RLECs Warn Neb. PSC Against Using FCC Broadband Data for State USF

Big telecom companies differed with rural telcos on how much the Nebraska Public Service Commission should rely on new FCC broadband data for Nebraska USF (NUSF) high-cost distributions. The PSC posted comments Monday on short-term issues in a comprehensive USF review opened Aug. 29 (see 2308290044).

The PSC’s current focus is short-term changes to account for the FCC ending Form 477 broadband data reporting. The commission order opening docket NUSF-139 proposed aggregating the FCC's newer, more granular broadband data collection (BDC) to determine high-cost support distributions in the 2024 calendar year. Also, it sought comment on the challenge process and using a 100 Mbps download and upload speeds broadband definition when considering if an area is served, rather than 25/3 Mbps used now. The PSC already requires 100 Mbps symmetrical speeds for projects funded through NUSF.

The Nebraska PSC got support for using federal BDC data in comments from Cox, Windstream, CTIA and Charter Communications. “Obtaining BDC data directly from the FCC would provide the Commission with a 'one-stop shopping' method for gaining the necessary broadband availability data that would be quick, efficient, and complete,” said Charter: The PSC shouldn’t adopt its own process since it lacks jurisdiction over various entities it doesn’t regulate. While it might take longer to obtain FCC data, that information will be more complete, Cox said.

The PSC should likewise adopt the FCC’s challenge process, some of the same groups said. Charter said "a different state process could create needless uncertainty for providers" and "would be expensive and time-consuming to implement, without assurances that the results would be better than the existing FCC process." Cox said creating a Nebraska-specific challenge process would delay distributing funds and risk "confusion and mistakes by providers."

But FCC broadband data may not be reliable, countered Nebraska Rural Independent Companies (RIC), a coalition including Consolidated Telephone and Great Plains Communications. "BDC tends to overcount" broadband serviceable locations by including "outbuildings, machine sheds, barns and stacks of hay bales.” For 2024 distributions, the PSC should instead carry forward 2023 location data and let carriers inform staff about additional buildout locations, said RIC: To ensure its reliability, reporting carriers "would self-certify the accuracy of newly deployed locations." The PSC should keep its current challenge process rather than rely on challenges to FCC data, it said.

The Rural Telecommunications Coalition of Nebraska agreed with using 2023 data for 2024. "Our support for [using BDC data] is conditioned upon the FCC’s BDC data and challenge process maturing into reliable mechanisms for determining broadband availability in Nebraska,” said the RLECs. which include ATC Communications and Waneta Telephone. "We do not believe at present that bar has been reached -- nor do we expect it to be reached quickly enough for the BDC data and challenge process to be useful in determining high-cost distributions for the 2024 calendar year.”

The Nebraska Rural Broadband Association (NRBA) supported using the most current BDC data. The PSC may want to align NUSF allocation decision timelines with BDC data updates, said NRBA, which includes Cambridge Telephone and Glenwood Telephone Membership Corporation. Or the PSC should let providers challenge the FCC data at the Nebraska PSC, "rather than having the Commission rely on the adjudication of federal challenges in this case, which could unnecessarily extend the allocation timeline,” it said. “Currently carriers are submitting challenges to the FCC related to BDC data, but such challenges are not always reflected on the map in a timely manner nor are they clearly indicated in the applicable June 30 and December 31 map iterations."

The PSC should end support for locations and service territories not receiving 100/100 Mbps by June 30, 2025, said NRBA. “Incumbent carriers have received well more than $750 million in NUSF support since the NUSF Act was passed in 1997. Ongoing support should no longer fund networks that are obsolete and unserved." Windstream said it would support a 100/100 Mbps speed standard if the PSC allows the existing provider to receive support there to upgrade service to deliver the faster speeds.

Cable commenters sought a 100/20 Mbps standard instead. "Changing the speed benchmark would require a statutory change -- and would be unwise, as it could result in providers requesting NUSF support for areas that currently have gigabit-speed internet connections,” said Charter. Cox warned that a 100 Mbps symmetrical standard “would lead to overbuilding recent construction projects, including those not even completed and are forthcoming through” the broadband, equity, access and deployment program, the enhanced alternative connect America fund and the rural digital opportunity fund. All use 100/20 Mbps.

Minimize substantive short-term changes to NUSF, urged CTIA. In particular, don't make immediate changes to the challenge process and speed thresholds for served areas, the wireless industry group said. However, CTIA strongly supports holistic state USF review given major changes to the telecom market over the past two decades and the massive federal funding coming for broadband, it said.