Category Archives: FCC

Broadband “nutritional” labels are required April 10 (today!)

Posted on by
Reply

KSTP TV reports…

Much like nutritional labels on food products, “broadband labels” for internet packages will soon tell you just what is going into the pricing of your service, thanks to new rules adopted by the Federal Communications Commission this week.

“If you’ve ever shopped for home or mobile internet, you can understand how hard it can be to understand what you’re actually paying for,” said Jon Donenberg, Deputy Director of the White House National Economic Council, on a call with reporters. “The broadband nutrition label is a tool that can help consumers make sure they have a clear, straightforward explanation of home and mobile services before signing up for anything.”

Following the design of FDA food labels, these broadband labels will provide easy-to-understand, accurate information about the cost and performance of high-speed internet service to help consumers avoid junk fees, price hikes, and other unexpected costs.

Internet service providers selling home access or mobile broadband plans will be required to have a label for each plan beginning April 10.

The labels will be mandated to appear at any point of sale, including online and in stores, and they will be required to disclose all pricing information — including introductory rates, data allowances, and speeds. The labels will also include links to information about network management practices and privacy policies.

The FCC to vote on restoring Net Neutrality

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC shares…

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel today announced the Commission will vote during its April Open Meeting to restore Net Neutrality, which would bring back a national standard for broadband reliability, security, and consumer protection.  If adopted, the Chairwoman’s proposal would ensure that broadband services are treated as an essential resource deserving of FCC oversight under Title II authority.

“The pandemic proved once and for all that broadband is essential,” said Chairwoman Rosenworcel.  “After the prior administration abdicated authority over broadband services, the FCC has been handcuffed from acting to fully secure broadband networks, protect consumer data, and ensure the internet remains fast, open, and fair.  A return to the FCC’s overwhelmingly popular and court-approved standard of net neutrality will allow the agency to serve once again as a strong consumer advocate of an open internet.”

If adopted, the proposal would:

  • RETURN POPULAR NET NEUTRALITY PROTECTIONS – The FCC would once again play a key role in preventing at the federal level broadband providers from blocking, slowing down, or creating pay-to-play internet fast lanes.
  • PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF BROADBAND OUTAGES – When households and businesses lose internet service, consumers often expect that the FCC might either be able to help the restoration or at least have information about the outage.  By restoring the FCC’s Title II authority over internet service providers, the FCC will bolster its ability to require these companies to address internet outages.  Without such authority, the FCC cannot require companies to report broadband outages, cannot collect outage data, and lacks the authority to even consider ways that it can help protect against and recover from internet service outages.
  • BOOST SECURITY OF BROADBAND NETWORKS – In this digital age, there are new and emerging digital threats.  Without broadband oversight, the FCC is unable to fully monitor and respond to such national security concerns.  For example, without reclassification, the FCC is limited in its authority to direct foreign-owned companies deemed to be national security threats to discontinue any domestic or international broadband services under Sec. 214 – as the agency has done with telephone services.  In addition, without reclassification, the FCC has limited authority to incorporate updated cybersecurity standards into network policies.
  • INCREASE CONSUMER PROTECTIONS – Net Neutrality protections would increase the tools the FCC has available to protect consumer data and respond to evolving consumer threats.  Updated rules could mean broadband providers could not sell your location data, among other sensitive information.  This would empower the agency to protect consumers from other harmful practices.
  • RESTORE A WIDELY ACCEPTED NATIONAL STANDARD – When the previous FCC stepped back from Net Neutrality protections, the court said states could step in.  Despite these efforts by individual states to provide robust oversight in response to the prior administration’s retreat from authority, we need a national standard to keep internet access fast, open, and fair.  A national standard is also broadly popular: eighty percent of Americans support open internet policies.

The Chairwoman will circulate her proposal to her fellow Commissioners for their review.  As is the general practice, a public draft of the proposal – officially a Declaratory Ruling, Order, Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration – will be made public on Thursday on FCC.gov.  At the Commission’s April 25 Open Meeting, the Commissioners will consider and vote on the proposal.  The meeting will be open to the public and streamed live at www.fcc.gov/live.  If adopted, the reclassification and rules would largely go into effect 60 days after Federal Register publication.

 

FCC dismisses Starlink’s spectrum application

Posted on by
Reply

Ars Technica reports…

Starlink’s mobile ambitions were dealt at least a temporary blow yesterday when the Federal Communications Commission dismissed SpaceX’s application to use several spectrum bands for mobile service.

SpaceX is seeking approval to use up to 7,500 second-generation Starlink satellites with spectrum in the 1.6 GHz, 2 GHz, and 2.4 GHz bands. SpaceX could still end up getting what it wants but will have to go through new rulemaking processes in which the FCC will evaluate whether the spectrum bands can handle the system without affecting existing users.

The FCC Space Bureau’s ruling dismissed the SpaceX application yesterday as “unacceptable for filing.” The application was filed over a year ago.

The FCC said the SpaceX requests “do not substantially comply with Commission requirements established in rulemaking proceedings which determined that the 1.6/2.4 GHz and 2 GHz bands are not available for additional MSS [mobile-satellite service] applications.”

But the FCC yesterday also issued two public notices seeking comment on SpaceX petitions to revise the commission’s spectrum-sharing rules for the bands. Dish Network and Globalstar oppose the SpaceX requests, and SpaceX will have to prove to the FCC that its plan won’t cause harmful interference to other systems.

Cautionary tale of Ohio broadband provider who lied to the FCC

Posted on by
Reply

Ars Technica reports…

An Internet service provider that admitted lying to the Federal Communications Commission about where it offers broadband will pay a $10,000 fine and implement a compliance plan to prevent future violations.

Jefferson County Cable (JCC), a small ISP in Toronto, Ohio, admitted that it falsely claimed to offer fiber service in an area that it hadn’t expanded to yet. A company executive also admitted that the firm submitted false coverage data to prevent other ISPs from obtaining government grants to serve the area. Ars helped expose the incident in a February 2023 article.

The FCC announced the outcome of its investigation on March 15, saying that Jefferson County Cable violated the Broadband Data Collection program requirements and the Broadband DATA Act, a US law, “in connection with reporting inaccurate information or data with respect to the Company’s ability to provide broadband Internet access service.”

“To settle this matter, Jefferson County Cable agrees to pay a $10,000 civil penalty to the United States Treasury,” the FCC said. “Jefferson County Cable also agrees to implement enhanced compliance measures. This action will help further the Commission’s efforts to bridge the digital divide by having accurate data of locations where broadband service is available.”

Minnesota alone is about to get $650 million in federal funding to expand broadband. It’s a good time to make sure money is going to the right areas and to the providers who are best able to serve those communities.

FCC Issues Formal Notice That April Is Final Full Month of ACP

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC gives public notice...

DA 24-195
Released: March 4, 2024
WIRELINE COMPETITION BUREAU ANNOUNCES THE FINAL MONTH OF THE
AFFORDABLE CONNECTIVITY PROGRAM
WC Docket No. 21-450

In this Public Notice, due to the lack of additional funding for the Affordable Connectivity
Program (ACP), the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) of the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) announces that the last fully funded month for the ACP benefit is April 2024. 1 Absent additional funding from Congress, the ACP can only provide a partial reimbursement for May 2024, and ACP providers have the option to claim and pass on that partial reimbursement amount to enrolled households. After May 2024, the ACP will no longer support any benefits to enrolled households. This Public Notice also (1) provides guidance on the May 2024 partial reimbursement month; (2) reminds participating providers of the notices they must send to ACP households; and (3) provides guidance on the consumer protections for ACP households during wind-down and after the ACP ends. The instructions and guidance in this Public Notice further the goal set forth in the ACP Wind-Down Order of keeping as many households as possible connected to broadband service after the end of the ACP.

Read more.

LTD Broadband files petition to review FCC’s decision to deny them RDOF money

Posted on by
4

Broadband Breakfast reports…

LTD Broadband has filed a petition for review of the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to deny it funding as part of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund.

The company, which largely offers fixed wireless broadband, filed a request for judicial review with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 2, contesting the agency decision on December 4.

I recently posted a recap of the situation with LTD Broadband in Minnesota shared by the MN Public Utilities Commission. Very briefly, LTD Broadband was awarded the chance to bid of building broadband in Minnesota. Then the funding was denied. A byproduct of that series of events is that the MN PUC is now looking at revoking LTD’s ETC designation. In a recent meeting with the PUC, LTD Broadband referred to the “unlikely event that the FCC does ultimately approve the long form [application for funds]…

It will be interesting to see how the petition regarding the FCC will go.

Le Sueur County asks FCC to put burden of proof of broadband maps on broadband providers

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

Le Sueur County, Minnesota, is urging the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a more proactive and regulatory role in the BEAD challenge process, contending the challenge process currently places the burden of proof on local units of government, when it should be on internet service providers.

In comments submitted to the commission on Monday, Le Sueur County officials call for the FCC to provide grants or resources to local government units to hire professional vendors to work on addressing challenges submitted to the FCC’s national broadband map.

A look at who owns the broadband mapping data from Doug Dawson

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve had several questions about broadband mapping and BEAD challenges lately, especially since the Minnesota Broadband Task Force meeting last week. A quick reminder, or framing for new folks, broadband mapping is important because it determines eligibility for funding. There are a lot of moving pieces to how to best correct (challenge) the maps if you feel your location is misrepresented if you have the time and talent to do it.

Leave it to my smarter friend Doug Dawson (POTS and PANS) to take a step back and ask, who is creating the maps and how is the data made available…

My biggest current pet peeve about the FCC mapping is that the agency made the decision to give power over the mapping and map challenge process to CostQuest, an outside commercial vendor.

The FCC originally awarded CostQuest $44.9 million to create the broadband maps. Everybody I know who works with mapping thinks this is an exorbitant amount, but if this was the end of the mapping story, then congratulations to CostQuest for landing a lucrative federal contract – lots of other companies have made hay doing so over the years.

Unfortunately, this is only the beginning of the mapping story because the FCC gave CostQuest the ability to own the rights to the mapping fabric, which is the database that shows the location of every home and business in the country that is a potential broadband customer. This is a big deal because it means that CostQuest, a private company, controls the portal for data needed by the public to understand who has or doesn’t have broadband.

A case in point is that soon after CostQuest created the first FCC map, the company was hired by the NTIA to provide the databases and maps for the BEAD grant process for a price tag of $49.9 million – more than the FCC paid to create the maps. CostQuest will also sell access to the mapping fabric to others for a fee. I have to imagine that the FCC is also paying CostQuest a big fee twice a year to update the FCC maps and to process map challenges.

I’m just flabbergasted that there is a private company that holds the reins to the database of broadband availability and which only makes it available for a fee.

Again, Doug hits the nail on the head with the frustration level in the field…

Our industry is full of data geeks who could work wonders if they had free access to the mapping fabric database. There are citizen broadband committees and retired folks in every community who are willing to sift through the mapping data to understand broadband trends and to identify locations where ISPs have exaggerated coverage claims. But citizens willing to do this research are not going to pay the fees to get access to the data – and shouldn’t have to.

The FCC says that getting broadband to everybody is its most important mission. However, restricting access to mapping data doesn’t support that sentiment. It almost feels more like the FCC doesn’t want folks pointing out the many errors in the data, which is a shame. Nobody expected mapping data that is reported by ISPs to be accurate since ISPs all have their own agendas. When the new maps were created. I had high hopes that an army of volunteers could challenge the ISPs and set the record straight. It seems like the FCC went out of its way to make sure that doesn’t happen by giving a gatekeeper the ownership of the data.

Stats on impact of Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) from Net Inclusion 2024

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

A recent survey revealed that 81 percent of households with schoolchildren receiving a monthly broadband subsidy are worried about the prospect of losing this assistance and its potential effects on their children’s education, according to the Universal Service Administrative Company.

These metrics “demonstrate with incredible clarity just how important it is to stay connected in modern life and how dangerous it is to threaten disconnection,” said Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, speaking during a Tuesday keynote at the Net Inclusion 2024 event convened by the National Digital Inclusion Alliance.

Rosenworcel further reported that 75 percent of households receiving broadband internet subsidies use their broadband connection for telemedicine purposes.

You can watch the session from the conference below:

(You can watch the conference in progress today and tomorrow on YouTube.)

 

OPPORTUNITY: FCC seeks public comment on broadband data collection challenge process

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC is seeking public comment on broadband data collection challenge process…

Comment Date: February 19, 2024

Reply Comment Date: March 5, 2024

 By this Public Notice, the Broadband Data Task Force, in coordination with the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB), Wireline Competition Bureau, and Office of Economics and Analytics (OEA) (collectively BDTF), seeks public comment on its Broadband Data Collection (BDC) challenge processes.  The BDC is the most granular, detailed collection of broadband availability data the FCC has ever gathered or released, depicting location-level information on mass-market fixed broadband internet access services available across the United States as well as standardized coverage maps of 3G, 4G, and 5G mobile wireless services.  Importantly, the BDC—for the first time ever—also provides opportunities for consumers, State, local, and Tribal governmental entities, and other stakeholders to challenge the coverage and broadband availability information reported to the FCC and depicted in the new maps.

Pursuant to section 802(b)(5)(D) of the Communications Act, as amended by Pub. L. No. 116-130, the Commission is required to submit a report to Congress that evaluates the challenge processes and considers whether the Commission should commence an inquiry on the need for other tools to help identify potential inaccuracies in BDC data and improve the accuracy of those data.[1]  Comments received in response to this Public Notice will inform this report.  To this end, we request input on the extent to which stakeholders are participating in the challenge processes, whether they find the challenge processes to be “user-friendly”, and, if not, what improvements the Commission can make to its processes to make participation more user-friendly, and the effectiveness of the challenge processes in improving the quality and accuracy of our broadband availability data.

[1] See 47 U.S.C. § 642(b)(5)(D);  Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act, Pub. L. No. 116-130, 134 Stat. 228 (2020) (codified at 47 U.S.C. §§ 641-646) (Broadband DATA Act or BDA), 47 U.S.C. § 642(a)(1)(A).  The report must be submitted to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce.  47 U.S.C. § 642(b)(5)(D).

FCC says Starlink is ineligible for $900M in RDOF subsidies

Posted on by
Reply

Punjab News reports…

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US has announced not to award Elon Musk’s Starlink nearly $900 million subsidy for expanding broadband service in rural areas, based on its failure to meet the basic programme requirements.

The ‘Universal Service Fund’ programme, which uses funding collected from consumers, sought to expand access to broadband networks in rural areas.

“The FCC followed a careful legal, technical and policy review to determine that this applicant (Starlink) had failed to meet its burden to be entitled to nearly $900 million in universal service funds for almost a decade, ” said FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel.

The agency qualified Starlink at the short-form stage, but at the long-form stage, the Commission determined that Starlink failed to demonstrate that it could deliver the promised service.

“Funding these vast proposed networks would not be the best use of limited Universal Service Fund dollars to bring broadband to unserved areas across the US, ” the Commission noted.

And more details from Broadband Communities…

The FCC has reaffirmed a prior decision to reject Starlink’s application to receive public support through the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund program.

The decision was announced by the FCC in the form of a statement, released Dec. 12, which accompanied the release of an Order on Review that resulted in a decision to uphold the denial of Starlink’s application.

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel’s statements were included in the FCC’s recent announcement. She said the FCC “followed a careful legal, technical and policy review to determine that this applicant had failed to meet its burden to be entitled to nearly $900 million in universal service funds for almost a decade.”

The original decision to deny Starlink’s application was made by the Wireline Bureau in August 2022. At the time, Rosenworcel said Starlink’s technology “has real promise,” but she raised concerns as well.

“The question before us was whether to publicly subsidize (Starlink’s) still developing technology for consumer broadband—which requires that users purchase a $600 dish—with nearly $900 million in universal service funds until 2032,” she previously said in August 2022, according to an FCC announcement about Starlink’s original denial.

Industry response to FCC talking about raising broadband speeds and looking at affordability

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC is planning to measure broadband affordability. Ars Technica reports on the cable industry’s lobby group response…

The US broadband industry is protesting a Federal Communications Commission plan to measure the affordability of Internet service.

The FCC has been evaluating US-wide broadband deployment progress on a near-annual basis for almost three decades but hasn’t factored affordability into these regular reviews. The broadband industry is afraid that a thorough examination of prices will lead to more regulation of ISPs. …

Cable industry lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association complained in a filing released Monday that the Notice of Inquiry’s “undue focus on affordability—or pricing—is particularly inappropriate.” The group, which represents cable providers such as Comcast and Charter, said that setting an affordability benchmark could lead to rate regulation:

While the Commission has reiterated that it has no interest in any kind of rate regulation, the proposal to make a traditional deployment analysis contingent on whether the Commission determines that broadband pricing is sufficiently affordable suggests that rate regulation in some form is potentially on the table.

They also remark on industry response to potentially  raising the speed definitions…

The FCC Notice of Inquiry also proposes to raise the speed of its benchmark for determining whether a broadband service counts as “advanced telecommunications capability.” People often refer to this as the FCC’s broadband definition. The benchmark was last updated in January 2015 and remains at 25Mbps downstream and 3Mbps upstream.

Trump-era FCC Chairman Ajit Pai kept the 25Mbps/3Mbps standard throughout his term. The new Notice of Inquiry prepared by Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel proposes raising the standard to 100Mbps on the download side and 20Mbps for uploads. The notice also proposes “a long-term fixed broadband speed goal” of 1Gbps download speeds and 500Mbps upload speeds.

USTelecom, which represents fiber and DSL providers such as AT&T and Verizon, supported the 100Mbps/20Mbps benchmark but objected to the long-term goal of 1Gbps/500Mbps. The trade group argued that the 500Mbps upload benchmark would shut out all non-fiber networks.

FCC denies LTD Broadband’s funding appeal and issues fines. Owner starts/rebrands GigFire?

Posted on by
3

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports on LTD Broadband…

The Federal Communications Commission has upheld a decision to block LTD Broadband from using any part of $1.3 billion in federal grants to subsidize the construction of high-speed internet infrastructure, including a major proposed buildout in Minnesota.

The FCC this week denied an appeal from LTD and proposed a nearly $22 million penalty for the embattled telecom company. The agency and many critics in Minnesota say the company is unlikely to deliver on its promises to serve rural areas lacking adequate broadband after winning a grant contest in 2020.

Corey Hauer, CEO of Nevada-based LTD, told the Star Tribune the company is “disappointed in the two FCC decisions and are evaluating our options, including taking the FCC to court.”

They added…

Separately, the FCC also said Hauer created a similar company named GigFire potentially to evade liability for LTD’s actions. The agency hasn’t imposed the penalty yet, but can do so after LTD has a chance to respond.

In March 2023, LTD Broadband announced a name change to GigiFi. I remember the announced predated a new website. (It looks like there is a gigifi based in Puerto Rico.) Now the LTD Broadband website mentions and redirects the visitor to GigFire. It’s unclear to me whether this is a rebranding or a new venture. Both GigFire and LTD Broadband currently show up as vendors on the FCC National Broadband Map. That seems problematic, especially when they seem to cover the same area.

The map below from the FCC National Map shows where GigFire serves FTTH (in pink) and unlicensed fixed wireless (in purple):

And here is the same map for LTD Broadband…

The FCC denies LTD Broadband’s application for review of RDOF awards

Posted on by
Reply

LTD Broadband was awarded the opportunity to apply for a lot of federal money (RDOF) to bring broadband to specific states, including Minnesota. They were the largest winning bidder. LTD needed to submit long-form applications to receive the awards. The review of the long form applications was not as success of the original application. LTD Broadband trying to appeal to the negative results and the FCC has just answered by saying they deny the application for review. The full reply is detailed and interesting. I have tried below to pull out the points most pertinent to LTD Broadband…

By this Order on Review, we deny an application for review submitted by LTD Broadband, LLC (LTD).1 LTD seeks review of a decision by the Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB or Bureau) that denied its application to be authorized to receive broadband deployment support from the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) Auction 904.

…

LTD timely submitted a short-form application and was announced as one of 386 bidders approved to participate in Auction 904.22 Auction 904 commenced on October 29, 2020. In the first round of the auction, LTD bid to deploy gigabit service to 2,223,682 locations in 16 states, seeking $13,326,751,930 in 10-year support despite an existing small deployment footprint and subscriber base of approximately 15,000 customers. At the conclusion of the auction after 19 rounds of bidding, LTD was

the largest winning bidder in the auction, with winning bids to deploy gigabit speed low-latency service to 528,088 locations in 15 states with $1,320,920,719 in 10-year support.

…

LTD filed its timely long-form application for support on January 29, 2021, and submitted, among other items, an attachment with its detailed technology and system design description as required of all applicants by February 15, 2021. On February 18, 2021, staff announced that there were 417 long-form applicants.26

…

Auction 904 long-form applicants were required to certify that they are eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) in all bid areas and to submit appropriate documentation supporting such certification on or before June 7, 2021.27 LTD timely sought and received ETC designation in eight states (Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin). In the remaining seven states in which it had winning bids (California, Iowa, Kansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, North Dakota,

South Dakota), LTD filed a request for waiver of the June 7, 2021 deadline to submit ETC certifications to the FCC.28 In two separate orders, the Bureau denied LTD’s request for waiver of the ETC certification deadline for California, Kansas, Oklahoma, Iowa, Nebraska, and North Dakota.29 LTD subsequently defaulted on all winning bids in Kansas and Oklahoma and sought reconsideration of the waiver denials regarding California, Iowa, Nebraska, and North Dakota.30 Later, LTD withdrew its petition for reconsideration of the waiver denials in California and Iowa, thus defaulting on all bids in those two states.31

…

In March 2021, June 2021, September 2021, and multiple times in March 2022, staff spoke with LTD about the financial and technical deficiencies that staff identified in LTD’s long form application. In these calls, staff explained the insufficiencies to LTD and answered LTD’s questions regarding program requirements. LTD did not submit revised financial information after its initial filings at the long-form application deadline. On August 5, 2021, LTD submitted a revised technical description

purporting to cover Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi (states in which it did not place winning bids). Even if assumed to apply to the fifteen states in which LTD did place winning bids, the revised documents did not sufficiently address the application technical deficiencies. After the September 2021 staff call, LTD submitted another revised technical description in November 2021, but that revised version still indicated that it applied to Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, and it was still insufficient to show that LTD could meet the obligations associated with its winning bids. Repeated contacts with LTD through March 2022 did not elicit additional financial or technical filings. To conclude this process, staff sent a formal letter to LTD on May 26, 2022, extensively detailing the application’s deficiencies and providing LTD a final opportunity to demonstrate its qualifications for support. LTD’s response was due by June 27, 2022.

In response to that letter, on June 27, 2022, LTD submitted revised financial and technical attachments to explain its network deployment plans in 10 states (Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin). Furthermore, LTD identified that it had entered into two financial agreements on that same day to obtain additional funding and a source for future loaned funds, ostensibly to enhance its financial position and operational

capabilities. Subsequently, staff sought clarification from LTD as to why a technical or financial plan for Nebraska was not included in these revised materials. LTD responded that it was still seeking RDOF support in Nebraska despite not including this state in its final financial and technical submissions.32 In sum, LTD proposed to deploy fiber to 475,616 estimated locations in 11 states.33

The Bureau concluded its review of LTD’s long-form application in each remaining state in which LTD had placed winning bids to determine whether it met all legal, financial, and technical requirements. The Bureau determined that LTD was not reasonably capable of complying with the Commission’s public interest requirements established for the RDOF program for a number of both financial and technical reasons. It therefore denied LTD’s application and announced LTD in default in

all of its remaining winning bids.34 The Bureau also dismissed LTD’s remaining Petition for Reconsideration regarding its ETC Designation Waiver Requests as to Nebraska and North Dakota.35 Having inadvertently failed to dismiss LTD’s ETC Designation Waiver Request in South Dakota when it denied LTD’s long-form application, the Bureau subsequently dismissed that waiver request in a Public Notice.36

Folks in Minnesota have been watching the situation with LTD Broadband with the FCC and the Minnesota PUC, where they have been having similar issues. The MN PUC suspended LTD’s ETC designation in November and asked the Office of Administration to look further into it.

 

New FCC rules protect against discrimination and redlining

Posted on by
Reply

St Paul Pioneer Press reports…

The Federal Communications Commission has enacted new rules intended to eliminate discrimination in access to internet services, a move which regulators are calling the first major U.S. digital civil rights policy.

The rules package, which the commission ratified on Wednesday, would empower the agency to review and investigate instances of discrimination by broadband providers to different communities based on income, race, ethnicity and other protected classes.

The order also provides a framework for the FCC to crack down a range of digital inequities including the disparities in the investment of services for different neighborhoods, as well as the “digital divide,” a term experts use to describe the complete lack of internet access many communities experience due to regional or socioeconomic inequality.