The Arizona Corporation Commission will wait to change or repeal state USF, said a 5-0 decision released Thursday in docket T-00000A-20-0336. Staff recommended last month waiting for a Frontier Communications rate case coming Aug. 30 (see 2302070057).

Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Communications Subcommittee ranking member John Thune, R-S.D., pressed the FCC Thursday for a detailed accounting of its distribution of money to four broadband programs enacted via the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and COVID-19 aid measures. Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Senate Communications Subcommittee Chairman Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., meanwhile, led refiling of the Funding Affordable Internet with Reliable (Fair) Contributions Act.

The administrative law judge process at the FCC is “completely broken” and “something you would find in a banana republic,” not the U.S., former FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly said during a Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy webinar Wednesday. O’Rielly noted review by an ALJ was recently “activated” as part of the review of the Standard/Tegna deal (see 2303100082.)

Inmate calling services providers and consumer advocacy organizations welcomed a draft NPRM and order the FCC will consider during the commissioners' open meeting Thursday that would begin implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Just and Reasonable Communications Act of 2022. Advocates sought some clarifying language in the final item, and ICS providers sought additional language in the draft on how the agency should establish just and reasonable rates.

The USF contribution factor has “gone up really through the roof” and “led to a pretty vibrant debate right now about what the future of the universal service is going to be funded going forward,” said Keller and Heckman partner Casey Lide during a firm webinar Thursday. The telecom lawyer noted some groups sought direct congressional appropriations to fund USF, while others urged the FCC to include broadband internet access service revenue in the contribution base. Consumers’ Research’s challenge of the USF contribution factor in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based on the nondelegation doctrine could “force the hand on this kind of reform discussion,” he said (see 2301180054). If the court finds in favor of the petitioners, “it's undoubtedly going to go before the Supreme Court,” Lide said: "This Supreme Court could well uphold that [and] if that happens, then you're in a scenario where the universal service program is effectively gutted by judicial process.”

FCC commissioners emphasized the need for action on spectrum policy and 5G, and more certainty on broadband affordability and deployment efforts, during Incompas’ policy summit Tuesday. Some industry experts also urged changes to sustain the USF because funding for the affordable connectivity program remains uncertain and the USF contribution factor continues to rise.

The California Public Utilities Commission is seeking comments on provider-imposed charges on customer bills. It’s phase two in a rulemaking to update telecom surcharge mechanisms, the CPUC said. The commission switched to a connections-based state USF contribution method in phase one of docket R.21-03-002 (see 2210200073). T-Mobile asked a court to stop that October decision from taking effect April 1 (see 2302280037). Provider-imposed charges are “separate and in addition to the various [public purpose program] surcharges on customer bills, the CPUC said. “These charges are not always clearly identified, nor is the purpose of these charges clear. These charges have increased substantially in recent years.” The CPUC asked providers to list their charges, how much revenue they generate and how that money is spent. The agency asked companies how they disclose the fees and if any violate state cramming restrictions. “Explain whether the Commission should prohibit provider fees for purposes of protecting consumers against unjust, unreasonable, or illegal charges and fees that appear on communications customers’ bills.” Comments are due April 5, with replies due April 20.

AT&T representatives met with staff from the FCC Wireline Bureau and Office of Economics and Analytics about USF, including the future of the Alternative Connect America Cost Model (ACAM) program. “Specifically, we stressed how broken and in need of reform the current” USF “contributions mechanism and factor are,” said a filing posted Friday in docket 21-476: “Indeed, the perilous state of the contribution factor and how to modernize the funding mechanism was ‘one of the most intensively discussed topics’ in the Future of USF proceeding’s record.” Among AT&T’s recommendations are that the FCC consider making some ACAM locations eligible for broadband, equity, access and deployment program or other federal/state broadband funding programs, and whether “other technologies like fixed wireless already exist in ACAM-eligible areas and/or would be more cost-effective to reach certain high-cost locations.”

The Oklahoma Corporation Commission should “avoid rule changes that may exacerbate … uncontrolled growth” of Oklahoma USF (OUSF), CTIA said in Friday comments on a proposal in docket RM 2023-000006. One proposed change would “lower the evidentiary standard for OUSF surcharge increases” by allowing the fund administrator to forgo filing supporting testimony, said CTIA: That would be OK only for proposals to maintain or reduce the surcharge. The wireless industry association also raised concerns with a proposal to give the commission “sole discretion” on whether to hold a hearing to resolve objections to proposed surcharge changes. That, coupled with a proposal that would automatically deny objections if the commission doesn’t act on them within 30 days, would limit stakeholders’ opportunity to disagree with fee changes, CTIA said. Rural carriers proposed making it easier for surcharge changes to take effect. If no objection is filed to the administrator’s recommendation and commissioners choose not to adjust it, the recommendation should take effect in 30 days, said Atlas Telephone, Consolidated Communications and others. If an objection is filed but the commission takes no action on it in 45 days, then the objection should be deemed denied and the administrator’s recommendation should take effect the next day, the RLECs said. With a more efficient process for modifying the OUSF assessment, recipients will likely obtain support in a “more timely” manner, said Oklahoma Corporation Commission staff in a Wednesday rule impact statement. Staff said it doesn’t expect any adverse economic effects to small businesses or increases to compliance costs.

Industry groups and consumer advocacy organizations disagree about how the FCC should define digital discrimination and ways to facilitate equal access to broadband, according to comments posted through Wednesday in docket 22-69. The commission adopted an NPRM in December seeking comment on rules to combat digital discrimination, as required by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (see 2301190049).