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.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler offered a bevy of defenses and explanations to Capitol Hill on his Lifeline program overhaul and broadband privacy regulation NPRM, both set for votes Thursday at the FCC’s meeting. The agency released Wheeler’s responses to multiple lawmakers Wednesday on the items, as governors slammed the Lifeline overhaul plan and Charter Communications defended it.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler offered a bevy of defenses and explanations to Capitol Hill on his Lifeline program overhaul and broadband privacy regulation NPRM, both set for votes Thursday at the FCC’s meeting. The agency released Wheeler’s responses to multiple lawmakers Wednesday on the items, as governors slammed the Lifeline overhaul plan and Charter Communications defended 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.”

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.

“Broadband" differs from "advanced telecommunications capability" but is key to an ATC statutory mandate, the FCC said in a Broadband Progress Report it released Friday after approving it Thursday (see 1601280064). The report said for simplicity’s sake, the commission sometimes used the term “broadband” to refer to “advanced telecommunications capability” in past inquiries on whether ATC was being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion to all Americans pursuant to Section 706 of the 1996 Telecom Act. But it said “advanced telecommunications capability” is a statutorily defined term that differs from “broadband” as it’s used in other contexts. “Thus, in this Inquiry, we do not equate the term 'broadband' with the statutory term 'advanced telecommunications capability,' but we do necessarily consider the availability of various broadband services that contribute to advanced telecommunications capability in our analysis under the statute,” it said. The report cited various data for why the FCC said ATC isn’t being deployed “broadly enough and quickly enough” to meet the Section 706 mandate. It said one in 10 Americans lacks 25/3 Mbps (download/upload) broadband availability, and ATC deployment disparities persist between urban areas and rural and tribal areas. It elaborated on why the FCC believes both mobile and fixed broadband availability are necessary under the statutory mandate. It said there are various marketing, usage and adoption differences that dispel the notion that current fixed and mobile broadband services give consumers the same or substitutable services. “On the contrary, they are distinct services with complementary strengths and weaknesses, distinguishable in capability, pricing, and in the utility they provide consumers,” it said. The report said the FCC couldn’t yet define adequate mobile broadband speed or service standards, and it noted the FCC may consider different mobile and fixed speed benchmarks. The report said there are “many and varied” barriers to ATC deployment, and cited past and ongoing FCC efforts on rural broadband, E-rate and Lifeline USF modernization, and other matters. It said if consumers’ personal information can be protected, that could spur broadband service, investment and deployment, consistent with the 1996 act’s goals. Consumer groups are pushing the FCC to issue an NPRM opening a broadband privacy rulemaking (see 1601190077).

“Broadband" differs from "advanced telecommunications capability" but is key to an ATC statutory mandate, the FCC said in a Broadband Progress Report it released Friday after approving it Thursday (see 1601280064). The report said for simplicity’s sake, the commission sometimes used the term “broadband” to refer to “advanced telecommunications capability” in past inquiries on whether ATC was being deployed in a reasonable and timely fashion to all Americans pursuant to Section 706 of the 1996 Telecom Act. But it said “advanced telecommunications capability” is a statutorily defined term that differs from “broadband” as it’s used in other contexts. “Thus, in this Inquiry, we do not equate the term 'broadband' with the statutory term 'advanced telecommunications capability,' but we do necessarily consider the availability of various broadband services that contribute to advanced telecommunications capability in our analysis under the statute,” it said. The report cited various data for why the FCC said ATC isn’t being deployed “broadly enough and quickly enough” to meet the Section 706 mandate. It said one in 10 Americans lacks 25/3 Mbps (download/upload) broadband availability, and ATC deployment disparities persist between urban areas and rural and tribal areas. It elaborated on why the FCC believes both mobile and fixed broadband availability are necessary under the statutory mandate. It said there are various marketing, usage and adoption differences that dispel the notion that current fixed and mobile broadband services give consumers the same or substitutable services. “On the contrary, they are distinct services with complementary strengths and weaknesses, distinguishable in capability, pricing, and in the utility they provide consumers,” it said. The report said the FCC couldn’t yet define adequate mobile broadband speed or service standards, and it noted the FCC may consider different mobile and fixed speed benchmarks. The report said there are “many and varied” barriers to ATC deployment, and cited past and ongoing FCC efforts on rural broadband, E-rate and Lifeline USF modernization, and other matters. It said if consumers’ personal information can be protected, that could spur broadband service, investment and deployment, consistent with the 1996 act’s goals. Consumer groups are pushing the FCC to issue an NPRM opening a broadband privacy rulemaking (see 1601190077).

The regulatory fee battle raged as the American Cable Association and ITTA urged the FCC to shift some fees from wireline to wireless companies, while CTIA opposed that. CTIA also opposed NAB’s proposal to reapportion regulatory fees to the wireless sector because of the planned incentive auction, which will allow wireless providers to bid for broadcast TV spectrum. ACA and CTIA filed reply comments (here and here), while ITTA made an ex parte filing this week in docket 15-121 on a recent meeting with FCC officials. NAB met with officials last week to discuss its proposal (see 1512030061).

The NAB said some broadcast regulatory fees should be reassigned to wireless carriers to reflect the expected spectrum transfer between sectors from the upcoming incentive auction. “The only equitable approach is for the regulatory fees to ‘follow the spectrum.’ The spectrum to be repurposed through the incentive auction will benefit wireless service providers,” said the NAB in comments as industry parties responded to an FCC Further NPRM in docket 15-121 this week (replies are due Dec. 7). CTIA didn’t address the possible broadcast fee shift in its written comments and had no comment to us Tuesday.