Telco Brief Attacks FCC Orders Keeping USF Voice Duties Without Support
Price-cap telcos said the FCC violated the law by refusing to give them relief from legacy USF voice duties in areas where they don't receive new broadband-oriented Connect America Fund support. AT&T and CenturyLink, joined by intervenor USTelecom, Tuesday filed…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
their opening brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which is reviewing their challenges to 2014 and 2015 FCC orders (AT&T, CenturyLink v. FCC, No. 15-1038 and consolidated cases) (see 1601110036 and 1602050029). "The Communications Act requires the FCC to adhere to a basic principle: a carrier required to provide services in high-cost areas must receive support in the form of sufficient payments from a universal service fund. The FCC orders under review violate this principle," the telco brief said. "By the FCC’s own calculation, Petitioners and other carriers face more than $1 billion in annual unfunded mandates under the FCC’s orders." The telcos said Section 214(e)(1)(A) requires USF eligible telecom carriers (ETCs) to provide services that “are supported” by universal service funding. But the FCC rule "leaves in place statewide price cap carrier ETC designations that require those carriers to provide service in high-cost areas where the required services are not ‘supported’ by high-cost funds," their brief said. "Those obligations violate the straightforward text of § 214(e)(1)(A). Likewise, requiring that service be provided in high-cost areas without supporting it with disbursements from the Fund violates the statutory command in 47 U.S.C.§ 254(b)(5) and (e) that funding be ‘sufficient’ to advance universal service. The Act also requires States to designate ‘service area[s]’ for price cap carrier ETCs that are linked to the FCC’s 'universal service obligations and support mechanisms.' 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(5) (emphasis added). Legacy statewide service areas violate this requirement because they are a product of the replaced ‘support mechanisms’ and bear no relationship to the targeted funding mechanism that now determines high-cost support." They also said the FCC violated "the principle of competitive neutrality" and the Administrative Procedure Act. The FCC/DOJ brief is due Sept. 2 (see 1606010042).