subscriber-based process, respectively. Ten fixed and mobile carriers 
in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands currently receive high-cost 
support. Even assuming other carriers will obtain an ETC designation to 
receive part of the additional support proposed by the Notice, the 
Commission does not anticipate the proposed rule to affect more than 15 
providers out of the 737 providers currently receiving high-cost 
support. Accordingly, the Commission anticipates that this Notice

[[Page 27537]]

will not affect a substantial number of carriers, and so it does not 
anticipate that it will affect a substantial number of small entities. 
Therefore, the Commission certifies that this Notice will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    78. Comments. All comments to this Notice should be filed in WC 
Docket No. 18-143, The Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI 
Fund.

IV. Ordering Clauses

    79. Accordingly, it is ordered, pursuant to the authority contained 
in sections 4(i), 214, 254, 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act 
of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 214, 254, 303(r), and 403, and 
sections 1.1, 1.3, and 1.412 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.1, 
1.3, and 1.412, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is adopted. The Notice is 
effective thirty (30) days after publication of the text or summary 
thereof in the Federal Register.
    80. It is further ordered that pursuant to applicable procedures 
set forth in sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's Rules, 47 CFR 
1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments on the Notice on or 
before July 5, 2018, and reply comments on or before July 18, 2018.

Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-12625 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6712-01-P



                                                27528                 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                particular statute or statutes? If so, please           due on or before July 18, 2018. If you                 mobile voice and broadband (a $16.8
                                                provide examples.                                       anticipate that you will be submitting                 million increase).
                                                                                                        comments, but find it difficult to do so                  2. Through the Connect USVI Fund,
                                                III. Statutory and Executive Order                      within the period of time allowed by                   the Commission will make available up
                                                Reviews                                                 this document, you should advise the                   to $204 million of funding to carriers in
                                                   Under Executive Order 12866,                         contact listed in the following as soon                the U.S. Virgin Islands, including an
                                                entitled Regulatory Planning and                        as possible.                                           immediate infusion of $13 million for
                                                Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),                  ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
                                                                                                                                                               restoration efforts in 2018. Of the
                                                this is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’             identified by WC Docket Nos. 18–143,                   remainder, the Commission proposes
                                                because the action raises novel legal or                                                                       that about $186.5 million would be
                                                                                                        10–90 and 14–58, by any of the
                                                policy issues. Accordingly, EPA has                                                                            made available over a 10-year term for
                                                                                                        following methods:
                                                submitted this action to the Office of                                                                         fixed broadband (a $21 million increase)
                                                                                                           • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://               and that about $4.4 million would be
                                                Management and Budget (OMB) for                         www.regulations.gov. Follow the
                                                review under Executive Order 12866                                                                             made available over a 3-year term for 4G
                                                                                                        instructions for submitting comments.                  LTE mobile voice and broadband (a $4.2
                                                and any changes made in response to                        • Federal Communications
                                                OMB recommendations have been                                                                                  million increase).
                                                                                                        Commission’s website: http://                             3. As a result of these Funds, as well
                                                documented in the docket for this                       fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the
                                                action. Because this action does not                                                                           as the Commission’s decision not to
                                                                                                        instructions for submitting comments.                  offset more than $65 million in advance
                                                propose or impose any requirements,
                                                                                                           • People with Disabilities: Contact the             payments it made to carriers last year,
                                                and instead seeks comments and
                                                                                                        FCC to request reasonable                              it will make available up to $256
                                                suggestions for the agency to consider in
                                                                                                        accommodations (accessible format                      million in additional high-cost support
                                                possibly developing a subsequent
                                                                                                        documents, sign language interpreters,                 for rebuilding, improving, and
                                                proposed rule, the various statutes and
                                                                                                        CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov                   expanding broadband-capable networks
                                                Executive Orders that normally apply to
                                                                                                        or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202)                 in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
                                                rulemaking do not apply in this case.
                                                                                                        418–0432.                                              The Commission seeks comment on
                                                Should EPA subsequently determine to
                                                pursue a rulemaking, EPA will address                      For detailed instructions for                       how best to structure the second stage
                                                the statues and Executive Orders as                     submitting comments and additional                     of these Funds to speed longer-term
                                                applicable to that rulemaking.                          information on the rulemaking process,                 efforts to rebuild fixed and mobile voice
                                                                                                        see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION                      and broadband networks in the
                                                  Dated: June 7, 2018.                                  section of this document.                              territories and harden them against
                                                E. Scott Pruitt,                                                                                               future natural disasters. The
                                                                                                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                Administrator.
                                                                                                        Alexander Minard, Wireline                             Commission intends to target high-cost
                                                [FR Doc. 2018–12707 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]             Competition Bureau, (202) 418–7400 or                  support over the next several years in a
                                                BILLING CODE 6560–50–P                                  TTY: (202) 418–0484.                                   tailored and cost-effective manner,
                                                                                                                                                               using competitive processes where
                                                                                                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a                   appropriate.
                                                                                                        synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
                                                FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS                                  Proposed Rulemaking (Notice) in WC                     II. Notice: Stage 2 Funding for Long-
                                                COMMISSION                                              Docket Nos. 18–143, 10–90, 14–58; FCC                  Term Rebuilding
                                                47 CFR Part 54                                          18–57, adopted on May 8, 2018 and                         4. The Commission recognizes that a
                                                                                                        released on May 29, 2018. The full text                longer-term solution is needed to
                                                [WC Docket Nos. 18–143, 10–90, 14–58; FCC               of this document is available for public               rebuild, improve, and expand service in
                                                18–57]                                                  inspection during regular business                     Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
                                                                                                        hours in the FCC Reference Center,                     given the widespread devastation to
                                                The Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and
                                                                                                        Room CY–A257, 445 12th St. SW,                         communications networks caused by
                                                the Connect USVI Fund, Connect
                                                                                                        Washington, DC 20554 or at the                         the hurricanes. In this Notice, the
                                                America Fund, ETC Annual Reports
                                                                                                        following internet address: https://                   Commission proposes to establish
                                                and Certifications
                                                                                                        docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-                   second stages for the Uniendo a Puerto
                                                AGENCY:  Federal Communications                         18-57A1.pdf. The Order that was                        Rico Fund and the Connect USVI
                                                Commission.                                             adopted concurrently with the Notice is                Fund—one that would make available
                                                ACTION: Proposed rule.                                  published elsewhere in the Federal                     about $699 million through the Uniendo
                                                                                                        Register.                                              a Puerto Rico Fund and about $191
                                                SUMMARY:   In this document, the Federal                                                                       million through the Connect USVI
                                                Communications Commission                               I. Introduction
                                                                                                                                                               Fund.
                                                (Commission) seeks comment on how                          1. Through the Uniendo a Puerto Rico                   5. As background, the USF currently
                                                best to structure the second stage of the               Fund, the Commission will make                         directs approximately $36 million each
                                                Uniendo a Puerto Rico and Connect                       available up to $750 million of funding                year to fixed services in Puerto Rico and
                                                USVI Funds to speed longer-term efforts                 to carriers in Puerto Rico, including an               $16 million each year to fixed services
                                                to rebuild fixed and mobile voice and                   immediate infusion of $51.2 million for                in the U.S. Virgin Islands, along with
                                                broadband networks in the territories                   restoration efforts in 2018. Of the                    $79.2 million each year to mobile
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                and harden them against future natural                  remainder, the Commission proposes                     services in Puerto Rico and only
                                                disasters. The Commission intends to                    that about $444.5 million would be                     $67,000 each year to mobile services in
                                                target high-cost support over the next                  made available over a 10-year term for                 the U.S. Virgin Islands. However, none
                                                several years in a tailored and cost-                   fixed voice and broadband (an $84                      of this funding is tied to specific,
                                                effective manner, using competitive                     million increase over current funding                  accountable build-out targets. The
                                                processes where appropriate.                            levels) and that about $254 million                    Commission now seeks comment on
                                                DATES: Comments are due on or before                    would be made available over a 3-year                  revisiting that spending to ensure there
                                                July 5, 2018 and reply comments are                     term for 4G Long-Term Evolution (LTE)                  is sufficient support for the long-term


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00009   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                                      Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                            27529

                                                rebuilding of the territories and that                  service is rebuilt quickly and efficiently,            that changed circumstances require
                                                such support is distributed in a cost-                  while improving networks where                         them to revisit funding for fixed
                                                efficient manner.                                       feasible and protecting critical                       networks in these territories. How does
                                                   6. Based on the Commission’s                         communications networks against                        the fact that the Commission has not
                                                analysis, it proposes to spend up to an                 future natural disasters. Recognizing                  adopted specific CAF Phase II
                                                additional $126 million through the                     that access to reliable communications                 obligations for PRTC and Viya impact
                                                second stages of the Uniendo a Puerto                   services is essential, particularly in                 the reliance interests, if any, these
                                                Rico Fund and the Connect USVI Fund.                    times of emergency, the Commission                     carriers could reasonably have had in
                                                Specifically, the Commission would                      also explores options to expand service                the status quo continuing through 2020?
                                                increase funding for fixed services by                  to areas that were unserved prior to the               How should the need for extensive
                                                $10.5 million per year over ten years                   hurricanes. The Commission invites                     rebuilding factor into the Commission’s
                                                and for mobile services by $7 million                   comment on how to balance its                          decision? How should the fact that the
                                                per year over three years to ensure that                competing objectives of rebuilding and                 Commission is considering the addition
                                                carriers have sufficient funds to rebuild               improving service, ensuring network                    of $10.5 million in high-cost funding
                                                and improve the voice and broadband-                    resiliency, and expanding coverage. At                 per year for rebuilding fixed networks in
                                                capable networks, both where the                        the same time, the Commission is                       these territories affect its decision? And
                                                hurricanes destroyed existing                           mindful of its responsibility as stewards              how should the Commission weigh the
                                                infrastructure and in rural areas that                  of the USF to ensure that support is                   efficiency of more competitive
                                                have not yet been served. As result, the                spent efficiently and seek comment on                  approaches that could extend improved
                                                Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund would                        appropriate safeguards to ensure                       service more widely to consumers in
                                                make available about $444.5 million                     accountability. Similar to Stage 1                     Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
                                                over a decade for fixed broadband (an                   funding, the Commission reminds                        against any reliance interests in
                                                $84 million increase over current                       Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands                continuing to administer frozen support
                                                funding levels) and about $254 million                  that the Act prohibits the territories                 as before?
                                                over 3 years for 4G LTE mobile                          from adopting regulations related to                      12. Given the changed circumstances,
                                                broadband (a $16.8 million increase).                   Stage 2 funding that are ‘‘inconsistent                the Commission proposes to reconsider
                                                And the Connect USVI Fund would                         with the Commission’s rules to preserve                the existing frozen high-cost support
                                                make available about $186.5 million                     and advance universal service.’’                       mechanisms and replace them with a
                                                over a decade for fixed broadband (a $21                   10. The long-term rebuilding,                       competitive mechanism that would
                                                million increase) and about $4.4 million                improvement, and hardening of fixed                    allocate an additional $105 million to
                                                over a 3-year term for 4G LTE mobile                    voice and broadband service is critical                fixed networks in the territories over a
                                                broadband (a $4.2 million increase).                    in helping Puerto Rico and the U.S.                    decade. The Commission proposes to
                                                   7. The Commission expects that this                  Virgin Islands recover from the                        allocate these support amounts so that
                                                support will provide meaningful relief                  devastation caused by the hurricanes.                  approximately 80 percent goes to the
                                                to carriers in the storm-ravaged                        The Commission believes that                           Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and
                                                territories in a targeted and cost-                     authorizing up to $105 million in                      approximately 20 percent to the
                                                effective manner. The Commission                        additional funds for rebuilding while                  Connect USVI Fund. As a result, fixed
                                                seeks comment on whether this budget                    distributing all high-cost funding for                 network operators in Puerto Rico would
                                                is appropriate and whether additional                   fixed networks through an incentive-                   have an opportunity to compete for
                                                support beyond current levels of high-                  based mechanism will best ensure that                  $444.5 million over the next decade and
                                                cost support is necessary to rebuild,                   networks are rebuilt, improved, and                    fixed network operators in the U.S.
                                                improve, and expand service in these                    expanded across the territories in an                  Virgin Islands would have an
                                                areas. Does the Commission’s proposed                   efficient manner.                                      opportunity to compete for $186.5
                                                allocation of additional high-cost                         11. The Commission first notes that                 million over the next decade.
                                                support between fixed and mobile                        present circumstances require them to                     13. The Commission seeks comment
                                                providers accurately reflect the costs                  revisit the Commission’s past treatment                on this proposal. In the concurrently
                                                that each will face in restoring,                       of high-cost support for fixed networks                adopted Order, the Commission used
                                                improving and expanding service? The                    in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin                     the same 80–20 ratio to balance the
                                                Commission also seeks comment on                        Islands. In the December 2014 Connect                  difference in population between Puerto
                                                whether and how to incorporate any                      America Fund Order, 80 FR 4446,                        Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the
                                                unclaimed restoration funding into its                  January 27, 2015, the Commission                       significant financial challenges faced by
                                                long-term plan. Commenters are                          decided to allow price-cap carriers in                 carriers in both areas, the current level
                                                requested to provide specific                           insular areas to elect to continue                     of high-cost support available to
                                                information to substantiate their views.                receiving frozen high-cost support                     providers, and other relevant factors.
                                                   8. The proposal for different terms of               amounts in exchange for accepting                      Should the Commission maintain that
                                                support for fixed and mobile providers                  tailored service obligations to be                     ratio for the purpose of allocating
                                                reflects the Commission’s distinct goals                adopted at a later date. Although PRTC                 additional support? Are the total
                                                of providing longer-term support for                    (in Puerto Rico) and Viya (in the U.S.                 funding amounts appropriate for each
                                                fixed services and restoring a                          Virgin Islands) elected to receive frozen              territory given the rebuilding required
                                                competitive environment for mobile                      support, the Commission has yet to                     and the improvements need to harden
                                                providers. And because the                              establish specific service obligations for             networks against future natural disasters
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                Commission’s proposed long-term plan                    either carrier. Moreover, the hurricanes               and the expansion needed in rural
                                                treats fixed and mobile services in                     and their aftermath wrought havoc upon                 areas? Is a ten-year term of support,
                                                different ways, it seeks more detailed                  these existing networks—so much so                     which the Commission has repeatedly
                                                comment in the following on the                         that each of these carriers has claimed                used in other high-cost programs to
                                                particulars of the plan for each type of                that multiples of their current annual                 ensure those building out had sufficient
                                                service.                                                support amounts are necessary for                      time to amortize and recover their costs,
                                                   9. More generally, the Commission                    restoration and rebuilding. The                        appropriate here? How should the
                                                seeks comment on how to ensure that                     Commission seeks comment on the view                   Commission address differences in the


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00010   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                27530                 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                geographic or competitive landscape in                  FCC Form 477 data, had an existing                     in addition to restoring service to areas
                                                evaluating its long-term plans? For                     fixed network and provided broadband                   that had service before the hurricanes.
                                                example, Viya is currently the only                     service in Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin              Further, the Commission anticipates
                                                fixed provider in the U.S. Virgin                       Islands prior to the hurricanes would be               that making all of Puerto Rico eligible
                                                Islands. Does that argue for requiring                  eligible to apply to participate. The                  for support will increase competition,
                                                inter-area competition as the                           Commission seeks comment on whether                    driving down the support amounts
                                                Commission does in the Connect                          participation should be limited to fixed               proposed in lower-cost areas. The
                                                America Fund Phase II reverse auction?                  providers who served at least some                     Commission seeks comment on this
                                                Or is a quasi-competitive process on the                residential locations or whether                       approach. Similarly, the Commission
                                                U.S. Virgin Islands nonetheless feasible?               providers that served only business                    proposes to make eligible all of the U.S.
                                                Or should the Commission pursue some                    locations should also be permitted to                  Virgin Islands and seek comment on
                                                alternative option?                                     participate. The Commission proposes                   that approach.
                                                   14. The Commission also invites                      to limit participation to providers who                   22. Alternatively, the Commission
                                                comment on how to best promote its                      had provided services before the                       seeks comment on whether certain areas
                                                aim of providing support quickly and                    hurricane because it believes they                     should be excluded. For example, are
                                                efficiently to speed the rebuilding,                    would be better equipped to rebuild and                there areas where service has already
                                                improvement, and expansion of service.                  expand service as quickly as possible.                 been rebuilt (or will be rebuilt by the
                                                How can the Commission ensure that                      Relatedly, the Commission also believes                end of 2018)? Are there areas where
                                                people living in the territories have                   that existing providers with established               providing high-cost support to one
                                                access to reasonably comparable,                        track records present a smaller risk of                carrier would distort the competitive
                                                affordable fixed voice services and                     defaulting on their service obligations.               market and reduce potential
                                                broadband-capable networks? And as                      However, the Commission seeks                          competitors’ incentives to rebuild
                                                stewards of the USF, the Commission                     comment on whether new entrants                        service? How can the Commission
                                                seeks comment on how best to fulfill its                should also be eligible. If so, what                   ensure consistency with its policy
                                                commitment to fiscal responsibility to                  particular qualifications if any should                against providing funding in areas
                                                ensure that funds are targeted                          the Commission impose on them?                         where there is an unsubsidized
                                                efficiently.                                               19. The Commission further proposes                 competitor? Would the ability of other
                                                   15. As detailed in the following, the                to evaluate the financial and technical                carriers to bid for such support reduce
                                                Commission proposes to award high-                      capabilities of the applicants through a               the funding in such areas to only what’s
                                                cost support using a competitive                        single-stage application process. Doing                needed to rebuild otherwise unserved
                                                proposal process, similar to a request for              so would minimize the amount of time                   areas? Are there areas where support
                                                proposal process. The Commission also                   it takes to complete the competitive                   levels would be so low as to be
                                                seeks comment on conducting an                          proposal process and begin awarding                    unnecessary to rebuild and improve
                                                auction, negotiating directly with ETCs,                support. The Commission seeks                          service, such as census blocks in Puerto
                                                and establishing build-out obligations                  comment on whether to use instead the                  Rico identified by the model as having
                                                while continuing to provide frozen                      two-phase application process of the                   particularly low average monthly costs?
                                                high-cost support at current levels.                    competitive bidding rules for universal                How can the Commission best achieve
                                                   16. The Commission proposes to                       service in Part 1, Subpart AA of the                   its goal of maximizing the expansion of
                                                award fixed support through the                         Commission’s rules, as it has done for                 service to unserved areas in addition to
                                                Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the                      the CAF Phase II auction.                              restoring and improving service to areas
                                                Connect USVI Fund by evaluating                            20. Consistent with the                             that had it before the hurricanes?
                                                competitive proposals submitted by                      Communications Act of 1934, as                            23. Minimum Geographic Area.—The
                                                carriers. This approach could be                        amended, and the Commission’s rules, a                 Commission proposes to accept
                                                completed quickly and efficiently,                      provider must be designated as an ETC                  proposals for support to satisfy specific
                                                thereby avoiding lengthy delays in                      before receiving support. To the extent                service obligations within each of
                                                getting critical funding to carriers. A                 necessary, the Commission proposes to                  Puerto Rico’s 78 municipios. Using
                                                competitive proposal process is a more                  allow providers to obtain ETC                          municipios as the basic geographic area
                                                streamlined approach than the typical                   designations after winning support                     for support may allow providers to
                                                Commission auction, yet still requires                  rather than before participating in the                achieve economies of scale that would
                                                carriers to compete for support.                        competitive proposal process, similar to               not be available if the Commission used
                                                Moreover, this option may better enable                 the approach it followed for the CAF                   smaller areas, such as Puerto Rico’s over
                                                the Commission to determine how best                    Phase II auction. The Commission seeks                 900 barrios. On the other hand, there
                                                to award support for network-hardening                  comment on this approach. What                         may be some risk that municipios are
                                                purposes than the auction approach.                     methods would be appropriate for                       too large to target funding in a
                                                   17. The Commission proposes that                     selecting another carrier if the winner                competitively neutral manner—
                                                accepted proposals will receive support                 fails to timely obtain an ETC                          incumbent providers with large existing
                                                for 10 years, beginning in January 2019                 designation?                                           service territories are likely more
                                                and running through December 2028.                         21. Eligible Areas.—Given the unique                amenable to providing service over a
                                                The Commission seeks comment on                         circumstances presented by the                         wider area. The Commission seeks
                                                whether to transition support, through a                widespread destruction of critical                     comment on whether using municipios
                                                phase-down process, in any geographic                   infrastructure, the Commission proposes                makes sense or whether it should
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                area where the incumbent carrier, i.e.,                 to make eligible all of Puerto Rico. By                instead provide support on a more
                                                PRTC or Viya, did not win support                       making the entire territory eligible, the              granular basis, such as by barrios,
                                                based on its proposal. The Commission                   Commission would eliminate the need                    census block groups, or some other
                                                provides additional details and seek                    to establish a challenge process and thus              geographic unit.
                                                comment on them in the following.                       enable a more expeditious completion                      24. The Commission seeks comment
                                                   18. Eligible Providers.—The                          of the process. Doing so would also                    on the appropriate minimum geographic
                                                Commission proposes that only a                         encourage applicants to expand service                 area for support in the U.S. Virgin
                                                provider that, according to June 2017                   to areas that were previously unserved,                Islands. Should the Commission treat


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00011   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                                      Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                           27531

                                                the entire territory as one geographic                  overestimates the number of locations in               that had never been served versus
                                                area to carry out this initiative? Or                   an area, it seeks comment on what                      restoring service (potentially at a lower
                                                should the Commission treat each                        flexibility to offer winning applicants.               cost) to locations where service had
                                                island in the U.S. Virgin Islands                       Should the Commission, for example,                    been disrupted by the hurricanes. For
                                                separately for this purpose? Or would                   reduce support on a pro rata basis if it               example, the Commission has
                                                using some other census-defined                         lowers the number of locations a                       previously assigned zero support to
                                                geography such as census tract, census                  provider must serve, and if so, what                   locations below the high-cost threshold
                                                block group, or census block be more                    requirements and limitations should the                on the assumption that a business case
                                                appropriate?                                            Commission establish for such                          nonetheless existed to serve such
                                                   25. Number of Locations in Each                      reductions? Should the Commission                      locations. Does the context of rebuilding
                                                Geographic Area.—The Commission                         consider giving providers more                         networks on these islands suggest
                                                proposes to identify the number of                      flexibility here than it has in other                  revisiting that assumption and assigning
                                                locations in each geographic area by                    contexts given the facilities lost and the             some funding—say 10 percent of cost—
                                                using the Connect America Cost Model                    recent emigration from the territories?                to cover the costs below the high-cost
                                                (the CAM). The Commission seeks                            28. Reserve Prices.—The Commission                  threshold? The Commission also seeks
                                                comment on how it can best account for                  proposes to use a three-step process to                comment on how the CAM should be
                                                the fact that people may have migrated                  set reserve prices. First, the Commission              adjusted, if at all, to take into account
                                                from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin                    would employ the cost model used to                    the need for network hardening. For
                                                Islands since the storms. The                           establish support for price cap carriers               example, should the Commission
                                                Commission seeks comment on what                        (the CAM) to calculate the average cost                assume the cost of above-ground plant
                                                other sources of data would more                        per location of all locations in a census              will increase 10 percent (or more) to
                                                accurately model the number of                          block. Second, the Commission would                    account for such hardening before it
                                                locations in each area. The Commission                  set separate high-cost and extremely                   determines the costs per location?
                                                also seeks comment on whether to                        high-cost thresholds for Puerto Rico and                 30. Selection Process.—The
                                                provide support based on only certain                   the U.S. Virgin Islands to ensure the full             Commission seeks comment on the
                                                locations within each geographic area,                  amount of funding available to each                    appropriate time frame and format for
                                                such as those that are more costly to                   territory over the ten-year period is                  submitting proposals. The Commission
                                                serve, and whether to exclude certain                   available for obligation. Third, the                   proposes to allow confidential
                                                other locations from bidding, such as                   Commission would establish a reserve                   proposals. Should the Commission
                                                those that are less costly and therefore                price for each minimum geographic area                 unseal proposals after finishing the
                                                may not require high-cost support. The                  based on the sum of the support                        evaluations process for transparency
                                                Commission proposes, as a condition of                  amounts calculated for each eligible                   reasons? The Commission seeks
                                                receiving support for funded locations,                 census block in that municipio. Under                  comment on whether to make public the
                                                that a winning bidder serve all locations               the proposal, WCB would release the                    submitted proposals after the evaluation
                                                within a geographic area, not just those                reserve price and number of locations                  process has been completed and
                                                funded (if the Commission decides to                    for all eligible areas by public notice no             winning applicants have been
                                                fund just a subset of locations). This                  later than 30 calendar days before the                 determined. The Commission seeks
                                                proposal comports with the                              application deadline to submit                         comment on prohibiting multiple
                                                Commission’s decision to focus on                       competitive proposals.                                 carriers from submitting a proposal
                                                rebuilding all networks and make all of                    29. The Commission seeks comment                    jointly.
                                                Puerto Rico eligible for bidding, rather                on this proposal, and particularly on the                31. The Commission proposes to
                                                than only discrete areas. Alternatively,                key second step. The Commission notes                  select winning proposals based
                                                the Commission seeks comment on                         that the extremely high-cost threshold                 primarily on price per-location served
                                                limiting the obligation only to funded                  here would be used to establish a per-                 while adjusting the bids to consider
                                                locations or locations in census blocks                 location funding cap, similar to how the               factors including network resiliency,
                                                identified by the model as being above                  Commission offered rate-of-return                      network deployment timing, and
                                                a certain funding benchmark?                            carriers model-based support. How                      network performance. The Commission
                                                   26. Given possible changes in the                    should the Commission establish the                    seeks comment on these factors and
                                                number of locations post-hurricane and                  appropriate thresholds? The CAM                        what other factors it should consider
                                                the difficulties in obtaining more recent,              established a high-cost threshold of                   when evaluating proposals. Considering
                                                accurate data, the Commission also                      $52.50 based on assumed take rates and                 price as the primary factor responsibly
                                                seeks comment on whether to instead                     potential average revenues per                         manages the Fund, but the Commission
                                                evaluate proposals to serve all the                     subscriber. Do those assumptions still                 recognizes the increased costs of
                                                locations in a municipio without                        hold in the context of Puerto Rico and                 deploying a storm-hardened network in
                                                determining exactly how many                            the U.S. Virgin Islands after the                      Puerto Rico and the USVI. For instance,
                                                locations that represents. In other                     hurricanes? If not, should the                         how should the Commission factor
                                                words, applicants would commit to                       Commission lower the high-cost                         storm hardening proposals into the
                                                serve all locations in a municipio rather               threshold and if so, by how much? By                   Commission’s evaluation? Should the
                                                than to serve a specific number. The                    25 percent? By more? The CAM                           Commission require or increase the
                                                Commission also seeks comment on                        established a high-cost threshold of                   weight of bids that comply with
                                                whether differences in municipio                        $198.60. Is that appropriate here? The                 resiliency standards like TIA–222–H,
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                characteristics, such as quantity of high               Puerto Rico Telecommunications                         the most up-to-date standard for
                                                cost locations or remoteness, should                    Regulatory Board has stated that more                  antenna supporting structures, with best
                                                lead the Commission’s to attach                         support needs to be directed to the rural              practices promulgated by the FCC’s
                                                different obligations to funding so as to               parts of the island. Would that suggest                Communications Security, Reliability
                                                better ensure all parts of the territories              setting a higher extremely high-cost                   and Interoperability Council, or with
                                                are provided with service.                              threshold? The Commission also seeks                   another industry used standard for
                                                   27. Furthermore, if the data the                     comment on how to allocate funds                       network resiliency? Should the
                                                Commission eventually adopts                            between bringing service to locations                  Commission establish weights to


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00012   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                27532                 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                account for the speed of deployment?                    areas remaining in the second round.                   Commission proposes that winning
                                                What weight would be appropriate to                     The Commission seeks comment on this                   bidders must deploy to at least 40
                                                balance costs against encouraging                       approach, including whether it would                   percent of locations after the third year
                                                prompt deployment to the territories?                   be vulnerable to potential                             of support, at least 60 percent after the
                                                Should the Commission establish                         gamesmanship by bidders.                               fourth, at least 80 percent after the fifth,
                                                weights to account for proposals                           35. In addition, as a backstop, the                 and 100 percent after the sixth year of
                                                offering ‘‘higher speeds over lower                     Commission proposes to require the                     support. The Commission seeks
                                                speeds, higher usage allowances over                    incumbent carrier to continue to                       comment on whether this schedule is
                                                lower usage allowances, and lower                       provide service to any unawarded areas                 appropriate. The Commission also seeks
                                                latency over higher latency’’? If so, what              using frozen high-cost support—with                    comment on how it should track
                                                weighting scheme would be appropriate                   corresponding service obligations to be                milestones if a particular number of
                                                for that purpose? Instead of using                      determined by the Commission after the                 locations, as already discussed, is not
                                                specific weights could the Commission                   competitive proposal process is                        defined. Are there other ways to track
                                                define preferences for various                          complete. The Commission notes that                    progress without having to rely on
                                                characteristics in the proposals? If the                for this and other purposes (such as any               location counts given the possible
                                                Commission does not require proposals                   transitional payments) it would allocate               difficulty of establishing a number of
                                                to identify a specific number of                        an incumbent carrier’s existing frozen                 locations?
                                                locations to serve, what factors should                 support across their service territory in                 40. Oversight and Accountability
                                                it consider in comparing proposals?                     proportion to the reserve prices the                   Measures.—The Commission has an
                                                   32. How should the Commission                        Commission initially set for the                       obligation to ensure that carriers receive
                                                address package bidding? For example,                   competitive proposal process. The                      support ‘‘only for the provision,
                                                should the Commission allow package                     Commission believes this backstop                      maintenance, and upgrading of facilities
                                                bidding? If so, what limits if any should               would place incumbent carriers in no                   and service for which the support is
                                                the Commission put on packages (e.g.,                   worse a position then they are in today,               intended’’ as required by section 254(e)
                                                should the Commission require all                       with frozen support and accompanying                   of the Act. The Commission has
                                                packages to be contiguous or limit the                  service obligations to be determined by                exercised its oversight obligations in a
                                                number of minimum geographic areas                      the Commission.                                        variety of way since inception of the
                                                included in the package)? If selecting                     36. Service Obligations.—In addition                fund. In the following, the Commission
                                                two package bids would be the most                      to voice service, the Commission                       proposes various oversight and
                                                efficient outcome even if they                          proposes to require support recipients to              accountability measures that, taken
                                                overlapped in a particular geographic                   offer broadband service meeting the                    together, serve the public interest by
                                                area, should the Commission accept                      following metrics: Download/upload                     enhancing the Commission’s ability to
                                                both (perhaps requiring the less efficient              speeds of at least 10/1 megabits per                   monitor the use of USF and ensure its
                                                bidder to redirect support from the                     second (Mbps), roundtrip latency of no                 use for intended purposes.
                                                overlapped area to other unserved areas)                greater than 100 milliseconds (ms), and                   41. First, the Commission proposes
                                                or reject the less efficient package                    a minimum usage allowance of the                       that support recipients must satisfy all
                                                (perhaps leaving no bidder for some                     higher of 170 GB per month or one that                 reporting and certification obligations of
                                                areas)?                                                 reflects the average usage of a majority               providers receiving CAF Phase II
                                                   33. How should the Commission                        of consumers, using Measuring                          auction support, including as described
                                                evaluate bids? Should the Commission                    Broadband America data or a similar                    in sections 54.313 and 54.316 of the
                                                direct USAC or WCB to evaluate bids?                    data source.                                           Commission’s rules. The Commission
                                                The Commission proposes directing the                      37. The Commission seeks comment                    seeks comment on this proposal. The
                                                reviewer to evaluate the bids in                        on whether these obligations are                       Commission seeks comment on whether
                                                accordance with the selection criteria,                 appropriate. Should the Commission,                    providers who win support must track
                                                methodology and bidding process                         for instance, require some portion of the              their restoration expenditures. Should
                                                outlined above. Once that initial                       areas served to receive 25/3 Mbps                      providers retain documentation on how
                                                evaluation is complete, should the                      service? And, if so, what fraction would               much support was used for capital
                                                Commission make selections or offer                     be appropriate? Should the Commission                  expenditures and operating
                                                feedback to applicants and allow them                   impose different requirements for areas                expenditures? What are the associated
                                                to return with best-and-final offers? Or                based on the amount of support                         burdens with retaining expenditure
                                                would that introduce undue discretion                   allocated?                                             documentation? Would retention of this
                                                into the process or create additional                      38. Further, the Commission proposes                documentation be duplicative of records
                                                administrative burdens or delays? If a                  requiring each support recipient to offer              needed for deployment milestones?
                                                dissatisfied applicant wants to challenge               broadband service in its supported area                   42. Second, the Commission proposes
                                                its non-selection, would existing                       at rates that are reasonably comparable                aligning the annual reporting
                                                appeals processes be sufficient?                        to rates offered for comparable services               obligations with the obligations of other
                                                   34. How should the Commission                        in urban areas. Rates will be considered               rate-of-return carriers in the 2016 Rate-
                                                address areas without bids? One                         reasonably comparable if they are ‘‘at or              of-Return Order, 81 FR 24282, April 25,
                                                approach would be to invite a second                    below the applicable benchmark to be                   2016, by requiring geocoded location
                                                round of competitive proposals, with                    announced annually by public notice                    reporting into the HUBB. This reporting
                                                the difference between bids and reserve                 issued by the Wireline Competition                     obligation would require providers to
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                prices in the first round being                         Bureau.’’ Based on the results of the                  submit information demonstrating
                                                transferred to raise the reserve price of               Urban Rate Survey, the Commission                      locations the provider is reporting as
                                                remaining areas (pro rata) in the second                sees no reason to adopt a different                    broadband-enabled where the company
                                                round. In other words, if the reserve                   benchmark specific to Puerto Rico or the               is prepared to offer voice and broadband
                                                price for areas won in the first round                  U.S. Virgin Islands. The Commission                    service meeting the requisite
                                                were $10 million and only $8 million                    seeks comment on this approach.                        performance standards. Do carriers
                                                was bid, then $2 million would be                          39. Deployment Milestones.—As with                  currently retain geolocation data for
                                                available to raise the reserve prices in                the CAF Phase II Auction, the                          served locations? If not, what period of


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00013   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                                      Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                            27533

                                                time is needed to enable collection of                  structured? Should it be for the full                  otherwise largely track the terms for the
                                                geolocation data? Should the                            amount awarded, or some lesser amount                  competitive proposal process described
                                                Commission require this data be                         that will nevertheless protect the USF?                above.
                                                reported for only newly deployed                        Should an alternative to a letter of credit               49. The Commission seeks comment
                                                locations or all reported locations?                    be considered, such as a performance or                on whether the competitive
                                                Would annual reporting or a longer                      payment bond?                                          environment in Puerto Rico is
                                                period more appropriately balance the                      46. Fifth, the Commission proposes to               sufficiently robust to ensure an auction
                                                reporting burden against the accuracy of                subject all awarded carriers in the                    that distributes funds in a cost-effective
                                                the data? Additionally, the Commission                  territories to ongoing oversight by the                way. The Commission seeks comment
                                                proposes requiring awarded carriers to                  Commission and USAC to ensure                          on whether to use an auction process to
                                                submit performance measurements in                      program integrity and prevent waste,                   distribute funds in Puerto Rico, but not
                                                accordance with the requirements to be                  fraud, and abuse. The Commission has                   in the U.S. Virgin Islands, given that
                                                defined by the Commission. To the                       a longstanding audit program that is                   FCC Form 477 data shows that Viya is
                                                extent that awarded carriers have not                   continually updated to respond to the                  currently the only fixed provider there.
                                                participated in that proceeding, the                    Commission’s needs inclusive of                           50. Are there any specific auction
                                                Commission proposes requiring the                       changes in program requirements, new                   rules or procedures the Commission
                                                same testing method options and                         guidance from GAO and OMB, and                         should consider so that an auction
                                                parameters as price cap carriers.                       changes in law. Accordingly, the                       would not be overly complicated for the
                                                   43. Third, the Commission proposes                   Commission proposes that all awarded                   Commission to administer and would
                                                to carefully monitor and reassess the                   carriers would be subject to random                    not overly burden potential bidders? Is
                                                deployment obligations of the awarded                   compliance audits and other                            there an auction design the Commission
                                                support before the end of the fifth year.               investigations to ensure compliance                    could use that would achieve its
                                                Understanding the deployment and                        with program rules and orders. The                     objective of maximizing consumer
                                                operational realities of providing service              Commission seeks comment on what                       benefits? Would this approach afford
                                                in both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin                 sorts of audit procedures the                          the same flexibility as a competitive
                                                Islands, the Commission believes this                   Commission should undertake to                         proposal process?
                                                reassessment would be prudent to                        confirm that support has been spent on                    51. The Commission seeks comment
                                                address any changed circumstances                       allowed restoration costs. The                         on whether to structure the second
                                                within the territories, whether that be                 Commission also seeks comment on                       stages based on carrier-submitted
                                                changes in subscribership expectations                  whether there are specific                             proposals to rebuild, improve, and
                                                due to population changes or future                     circumstances facing carriers in the                   expand service in the territories. Such
                                                disruptive natural disasters. As the                    territories that require modifying the                 proposals would not be evaluated on a
                                                current situation demonstrates, the long-               current audit practices.                               competitive basis, but would be the
                                                term planning involved in any                              47. As an alternative to the                        result of negotiation between the
                                                telecommunications deployment                           competitive proposal process, the                      Commission and carriers. Given
                                                decision requires a number of                           Commission seeks comment on using an                   similarly unique circumstances, the
                                                assumptions that may change                             auction for the second stages of the                   Commission adopted a framework based
                                                dramatically over time. Would                           Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the                     on carrier commitments to maintain and
                                                providing an opportunity for the                        Connect USVI Fund. The Commission                      expand the availability of service in
                                                Commission to reassess deployment                       notes that it cannot simply apply the                  Alaska.
                                                obligations be beneficial to providers or               same rules of the CAF Phase II Auction                    52. Like the competitive proposal
                                                cause unneeded uncertainty? Should                      here because it seeks to achieve                       option, through this process the
                                                the reassessment be tied to deployment                  different goals. Among other                           Commission seeks to maximize the
                                                milestones? For example, the                            differences, here the Commission                       number of locations where fixed voice
                                                reassessment would not be triggered if                  wishes to rebuild networks, including in               and broadband services would be
                                                a provider is 60 percent deployed after                 areas where a business case existed pre-               available in a targeted and cost-effective
                                                four years, but would occur if a provider               hurricane for providing service, whereas               manner. As with any method of
                                                failed to meet the deployment                           in the CAF Phase II context, the                       awarding of support, the Commission
                                                obligation. Would it be appropriate to                  Commission aims to maintain and                        expects to hold providers accountable to
                                                alter the obligations by increasing or                  expand service where there is no such                  use support for its intended purposes
                                                decreasing the number of locations or                   business case.                                         and to meet the deployment
                                                modifying the service obligations?                         48. Instead, the Commission seeks                   commitments it set.
                                                   44. Fourth, the Commission proposes                  comment on using a single-round sealed                    53. To the extent the Commission
                                                to subject awarded carriers to the same                 bid auction to award support. Such an                  adopts this approach, it seeks comment
                                                compliance standards as any other                       approach generally would award                         on the process by which it would seek
                                                carrier with defined obligations by                     support on a per-location basis, based                 proposals, review them, and award
                                                defining specific obligations for the                   on the lowest price. Bidders would                     support. The Commission anticipates
                                                support. This may result in a carrier that              identify a per-location support price at               establishing the specific criteria by
                                                failed to meet its milestones having                    which they are willing to meet                         which it would award support and
                                                support reduced until the carrier can                   Commission requirements to cover the                   measure compliance by Public Notice,
                                                meet its obligations or face recovery                   locations in each eligible area they                   along with a time frame for submitting
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                actions. The Commission seeks                           specify. Bids would then be ranked,                    proposals. The Commission invites
                                                comment on this approach.                               lowest to highest, and support would be                comment on this approach.
                                                   45. The Commission also seeks                        assigned to those areas with the lowest                   54. In the Universal Service
                                                comment on whether successful                           bid amounts submitted (and within each                 Transformation Order, 76 FR 73830,
                                                applicants must obtain a letter of credit               assigned area, to the lowest bidder),                  November 29, 2011, the Commission
                                                by way of security, as must winning                     until no further bids can be                           allowed price cap carriers serving
                                                bidders in the CAF Phase II auction. If                 accommodated under the budget. The                     specific non-contiguous areas of the
                                                so, how should the letter of credit be                  terms of such an auction would                         United States—including Puerto Rico


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00014   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                27534                 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                and the U.S. Virgin Islands—to maintain                 Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands,               and the U.S. Virgin Islands prior to the
                                                frozen support levels for those carriers                whichever occurred earlier.                            hurricane impacts, according to the June
                                                if, in the Bureau’s determination, certain                 58. The Commission now proposes to                  2017 Form 477 data, would be eligible
                                                conditions were met. Recognizing that                   extend that waiver, exempt these mobile                to elect this new funding. The
                                                these carriers faced different operating                providers from filing this coverage                    Commission proposes to allocate the
                                                conditions and challenges compared to                   information, and carve Puerto Rico and                 new funding based on the number of
                                                carriers in the contiguous 48 states, the               the U.S. Virgin Islands out from the                   subscribers (voice or broadband internet
                                                Bureau invoked its discretion. Both                     MF–II auction. Instead, the Commission                 access service) each provider served as
                                                PRTC and Viya elected to continue                       proposes to supplement existing                        of June 30, 2017—similar to how the
                                                receiving frozen support, with the                      support over a three-year period by                    Commission calculates support in stage
                                                Commission responsible for adopting                     giving providers an additional $21                     one. As an alternative, the Commission
                                                specific service obligations tailored to                million to rebuild their networks after                seeks comment on allocating all funding
                                                the individual circumstances of each                    the destruction wrought by Hurricanes                  available for mobile network operators
                                                carrier.                                                Irma and Maria and their aftermath. The
                                                                                                                                                               in the second stages of the Uniendo a
                                                   55. As the Commission has not yet                    Commission seeks comment on
                                                                                                                                                               Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI
                                                adopted CAF II obligations for the                      allocating these support amounts so that
                                                                                                                                                               Fund based on pre-hurricane
                                                frozen support that PRTC and Viya                       approximately 80 percent goes to the
                                                                                                        Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and                         subscribership. Such an approach
                                                continue to receive, it seeks comment                                                                          would avoid any inefficiencies in the
                                                on whether to forego reconsidering the                  approximately 20 percent to the
                                                                                                        Connect USVI Fund. As a result, over                   historic allocation of support among the
                                                Commission’s prior decisions and                                                                               islands and avoid the need for a
                                                instead simply adopt specific service                   the next three years, the Uniendo a
                                                                                                        Puerto Rico Fund would make available                  decision ahead of time regarding how
                                                obligations to reflect the frozen-support                                                                      much in particular should go to Puerto
                                                amounts PRTC and Viya currently                         $254.4 million to mobile network
                                                                                                        operators and the Connect USVI Fund                    Rico versus the U.S. Virgin Islands. If
                                                receive. If the Commission pursues this                                                                        the Commission pursues this alternative
                                                alternative, what obligations would be                  would make available $4.4 million to
                                                                                                        mobile network operators. These                        approach, should the Commission set
                                                appropriate and feasible? Should the                                                                           transitional funding amounts for
                                                Commission establish particular                         territories currently face serious and
                                                                                                        continuing challenges in restoring their               existing recipients of high-cost support?
                                                expectations regarding expanding                                                                               In particular, should the Commission
                                                service to new areas or implementing                    mobile communications capacity, and
                                                                                                        the Commission tentatively concludes                   ensure that existing recipients receive at
                                                more resilient networks?                                                                                       least two-thirds of their current mobile
                                                                                                        that this additional funding will allow
                                                   56. In the aftermath of the hurricanes,                                                                     support in 2019 and at least one third
                                                                                                        providers in these territories to repair
                                                the rapid restoration of mobile service                                                                        in 2020?
                                                                                                        the damage caused by the hurricanes to
                                                was critical in facilitating
                                                                                                        their wireless networks as well as make                   61. The Commission proposes that, in
                                                communications with public safety and                   their networks more resilient to future
                                                civic officials and connecting families to                                                                     exchange for accepting additional
                                                                                                        natural disasters.                                     support, each mobile provider must
                                                loved ones. Building upon the                              59. The Commission seeks comment
                                                significant restoration efforts that have                                                                      commit to, at minimum, a full
                                                                                                        on this proposal. In the concurrently                  restoration of its pre-hurricane coverage
                                                taken place to date, the Commission                     adopted Order, the Commission used
                                                seeks comment on how best to target                                                                            area, at a level of service that meets or
                                                                                                        the same 80–20 ratio to balance the                    exceeds the minimum standard required
                                                high-cost support to rebuild, improve,                  difference in population between Puerto
                                                harden, and expand mobile services in                                                                          of recipients of MF–II support. Such a
                                                                                                        Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the
                                                Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.                                                                       requirement aligns with the goal of MF–
                                                                                                        significant financial challenges faced by
                                                The Commission proposes to make $259                                                                           II to ‘‘target universal service funding to
                                                                                                        carriers in both areas, the current level
                                                million in support available to eligible                                                                       support the deployment of the highest
                                                                                                        of high-cost support available to
                                                facilities-based mobile providers over                                                                         level of mobile service available today—
                                                                                                        providers, and other relevant factors.
                                                the next three years through the                        Should the Commission maintain that                    4G LTE.’’ The Commission tentatively
                                                Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the                      ratio for the purpose of allocating                    concludes that, given the extent of
                                                Connect USVI Fund. The Commission’s                     additional support? Are the total                      damage in Puerto Rico and the U.S.
                                                goal is to facilitate timely recovery of                funding amounts appropriate for each                   Virgin Islands, most providers will
                                                mobile services within these territories                territory given the rebuilding required                already be engaging in substantial
                                                in a cost-effective manner.                             and the improvements need to harden                    rebuilding of towers and infrastructure,
                                                   57. The Commission notes that it has                 networks against future natural disasters              and will find it most economical to
                                                previously targeted Puerto Rico and the                 and the expansion needed in rural                      deploy 4G LTE during such restoration
                                                U.S. Virgin Islands as potential areas                  areas? Is a three-year term of support                 versus alternative technologies. The
                                                eligible for the upcoming MF–II auction.                appropriate here? How should the                       Commission seeks comment on whether
                                                However, the Commission recognized in                   Commission address differences in                      this requirement is appropriate. Should
                                                December that conditions in the                         historic universal service funding in                  the Commission instead require
                                                territories after the hurricanes made                   evaluating its long-term plans? For                    providers to rebuild their networks at a
                                                establishing reliable coverage of mobile                example, mobile carriers in the U.S.                   different standard? For example, should
                                                networks infeasible in the near term. As                Virgin Islands receive almost no funding               the Commission instead require
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                such, the Commission waived the filing                  today. Does that argue for allocating                  deployment at the speed benchmark
                                                deadline for mobile providers to submit                 most of the new funding there? Or                      used to identify areas eligible for MF–
                                                4G LTE coverage information for a                       should the Commission redistribute all                 II? Is there an alternative standard
                                                period of 180 days or until the                         funding across both territories setting                appropriate to ensure that residents of
                                                Commission took action addressing the                   aside historic allocations?                            Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
                                                appropriate approach, given the                            60. The Commission proposes that                    have comparable service to other areas
                                                circumstances, for providing ongoing,                   only providers that provided facilities-               of the United States? Should the
                                                high-cost support for mobile services in                based mobile services in Puerto Rico                   Commission restrict funding to support


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00015   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                                      Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                            27535

                                                operation, deployment, and                              to submit one or more Milestone                        should require second-stage participants
                                                enhancement only of 4G LTE?                             Reports to demonstrate progress on                     to improve the ability of their facilities
                                                   62. The Commission also seeks                        service restoration? Would it be                       and equipment to resist hurricanes and
                                                comment on whether the Uniendo a                        beneficial for the Commission or USAC                  other natural disasters. If so, should the
                                                Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI                   to make use of independent testing to                  Commission require compliance with
                                                Fund should include requirements to                     determine service speed, quality, and                  resiliency standards like TIA–222–H,
                                                expand service. Are there areas, for                    reliability in these areas?                            the most up-to-date standard for
                                                instance, that lacked coverage before the                  65. The Commission proposes to use                  antenna supporting structures or with
                                                hurricanes and that the Commission                      an auction to allocate funding following               best practices promulgated by the FCC’s
                                                should nonetheless require providers to                 this three-year period, with any funding               Communications Security, Reliability
                                                serve? How should such areas be                         commitments resulting from such an                     and Interoperability Council? Are there
                                                identified and how should the                           auction to commence on the day                         other industry standards that would
                                                Commission determine what carriers                      following the end of the three-year                    help improve resistance to flooding,
                                                should be required to serve them? The                   period. The Commission seeks comment                   wind damage, and water damage? How
                                                Commission seeks comment on how                         on whether the competitive                             should any such requirements be
                                                quickly rebuilding could be                             environment in Puerto Rico and the U.S.                enforced? What are the expected costs of
                                                accomplished and what milestones                        Virgin Islands is sufficiently robust to               deploying a ‘‘storm hardened’’ network,
                                                might be appropriate to complete build                  ensure an auction that distributes funds               and how should the Commission
                                                out. Is three years of funding for                      in a cost-effective way and whether it                 evaluate the costs and benefits of any
                                                rebuilding appropriate? Why or why                      makes sense from the perspective of                    such network? Should the Commission
                                                not?                                                    administrative efficiency to hold such                 consider requiring hardening of certain
                                                   63. The Commission also seeks                        an auction. Can the Commission use the                 key network assets, but not the entire
                                                comment on the appropriate reporting                    same general auction rules and same                    network? If so, how should key assets be
                                                requirements for support recipients. The                auction design for this auction as it will             identified? Would requiring hardening
                                                Commission proposes to have any                         use for the MF–II auction? Are there any               only of assets sufficient to provide voice
                                                mobile providers receiving second-stage                 specific auction rules or procedures the               and basic data service be appropriate?
                                                support via the Uniendo a Puerto Rico                   Commission should consider so that an                  What level of data service would be
                                                Fund and the Connect USVI Fund                          auction would not be overly                            appropriate? Are costs associated with
                                                report twice per year on their coverage.                complicated for the Commission to                      back-up power endurance, backhaul
                                                Specifically, the Commission proposes                   administer and would not overly burden                 resiliency, physical infrastructure
                                                that providers supply coverage maps                     potential bidders?                                     resiliency, recovery plans, and/or
                                                using the buildout parameters the                          66. If the Commission were to use an                redundant or alternate network
                                                Commission will adopt for the MF–II                     auction to allocate funding, how should
                                                                                                                                                               implementations appropriate in this
                                                auction. If the Commission adopts a                     it determine which areas would be
                                                                                                                                                               context? Should the Commission
                                                different service requirement for                       eligible to win support in the auction?
                                                                                                                                                               instead allow carriers to include in their
                                                funding recipients than the minimum                     Should the Commission consider an
                                                                                                                                                               proposals how and to what degree they
                                                standard required of recipients of MF–                  area eligible if it does not meet the
                                                                                                                                                               would harden their networks, and factor
                                                II support, it proposes to make                         speed and technical parameters used to
                                                                                                                                                               that information into the evaluation of
                                                appropriate adjustments to the reporting                identify areas eligible for MF–II? Should
                                                                                                                                                               proposals?
                                                requirements. The Commission seeks                      the Commission adopt additional or
                                                comment on these proposals. The                         alternative specifications for eligibility                68. The Commission also proposes to
                                                Commission also seeks comment on                        that would be more suitable for Puerto                 require second-stage participants to
                                                how this data should best be submitted                  Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands? For                  provide more detailed information to
                                                to the Commission, such as through the                  example, should an area be eligible if,                support tracking of recovery efforts.
                                                regular Form 477 filings or some other                  despite meeting a certain download                     Although mobile carriers already
                                                process?                                                speed requirement, it does not meet                    provide information on coverage (but
                                                   64. As noted above, the Commission                   certain network resiliency requirements,               not signal strength, antenna alignment,
                                                has an obligation to ensure that carriers               e.g. hardening to hurricane impacts? If                and throughput) on a biannual basis
                                                receive support ‘‘only for the provision,               so, what resiliency requirements would                 through FCC Form 477, that information
                                                maintenance, and upgrading of facilities                be appropriate? In this document, the                  does not reveal the real-time status of
                                                and service for which the support is                    Commission proposes that providers                     communications systems in the
                                                intended’’ as required by section 254(e)                supply coverage maps using the                         aftermath of a disaster. Carriers
                                                of the Act. The Commission seeks                        technical parameters buildout                          currently have the option to provide
                                                comment on appropriate oversight and                    parameters the Commission will adopt                   information about the status of their
                                                accountability measures for carriers that               for the MF–II auction. Would that                      infrastructure via the Commission’s
                                                receive additional high-cost support as                 coverage information suffice for                       voluntary Disaster Information
                                                proposed in this Notice. The                            determining areas eligible for an                      Reporting System (DIRS), and it
                                                Commission proposes that recipients of                  auction, or is additional data required,               proposes to require carriers who accept
                                                such funds conform to the annual                        such as a one-time data collection using               USF funding through the Uniendo a
                                                reporting requirements the Commission                   the MF–II Challenge process technical                  Puerto Rico Fund and the Connect USVI
                                                adopted for MF–II. The Commission                       parameters? If so, when should the                     Fund to participate in DIRS. The
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                also proposes that all support recipients               Commission collect that data to ensure                 Commission seeks comment on this
                                                be subject generally to the same audit                  that funding commitments can begin on                  proposal and on the data that DIRS
                                                requirements as recipients of CAF–II                    schedule?                                              should seek. Would it be appropriate to
                                                support and all other high-cost support.                   67. Several parties have proposed that              require mobile carriers to provide
                                                The Commission seeks comment on                         rebuilt networks be ‘‘storm hardened.’’                coverage maps, signal strength, antenna
                                                whether any other oversight or                          The Commission seeks comment on                        alignment, and throughput on a periodic
                                                accountability measures are appropriate.                whether the Uniendo a Puerto Rico                      basis in DIRS? How often should these
                                                Should the Commission require carriers                  Fund and the Connect USVI Fund                         reports be provided? Would it be


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00016   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                27536                 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules

                                                appropriate to require coverage maps at                 ensure that their networks can function                concurrently adopted Order. If the
                                                a more granular boundary value, for                     even when the electrical power grid is                 Commission were to pursue such relief,
                                                example -98 dBm to reflect indoor                       down. For instance, the Commission                     how could it ensure that any funds are
                                                coverage for both voice and data? Would                 seeks comment on whether carriers                      well spent?
                                                it be appropriate to require carriers to                could run their networks using energy
                                                                                                                                                               III. Procedural Matters
                                                include information about disruptions                   sources readily available in Puerto Rico
                                                to backhaul? Should the DIRS data                       and the U.S. Virgin Islands that do not                A. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act
                                                contain more information about the                      need to be shipped from elsewhere. The                    75. This document contains proposed
                                                customers’ experience with their mobile                 Commission seeks comment on the                        information collection requirements.
                                                service, for example by including more                  applicable costs of sustainable back-up                The Commission, as part of its
                                                information about the condition of                      power. What are the costs of                           continuing effort to reduce paperwork
                                                backhaul? If so, at what intervals? What                maintaining generators on-site versus                  burdens, invites the general public and
                                                are the costs and benefits of requiring                 using portable generators? What are the                the Office of Management and Budget
                                                additional reporting? When might it be                  costs and additional considerations of
                                                                                                                                                               (OMB) to comment on the information
                                                appropriate to relieve carriers of any                  obtaining renewable back-up power
                                                                                                                                                               collection requirements contained in
                                                enhanced reporting requirements?                        versus traditional power methods?
                                                   69. The Commission anticipates that                     72. Finally, the Commission seeks                   this document, as required by the
                                                any second-stage mobile participants in                 comment on other alternatives.                         Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
                                                the Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the                     73. The Commission seeks comment                    Public Law 104–13. In addition,
                                                Connect USVI Fund would continue to                     on a petition filed by PRTC on January                 pursuant to the Small Business
                                                adhere to the current post-disaster                     19, 2018, asking the Commission to                     Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public
                                                resiliency framework for some time and                  ‘‘create a $200 million emergency                      Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4),
                                                seek comment on when that framework                     Universal Service Fund designated to                   the Commission seeks specific comment
                                                should and should not apply. First, are                 facilitate restoration of service in insular           on how it might further reduce the
                                                there common metrics used across                        areas by [ETCs] in Puerto Rico.’’ PRTC’s               information collection burden for small
                                                providers to determine whether and                      request encompasses support for both                   business concerns with fewer than 25
                                                when to open roaming capabilities?                      fixed and mobile providers in Puerto                   employees.
                                                Should the Commission no longer                         Rico. It suggests the Commission                          76. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
                                                expect adherence to the framework                       distribute funds ‘‘based on a percentage               Certification. The Regulatory Flexibility
                                                when coverage has been rebuilt to pre-                  of the consumer service disruption                     Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires
                                                hurricane levels? If so, should there be                credits provided by facilities-based                   that a regulatory flexibility analysis be
                                                a minimum level of service associated                   ETCs to end user customers’’ or ‘‘in                   prepared for rulemaking proceedings,
                                                with such coverage? Alternatively,                      proportion to the total number of lines                unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule
                                                would a set time period for continued                   each facilities-based ETC restores during              will not have a significant economic
                                                adherence, such as one year, be more                    the next twelve months.’’ The                          impact on a substantial number of small
                                                appropriate and reduce administrative                   Commission seeks specific comment on                   entities.’’ The RFA generally defines
                                                burden? If so, what time period would                   whether additional short-term funding                  ‘‘small entity’’ as having the same
                                                be appropriate? Finally, should a similar               is necessary for Puerto Rico given the                 meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’
                                                framework be adopted for fixed                          actions it takes in the concurrently                   ‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small
                                                providers?                                              adopted Order. If the Commission were                  governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition,
                                                   70. The Commission also anticipates                  to pursue such relief, how could it                    the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same
                                                that any second-stage participants in the               ensure that any funds are well spent? Do               meaning as the term ‘‘small business
                                                Uniendo a Puerto Rico Fund and the                      carriers regularly offer ‘‘service                     concern’’ under the Small Business Act.
                                                Connect USVI Fund would coordinate                      disruption credits,’’ or do different                  A small business concern is one which:
                                                any construction and access issues with                 carriers offer different options to their              (1) Is independently owned and
                                                other carriers and state and federal                    consumers? And would such an                           operated; (2) is not dominant in its field
                                                agencies to minimize duplicative                        emergency fund create a perverse                       of operation; and (3) satisfies any
                                                facilities, hardening, construction,                    incentive of rewarding those carriers                  additional criteria established by the
                                                digging, and other activity. The                        that had greater service disruptions vis-              Small Business Administration (SBA).
                                                Commission believes that such                           à-vis those that recovered more quickly                  77. This Notice proposes annual
                                                coordination could help rebuild service                 from the hurricanes?                                   support to rebuild, improve, and expand
                                                in these areas more quickly and                            74. The Commission also seeks                       fixed and mobile services in Puerto Rico
                                                efficiently. The Commission seeks                       comment on the petition filed by Viya                  and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Notice
                                                comment on whether voluntary                            proposing a one-time infusion of $45                   proposes making support available to
                                                coordination is sufficient or if it should              million in support to help it rebuild its              any fixed or mobile provider who
                                                adopt specific requirements.                            fixed network in the U.S. Virgin Islands,              obtains an ETC designation, using a
                                                Commenters should identify specific                     the petition filed by Viya on October 5,               competitive and subscriber-based
                                                carrier obligations and a framework for                 2017, that sought ‘‘a supplemental, one-               process, respectively. Ten fixed and
                                                coordination. If the Commission                         time infusion of up to $50 million for                 mobile carriers in Puerto Rico and the
                                                adopted requirements, are there any                     carriers to rebuild wireless networks                  U.S. Virgin Islands currently receive
                                                reporting obligations that would be                     using hurricane-hardened facilities’’ in               high-cost support. Even assuming other
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                appropriate to ensure cooperation?                      the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the petition              carriers will obtain an ETC designation
                                                   71. Finally, the Commission                          filed by Open Mobile seeking additional                to receive part of the additional support
                                                understands that much of Puerto Rico                    high-cost support and an advance on its                proposed by the Notice, the Commission
                                                still lacks electrical power.                           support payments. The Commission                       does not anticipate the proposed rule to
                                                Communications networks require                         seeks specific comment on whether                      affect more than 15 providers out of the
                                                reliable power to operate. The                          additional short-term funding is                       737 providers currently receiving high-
                                                Commission seeks comment on what                        necessary for the U.S. Virgin Islands                  cost support. Accordingly, the
                                                obligations providers should bear to                    given the actions it takes in the                      Commission anticipates that this Notice


                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00017   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 4702   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1


                                                                      Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules                                                  27537

                                                will not affect a substantial number of                 licensed to OST. OST requests an                       (computer diskettes, large print, audio
                                                carriers, and so it does not anticipate                 amendment of the DTV Table of                          recording, and Braille), send an email to
                                                that it will affect a substantial number                Allotments to delete channel 17 at Block               fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Commission’s
                                                of small entities. Therefore, the                       Island, Rhode Island, and substitute                   Consumer and Governmental Affairs
                                                Commission certifies that this Notice                   channel 17 at Newport, Rhode Island.                   Bureau at (202) 418–0530 (voice), (202)
                                                will not have a significant economic                    Petitioner also requests modification of               418–0432 (TTY). This document does
                                                impact on a substantial number of small                 WPXQ’s license to specify Newport as                   not contain proposed information
                                                entities. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).                          its community of license pursuant to                   collection requirements subject to the
                                                  78. Comments. All comments to this                    agency rules. The Petitioner asserts that              Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
                                                Notice should be filed in WC Docket No.                 substantial public interests weigh                     Public Law 104–13. In addition,
                                                18–143, The Uniendo a Puerto Rico                       heavily in favor of reallocating WPXQ to               therefore, it does not contain any
                                                Fund and the Connect USVI Fund.                         Newport. Newport has a population of                   proposed information collection burden
                                                                                                        24,027 while Block Island’s population                 ‘‘for small business concerns with fewer
                                                IV. Ordering Clauses
                                                                                                        consists of approximately 1,000.                       than 25 employees,’’ pursuant to the
                                                  79. Accordingly, it is ordered,                       Petitioner asserts that the proposed                   Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of
                                                pursuant to the authority contained in                  reallotment will cause no public harm                  2002, Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
                                                sections 4(i), 214, 254, 303(r), and 403                because Block Island will not only                     3506(c)(4).
                                                of the Communications Act of 1934, as                   continue to be served by five full-power                  Provisions of the Regulatory
                                                amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 214, 254,                    commercial and one full-power non-                     Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to
                                                303(r), and 403, and sections 1.1, 1.3,                 commercial television stations, but will               this proceeding. Members of the public
                                                and 1.412 of the Commission’s rules, 47                 also continue to receive the exact same                should note that from the time a Notice
                                                CFR 1.1, 1.3, and 1.412, Notice of                      over-the-air service from Petitioner that              of Proposed Rule Making is issued until
                                                Proposed Rulemaking is adopted. The                     they are receiving currently. The                      the matter is no longer subject to
                                                Notice is effective thirty (30) days after              proposal would result in a preferential                Commission consideration or court
                                                publication of the text or summary                      allotment by providing Newport with its                review, all ex parte contacts (other than
                                                thereof in the Federal Register.                        first local full-power television services             ex parte presentations exempt under 47
                                                  80. It is further ordered that pursuant               in satisfaction of the Commission’s                    CFR 1.1204(a)) are prohibited in
                                                to applicable procedures set forth in                   second allotment priority, which is also               Commission proceedings, such as this
                                                sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the                         consistent with Commission precedent                   one, which involve channel allotments.
                                                Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.415,                       and consistent with the public interest.               See 47 CFR 1.1208 for rules governing
                                                1.419, interested parties may file                      DATES: Comments must be filed on or                    restricted proceedings.
                                                comments on the Notice on or before                     before July 13, 2018, and reply
                                                July 5, 2018, and reply comments on or                                                                            For information regarding proper
                                                                                                        comments on or before July 30, 2018.                   filing procedures for comments, see 47
                                                before July 18, 2018.
                                                                                                        ADDRESSES: Federal Communications                      CFR 1.415 and 1.420.
                                                Federal Communications Commission.                      Commission, Office of the Secretary,
                                                Marlene Dortch,                                         445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC                     List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
                                                Secretary.                                              20554. In addition to filing comments                      Television.
                                                [FR Doc. 2018–12625 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]             with the FCC, interested parties should
                                                                                                        serve counsel for petitioner as follows:               Federal Communications Commission.
                                                BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
                                                                                                        Ocean State Television, LLC, c/o Cooley                Barbara A. Kreisman,
                                                                                                        LLP, John R. Feore, Jr., Esq., Jason                   Chief, Video Division, Media Bureau.
                                                FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS                                  Rademacher, Esq., 1299 Pennsylvania                    Proposed rules
                                                COMMISSION                                              Avenue NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC
                                                                                                        20004.                                                   For the reasons discussed in the
                                                47 CFR Part 73                                          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                       preamble, the Federal Communications
                                                [MB Docket No. 18–153, RM–11801; DA 18–                 Darren Fernandez, Darren.Fernandez@                    Commission proposes to amend 47 CFR
                                                496]                                                    fcc.gov, phone 202–418–2769, Video                     part 73 as follows:
                                                                                                        Division, Media Bureau.
                                                Television Broadcasting Services;                                                                              PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
                                                                                                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
                                                Block Island and Newport, Rhode                                                                                SERVICES
                                                                                                        synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
                                                Island                                                  Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No.
                                                                                                                                                               ■ 1. The authority citation for part 73
                                                AGENCY:  Federal Communications                         18–153, adopted May 14, 2018, and
                                                                                                                                                               continues to read as follows:
                                                Commission.                                             released May 15, 2018. The full text of
                                                                                                        this document is available for public                    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336,
                                                ACTION: Proposed rule.                                                                                         and 339.
                                                                                                        inspection and copying during normal
                                                SUMMARY:   The Commission has before it                 business hours in the FCC’s Reference                  § 73.622   [Amended]
                                                a petition for rulemaking filed by Ocean                Information Center at Portals II, CY–
                                                State Television, LLC (Petitioner or                    A257, 445 12th Street SW, Washington,                  ■ 2. Section 73.622(i), the Post-
                                                OST), licensee of television station                    DC 20554. This document will also be                   Transition Table of DTV Allotments
                                                WPXQ–TV, channel 17, Block Island,                      available via ECFS (http://www.fcc.gov/                under Rhode Island is amended by
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1




                                                Rhode Island (WPXQ). WPXQ operates                      cgb/ecfs/). (Documents will be available               adding channel 17 at Newport and
                                                on channel 17 on a shared basis with                    electronically in ASCII, Word 97, and/                 removing channel 17 at Block Island.
                                                commercial television station WLWC,                     or Adobe Acrobat.) To request this                     [FR Doc. 2018–12657 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]
                                                New Bedford, Massachusetts, also                        document in accessible formats                         BILLING CODE 6712–01–P




                                           VerDate Sep<11>2014   16:45 Jun 12, 2018   Jkt 244001   PO 00000   Frm 00018   Fmt 4702   Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\13JNP1.SGM   13JNP1



Document Created: 2018-06-12 23:59:18
Document Modified: 2018-06-12 23:59:18
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionProposed Rules
ActionProposed rule.
DatesComments are due on or before July 5, 2018 and reply comments are due on or before July 18, 2018. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this document, you should advise the contact listed in the following as soon as possible.
ContactAlexander Minard, Wireline Competition Bureau, (202) 418-7400 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.
FR Citation83 FR 27528 

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR