Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications, Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime, 22901-22903 [2017-10099]
Download as PDF
22901
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Effective date
authorization/cancellation
of sale of
flood insurance
in community
Community
No.
State and location
Glendora, City of, Tallahatchie County
280210
Marks, City of, Quitman County ............
280140
Quitman County, Unincorporated Areas
280207
Sumner, Town of, Tallahatchie County
280194
Tutwiler, Town of, Tallahatchie County
280197
Webb, Town of, Tallahatchie County ....
280213
South Carolina:
Chester County, Unincorporated Areas
450047
Lancaster, City of, Lancaster County ....
450121
Lancaster
County,
Unincorporated
Areas.
Tega Cay, City of, York County ............
450120
450036
York County, Unincorporated Areas .....
450193
Region VII
Iowa:
Anita, City of, Cass County ...................
190048
Cass County, Unincorporated Areas .....
190852
Fonda, City of, Pocahontas County ......
190483
Griswold, City of, Cass County .............
190346
Marne, City of, Cass County .................
190348
Massena, City of, Cass County .............
190349
Current effective
map date
Date certain
federal
assistance no
longer available
in SFHAs
April 9, 1974, Emerg; September 27, 1985,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
March 4, 1974, Emerg; September 4, 1985,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
March 4, 1974, Emerg; September 4, 1985,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
January 28, 1974, Emerg; September 4,
1985, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
January 28, 1974, Emerg; September 1,
1986, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
May 3, 1975, Emerg; August 1, 1986, Reg;
May 16, 2017, Susp.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
August 20, 1975, Emerg; July 5, 1982, Reg;
May 16, 2017, Susp.
December 7, 1973, Emerg; July 5, 1982,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
July 3, 1975, Emerg; January 6, 1983, Reg;
May 16, 2017, Susp.
N/A, Emerg; January 28, 2009, Reg; May
16, 2017, Susp.
June 18, 1975, Emerg; November 4, 1981,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
......do ...............
Do.
April 11, 1975, Emerg; June 17, 1986, Reg;
May 16, 2017, Susp.
August 25, 1975, Emerg; September 1,
1986, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
May 26, 2010, Emerg; May 1, 2011, Reg;
May 16, 2017, Susp.
October 26, 1976, Emerg; May 1, 1987,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
September 11, 2008, Emerg; January 6,
2011, Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
January 15, 2008, Emerg; January 6, 2011,
Reg; May 16, 2017, Susp.
*do = Ditto.
Code for reading third column: Emerg.—Emergency; Reg.—Regular; Susp.—Suspension.
Dated: May 4, 2017.
Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Mitigation,
Federal Insurance and Mitigation
Administration, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
ACTION:
BILLING CODE 9110–12–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES
[WC Docket Nos. 10–90, 14–58, CC Docket
No. 01–92; FCC 17–36]
Connect America Fund, ETC Annual
Reports and Certifications, Developing
a Unified Intercarrier Compensation
Regime
Federal Communications
Commission.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 May 18, 2017
Jkt 241001
In this document, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) grants the Petition for
Reconsideration filed by NTCA—The
Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) of
the Commission’s Rate-of-Return
Reform Order with respect to the
average per-location, per-project
construction limitation on universal
service support provided for in the Rateof-Return Reform Order. Amending the
rule as described below will encourage
carriers to plan cost-effective broadband
deployment projects that include
higher-cost locations, while maintaining
adequate incentives for the efficient use
of universal service funds.
DATES:
Effective June 19, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alexander Minard, Wireline
Competition Bureau, (202) 418–0428 or
TTY: (202) 418–0484.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Order on
Reconsideration in WC Docket Nos. 10–
90, 14–58, CC Docket No. 01–92; FCC
17–36, adopted on April 20, 2017 and
released on April 21, 2017. The full text
of this document is available for public
inspection during regular business
hours in the FCC Reference Center,
Room CY–A257, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554, or at the
following Internet address: https://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_
Business/2017/db0421/FCC-1736A1.pdf.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2017–10161 Filed 5–18–17; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
Final rule.
Sfmt 4700
I. Order on Reconsideration
1. By this Order, the Commission
grants the Petition for Reconsideration
filed by NTCA of the Commission’s
Rate-of-Return Reform Order, 81 FR
24282, April 25, 2016, with respect to
the average per-location, per-project
construction limitation on universal
service support provided for in the Rate-
E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM
19MYR1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES
22902
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
of-Return Reform Order. The
Commission finds that amending the
rule as described below will encourage
carriers to plan cost-effective broadband
deployment projects that include
higher-cost locations, while maintaining
adequate incentives for the efficient use
of universal service funds.
2. In the Rate-of-Return Reform Order,
the Commission adopted a Capital
Investment Allowance to limit universal
service reimbursement of capital
expenses associated with very high-cost
locations, with a goal of preserving
funds for more efficient projects with
deployment to a greater number of
lower-cost locations. As part of the
Capital Investment Allowance, the
Commission adopted a rule precluding
carriers from seeking universal service
support for all capital expenses
associated with any construction project
with average per-location costs above a
company-specific ‘‘Maximum Average
Per-Location Construction Project
Limitation.’’
3. NTCA seeks reconsideration of how
the construction limitation is applied.
NTCA contends that disallowing all
costs associated with a construction
project will cause carriers to exclude
certain locations to reduce the average
per-location cost of the project, with the
possible consequence of permanently
‘‘stranding’’ some locations without
broadband-capable service. For
example, if a carrier subject to a $10,000
average per-location limitation
developed a project costing $105,000 to
serve 10 locations (i.e., with an average
cost per-location served of $10,500), the
cost of the entire project would be
disallowed. The carrier might instead
exclude a handful of the highest cost
locations to bring the average perlocation cost below the threshold. Once
excluded, however, there may not be a
subsequent project that deploys service
to those locations as efficiently as the
first project and, as a result, the location
may never receive broadband-capable
service.
4. NTCA therefore requests that the
rule disallow, for the purpose of seeking
universal service support, only the
portion of a project’s expenses that
exceed the average per-location
threshold. In the example above, where
the $10,500 average per-location cost of
the project exceeds the carrier’s $10,000
Maximum Average Per Location
Construction Project Loop Plant
Investment Limitation, the carrier
would report $100,000 (i.e., $10,000 per
location) for universal service support
purposes and exclude $5,000 (i.e., the
amount in excess of $10,000 per
location). In that case, a carrier might
elect to deploy service to the highest-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 May 18, 2017
Jkt 241001
cost locations without prejudice to its
ability to receive universal service
support for the project, up to the
amount of the average per-location cap.
5. Upon reconsideration, the
Commission agrees that wholly
disallowing costs associated with
projects exceeding the construction
limitation could have the effect of
preventing deployment to some
locations that a carrier might otherwise
choose to serve. As the Commission
noted in adopting the Capital
Investment Allowance, ‘‘[a]lthough it is
the Commission’s goal to ensure
broadband deployment throughout all
areas, finite universal service resources
must be used where they are most
needed.’’ NTCA’s proposed solution is
to retain the average per-location
construction limitation as a maximum
amount includable for universal service
support purposes in connection with a
construction project. The Commission
finds that this solution adequately
preserves two critical Commission
interests: First, promoting efficient use
of universal service funds to maximize
the number of high-cost locations with
broadband-capable facilities, and
second, enabling some locations to be
efficiently included within another
deployment project (when they might
otherwise be denied service altogether).
The Commission therefore grants
NTCA’s petition with respect to the
construction limitation.
II. Procedural Matters
6. Paperwork Reduction Act. This
document does not contain new or
modified information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public
Law 104–13. In addition, therefore, it
does not contain any new or modified
information collection burden for small
business concerns with fewer than 25
employees, pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4).
7. Final Regulatory Flexibility
Certification. The Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires
that a regulatory flexibility analysis be
prepared for rulemaking proceedings,
unless the agency certifies that ‘‘the rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.’’ The RFA generally defines
‘‘small entity’’ as having the same
meaning as the terms ‘‘small business,’’
‘‘small organization,’’ and ‘‘small
governmental jurisdiction.’’ In addition,
the term ‘‘small business’’ has the same
meaning as the term ‘‘small business
concern’’ under the Small Business Act.
A small business concern is one which:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(1) Is independently owned and
operated; (2) is not dominant in its field
of operation; and (3) satisfies any
additional criteria established by the
Small Business Administration (SBA).
8. In this Order on Reconsideration,
the Commission amends the
construction project limitation within
the Capital Investment Allowance to
permit carriers to report, for universal
service purposes, capital expenses per
location up to the established perlocation per project limit, rather than
disallowing all capital expenses
associated with construction projects in
excess of the limit. This project-specific
limitation provides a reasonable upper
limit on the amount of per-location
capital expenses associated with a
carrier’s new construction project that
the Commission expects will rarely be
exceeded. Moreover, to the extent that
this rule change has a significant
economic impact on any small carriers,
the rule change will provide such
carries additional flexibility to
undertake new construction projects
that exceed the limit without risk of
losing all universal service support
associated with the project. Because the
Commission anticipates that this rule
will not affect a substantial number of
carriers, the Commission does not
anticipate that it will affect a substantial
number of small entities. Therefore, the
Commission certifies that the
requirements of this Order on
Reconsideration will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Commission will send a copy of the
Order on Reconsideration including a
copy of this final certification to the
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C.
605(b).
9. Congressional Review Act. The
Commission will send a copy of this
Order on Reconsideration to Congress
and the Government Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
III. Ordering Clauses
10. Accordingly, it is ordered that,
pursuant to the authority contained in
sections 1 through 4, 214(e)(6), and 254
of the Communications Act of 1934, 47
U.S.C. 151–154, 214(e)(6), 254, and
pursuant section 1.429 of the
Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.429, the
Petition for Reconsideration filed by
NTCA on January 3, 2017 is granted to
the extent indicated above and this
Order on Reconsideration is adopted,
effective thirty (30) days after
publication of the text or summary
thereof in the Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM
19MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 96 / Friday, May 19, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
11. It is further ordered that the
Commission shall send a copy of this
Order on Reconsideration to Congress
and the Government Accountability
Office pursuant to the Congressional
Review Act, see 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
12. It is further ordered that pursuant
to section 1.427 of the Commission’s
rules, 47 CFR 1.427, this Order shall be
effective 30 days after publication of the
text or summary thereof in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with RULES
Communications common carriers,
Health facilities, Infants and children,
Internet, Libraries, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Schools,
Telecommunications, Telephone.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:45 May 18, 2017
Jkt 241001
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 54 as
follows:
PART 54—UNIVERSAL SERVICE
1. The authority citation for part 54
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201,
205, 214, 219, 220, 254, 303(r), 403, and 1302
unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend § 54.303 by revising
paragraph (f) introductory text to read as
follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
22903
§ 54.303 Eligible Capital Investment and
Operating Expenses.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Construction allowance
adjustment. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of this section, a rate-ofreturn carrier must exclude from the
data it submits for the purposes of
obtaining high-cost support under
subpart K or subpart M of this part the
amount of Loop Plant Investment
associated with a new construction
project that exceeds the Maximum
Average Per Location Construction
Project Limitation for that project as
determined by the Administrator
according to the following formula:
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–10099 Filed 5–18–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\19MYR1.SGM
19MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 96 (Friday, May 19, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22901-22903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10099]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 14-58, CC Docket No. 01-92; FCC 17-36]
Connect America Fund, ETC Annual Reports and Certifications,
Developing a Unified Intercarrier Compensation Regime
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission) grants the Petition for Reconsideration filed by NTCA--The
Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) of the Commission's Rate-of-Return
Reform Order with respect to the average per-location, per-project
construction limitation on universal service support provided for in
the Rate-of-Return Reform Order. Amending the rule as described below
will encourage carriers to plan cost-effective broadband deployment
projects that include higher-cost locations, while maintaining adequate
incentives for the efficient use of universal service funds.
DATES: Effective June 19, 2017.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alexander Minard, Wireline Competition
Bureau, (202) 418-0428 or TTY: (202) 418-0484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order
on Reconsideration in WC Docket Nos. 10-90, 14-58, CC Docket No. 01-92;
FCC 17-36, adopted on April 20, 2017 and released on April 21, 2017.
The full text of this document is available for public inspection
during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Room CY-
A257, 445 12th Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, or at the following
Internet address: https://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2017/db0421/FCC-17-36A1.pdf.
I. Order on Reconsideration
1. By this Order, the Commission grants the Petition for
Reconsideration filed by NTCA of the Commission's Rate-of-Return Reform
Order, 81 FR 24282, April 25, 2016, with respect to the average per-
location, per-project construction limitation on universal service
support provided for in the Rate-
[[Page 22902]]
of-Return Reform Order. The Commission finds that amending the rule as
described below will encourage carriers to plan cost-effective
broadband deployment projects that include higher-cost locations, while
maintaining adequate incentives for the efficient use of universal
service funds.
2. In the Rate-of-Return Reform Order, the Commission adopted a
Capital Investment Allowance to limit universal service reimbursement
of capital expenses associated with very high-cost locations, with a
goal of preserving funds for more efficient projects with deployment to
a greater number of lower-cost locations. As part of the Capital
Investment Allowance, the Commission adopted a rule precluding carriers
from seeking universal service support for all capital expenses
associated with any construction project with average per-location
costs above a company-specific ``Maximum Average Per-Location
Construction Project Limitation.''
3. NTCA seeks reconsideration of how the construction limitation is
applied. NTCA contends that disallowing all costs associated with a
construction project will cause carriers to exclude certain locations
to reduce the average per-location cost of the project, with the
possible consequence of permanently ``stranding'' some locations
without broadband-capable service. For example, if a carrier subject to
a $10,000 average per-location limitation developed a project costing
$105,000 to serve 10 locations (i.e., with an average cost per-location
served of $10,500), the cost of the entire project would be disallowed.
The carrier might instead exclude a handful of the highest cost
locations to bring the average per-location cost below the threshold.
Once excluded, however, there may not be a subsequent project that
deploys service to those locations as efficiently as the first project
and, as a result, the location may never receive broadband-capable
service.
4. NTCA therefore requests that the rule disallow, for the purpose
of seeking universal service support, only the portion of a project's
expenses that exceed the average per-location threshold. In the example
above, where the $10,500 average per-location cost of the project
exceeds the carrier's $10,000 Maximum Average Per Location Construction
Project Loop Plant Investment Limitation, the carrier would report
$100,000 (i.e., $10,000 per location) for universal service support
purposes and exclude $5,000 (i.e., the amount in excess of $10,000 per
location). In that case, a carrier might elect to deploy service to the
highest-cost locations without prejudice to its ability to receive
universal service support for the project, up to the amount of the
average per-location cap.
5. Upon reconsideration, the Commission agrees that wholly
disallowing costs associated with projects exceeding the construction
limitation could have the effect of preventing deployment to some
locations that a carrier might otherwise choose to serve. As the
Commission noted in adopting the Capital Investment Allowance,
``[a]lthough it is the Commission's goal to ensure broadband deployment
throughout all areas, finite universal service resources must be used
where they are most needed.'' NTCA's proposed solution is to retain the
average per-location construction limitation as a maximum amount
includable for universal service support purposes in connection with a
construction project. The Commission finds that this solution
adequately preserves two critical Commission interests: First,
promoting efficient use of universal service funds to maximize the
number of high-cost locations with broadband-capable facilities, and
second, enabling some locations to be efficiently included within
another deployment project (when they might otherwise be denied service
altogether). The Commission therefore grants NTCA's petition with
respect to the construction limitation.
II. Procedural Matters
6. Paperwork Reduction Act. This document does not contain new or
modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore,
it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden
for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to
the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198,
see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).
7. Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification. The Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 as amended (RFA) requires that a regulatory
flexibility analysis be prepared for rulemaking proceedings, unless the
agency certifies that ``the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally
defines ``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms
``small business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one which: (1) Is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
8. In this Order on Reconsideration, the Commission amends the
construction project limitation within the Capital Investment Allowance
to permit carriers to report, for universal service purposes, capital
expenses per location up to the established per-location per project
limit, rather than disallowing all capital expenses associated with
construction projects in excess of the limit. This project-specific
limitation provides a reasonable upper limit on the amount of per-
location capital expenses associated with a carrier's new construction
project that the Commission expects will rarely be exceeded. Moreover,
to the extent that this rule change has a significant economic impact
on any small carriers, the rule change will provide such carries
additional flexibility to undertake new construction projects that
exceed the limit without risk of losing all universal service support
associated with the project. Because the Commission anticipates that
this rule will not affect a substantial number of carriers, the
Commission does not anticipate that it will affect a substantial number
of small entities. Therefore, the Commission certifies that the
requirements of this Order on Reconsideration will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Commission will send a copy of the Order on Reconsideration
including a copy of this final certification to the Chief Counsel for
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
9. Congressional Review Act. The Commission will send a copy of
this Order on Reconsideration to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
III. Ordering Clauses
10. Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority
contained in sections 1 through 4, 214(e)(6), and 254 of the
Communications Act of 1934, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 214(e)(6), 254, and
pursuant section 1.429 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.429, the
Petition for Reconsideration filed by NTCA on January 3, 2017 is
granted to the extent indicated above and this Order on Reconsideration
is adopted, effective thirty (30) days after publication of the text or
summary thereof in the Federal Register.
[[Page 22903]]
11. It is further ordered that the Commission shall send a copy of
this Order on Reconsideration to Congress and the Government
Accountability Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
12. It is further ordered that pursuant to section 1.427 of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.427, this Order shall be effective 30 days
after publication of the text or summary thereof in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54
Communications common carriers, Health facilities, Infants and
children, Internet, Libraries, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Schools, Telecommunications, Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 54 as follows:
PART 54--UNIVERSAL SERVICE
0
1. The authority citation for part 54 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 205, 214, 219, 220,
254, 303(r), 403, and 1302 unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 54.303 by revising paragraph (f) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 54.303 Eligible Capital Investment and Operating Expenses.
* * * * *
(f) Construction allowance adjustment. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of this section, a rate-of-return carrier must exclude from
the data it submits for the purposes of obtaining high-cost support
under subpart K or subpart M of this part the amount of Loop Plant
Investment associated with a new construction project that exceeds the
Maximum Average Per Location Construction Project Limitation for that
project as determined by the Administrator according to the following
formula:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-10099 Filed 5-18-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P