Federal Communications Commission	DA 25-248


Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20554


In the Matter of

Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment

Technology Transitions



)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)


WC Docket No. 17-84


GN Docket No. 13-5

ORDER

Adopted:  March 20, 2025	Released:  March 20, 2025

By the Chief, Wireline Competition Bureau:

I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Order, in recognition of rapid advances in communications technology and the increase in the number and type of bundled offerings available to households, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) grants a petition filed by USTelecom—the Broadband Association (USTelecom) for waiver of the stand-alone requirement See 47 CFR § 63.71(f)(2)(ii); Petition of USTelecom—The Broadband Association for Limited Waiver, WC Docket No. 17-84 (filed Feb. 27, 2025), https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/102272010007405/1 (USTelecom Petition).
 when a carrier seeks to discontinue a legacy voice service pursuant to section 214(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act). 47 U.S.C. § 214(a); 47 CFR § 63.71(f)(2)(ii); Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, Second Report and Order, WC Docket No. 17-84, 33 FCC Rcd 5660, 5673, para. 30 (2018) (Second Wireline Infrastructure Order).
  The Bureau waives this requirement for a period of two years, unless the waiver is extended prior to its expiration.  The Bureau, on its own motion, also waives for a period of two years the requirement that a single replacement service must satisfy all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test for legacy voice service discontinuance applications under the same section of the Act. See Technology Transitions et al., WC Docket No. 13-5 et al., Declaratory Ruling, Second Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration, 31 FCC Rcd 8283, 8312, para. 87 (2016) (2016 Technology Transitions Order); see also 47 CFR § 63.71(f)(2)(i) (referencing the Adequate Replacement Test in 47 CFR § 63.602(b)).
  This relief will broaden the ability of applicants to qualify for streamlined treatment under the Commission’s rules, and is consistent with the Commission’s mandate to “encourage deployment of next-generation networks and to close the digital divide.” Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5660, para. 1; see also Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, Report and Order, Declaratory Ruling, and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, WC Docket No. 17-84, 32 FCC Rcd 11128, 11129, para. 2 (2017) (stating that “[t]o close th[e] digital divide, we seek to use every tool available to us to accelerate the deployment of advanced communications networks”) (First Wireline Infrastructure Order).
  
II. BACKGROUND
2. Section 214(a) of the Act provides that a carrier may not discontinue, reduce, or impair a telecommunications service without Commission authorization. 47 U.S.C. § 214(a).  Unless otherwise noted, this Order uses the term “discontinue” or “discontinuance” as a shorthand for the statutory language “discontinue, reduce, or impair.”
  In evaluating whether to grant such authorization, the Commission must determine whether the discontinuance would adversely impact the public interest. Id. (providing that “[n]o carrier shall discontinue, reduce, or impair service to a community, or part of a community, unless and until there shall first have been obtained from the Commission a certificate that neither the present nor future public convenience and necessity will be adversely affected thereby”).
  Most applicants are able to qualify for streamlined treatment of their application and thus achieve an automatic grant.  All applicants seeking to discontinue a service on a streamlined basis are required to file a section 214 application in accordance with rules governing notice, opportunity for comment, review, and processing requirements. 47 CFR § 63.71(a)-(b).
  Such applications are automatically granted on a specified date unless the Bureau has notified the applicant that the grant will not be automatically effective. Id. § 63.71(f)(1).  Under such streamlined processing, a discontinuance application is automatically granted on the 31st day (for non-dominant carriers) or the 60th day (for dominant carriers) after the Bureau accepts the application for filing.  Id.  Customers that have concerns may still file comments or objections to that carrier’s discontinuance application, and the Commission will evaluate those comments or objections to determine whether to remove the application at issue from streamlined processing for further evaluation under the traditional five-factor test.  Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5677, para. 37. 
  The Bureau routinely processes section 214(a) discontinuance applications under delegated authority, See 47 CFR §§ 0.91, 0.291.
 based on the application and any record developed in connection with it. See, e.g., First Wireline Infrastructure Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 11163, para. 89; Minnesota Independent Equal Access Corporation’s Petition for Forbearance from Dominant Carrier Regulation, WC Docket No. 22-407, Declaratory Ruling and Memorandum Opinion and Order, 38 FCC Rcd 10869, 10872, para. 8 n.38 (2023) (“[T]he Commission may remove an application from streamlined treatment and automatic grant if it determines more time is necessary to make its public interest finding.”); 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8300, para. 51, 8303, para. 61.  The Commission first adopted the section 63.71 streamlined process for discontinuance applications for services provided by  non-dominant carriers in 1980.  See Policy and Rules Concerning Rates for Competitive Common Carrier Services and Facilities Authorizations Therefor, CC Docket No. 79-252, First Report and Order, 85 F.C.C.2d 1, 34, paras. 143-47 (1980) (1980 Streamlining Order).  In adopting reduced content requirements for section 63.71 applications, the Commission concluded that as long as the carrier provides prior notice to its customers and “no showing is made that a reasonable substitute service is not available,” these applications would automatically grant on the 31st day after filing, with the ability of a customer to petition the Commission to deny the application.  Policy and Rules Concerning Rates for Competitive Common Carrier Services and Facilities Authorizations Therefor, CC Docket No. 79-252, Notice of Inquiry and Proposed Rulemaking, 77 F.C.C.2d 308, 347, para. 71 (1979) (1979 Streamlining Notice); 1980 Streamlining Order, 85 F.C.C.2d, 34, para. 145 (noting that the content of section 63.71 as adopted “is substantially the same as that proposed” in the 1979 Streamlining Notice).  The Commission reasoned that, despite the disruptive effect a discontinuance can have on a customer, the new rule “offer[ed] customers a fair degree of protection by requiring carriers to notify all customers of discontinuance plans and by providing customers with an opportunity to inform the Commission of resultant hardships.”  1980 Streamlining Order, 85 F.C.C.2d at 34, para. 146.
  The Bureau will generally authorize the discontinuance “unless it is shown that customers would be unable to receive service or a reasonable substitute from another carrier or that the public convenience is otherwise adversely affected.” See 47 CFR § 63.71(a)(5)(i)-(ii).  In evaluating whether the discontinuance will harm the public interest, the Commission has long applied a five-factor balancing test.  This test analyzes:  (1) the financial impact on the common carrier of continuing to provide the service; (2) the need for the service in general; (3) the need for the particular facilities in question; (4) increased charges for alternative services; and (5) the existence, availability, and adequacy of alternatives.  First Wireline Infrastructure Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 11160, para. 82 n.282 (citing 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8304, para. 62); Applications for Authority Pursuant to Section 214 of the Communications Act of 1934 to Cease Providing Dark Fiber Service, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 8 FCC Rcd 2589, 2600, para. 54 (1993), remanded on other grounds, Southwestern Bell v. FCC, 19 F.3d 1475 (D.C. Cir. 1994).  

3. In the 2016 Technology Transitions Order, the Commission adopted an updated approach for section 214 applications involving technology transitions. The Commission defines a “technology transition” as “any change in service that would result in the replacement of a wireline TDM-based voice service with a service using a different technology or medium for transmission to the end user, whether internet Protocol (IP), wireless, or another type.”  47 CFR § 63.60(i).
  It concluded that the public interest requires that applications seeking to discontinue a legacy TDM-based voice service as part of a transition to a new technology, whether Internet protocol (IP), wireless, or another type, indicate that a technology transition is implicated. 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8304-05, para. 64.
  The Commission determined that the adequacy of the replacement service has “heightened importance” in the context of technology transitions. Id. at 8304, para. 62.  
  It thus established the Adequate Replacement Test, which requires that technology transition discontinuance applications, to be eligible for streamlined treatment and automatic grant for their own replacement service, Applicants relying on a third-party replacement service rather than their own replacement service are allowed to make a prima facie showing based on publicly available information that the third-party service is an adequate replacement.  Id. at 8312, para. 86.
 satisfy three requirements: (1) demonstrate that an adequate replacement for their voice service exists “by either certifying or showing, based on the totality of the circumstances, that one or more replacement service(s) . . . offers substantially similar levels of network infrastructure and service quality”; (2) “show the replacement service complies with regulations regarding the availability and functionality of 911 service for consumers and public safety answering points”; and (3) “offers interoperability with key applications and functionalities.” 47 CFR § 63.602(b).
  With this three-prong Adequate Replacement Test, the Commission sought “to minimize uncertainty or confusion that could slow or even discourage technology transitions.” 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8307, para. 70.  
  And the Commission required applicants to show that a single replacement service (whether offered by the carrier or a third party) satisfies all three prongs of the test in order for the application to be eligible for streamlined treatment. Id. at 8312, para. 87; see 47 CFR § 63.602((b).
 
4. In the June 2018 Wireline Infrastructure Second Report and Order, in furtherance of its commitment to encouraging a more rapid transition to next-generation networks and advanced communications services, the Commission amended its technology transition discontinuance rules to provide an additional, more streamlined option, the Alternative Options Test,  Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5673, para. 30.
 for carriers seeking to discontinue legacy voice services. Id.; Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment, WC Docket No. 17-84, Declaratory Ruling, Order on Reconsideration, and Order, 35 FCC Rcd 11750, 11752, para. 7 (WCB 2020) (Third Wireline Infrastructure Order).  
  Under the Alternative Options Test, an application seeking authorization to discontinue a legacy retail voice service as part of a technology transition A “technology transition” is defined as “any change in service that would result in the replacement of a wireline TDM-based voice service with a service using a different technology or medium for transmission to the end user, whether internet Protocol (IP), wireless, or another type.”  47 CFR § 63.60(i).
 is eligible for streamlined treatment if (1) the applicant offers a stand-alone interconnected VoIP service throughout the affected service area, The Commission’s rules define “interconnected VoIP service” as a service that (i) enables real-time, two-way voice communications; (ii) requires a broadband connection from the user’s location; (iii) requires Internet protocol-compatible customer premises equipment (CPE); and (iv) permits users generally to receive calls that originate on the public switched telephone network and to terminate calls to the public switched telephone network.  Id. § 9.3.
 and (2) at least one other alternative stand-alone facilities-based wireline or wireless voice service is available from another unaffiliated provider throughout the affected service area, unless the Commission notifies the applicant otherwise. Id. § 63.71(f)(2)(ii).  The Commission’s rules exempt a carrier from the requirement to include in its application a certification or showing that it satisfies the adequate replacement test for streamlined processing if the carrier satisfies both prongs of the Alternative Options Test.  See id. § 63.71(h).  Where only one potential replacement service exists, a carrier must meet the more rigorous demands of the adequate replacement test in order to receive streamlined treatment of its discontinuance application.  Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5675, para. 34.
  A service is “stand-alone” if a customer is “not required to purchase a separate broadband service to access the voice service.” 47 CFR § 63.71(f)(2)(iii).
  An application filed by a carrier meeting the requirements of either the Adequate Replacement test or the Alternative Options Test will qualify for streamlined treatment and shall be automatically granted on the 31st day after filing unless the Commission has notified the applicant otherwise. Id. § 63.71(f)(1).
  
5. On February 27, 2025, USTelecom filed a petition requesting a limited waiver of the “stand-alone” voice service requirements of the Alternative Options Test as found in section 63.71 of the Commission’s rules. See generally USTelecom Petition.
  USTelecom asserts that since the Commission adopted the Alternative Options Test, the voice marketplace is increasingly less reliant on stand-alone voice services, with the percentage of adults living in landline-only households falling to 1.3 percent of all households as customers choose alternative voice options such as mobile and interconnected VoIP services. Id. at 3.
  It states that choices available to consumers, including bundled voice and broadband options, are available at prices that compare favorably to legacy voice pricing. Id. at 11-13 (indicating that facilities-based voice service is available from certain providers through unlimited voice/text mobile plans at advertised prices of $20 per month, or for $5 per month more, customers can purchase unlimited data, and that depending on where customers live, they can purchase bundled voice and broadband options through providers for $45 or $50 per month as compared to, e.g., legacy voice prices of $45, $54 and $87 per month).
  Asserting that the stand-alone requirement in the Alternative Options Test does not align with competitive marketplace options, USTelecom maintains it is discouraging applicants from filing to discontinue legacy services under the test, thereby hampering investment and innovation in modern services and leaving the Commission’s objectives unrealized. Id. at 7-8.

III. DISCUSSION
6. We hereby grant USTelecom’s Petition to waive the requirement that a replacement voice service offered by the carrier or an unaffiliated provider be stand-alone in order for a technology transitions discontinuance application to be eligible for streamlined processing under the Alternative Options Test for a period of two years. We adopt this timeframe to provide near-term relief from these requirements to reflect the current voice service marketplace while we consider what, if any, additional steps the Commission might want to take in this regard.  
  To be clear, by waiving the stand-alone requirement, a carrier may offer its own VoIP service bundled with other service offerings, as well as demonstrate the availability of another voice service throughout the affected service area that may only be available on a bundled basis.  We also waive, on our own motion, for a period of two years, the requirement in the Adequate Replacement Test that a carrier demonstrate that a single replacement service satisfies all three prongs of the test in order to be eligible for streamlined processing. 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8312, para. 87.
  In other words, a carrier may demonstrate that a bundled service offering also meets the different prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test, so long as all three prongs are satisfied throughout the affected service area. We take this opportunity to confirm USTelecom’s understanding that the “carrier” offering the replacement service under either the Alternative Options Test or the Adequate Replacement Test encompasses any business entity under the same corporate parent as the discontinuing carrier.  See USTelecom Petition at 7 n.22.
 
7. The Commission may waive its rules for good cause shown. 47 CFR § 1.3.  The authority to grant waivers, including on its own motion, has been delegated to the Wireline Competition Bureau.  See id. (permitting the suspension, revocation, amendment, or waiver for good cause shown of any Commission rules by the Commission, either “on its own motion or on petition if good cause therefor is shown”); id. § 0.91 (describing the functions of the Wireline Competition Bureau, and delegating to the Bureau the authority to “[c]arry out the functions of the Commission under the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, except as reserved to the Commission under § 0.291”); id. § 0.291 (delegating authority to the Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau to perform all functions of the Bureau subject to a list of exceptions and limitations).
  It may exercise its discretion to waive a rule where the particular facts make strict compliance inconsistent with the public interest. Northeast Cellular Telephone Co. v. FCC, 897 F.2d 1164, 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1990).
  In making this determination, the Commission may take into account considerations of hardship, equity, or more effective implementation of overall policy on an individual basis. WAIT Radio v. FCC, 418 F.2d 1153, 1159 (D.C. Cir. 1969).
  After a careful review, we find that good cause exists to waive the requirement that both the carrier’s interconnected VoIP service and an alternative provider’s voice service be stand-alone for the purposes of satisfying the Alternative Options Test.  We also find, for the same reasons set forth below, that good cause exists to waive the requirement that a single replacement service satisfy all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test.
8. The Commission adopted the “stand-alone” requirement of the Alternative Options Test to ensure the availability of replacement service options that “provide comparable network quality and service performance” to the service being discontinued. Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5675, para. 34 n.104 (quoting 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8306, para. 69).
  Specifically, the Commission required that the replacement service offered by both the discontinuing carrier and an unaffiliated carrier should embody “managed service quality and underlying network infrastructure, and disabilities access and 911 access requirements.” Id. at 5675, para. 34.
  Given the state of the voice marketplace at the time, the Commission declined to permit a showing that any voice service could serve as a replacement service under the test, Id. at 5677, para. 35.
 finding that such an approach would “fail to ensure the availability of a voice replacement service . . . that sufficiently addresses . . . concerns raised about the characteristics of the replacement voice service,” and would not “carry the added benefit of ensuring the availability of multiple alternatives to affected customers, whether present or future.” Id.
  
9. We conclude that the waiver we grant today is warranted by rapid developments in the communications marketplace since the Commission adopted the two streamlining tests.  Since that time, the technology has improved while the marketplace for voice services, such as interconnected VoIP and mobile voice, has vastly expanded and spurred the creation of new and innovative communications technologies and bundled service offerings that benefit consumers. See USTelecom Petition at 2 & n.3 (observing that “consumers in today’s marketplace do not typically seek stand-alone facilities-based voice [service]”).
  In June 2018, interconnected VoIP lines accounted for just 51% of all retail voice service connections. See FCC, Office of Economics and Analytics, Voice Telephone Services:  Status as of June 30, 2018 at 2-3 (2020), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-362881A1.pdf (2018 Voice Telephone Services Report).
  By the end of 2023, however, that number had risen to over 75%. See FCC, Office of Economics and Analytics, Voice Telephone Services:  Status as of December 31, 2023 at 2-3, Fig. 2 (2024), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-407308A1.pdf (December 2023 Voice Telephone Services Report). 
  The number of legacy switched access connections has dropped precipitously since the Commission adopted the Alternative Options Test, See USTelecom Petition at 3.
 while, over the same period, the number of fixed broadband connections which support over-the-top interconnected VoIP service has risen—in December 2023, there were approximately 89 residential fixed broadband connections per 100 households with speeds of at least 25 Mbps downstream and 3 Mbps upstream, up from 61 such connections per 100 households in 2018. FCC, Office of Economics and Analytics, Internet Access Services:  Status as of December 31, 2023 at 10 (2024), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-405488A1.pdf (December 2023 Internet Access Services Report); FCC, Office of Economics and Analytics, Internet Access Services:  Status as of June 30, 2018 at 10 (2020), https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-366979A1.pdf. 
  The proliferation of interconnected VoIP providers in the marketplace has “brought advanced communications services to the marketplace to the benefit of consumers,” Numbering Policies for Modern Communications et al., WC Docket Nos. 13-97 et al., Second Report and Order and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 38 FCC Rcd 8951, 8952, para. 1 (2023).
 and ensures that strong competition for IP-based voice service exists in every locality with broadband access.  And as of December 2023, more than three-quarters of adults in this country had cut the cord, going fully wireless for their voice service. Communications Marketplace Report, GN Docket No. 24-119, 2024 Communications Marketplace Report, FCC 24-136, at para. 158 (2024) (2024 Communications Marketplace Report) (noting that “preliminary data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), as of December 2023, approximately 76% of adults lived in a wireless-only household in late 2023, with adults in lower age-groups more likely to live in wireless-only households”); see also USTelecom Petition at 2 n.3 (citing Pew Research Center statistics showing that 98 percent of Americans now own a cellphone of some kind, and citing FCC statistics showing that over 80 percent of retail voice service connections are mobile).
  Indeed, as the Commission recently noted, “there are many other types of telecommunications offerings, including apps running solely on data networks that are nearly indistinguishable to the consumer from the core communications functionality of the public switched telephone network . . . [that] combine the benefits of voice, video, and text communications into one data-based service,” 2024 Communications Marketplace Report, at para. 154.
 obviating the need or desire for stand-alone voice service. 
10. These rapid changes in the marketplace mean that consumers now have access to a wide array of voice services, although few providers now offer stand-alone interconnected VoIP service. USTelecom Petition at 7-8.
  As a result, carriers offering legacy voice service often are unable to take advantage of the Commission’s streamlined processes, even when consumers clearly have access to multiple alternatives that “provide comparable network quality and service performance.” Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5675, para. 34 n.104 (quoting 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8306, para. 69); USTelecom Petition at 7-8 (noting that “[t]he pace of about one application per year that benefits from the alternative options test demonstrates that the Commission’s objectives remain unrealized”).
  This frustrates the Commission’s stated goal of promoting the transition to IP-based services, for the public’s benefit. See, e.g., Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5698, Appx. B, para. 3 (noting “the Commission’s goal of eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens, [and] decreas[ing] needless costs and delay in transitioning from legacy services to next-generation IP-based services”).
  We therefore conclude that the waiver of the stand-alone requirement is appropriate and needed at this time to “allow the alternative options test to be a meaningful path to streamlining, as the Commission intended.” USTelecom Petition at 9.
 
11. The developments in the voice service marketplace and the large-scale adoption of broadband among consumers also support our waiver of the single-service requirement of the Adequate Replacement Test.  In 2016, the Commission required applicants to show that a single replacement service (whether offered by the carrier or a third party) satisfies all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test to qualify for streamlined treatment.  The Commission adopted the single-service requirement because it presumed that “forc[ing] consumers to mix and match different services would undermine the entire effort” of ensuring consumers “receive the integrated service experience they need and deserve.” 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8312, para. 87.
  The Commission observed that “[i]t is reasonable for customers to expect a single service to provide adequate network infrastructure and service quality, performance from critical applications, and access to other key applications and functionalities,” such as fax machines, home security alarms, and analog-only caption telephone sets. Id.; see also id. at 8341-42, para. 159.
  Now, a variety of over-the-top services perform similar functions and are available to consumers over a single broadband connection, such as electronic mail, IP-based home security systems, and IP relay service.  These services are available from a variety of providers through the Internet marketplace, and are often superior in quality of service to their legacy counterparts. See, e.g., FCC, IP Relay Service (Jan. 27, 2021), https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/ip-relay-service (noting benefits of IP relay service over traditional TRS). 
  The aforementioned shift among consumers away from managed, stand-alone voice service to bundled voice and broadband service, which supports a near-infinite variety of over-the-top services, applications, and functionalities obviates the need for a single voice service that satisfies all three prongs. To be clear, our waiver of the single-service requirement of the Adequate Replacement Test is limited to scenarios where providers can demonstrate that there is a bundle of services available to consumers and offered by that same provider that satisfies all three prongs in section 63.602(b) of the rules.  
12. We also conclude that these waivers will serve the public interest.  Ensuring that carriers can continue to take advantage of streamlined applications will free up carrier resources to devote to the development and deployment of next-generation networks. See USTelecom Petition at 10-11; First Wireline Infrastructure Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 11169, para. 109.
  Almost seven years ago, the Commission explained that “[b]y providing additional opportunities to streamline the discontinuance process for legacy voice services, with appropriate limitations to protect consumers and the public interest, we allow carriers, including small carriers, to more quickly redirect resources to next-generation networks, and the public to receive the benefit of those new networks.” Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5674, para. 32.
  As USTelecom points out, “stand-alone VoIP service typically requires installation and maintenance of broadband equipment and ongoing provision of transmission capability,” which is costly for carriers and requires “IT support that is difficult to justify for a product with relatively low demand.” USTelecom Petition at 8.
  These inefficiencies “can raise costs for consumers and reduce capital available for investment and innovation.” Id.
  Similarly, requiring carriers to maintain a single voice service that satisfies all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test is unnecessarily onerous in light of the current marketplace in which consumers are rapidly transitioning away from such services.  By taking this action, we also enable carriers to devote more resources to transitioning customers from legacy TDM-based voice services to next-generation IP-based voice and broadband services, and the public to receive the benefit of those new networks. See id. at 10.  These benefits include access to advanced protocols and technologies available with VoIP such as STIR/SHAKEN, which helps protect consumers from illegally spoofed robocalls, and NG911 which will help save lives by ensuring faster call delivery to 911 call centers, improved service reliability, and more accurate caller location as well as support the transmission of text, photos, videos and data.  See Call Authentication Trust Anchor, WC Docket No. 17-97, Eighth Report and Order, FCC 24-120, at 2, para. 2 (Nov. 22, 2024); Facilitating Implementation of Next Generation 911 Services (NG911) et al., PS Docket Nos. 21-479 et al., Report and Order, FCC 24-78 at 8, para. 14 (July 19, 2024).
  The fact that these technologically advanced VoIP services may only be available in bundles with broadband, text messaging, or some other service should not preclude an adequate replacement finding if the price the consumer would pay for the bundle is relatively similar to or even less than the legacy TDM voice service it is replacing. See supra note 28; see also USTelecom Petition at 2 n.4 (“Many large providers do not enable consumers to purchase voice service on a stand-alone basis.”).    
  And because the price of the replacement service will be compared to the price of the legacy voice service, the Bureau will have the ability to ensure that the bundled options carriers might rely on to meet the Alternative Options Test or the Adequate Replacement Test do not result in unreasonable price increases for customers. See supra note 11.
  Additionally, with respect to the Adequate Replacement Test, the waiver will permit carriers to demonstrate access to applications and functionalities that satisfy the same or similar needs through the broadband component of a bundled voice replacement service as the legacy applications and functionalities identified almost nine years ago.
13. We remind carriers that our streamlined processing rules require carriers to notify their customers of their applications to discontinue service and provide information regarding replacement service options. 47 CFR § 63.71(a).
  While a carrier may use the Alternative Options Test to receive streamlined treatment of its discontinuance application by showing that it offers its own VoIP service on a bundled basis as well as by demonstrating the availability of another voice service throughout the affected service area that may only be available on a bundled basis, customers with concerns about a replacement service may still file comments or objections to that carrier’s discontinuance application with the Commission. See Second Wireline Infrastructure Order, 33 FCC Rcd at 5677, para. 37.
  Similarly, customers may file comments or objections to a carrier’s discontinuance application relying on the availability of bundled services that together satisfy the prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test, which the Commission will evaluate. See 47 CFR § 63.71(a)(5)(i).
  The Commission’s standards for processing both streamlined and non-streamlined applications for discontinuance will remain unchanged.  Should the Bureau have concerns regarding whether it is in the public interest to grant a particular request to discontinue service, it will remove that application from streamlined processing and engage in a closer review. See 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8309-10, paras. 76, 78.

14. Given the plethora of options for alternative voice services today, we find that the current market demonstrates that there is no longer a need to limit the replacement services for carriers discontinuing legacy voice under the Alternative Options Test to only stand-alone services, or require a single replacement service to satisfy all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test.  Accordingly we find that it is in the public interest to grant USTelecom’s waiver request for a period of two years and to waive on our own motion the requirement that the Adequate Replacement Test be satisfied by a single service also for a two-year period. See 47 CFR §§ 1.3, 63.71(f)(2), 63.302(b); 2016 Technology Transitions Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 8312, para. 87.
 
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
15. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1-4 of and 214 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 USC §§ 151-54, and 214, and sections 0.91, 0.291, and 1.3 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 1.3, that the word “stand-alone” in section 63.71(f)(2)(ii)-(iii) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 63.71(f)(2)(ii)-(iii), and the single-service requirement specified in paragraph 87 of the 2016 Technology Transitions Order ARE WAIVED to the extent described above. 
16. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to section 1.102(b)(1) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 1.102(b)(1), this Order SHALL BE EFFECTIVE upon release.

						FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION




						Trent B. Harkrader
						Acting Chief
						Wireline Competition Bureau

2