Groups Urge FCC to Give Rip and Replace Priority to Smallest Providers
Groups representing smaller carriers emphasized the importance of giving carriers with fewer than 2 million subscribers priority as the FCC establishes rules to pay for ripping and replacing network gear from Chinese vendors. Huawei protested any requirement that equipment be removed from networks and said the program should be voluntary. The FCC should be aware that a global shortage of chipsets (see 2104120057) could complicate replacement, USTelecom warned. Comments were posted Tuesday in docket 18-89.
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.
The comments respond to a February NPRM (see 2102170049) proposing changes to rules approved in late 2019 (see 1911220033) to align them with the combined FY 2021 appropriations and COVID-19 aid omnibus law (see 2012220061). It also reconciles differences between that law and the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act (see 2003040056).
Change the reimbursement program eligibility cap to 10 million or fewer customers “to conform with the requirements established by Congress,” said the Competitive Carriers Association. But the FCC should give priority to providers with fewer than 2 million customers, which often serve “some of the most remote and expensive areas of the country and are bridging the digital divide by bringing service to places where there would not be a business case to offer service absent support,” CCA said: “Many of these carriers provide the only wireless network (or the only reliable wireless network) in parts or all of their footprints, making them critical to public safety and essential for economic growth and opportunities in their territories.”
NTCA agreed the smallest providers should be given priority. Eligible telecom carriers should receive “funding that matches the full scope of equipment and services that must be replaced, which is to say funding that covers the cost of removing and replacing all covered equipment and services contained in the Covered List,” NTCA commented. “If any covered equipment remains in the ETC’s network, the provider will be forced to either find a way to finance the cost of replacing any covered equipment or services not reimbursed or risk losing eligibility for universal service funds, an outcome that ultimately hurts the communities served by these small providers.”
Nothing in the laws Congress passed authorize the FCC to mandate the removal of its gear, Huawei said: “Section 4 of the Secure Networks Act establishes a purely voluntary Reimbursement Program for carriers that choose to participate.” The Chinese company sought to overturn the ban in federal court (see 2012110017). “Because the Commission lacks statutory authority to impose a removal-and-replacement mandate in the first instance, the Commission has no authority to expand its already unlawful rule,” Huawei said.
USTelecom said the FCC must avoid prioritizing who gets funding, consistent with the appropriations language paying for the program. “The Commission should decline to sub-prioritize within the prioritization categories established by Congress,” the group said: “Such a scheme ... does not reflect congressional intent. In this situation, too, if any sub-prioritization had any effect, it would be to reduce funding to one or more applicants in favor of others notwithstanding Congress’s expectation that they would be treated equally.”
Supply chain issues could complicate replacement, USTelecom said: “Our members, which include companies of all sizes ... have heard from their vendors that they are facing shortages that could impact their ability to fulfill orders for the equipment that would be purchased to replace covered equipment."
Give priority to ETCs, which must remove equipment to keep their funding, the Rural Wireless Association said. “Considering the USF constitutes the source of much of ETCs’ funding as opposed to non-ETCs, limiting those funds has significantly hampered the ability of many rural ETCs to maintain their networks,” RWA said: “The pandemic has exacerbated this issue.”