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.