In the August 19, 2024, edition of the ICORE Blog we reported that Arvig Enterprises and Bevcomm had made a filing with the FCC claiming that their EA-CAM offers were incorrectly understated due to the classification of Midcontinent Communications (Midco) as an unsubsidized competitor offering voice and broadband services in their service territories. In the filing Arvig and Bevcomm provide specific estimates of the numbers of locations incorrectly designated as being served by Midco and the resulting reductions to EA-CAM support provided in the Companies’ EA-CAM offers. Arvig and Bevcomm asserted in their filing that they had conducted extensive research and have concluded that Midco does not offer the required voice service anywhere where Midco offers broadband services in the Companies’ territories and therefore does not meet the definition of an unsubsidized competitor. Also in the August 19, 2024, ICORE Blog, we reported that a group of Companies had made a separate filing related to Midco claiming that Midco was incorrectly designated as an unsubsidized competitor because Midco is the recipient of CAF Phase II support and does not provide required voice services. In response to the Arvig/Bevcomm filing the FCC issued a Public Notice seeking comment on the claims made in the filing. In a subsequent Public Notice released on September 11, 2024, the FCC has extended the extended the comment deadline to September 27, 2024.
In addition to the extension granted by the FCC for comments on the Arvig/Bevcomm filing mentioned above, on September 13.2024 comments were filed by Wikstrom Telephone, Manchester-Hartland Telephone, and Kasson & Mantorville Telephone seeking corrections of misidentified unsubsidized competitor locations and adjustments to their EA-CAM offers. The Companies allege that Midco does not provide voice services at locations where its fixed wireless service extends outside of its designated CAF II funding areas, including locations that fall within the Companies’ study areas. The Companies provide specific information regarding the locations alleged to be incorrectly designated as served by Midco and the amounts of EA-CAM support reductions that occurred because of the alleged misidentified locations.
As mentioned above, ex-parte discussions have occurred in recent weeks regarding the potential for adjustments to deployment obligations and support amounts required by the EA-CAM Order to occur no later than December 2025. On August 28, 2024, a group of industry representatives met with members of the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau (WCB) to discuss the 2025 adjustment process. The industry group urged the WCB to prepare and make available an illustrative example detailing the assumptions and calculations that will be used to adjust deployment obligations and resulting support amounts in 2025. The industry group also made specific suggestions as to the variables that should be considered. In related ex-parte, on September 12, 2024, NTCA urged the WCB to provide visibility into how adjustments might be implemented and the opportunity to provide feedback prior to the adoption of the final methodology.
Choosing to participate in the EA-CAM program was a major decision for those companies electing to do so. That decision was made even more difficult by the knowledge that the EA-CAM offer might be adjusted in 2025. We strongly endorse the efforts by industry representatives urging the FCC to be open and inclusive when developing the methodology for future changes to EA-CAM deployment obligations and support amounts. We will continue to monitor these issues and will provide updates as more information becomes available.
