20210507Final_Order_No_35038.pdf

ORDER NO. 35038 1

Office of the Secretary
Service Date
May 7, 2021
BEFORE THE IDAHO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

IN THE MATTER OF CEBRIDGE
TELECOM ID, LLC DBA SUDDENLINK
COMMUNICATIONS’ APPLICATION FOR
DESIGNATION AS AN ELIGIBLE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. SUD-T-21-01

ORDER NO. 35038

On January 6, 2021, Cebridge Telecom ID, LLC dba Suddenlink Communications
(“Company”) applied for designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (“ETC”) in
Idaho. On February 11, 2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Application and Modified
Procedure, setting comment deadlines. Order No. 34922. Commission Staff filed comments; no
other comments were received. The Commission now approves the Company’s Application.
BACKGROUND
Under the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (“Federal Act”), a carrier
designated as an ETC is eligible to receive federal support from the federal Universal Service Fund
(USF).1 47 U.S.C. § 214(e). This Commission has the authority, under the Federal Act, to grant
ETC designations within Idaho. 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(2). Authority for the Commission to designate
ETC status is also provided in Idaho law—the Idaho Telecommunications Act of 1988 (Idaho
Act”)—and expounded upon in prior Commission orders. See Idaho Code §§ 62-610D(1), 62-
615(1); Order No. 29841. Under this authority, this Commission has granted ETC designations to
numerous carriers in Idaho, including wireless carriers. See e.g., Order Nos. 32586, 32645, and
34163.
To qualify as an ETC, an applicant must satisfy several requirements established in
federal and state law. 47 U.S.C. § 214(e); Order No. 29841. The Federal Act requires the applicant
to be a “common carrier,” offering services supported under Section 254(c) of the Federal Act

1 The FCC established the federal USF with the intent to make adequate, efficient communications available
nationwide, at reasonable charges. In the Matter of Lifeline and Link Up Reform and Modernization, Lifeline and
Link Up, Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service, Advancing Broadband Availability Through Digital
Literacy Training (“Lifeline and Link Up Reform Order”) 27 F.C.C.R. 6656, at 6660-62 (Feb. 6, 2012); 47 U.S.C. §
254(b). Lifeline is a program supported by the USF that provides monthly discounts to eligible low-income
subscribers to maintain access to communications networks. Lifeline and Link Up Reform Order, 27 F.C.C.R. 6656
at 6662-63. Idaho has an analogous state USF program, established in Idaho Code §§ 62-610 and 62-610A-610F, and
a Lifeline program known as the Idaho Telecommunications Service Assistance Program (ITSAP).
ORDER NO. 35038 2

“using its own facilities or a combination of its own facilities and resale of another carrier’s
services,” unless otherwise granted FCC forbearance. 47 U.S.C. §§ 153(11), 214(e)(1)(A),
160(a)(3) (FCC has regulatory flexibility to forbear application where consistent with public
interest). The Federal Act also requires the applicant “advertise the availability of such services
and the charges therefor using media of general distribution.” 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(1)(B).
Under the Federal Act, state commissions are granted the authority to determine
whether ETC designation is “consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” 47
U.S.C. § 214(e)(2). In evaluating this public interest element, this Commission has generally
considered two factors. See Order Nos. 33002 at 2-3; and 33226 at 3. First, the Commission
evaluates whether the carrier contributes to state assistance programs such as ITSAP and the Idaho
Telecommunications Relay Services (TRS) program. Id.; Idaho Code § 61-1301. Second, the
Commission considers if the designation is sought for only part of a rural telephone company’s
study area, thus leaving some (perhaps less profitable) customers without service. See Order Nos.
33002 at 2-3; and 33226 at 3. Such practice, known as “cream skimming,” has been determined
by this Commission to be contrary to the public interest. Id.
Federal regulations include these additional requirements, which the Commission has
adopted by reference, in evaluating applications for ETC designation: (1) compliance with service
requirements applicable to support received; (2) submission of a plan for proposed improvements
or upgrades to the network (where applicable); (3) demonstrated ability to remain functional in
emergencies without an external power source; (4) demonstrated willingness to satisfy consumer
protection and service quality standards; (5) financial and technical capability to provide Lifeline
service; and (6) notice to affected Tribes where designation is sought for any part of Tribal lands.
See 47 C.F.R. § 54.202; No. 29841 at 5 and 16.
For applicants seeking Lifeline-only ETCs, the FCC has waived the requirement to
submit a network improvement and upgrade plan, noting that such ETCs do not receive funds to
improve or extend their networks. Lifeline and Link Up Reform Order, 27 F.C.C.R. 6656, ¶ 386.
This Commission—which requires a two-year network improvement plan and progress report
(Order No. 29841 at 18) where applicable—has also waived the requirement where a Lifeline-only
ETC is requested. Order No. 33002 at 3.

ORDER NO. 35038 3

THE APPLICATION
The Company is an indirect subsidiary of Altice USA, Inc. Altice USA, Inc. was among
the winning bidders in the recent Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”) Auction 904, and
Altice USA, Inc. assigned its winning bids in Idaho to the Company on December 22, 2020. The
Company applied to be designated an ETC in the Idaho census blocks where its RDOF funding
may be used. See Application, Exhibit A. The Company asserted it meets all federal and state
requirements for designation as an ETC and that designating the Company as an ETC is in the
public interest. The Company noted it must be designated an ETC by the Commission before it
can receive RDOF support, and asked that the Commission approve its Application and designate
it an ETC by June 6, 2021.
STAFF COMMENTS
Staff recommended approval of the Company’s Application. Staff’s analysis included
a review of the Company’s compliance with the Federal Act and FCC regulations and orders. Staff
also verified whether the Company meets the ETC eligibility and reporting requirements
established by the Commission in Order No. 29841. Staff concluded “the Application
demonstrates the Company’s commitment to fulfill the obligations of an ETC in Idaho.” Staff
Comments at 4.
When analyzing whether a common carrier’s ETC application is in the public interest,
Staff usually focuses on two considerations: whether the company will contribute to Idaho
telecommunications funds, and whether the company’s application raises cream-skimming
concerns. See Case No. VCS-T-18-01. Regarding the first consideration, Staff noted the Company
confirmed in its Application that it will participate and contribute to the appropriate Idaho
telecommunications programs, and will comply with the Commission’s reporting requirements.
Regarding the second consideration, Staff noted “the Company requests ETC designation for entire
census blocks in areas that are wholly unserved by 25/3 Mbps broadband; therefore, no cream-
skimming analysis is required.” Staff Comments at 3.
COMMISSION FINDINGS AND DECISION
The Commission has authority to grant ETC designation to a telecommunications
carrier under federal and state law. 47 U.S.C. § 214(e); and Idaho Code §§ 62-610D, 62-615(1).
The Commission has reviewed and considered the record, including Company’s Application and
Staff Comments. We now make the following findings.
ORDER NO. 35038 4

A. Common Carrier, Own-Facilities, and Advertising
We first address requirements listed in § 214(e)(1) of the Federal Act. That provision
requires an applicant to be a “common carrier” offering services “using its own facilities or a
combination of its own facilities and resale of another carrier’s services,” unless otherwise granted
FCC forbearance. 47 U.S.C. §§ 153(11), 214(e)(1)(A), 160(a)(3). The Company stated it will
satisfy this requirement by “primarily [using] its own facilities, but at times may purchase on a
wholesale basis another carrier’s services to offer the services that are supported by Federal
universal service support mechanisms.” Application at 6. The Company noted that it “is a
facilities-based carrier that will use a combination of its own facilities and the facilities of other
services providers from time to time to provide requested services.” Id. at 7. Therefore, we find
the Company will utilize its own facilities as a facilities-based provider. On the record before us,
we find the Company is also a “common carrier.” See 47 U.S.C. § 153(11).
An applicant seeking ETC designation must also “advertise the availability of such
services and the charges therefor using media of general distribution.” 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(1)(B).
Based on the record and the Company’s assurances, we find this requirement to also be satisfied.
See Application at 7.
B. Public Interest and Related ETC Designation Requirements
Under the Federal Act, state commissions shall determine whether granting the
requested ETC designation is “consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity.” 47
U.S.C. § 214(e)(2).
First, the Company committed to offering “the services that are supported by Federal
universal service support mechanisms throughout the service area for which designation is
received.” Application at 7. The Company also committed to offering Lifeline services, as required
by FCC rules. See 47 C.F.R. § 54.101(d). We find that the Company’s offering of these services
in the auction-awarded service areas promotes the public interest because these services will
deploy RDOF auction funds to high-cost areas of Idaho which are unserved or underserved and
provide investment in facilities and equipment in these areas. This deployment also furthers this
Commission and the FCC’s goals of expanding the reach of digital connectivity to promote
economic growth in rural areas. In pursuit of deployment, the Company has committed to
satisfying all applicable state and federal requirements related to consumer protection and service
quality standards. Application at 9.
ORDER NO. 35038 5

We also consider whether the Company would contribute to the appropriate Idaho
funds. Order Nos. 33002 at 2-3, 33226 at 3. Staff confirmed that the Company will participate in
the appropriate Idaho programs and comply with the Commission’s annual reporting requirements.
Staff Comments at 3. We find that the Company’s commitment to participating in the appropriate
Idaho programs advances the public interest.
Next, we consider whether the Company is engaged in “cream skimming,” which we
have found to be contrary to the public interest. Order Nos. 33002 at 2-3, 33226 at 3. Because the
Company requested ETC designation for entire census blocks in areas wholly unserved by 25/3
Mbps broadband, no cream-skimming analysis is required.
We therefore find that granting the Company ETC designation in the applied for census
blocks satisfies state and federal public interest requirements.
C. Remaining Requirements
Finally, we address the six remaining requirements from federal regulations and Order
No. 29841. See 47 C.F.R. § 54.202.
(1) Service Requirements for Support Received. We find the Company has sufficiently
committed to meeting these requirements. Application at 6.
(2) Plan for Proposed Improvements or Upgrades to the Network. The FCC waived the
requirement for a winning bidder to file a five-year plan as part of the ETC designation process,
citing its heightened oversight of auction winners. WCB Reminds Connect Am. Fund Phase II
Auction Applicants of the Process for Obtaining A Fed. Designation As an Eligible
Telecommunications Carrier, 33 F.C.C. Rcd. 6696 (2018). Considering the FCC’s heightened
oversight, we waive in this proceeding our requirement that the Company’s ETC Application
include a two-year network improvement plan. See Order No. 29841 at 8.
(3) Ability to Remain Functional in Emergencies. We find the Company has
demonstrated sufficient compliance with this requirement. Application at 8-9.
(4) Willingness to Satisfy Consumer Protection and Service Quality Standards. We are
satisfied with the Company’s assurances as to this requirement. Id. at 9.
(5) Financial and Technical Capability. Based on the Company’s assurances and
description of its financial and technical qualifications, as well as the way that it interacts and
partners with its parent company, we also find this requirement to be satisfied. Id. at 9-10.
ORDER NO. 35038 6

(6) Notice to Affected Tribes. We find the Company is not seeking ETC designation
for any part of tribal lands. Therefore, no tribes will be affected if the Company’s Application is
granted. See Id. at 10; see 47 C.F.R. § 54.202; Order No. 29841 at 14.
Based on the above findings, we conclude that the Company has satisfied the federal
and state requirements for an ETC designation, and we therefore grant the Application for the
Idaho census blocks listed in Exhibit A of the Company’s Application.
O R D E R
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Company’s Application for designation as an ETC
in the Idaho census blocks listed in Exhibit A of the Company’s Application is granted.
THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. Any person interested in this Order may petition for
reconsideration within twenty-one (21) days of the service date of this Order. Within seven (7)
days after any person has petitioned for reconsideration, any other person may cross-petition for
reconsideration. See Idaho Code § 61-626.
DONE by Order of the Idaho Public Utilities Commission at Boise, Idaho this 7th day
of May 2021.

PAUL KJELLANDER, PRESIDENT

KRISTINE RAPER, COMMISSIONER

ERIC ANDERSON, COMMISSIONER

ATTEST:

Jan Noriyuki
Commission Secretary

I:\Legal\TELEPHONE\SUD-T-21-01\SUDT2101_final_mh.docx