The Connect America Fund (CAF) cost model "lacks sufficient focus to properly treat extremely high-cost," (XHC) sparsely populated areas of Wyoming, the Public Service Commission replied in FCC docket No. 09-197. It responded to CenturyLink and USTelecom initial comments. The PSC is concerned that the FCC hasn't realigned "frozen support" for price-cap eligible telecom carriers (ETCs) to offer voice service in XHC areas, especially since CenturyLink refused CAF Phase II in Wyoming. In states where the incumbent price-cap carrier rejected CAF II support -- as in Wyoming -- the PSC recommends that all Census blocks receive a portion of frozen support for the immediate future. After the competitive bidding process, Census blocks not awarded to a carrier should continue to get frozen support, the PSC said. The state commission encouraged its federal counterpart to require the continuation of ETC voice obligations.

The New York State Broadband Program Office seeks input from entities that might apply for funding from, or contribute to, the state's new program, said the office's request for information released Thursday. Written RFI responses are due Oct. 30. The goal of the RFI is to collect recommendations on how New York can reduce broadband deployment costs, find out what challenges may exist for the state's $500 million program to be completed and how the state can speed deployment of infrastructure to meet the existing broadband program timeline, the RFI said. The broadband program aims to get every New York resident access to high-speed Internet and aims to be implemented by the end of 2018.

The FCC shouldn't use forbearance to "hollow out" the eligible telecom carrier obligations of price-cap carriers in areas where there is at least one other Lifeline provider, replied the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates in docket No. 14-192. Price-cap carriers should promote universal service through the offering of both ubiquitously available voice service and service made more affordable for eligible customers, NASUCA said. It said the FCC also should deny requests for forbearance that would allow ILECs to provide voice service only where they choose.

Filing nearly a month late, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) submitted a motion for acceptance of late-filed comments as well as comments on the FCC second Further NPRM regarding the federal Lifeline program, posted Friday in docket No. 11-42. Among its main concerns, the CPUC believes the FCC should address the role of states' authority to administer broadband Internet access service as a component of universal service in their own Lifeline programs. States should also be allowed to regulate consumer protection for all Lifeline services, the CPUC said. The state commission opposes reducing the number of qualifying public assistance programs for Lifeline as well as eliminating the income-based eligibility method, and standardizing Lifeline eligibility forms, it said. The FCC shouldn't reduce federal eligible telecom carrier obligations, the CPUC said. States should also be allowed to develop their own enrollment forms and processes so they can incorporate the unique characteristics of their states, CPUC said.

The Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development received requests for almost three times as much money as state broadband grant funding is available, the department said in a news release. The agency’s Office of Broadband Development received requests for $29.06 million from 44 entities, while $10.58 million in funding is available to build out broadband infrastructure in Greater Minnesota, it said. During the previous application period, the state received 40 applications, it said. Under the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, entities can use the funding to pay up to 50 percent of the cost of expanding broadband service in unserved or underserved regions. The maximum grant available for any single entity is $5 million, the release said. The agency expects to announce in November the entities approved for funding, it said.

The South Carolina Telephone Coalition filed a petition in docket No. 2015-290-C to have the Public Service Commission make a determination that carriers offering retail wireless services are providing telecom services in the state, and that they are providing radio-based local exchange services that compete with local telecom service. A hearing was scheduled for Nov. 3 before the commission, a notice in the docket said. The hearing may continue on subsequent dates, if necessary. Applicant’s direct testimony is due Tuesday, other parties of record direct testimony is due Oct. 13, applicant’s rebuttal testimony is due Oct. 20, and other parties of record surrebuttal testimony is due Oct. 27.

Several competitive wireless eligible telecom carriers have indefinitely put off deploying wireless facilities to nearly 50 rural exchanges across Alaska, many of which don't have a competing wireless carrier and thus don't have any wireless voice service, said the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) in FCC comments that were attached to the state's certification of support for high-cost ETCs. The logistics of providing wireless service to remote Alaska villages are uniquely challenging, the RCA said in docket 10-90. That "make[s] all the more reasonable the legitimate business concerns these ETCs with unfulfilled deployment commitments have raised before us," the RCA said. It urged the FCC to take up President Barack Obama's strategic focus on the Arctic by making telecom infrastructure across Alaska a stated priority; continue to engage with Alaska carriers to address the potential gaps through which many of Alaska's "most vulnerable customers are at risk of falling"; and provide "fair, ongoing, and stable subsidies necessary to build that telecommunications infrastructure" and set firm, near-term deployment deadlines for the ETCs that may receive them.

The Communications Workers of America took a Verizon statement to the FCC in July out of context, said an ex parte filing by Verizon posted Wednesday in docket 13-5 and RM-11358. The resulting public relations campaign has created a false impression of Verizon’s "efforts to provide high quality services to customers that Verizon continues to serve by copper facilities," the filing said. The company has not engaged in widespread “de facto” retirement of copper; rather it has spent more than $200 million since 2008 on its copper network, Verizon said. "CWA has seized on that comment, taken it out of context, and tried to use it to create the false impression that this was all of the money that Verizon has spent to keep copper in service." CWA did not immediately comment Wednesday.

California Gov. Jerry Brown’s (D) decision to not yet sign the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act is evidence that “California is no longer a leader, not when it comes to how our privacy laws are applied in an era of constant technological growth,” wrote Electronic Frontier Foundation Investigative Researcher Dave Maass in an open letter to Brown Wednesday. Maass said he has been “digging into historical documents for any hint about what action” Brown may take on CalECPA. Though Maass says he was “impressed” by Brown’s “early work on computer literacy in the education system,” he said Brown’s signature is needed on the bill by Oct. 11 to provide privacy for individuals in California, as well as protections for “the companies we entrust our data to and the public safety officers who have to navigate the gray areas to protect us.”

Verizon workers will rally Thursday in front of a Nassau County, New York, call center that could be on the chopping block if Verizon management pushes through its contract proposals, a Communications Workers of America news release said. Joining the Verizon employees will be New York Assemblywoman Michaelle Solages (D), Nassau County Legislature Minority Leader Kevan Abrahams (D) and Long Beach Councilman Anthony Eramo (D). The CWA and the company are at odds over contract terms, and the union has been holding protests and other demonstrations against the telco (see 1509090048). A Verizon spokesman said, "Rather than doing the hard work needed to fully engage with the company and negotiate the meaningful contractual changes demanded by our challenging and transforming industry, the unions are using their time to orchestrate meaningless street rallies. This approach, by union leaders, is not conducive to getting an agreement, nor does it serve the interests of our customers or the approximately 37,000 union-represented employees who are still working without a contract. ... These rallies are starting to become old news -- the same, old misguided allegations, week after week."