Rural telco groups said the FCC should be careful in changing rate-of-return rules for carrier cost recovery and related practices. Regulatory changes should apply prospectively only and should be targeted to provide increased clarity about allowable expenditures where helpful, said various RLEC groups in comments Thursday in docket 10-90, responding to a recent Further NPRM included in an item that overhauled rate-of-return USF mechanisms (see 1603300065 and 1603310039). Some voiced concern the FCC could make sweeping changes to throw out rules -- which they said had worked reasonably well -- based on "anecdotal" accounts of isolated problems.

The FCC can't give VoIP providers full numbering rights without classifying them as telecom carriers that provide telecom services under Title II of the Communications Act, NARUC said in challenging a 2015 order that gave interconnected VoIP (I-VoIP) providers direct access to phone numbers (see 1506180060). "Its implementing regulations giving I-VoIP providers direct access to numbers/portability" in all but name deem it a telecom service, the state regulatory group said in its brief filed late Monday (NARUC v. FCC, No. 15-1497). "An entity cannot 'be deemed' to be a telecommunications carrier unless it is offering a service that conforms to the Act's definition. In 2011, the [U.S. Court of Appeals for the] 10th Circuit rejected a similar FCC analysis." The commission's brief is due May 19.

The FCC can't give VoIP providers full numbering rights without classifying them as telecom carriers that provide telecom services under Title II of the Communications Act, NARUC said in challenging a 2015 order that gave interconnected VoIP (I-VoIP) providers direct access to phone numbers (see 1506180060). "Its implementing regulations giving I-VoIP providers direct access to numbers/portability" in all but name deem it a telecom service, the state regulatory group said in its brief filed late Monday (NARUC v. FCC, No. 15-1497). "An entity cannot 'be deemed' to be a telecommunications carrier unless it is offering a service that conforms to the Act's definition. In 2011, the [U.S. Court of Appeals for the] 10th Circuit rejected a similar FCC analysis." The commission's brief is due May 19.

States may sue the FCC over the commission’s Lifeline order, pending a review of the text of the final order, NARUC President Travis Kavulla said in an interview on Friday. At its Thursday meeting, the FCC approved by a 3-2 vote an order that would extend USF low-income subsidies to broadband (see 1603310056). While states support a broadband expansion, they have disagreed with the FCC’s decision to shift potential responsibility for verifying Lifeline broadband provider eligibility from the states to a national third party, sharply condemning the proposal in a March 17 letter ultimately signed by 96 state commissioners (see 1603180052). Before the FCC vote, the National Governors Association and NASUCA voiced concerns about where the order leaves states. Capitol Hill Democrats were revealed to be heavily involved in lobbying the agency hours before the vote. After the vote, rural telco/RLEC groups NTCA and WTA also voiced concerns about the Lifeline order.

States may sue the FCC over the commission’s Lifeline order, pending a review of the text of the final order, NARUC President Travis Kavulla said in an interview on Friday. At its Thursday meeting, the FCC approved by a 3-2 vote an order that would extend USF low-income subsidies to broadband (see 1603310056). While states support a broadband expansion, they have disagreed with the FCC’s decision to shift potential responsibility for verifying Lifeline broadband provider eligibility from the states to a national third party, sharply condemning the proposal in a March 17 letter ultimately signed by 96 state commissioners (see 1603180052). Before the FCC vote, the National Governors Association and NASUCA voiced concerns about where the order leaves states. Capitol Hill Democrats were revealed to be heavily involved in lobbying the agency hours before the vote. After the vote, rural telco/RLEC groups NTCA and WTA also voiced concerns about the Lifeline order.

The FCC seems disinclined to cap or control Lifeline subsidies as part of an effort to modernize the USF program supporting low-income telecom service, Commissioner Mike O’Reilly said in a blog post Thursday. “Failing a major change in direction, the FCC is preparing to massively expand the size and scope of the Lifeline Program without the necessary inclusion of a hard budget or financial constraints,” he said. “Such irresponsible action will balloon a program plagued by waste, fraud, and abuse and result in higher phone bills for every American -- including those already struggling in the current economy. In sum, it’s a recipe for disaster, and I can’t and won’t be part of it.”

The FCC seems disinclined to cap or control Lifeline subsidies as part of an effort to modernize the USF program supporting low-income telecom service, Commissioner Mike O’Reilly said in a blog post Thursday. “Failing a major change in direction, the FCC is preparing to massively expand the size and scope of the Lifeline Program without the necessary inclusion of a hard budget or financial constraints,” he said. “Such irresponsible action will balloon a program plagued by waste, fraud, and abuse and result in higher phone bills for every American -- including those already struggling in the current economy. In sum, it’s a recipe for disaster, and I can’t and won’t be part of it.”

IDT Telecom received somewhat more support than opposition to its bid for an FCC rulemaking aimed at expanding the Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund’s revenue base to include the intrastate revenue of industry contributors (see 1512210029). IDT’s petition got support from a coalition of consumer groups that advocate for the rights of the deaf and hard of hearing, and from some industry parties, including two video relay service (VRS) providers. But a VoIP industry group opposed the petition and an incumbent telco group said the FCC shouldn't make changes to the TRS Fund’s contribution at this time. The initial comments of parties were posted in docket 03-123 Thursday and Friday. The FCC currently assesses industry interstate and international telecom end-user revenue to pay for the TRS Fund.

The FCC should get going on reforming its USF contribution system, ITTA and the Montana Telecommunications Association (MTA) said Friday. There is “growing pressure on the Universal Service Fund as the Commission considers expanding the scope of services supported by USF programs,” said midsize-telco group ITTA in a filing posted in docket 10-90 summarizing an Oct. 28 meeting with Gigi Sohn, counselor to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. “We urged the Commission to undertake USF contribution reform and broaden the base of contributors before taking any further steps to modify the Lifeline program to include support for broadband services.” MTA also urged the FCC to address contribution reform, “particularly given the increasing pressure on the high cost reform efforts caused by budgetary restraints and the shrinking contributions base,” the association said in a filing on its meetings with aides to Wheeler and Commissioners Mike O'Rielly and Jessica Rosenworcel. An FCC spokesman said the issue was before a federal-state joint board. Carriers currently contribute 16.7 percent of their interstate and international telecom revenue to USF, a rate that has trended up over the years as subsidies have increased and the industry revenue base has eroded. Carriers generally pass the fees along to consumers.

Industry parties and others continued to support FCC proposals to Lifeline USF subsidies to broadband service and revamp administrative oversight, but divisions remain over specifics. In reply comments filed in docket 11-42 responding to initial comments on the FCC’s NPRM (see 1509010073 and 1509040045), parties generally backed giving low-income consumers expanded choice and shifting responsibility for verifying Lifeline subscriber eligibility from telecom carriers to a third party. But there was disagreement over whether the FCC should establish minimum Lifeline standards for broadband/voice service. Numerous tribal groups also filed reply comments urging the FCC to retain and even increase enhanced Lifeline tribal support.