At its October 29, 2026 Open Meeting, the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that seeks comment on implementing the Rural Broadband Protection Act. (RBPA). The RBPA, enacted in May 2026, directs the Commission to establish a rulemaking proceeding to establish a vetting process for recipients of certain new high-cost funding awards. The NPRM seeks input on ways to strengthen the Commission’s vetting and application process for future high-cost support mechanisms. In addition, the NPRM seeks comment on proposals for implementing the RBPA’s penalties that are applicable when a carrier commits to provide broadband with high-cost funding and then defaults before funding is authorized. The specific proposals included in the NPRM include the following:
* The NPRM proposes to interpret that the RBPA applies to future high-cost mechanisms that 1) are new, 2) require an application, and 3) fund both network deployment and service. The Commission’s interpretation of the term “application” would not require a vetting process for high-cost mechanisms that offer support to a carrier based on its ETC status and mode of FCC regulation (i.e. rate of return or price cap). Recipients of CAF-BLS support, High-Cost Loop support, and A-CAM support are vetted using the ETC designation process. These mechanisms offer support to a class of carriers and do not contemplate an “application” or specific applicant vetting.
* It’s proposed that future high-cost support programs include a vetting process requiring sufficient detail to ensure that the applicant has the technical, financial, and operational capabilities to build and operate broadband-capable networks.
* The NPRM seeks comment on whether and how to update vetting frameworks from prior competitive high-cost support mechanisms, including the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, and proposes that the details of the RBPA-mandated vetting framework be determined when new funding mechanisms are adopted.
* The NPRM proposes to increase penalties for carriers that commit to provide service, but then default before funding is awarded, and proposes to defer defining how the increased penalty may apply until rules are adopted for the future high-cost mechanisms.
Comments in this proceeding are due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register and Reply Comments are due 60 days after publication.
