Small carriers need money to build out their networks and the Corr Wireless order was wrong to not redirect surrendered funds back to other competitive eligible telecommunications carriers (CD Sept 7 p1), the Rural Telecommunications Group said in a filing at the FCC. In the order and notice of proposed rulemaking, the FCC declined to redistribute reclaimed high-cost support to other CETCs and proposed amending its Interim Cap Rule so that a state’s interim cap would be adjusted if a CETC relinquishes funds, as Verizon Wireless and Sprint Nextel did through merger commitments. In September, the commission ruled that the Universal Service Administrative Co. can’t modify the interim cap by deducting Verizon’s and Sprint’s contributions, but ruled that other eligible telecommunications carriers aren’t entitled to divvy up the left-over cash. The commission has since opened up to comments on how to handle surrendered USF funds (CD Sept 7 p6). “Existing wireless CETCs will use additional support to deploy advanced networks, cover unserved areas, and make available mobile broadband, ensuring that consumers in all regions of the nation have access to affordable services,” RTG said. “The Commission has recently acknowledged that while some areas lacking 3G coverage have some level of mobile voice service, other areas have no mobile wireless service at all.”

Wireline and wireless carriers said the FCC should back away from the controversial finding in its most recent Section 706 report that the commission couldn’t conclude broadband is being deployed to all Americans in a “reasonable and timely” way (CD July 21 p1). But Free Press said the commission was on the right track when it approved its sixth broadband deployment report during the summer and the seventh report should have the same finding. CTIA said the sixth report put too much emphasis on the speed of connections, to the detriment of wireless.

There’s no reason for the FCC to delay approval and release of an order that would allow states to require providers of nomadic VoIP service to contribute to state universal service funds, NARUC said in an FCC filing. Some providers seek a rulemaking to further delay their “obligations” to pay -- as their competitors pay -- to support state programs, NARUC said. They have raised as an issue -- “the unlikely scenario that one or more consumers -- in theory -- might actually pay into two state programs,” it noted. Currently, at least one state requires the in-state USF revenue identification to be based on billing addresses and at least one other State requires revenue identification to be based on primary service address. However, this “unlikely scenario” provides no basis for delay or a drawn out rulemaking, NARUC said, saying there’s no evidence in the record that this circumstance has actually occurred or “even likely to occur.” The group cited Sandy Reams, managing auditor for the Kansas Corporation Commission, saying Kansas is the only state currently assessing nomadic interconnected VoIP providers for state USF purposes. So no conflict between the revenue-identification methods currently exists. Reams also noted once the FCC issues an order and Nebraska and New Mexico implement the assessment on providers of nomadic interconnected VoIP service, it will be rare for a carrier to be assessed on the same revenue by two different states. The nomadic carriers have raised “an unsupported allegation as a fact” -- that a significant quantum of customers may be subject to overlapping state assessments -- as a defense to complying with what the FCC has found to be clear Congressional intent that Vonage contribute to state programs, NARUC said. Vonage (or other nomadic carriers) are the only parties to this proceeding in a position to demonstrate if the claim is true, it said. Vonage has provided no evidence a single customer in any state is in a position to be actually harmed based on the methods suggested by the Nebraska and Kansas commissions (or any other actual State commission rule or proposed rule), NARUC said. Additionally, if it actually does happen, the states will assure the affected customer “is made whole.” Two of the states involved have already specified, in the unlikely case that such a circumstance rises, they will work together to assure the consumer is not harmed. “In the unlikely event that a double assessment actually does occur,” the states can provide a credit to a carrier that is assessed twice on the same revenue,” it said. Meanwhile, states have successfully worked together on the issue for wireless providers, and that’s strong evidence that to the extent that any double billing issue arises, it will be readily resolved by the states’ collaboration, NARUC said.

There’s no reason for the FCC to delay approval and release of an order that would allow states to require providers of nomadic VoIP service to contribute to state universal service funds, NARUC said in an FCC filing. Some providers seek a rulemaking to further delay their “obligations” to pay -- as their competitors pay -- to support state programs, NARUC said. They have raised as an issue -- “the unlikely scenario that one or more consumers -- in theory -- might actually pay into two state programs,” it noted. Currently, at least one state requires the in-state USF revenue identification to be based on billing addresses and at least one other State requires revenue identification to be based on primary service address. However, this “unlikely scenario” provides no basis for delay or a drawn out rulemaking, NARUC said, saying there’s no evidence in the record that this circumstance has actually occurred or “even likely to occur.” The group cited Sandy Reams, managing auditor for the Kansas Corporation Commission, saying Kansas is the only state currently assessing nomadic interconnected VoIP providers for state USF purposes. So no conflict between the revenue-identification methods currently exists. Reams also noted once the FCC issues an order and Nebraska and New Mexico implement the assessment on providers of nomadic interconnected VoIP service, it will be rare for a carrier to be assessed on the same revenue by two different states. The nomadic carriers have raised “an unsupported allegation as a fact” -- that a significant quantum of customers may be subject to overlapping state assessments -- as a defense to complying with what the FCC has found to be clear Congressional intent that Vonage contribute to state programs, NARUC said. Vonage (or other nomadic carriers) are the only parties to this proceeding in a position to demonstrate if the claim is true, it said. Vonage has provided no evidence a single customer in any state is in a position to be actually harmed based on the methods suggested by the Nebraska and Kansas commissions (or any other actual State commission rule or proposed rule), NARUC said. Additionally, if it actually does happen, the states will assure the affected customer “is made whole.” Two of the states involved have already specified, in the unlikely case that such a circumstance rises, they will work together to assure the consumer is not harmed. “In the unlikely event that a double assessment actually does occur,” the states can provide a credit to a carrier that is assessed twice on the same revenue,” it said. Meanwhile, states have successfully worked together on the issue for wireless providers, and that’s strong evidence that to the extent that any double billing issue arises, it will be readily resolved by the states’ collaboration, NARUC said.

The FCC is putting out feelers to industry leaders and interest groups on the Universal Service Fund contributions formula, industry lobbyists said and records show. The commission said in April it was overhauling broadband regulations and overhauling the service fund and has said it plans a rulemaking notice in the fourth quarter. In recent days, lobbyists and industry leaders have been at the FCC for various ex parte meetings.

A Universal Service Fund overhaul “would best be grounded on classification of broadband Internet connectivity as a telecommunications service” by the FCC, said the Media Access Project in a meeting last week with the Wireline Bureau. “Such a decision would minimize the chance of an anomalous and undesirable outcome in which the Commission plausibly might require contributions from broadband providers but have no authority to provide explicit support for broadband deployment and adoption.” MAP can’t yet endorse either revenue-based or numbers-based contribution to USF, because of the current legal uncertainty about the commission’s broadband authority, it said. Whatever method is chosen, the group said it shouldn’t “increase the relative contribution burden passed through to providers’ residential subscribers, nor promote more regressive assessments."

Imposing Universal Service Fund obligations on satellite providers that don’t receive USF support isn’t a “fair or rational way” to provide broadband to remote areas, a group of satellite companies said at a meeting with the Wireline Bureau’s Telecommunications Access Policy Division. Inmarsat, Iridium, Intelsat, SES World Skies, Spacenet and WildBlue representatives were at the meeting, an ex parte filing said. The satellite companies urged the bureau to “think broadly about alternative contribution methodologies,” though each would raise definition and classification questions, the filing said.

The FCC should formally deny states’ regulatory authority over entry, rates and other conditions of VoIP services, said a group of 12 Internet, telecom and VoIP companies, Thursday. Google, AT&T, Verizon, Skype, Microsoft and eight other companies and associations asked the FCC to “exercise caution” as it considered a petition filed by the Kansas and Nebraska commissions to require interconnected VoIP providers to pay state universal service fees.

The FCC should formally deny states’ regulatory authority over entry, rates and other conditions of VoIP services, said a group of 12 Internet, telecom and VoIP companies, Thursday. Google, AT&T, Verizon, Skype, Microsoft and eight other companies and associations asked the FCC to “exercise caution” as it considered a petition filed by the Kansas and Nebraska commissions to require interconnected VoIP providers to pay state universal service fees.

The FCC Thursday put forward a list of 64 items for FCC action, along with time lines. The list includes most of what was recommended by the National Broadband Plan, released last month. The FCC had a similar list of items to work from when it implemented the 1996 Telecom Act, said a former FCC official. Eighth floor advisers were briefed on the plan Wednesday.