Federal Communications Commission	DA 26-209



DA 26-209
		Released:  February 27, 2026

DOMESTIC SECTION 214 APPLICATION GRANTED FOR THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN ASSETS OF POINT BROADBAND FIBER HOLDING, LLC BY CITY OF COLQUITT, GEORGIA

WC Docket No. 25-187

By this Public Notice, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) grants an application filed by Point Broadband Fiber Holding, LLC (Point Broadband) and the City of Colquitt, Georgia (Colquitt, together with Point Broadband, Applicants), pursuant to section 214(a) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and sections 63.04 of the Commission’s rules, See 47 U.S.C. § 214(a); 47 CFR § 63.04.
 requesting Commission approval for the acquisition of Point Broadband’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) buildout and service obligations associated with all census blocks within Study Area Code 229033 (Assigned Census Blocks), covering an estimated 2,000 locations in Miller County, Georgia, by Colquitt. Domestic Section 214 Application for the Acquisition of Certain Assets of Point Broadband Fiber Holding, LLC by City of Colquitt, Georgia, WC Docket No. 25-187 (filed May 30, 2025) (Application).  On November 18, 2025 and November 20, 2025, Applicants filed supplements to their domestic 214 application.  Letter from Steven E. Coran, Counsel to Point Broadband Fiber Holding, LLC, WC Docket No. 25-187 (filed Nov. 18, 2025) (Supplement); Letter from Steven E. Coran, Counsel to Point Broadband Fiber Holding, LLC, WC Docket No. 25-187 (filed Nov. 20, 2025) (Second Supplement).  Any action on the Application is without prejudice to Commission action on other pending applications. 

On September 12, 2025, the Bureau released a Public Notice seeking comment on the Application. See Domestic Section 214 Application Filed for the Acquisition of Certain Assets of Point Broadband Fiber Holding, LLC by City of Colquitt, Georgia, WC Docket No. 25-187, Public Notice, DA 25-846 (WCB 2025).
  The Bureau did not receive comments or petitions in opposition to the Application.
Applicants and Description of Transaction
Point Broadband, a Delaware limited liability company, is a provider of communications services using fixed wireless technology in Georgia and other states. Application at 3.  Applicants report that Point Broadband and its affiliates offer domestic telecommunications services in Alabama, Michigan, New York, Tennessee, and Virginia and provide communications services in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Ohio, and Texas.  Id.
  Point Broadband is designated as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) in Georgia, and the Commission has authorized Point Broadband to receive $4,241,074.70 in RDOF support for 2,000 locations in the Assigned Census Blocks. Id. at 4; Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Support Authorized for 466 Winning Bids, AU, Public Notice, AU Docket No. 20-34; WC Docket Nos. 19-126 and 10-90, 36 FCC Rcd 13574, Attach. A at 19 (WCB 2021).

Applicants report that Colquitt, a Georgia municipality in Miller County, currently provides broadband Internet access service to approximately 270 customers. Application at 4.
  Colquitt does not have any 10% or greater owner nor is Colquitt affiliated with any other provider of domestic telecommunications services. Id. at 21.
  Colquitt does not currently receive any high-cost Universal Service Fund support. Id. at 2, n.2, 6, and 23.
  On November 18, 2025, the Georgia Public Service Commission granted Colquitt’s application for ETC designation and Point Broadband’s application to relinquish its ETC designation for the locations proposed to be assigned, conditioned upon the Federal Communications Commission’s authorization of this transaction. See Second Supplement.

Pursuant to the terms of the proposed transaction, Colquitt will acquire certain assets Point Broadband acquired with RDOF support, as well as unexpended RDOF support, and the right to receive future RDOF support for the Assigned Census Blocks. Application at 5.
  Colquitt will also assume Point Broadband’s RDOF obligations in the Assigned Census Blocks. Id.  Point Broadband will retain a portion of the RDOF support it has received to date to cover its expenditures for the provision, maintenance, and upgrade of supported facilities and services, and will deliver to Colquitt at closing an agreed-upon sum to represent the remainder of those funds.  Id. at 6.  Applicants state that, following the consummation of the proposed transaction, Colquitt will be solely responsible for complying with Universal Service Fund requirements and Commission rules and will continue to assume all risks and consequences of noncompliance with program requirements, including default recovery of support and potential forfeiture penalties, in all supported areas.  Id. at 7.
  Point Broadband has also agreed to provide Colquitt with its engineering plans, pole attachment rights, power, real property, and transport services that it has created for the Assigned Census Blocks, and to transfer customer accounts to Colquitt. Id.  Applicants state that they had already entered into a Management Agreement pursuant to which Colquitt has assumed managerial responsibility over RDOF deployment in the Assigned Census Blocks, subject to Point Broadband’s overall supervision and control.  Id. at 6.

Discussion
Pursuant to section 214(a) of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214(a).  We note that in all transactions like this, the FCC’s approval is without prejudice to any enforcement or related actions.
 we must determine whether grant of the proposed transaction will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity.  In making this determination, we first assess whether the proposed transaction complies with the specific provisions of the Act, other applicable statutes, and the Commission’s rules. See, e.g., Frontier Communications Parent, Inc. and Verizon Communications, Inc. Application for Consent to Transfer Control, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 40 FCC Rcd 3156, 3160, para. 9 (WCB, OIA, WTB 2025) (Verizon-Frontier Order); Applications of Level 3 Communications, Inc. and CenturyLink, Inc. for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 32 FCC Rcd 9581, 9585, para. 8 (2017) (CenturyLink-Level 3 Order); Applications of GCI Communication Corp., ACS Wireless License Sub, Inc., ACS of Anchorage License Sub, Inc., and Unicom, Inc. for Consent to Assign Licenses to the Alaska Wireless Network, LLC, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Declaratory Ruling, 28 FCC Rcd 10433, 10442, para. 23 (2013) (Alaska Wireless-GCI Order).
 
If the proposed transaction does not violate a statute or rule, we then consider whether the transaction could result in public interest harms by substantially frustrating or impairing the objectives or implementation of the Act or related statutes. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3160, para. 10; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9585, para. 9; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10442, para. 23.
  Our competitive analysis, which forms an important part of the public interest evaluation, is informed by, but not limited to, traditional antitrust principles. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3160, para. 10; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9585, para. 9; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10443, para. 25; see also Northeast Utils. Serv. Co. v. FERC, 993 F.2d 937, 947 (1st Cir. 1993) (public interest standard does not require agencies “to analyze proposed mergers under the same standards that the Department of Justice . . . must apply”).
  The United States Department of Justice has independent authority to examine the competitive impacts of proposed mergers and transactions (including those involving transfers of Commission licenses), but the Commission’s competitive analysis under the public interest standard is somewhat broader, and often takes a more extensive view of potential and future competition and its impact on the relevant markets. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3160, para. 10; Applications for Consent to the Transfer of Control of Licenses, XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., Transferor to Sirius Satellite Radio Inc., Transferee, MB Docket No. 07-57, Memorandum Opinion and Order and Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 12348, 12365-66, para. 32 (2008); AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corporation Application for Transfer of Control, WC Docket No. 06-74, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 22 FCC Rcd 5662, 5674, para. 21 (2007) (AT&T-BellSouth Order); Applications of Nextel Communications, Inc. and Sprint Corporation for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, File Nos. 0002031766, et al., WT Docket No. 05-63, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 20 FCC Rcd 13967, 13978, para. 22 (2005); Applications of AT&T Wireless Services, Inc. and Cingular Wireless Corporation for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, File Nos. 0001656065, et al.; Applications of Subsidiaries of T-Mobile USA, Inc. and Subsidiaries of Cingular Wireless Corporation for Consent to Assignment and Long-Term De Facto Lease of Licenses, File Nos. 0001771442, 0001757186, and 0001757204; Applications of Triton PCS License Company, LLC, AT&T Wireless PCS, LLC, and Lafayette Communications Company, LLC for Consent to Assignment of Licenses, File Nos. 0001808915, 0001810164, 0001810683, and 50013CWAA04, WT Docket Nos. 04-70, 04-254, and 04-323, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 19 FCC Rcd 21522, 21545, para. 42 (2004).  
  Notably, the Commission has determined it may impose and enforce transaction-related conditions to ensure that the public interest is served by the transaction. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3160, para. 10; Applications of AT&T Inc. and DIRECTV for Consent to Assign or Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 30 FCC Rcd 9131, 9141, para. 22 (2015) (AT&T-DIRECTV Order); Applications of Comcast Corp., General Electric Co. and NBC Universal, Inc. for Consent to Assign Licenses and Transfer Control of Licenses, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 26 FCC Rcd 4238, 4249, para. 25 (2011) (Comcast-NBC Universal Order); Application of EchoStar Communications Corp., (A Nevada Corp.), General Motors Corp., and Hughes Electronics Corp (Delaware Corps.) (Transferors) and EchoStar Communications Corp. (A Delaware Corp.) (Transferee), Hearing Designation Order, 17 FCC Rcd 20559, 20575, para. 27 (2002) (EchoStar-DIRECTV HDO); see also Application of WorldCom, Inc. and MCI Commc’ns Corp. for Transfer of Control of MCI Communications Corporation to WorldCom, Inc., Memorandum Opinion and Order, 13 FCC Rcd 18025, 18032, para. 10 (1998) (WorldCom-MCI Order) (stating that the Commission may attach conditions to the transfers); Applications of T-Mobile US, Inc., and Sprint Corp., for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses and Authorizations, Applications of American H Block Wireless L.L.C., DBSD Corp., Gamma Acquisition L.L.C., and Manifest Wireless L.L.C. for Extension of Time, Memorandum Opinion and Order, Declaratory Ruling, and Order of Proposed Modification, 34 FCC Rcd 10578, 10596, para. 42 (2019) (T-Mobile-Sprint Order).

If we determine that a transaction raises no public interest harms or that any such harms have been ameliorated by the Commission-imposed conditions or voluntary commitments, we next consider a transaction’s public interest benefits.  The Applicants bear the burden of proving those benefits by a preponderance of the evidence.  47 U.S.C. § 309(e); Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3161, para. 11; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586, para. 10; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10442, para. 23.
  As part of our public interest authority, we may impose conditions to ensure for the public the transaction-related benefits claimed by the Applicants. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3161, para. 11; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10443, para. 26; Applications of AT&T Inc. and Centennial Communications Corp. for Consent to Transfer Control of Licenses, Authorizations, and Spectrum Leasing Arrangements, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 24 FCC Rcd 13915, 13929, para. 30 (2009)..
  
Finally, if we are able to find that transaction-related conditions are able to ameliorate any public interest harms and the transaction is in the public interest, we may approve the transaction as so conditioned or agreed. See, e.g., Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3161, para. 12; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586, para. 11.  If we are unable to find that a proposed transaction even with such conditions serves the public interest or if the record presents a substantial and material question of fact, then we must designate the application for hearing.  47 U.S.C. § 309(e); Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3161, para. 12; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586-87, para. 11; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10444, para. 27.  Section 309(e)’s requirement applies only to those applications to which Title III of the Act applies.  ITT World Communications, Inc. v. FCC, 595 F.2d 897, 901 (2d Cir. 1979); CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586-87, para. 11 & n.37.
  In contrast, if we are unable to find that a proposed transaction even with such conditions serves the public interest or if the record presents a substantial and material question of fact, then we must designate the application for hearing. Verizon-Frontier Order, 40 FCC Rcd at 3161, para. 12; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586-87, para. 11; Alaska Wireless-GCI Order, 28 FCC Rcd at 10444, para. 27.  Section 309(e)’s requirement applies only to those applications to which Title III of the Act applies.  ITT World Communications, Inc. v. FCC, 595 F.2d 897, 901 (2d Cir. 1979); CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586-87, para. 11 & n.37.

No party has raised an issue with respect to the basic qualifications of the Applicants.  Accordingly, pursuant to Commission precedent, The Commission generally does not reevaluate the qualifications of transferors unless issues related to basic qualifications have been sufficiently raised in petitions to warrant designation for hearing.  See T-Mobile-Sprint Order, 34 FCC Rcd at 10597, para. 45; AT&T-DIRECTV Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 9142, para. 25.
 we find that there is no reason to reevaluate the requisite citizenship, character, financial, technical, or other basic qualifications of Colquitt under the Act or our rules, regulations, and policies. See T-Mobile-Sprint Order, 34 FCC Rcd at 10597, para. 44; AT&T-DIRECTV Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 9142, para. 25.
  We also find that the proposed transaction will not violate any statutory provision or Commission rule.
We find that there are no potential public interest harms identified in the record.  First, the proposed transaction will not result in a reduction in competition.  The Bureau has confirmed that Colquitt has not reported broadband availability data for the Assigned Census Blocks on the National Broadband Map, See FCC National Broadband Map,  https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/data-download/nationwide-data?pubDataVer=jun2025.
 a finding consistent with Applicants’ disclosure in the Supplement that Colquitt has not made available any such service in the Assigned Census Blocks. Supplement at 4 (“Colquitt does not offer any mass-market broadband or voice service within the Assigned Census Blocks”); id. at 6 (“Colquitt does not serve any [Broadband Serviceable Locations] in the Assigned Census Blocks today.”).  
  Applicants indicate that Point Broadband will transfer customer accounts for approximately 120 Point Broadband subscribers located in the Assigned Census Blocks. Application at 2.  Point Broadband has reported in the National Broadband Map that it has made available 100/20  Mbps broadband Internet access service to 1,081 locations in the Assigned Census Blocks, including 328 locations to which they offer 1,000/50 Mbps.  See FCC National Broadband Map, https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/data-download/nationwidedata?pubDataVer=jun2025.  
  Accordingly, the transaction will not result in any loss or impairment of service for subscribers and will have no adverse effect on competition. Application at 2.

Second, Colquitt commits to meeting all public interest and performance obligations associated with the receipt of the transferred support, Id. at 8-11.
 and the record indicates that Colquitt has the technical, financial, and managerial expertise to do so. Id. at 8-9; Supplement.
  Applicants state that Colquitt has set aside dedicated capital to fund the costs of deploying the network facilities to provide RDOF-supported service in the Assigned Census Blocks and does not anticipate the need to borrow money or incur debt in order to meet the milestone and performance measurement standards. Application at 8-9.

Applicants further state that the proposed transaction will not result in any adverse alteration to the buildout plans Point Broadband submitted to the Commission for the Assigned Census Blocks as part of its long-form application to the Commission and has provided those plans to Colquitt. Id. at 9-10.  Supplement at 9 (“Colquitt has adopted the technical parameters of the Point Broadband long form for the state of Georgia”) and Exh. B (Point Broadband 2021 Long Form Application).  Applicants assert that Colquitt will offer new financial, managerial, technical resources, and operational efficiencies, and therefore, consumers will be able to receive RDOF services in the Assigned Census Blocks more quickly.  Id.
  Colquitt commits to meeting the buildout milestones and performance obligations established for the Assigned Census Blocks, including the upcoming 60% buildout milestone. Application at 10.
  Applicants assert that the proposed transaction will accelerate Colquitt’s ongoing efforts to expand broadband service to unserved and underserved rural areas of Miller County, Georgia. Id.
  Applicants state that there will be no reduction in competition for domestic telecommunications service in the Assigned Census Blocks. Id. at 10-11.
  Overall, we conclude that the record in this proceeding does not support a finding of a public interest harm.
We next consider whether the proposed transaction is likely to generate verifiable, transaction-specific public interest benefits. See AT&T/DIRECTV Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 9237, paras. 273-74; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9604, para. 50 (citing AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corporation Application for Transfer of Control, WC Docket No. 06-74, 22 FCC Rcd 5662, 5761, para. 202 (2007)).
  Applicants must provide evidence of a claimed benefit to allow the Commission to verify its likelihood and magnitude. See AT&T/DIRECTV Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 9237-38, paras. 275-76; CenturyLink-Level 3 Order, 32 FCC Rcd at 9586, para. 10.
  Where potential harms appear unlikely, as is the case with the Application before us here, the Commission accepts a lesser degree of magnitude and likelihood than when harms are present. See id.

The Commission has specified that ensuring consumers receive new or additional services is an important public interest factor, See, e.g., AT&T-DIRECTV Order, 30 FCC Rcd at 9140, para. 19.
 and accelerating private sector deployment of advanced services is one of the aims of the Act. See Verizon-TracFone Order, 36 FCC Rcd at 17001, para. 21 (citing 47 U.S.C. §§ 254, 332(c)(7), 1302; Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-104, Preamble, 110 Stat. 56 (1996) (one purpose of the Act is to “accelerate rapidly private sector deployment of advanced telecommunications and information technologies and services”)).
  In light of the Applicants’ commitments to meet all of Point Broadband’s federal high cost support obligations Application at 8-9, 11.
 and the fact that Applicants are prepared to accelerate facilities-based service offerings, Id.
 we find it likely that the proposed transaction would result in some public interest benefits.  Absent any potential harms, and considering that the proposed transaction is likely to yield some benefits, we find that the proposed transaction serves the public interest.
Conditional Authorization of RDOF Support
As stated above, we find that Colquitt has sufficiently demonstrated its managerial, financial, and technological capabilities to meet its RDOF obligations and accordingly, we conditionally authorize Colquitt to receive the RDOF support associated with the Assigned Census Blocks, conditioned upon its satisfaction of the following prerequisites within 90 days from the release date of this public notice:  (1) submission and approval of an irrevocable letter of credit (LOC) from a qualifying bank securing the requisite amount of support for the Assigned Census Blocks; 47 CFR § 54.804(c).  
 (2) submission and approval of a supporting Bankruptcy Opinion Letter (Opinion Letter); and (3) submission of a notice of consummation of the transaction and satisfaction of all other prerequisites for authorization. If Colquitt fails to meet one or more conditions on its authorization as of this deadline, it must file notice of this failure on or before the 10th calendar day after this deadline in the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) within the docket specified above.  Colquitt will automatically receive an additional 45 days to meet all conditions if, in this notification, it certifies that there have been no material changes relevant to, and as of, the grant of its conditional authorization and provides an estimated time frame for the completion of all unfulfilled conditions on the authorization.  If circumstances warrant special consideration of the timing of the authorization (such as, inter alia, a pending default, upcoming milestone deadline, or an inability to certify no material changes), this extension may not be granted, and the Bureau will notify Colquitt of this fact and the reasons thereof by letter.  If Colquitt fails to meet its deadline (as extended, if applicable), the Bureau will reassess Colquitt’s continuing eligibility for authorization.  It will notify Colquitt by letter of the new terms of authorization, including, potentially, the imposition of additional conditions on authorization and the new deadline for meeting any outstanding conditions, or its determination that Colquitt is ineligible for authorization.  In the interest of expediting all pending authorizations, the Bureau makes clear that these changes apply to all pending authorizations associated with 214 transfers.

When submitting this information, Colquitt must comply with the following procedures: 
Letter of Credit and Opinion Letter.  Colquitt must submit a hard copy of the LOC and a hard copy of the Opinion Letter to the Universal Service Administrative Agency (USAC), at the following address:  Universal Service Administrative Company, High Cost Program, Rural Digital Opportunity Fund LOC, Attn: Stephen Snowman and Kevin Case, 700 12th Street, NW, Suite 900, Washington, DC 20005, and electronic copies of the hard copies of the LOC and the Opinion Letter to USAC at hcinfo@usac.org and OGC-LOC@usac.org.
Completion Notice.  Colquitt must submit an electronic copy of the Completion Notice to USAC at hcinfo@usac.org and OGC-LOC@usac.org, and file an electronic copy in the Commission’s Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) under WC Docket No. 25-187.  Applicants should also email a copy of this notice directly to Gregory Kwan at gregory.kwan@fcc.gov and to Nissa Laughner at nissa.laughner@fcc.gov.
If and when all of these prerequisites are satisfied, the authorization of Colquitt to receive the support associated with the Assigned Census Blocks will become effective.  Until such authorization, Point Broadband must maintain an irrevocable LOC securing the support for the Assigned Census Blocks and will retain sole responsibility for complying with the Universal Service Fund requirements for the Assigned Census Blocks.  Once Colquitt is authorized, all support and related transferrable assets associated with the Assigned Census Blocks, including any disbursements for the Assigned Census Blocks received by Point Broadband pending the effective date of Colquitt’s authorization or thereafter, must be transferred to Colquitt. Once Colquitt is authorized to receive the support, USAC will transfer all future support payments to Colquitt as of the next month following the authorization or as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter.  Unless parties to the transaction satisfy all conditions of authorization and give notice of such satisfaction in accordance with the above listed procedures on or before the 10th date of the month, it is unlikely that USAC will be able to transfer the next end-of-month payment to Colquitt.  We note that there may be extenuating circumstances other than this timing that might cause a temporary delay in the transfer of the payment.
  If USAC cannot modify the payment system before one or more post-authorization payments associated with the Assigned Census Blocks comes due, Point Broadband must, consistent with its obligation to transfer all support and assets associated with the Assigned Census Blocks, transfer the full amount of support it has received from USAC for the Assigned Census Blocks after Colquitt’s authorization.  
We remind Colquitt that once it satisfies all conditions of the RDOF authorization for the Assigned Census Blocks, it assumes sole responsibility for complying with universal service fund requirements and Commission rules, regardless of any preexisting or reasonably foreseeable conditions that could impact its ability to meet its obligations in the future, including technical, marketplace, and on-the-ground conditions. See, e.g., Authorization of Atlink Services, LLC to Receive Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II Auction Support Transferred from Cherokee Telephone Company Pursuant to a Commission Approved Transaction, WC Docket No. 10-90, Public Notice, 37 FCC Rcd 6158, 6159 (WCB 2022).  See supra note 12 (indicating that Applicants have agreed to these terms within the Application). 
  Indeed, any carrier seeking authorization to receive high cost support pursuant to a section 214 authorization must conduct the proper due diligence prior to consummation of the transaction and, in doing so, must assume all risks and consequences of noncompliance with program requirements, including default recovery of support and potential forfeiture penalties. See Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Connect America Fund, WC Docket Nos. 19-126 and 10-90, Report and Order, 35 FCC Rcd 686, 717-18, para. 68 (2020) (Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Order) (stressing that it is RDOF bidders’ “sole responsibility” to complete due diligence by conducting adequate research and analysis before participating in the RDOF auction); id. at 725, para. 84 (requiring RDOF short-form applicants to certify that they are solely responsible for compliance with all RDOF requirements).
  In addition, Colquitt must meet all administrative, performance, and deployment obligations and deadlines, The Bureau provides a summary of the various obligations of authorized RDOF support recipients in prior authorization public notices.  As stated in these public notices, the summary is not intended to be comprehensive, and all authorized parties are responsible for conducting the due diligence required to comply with universal service fund requirements and the Commission’s rules.  See, e.g.,  Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Support Authorized for 1,345 Winning Bids, AU Docket No. 20-34, WC Docket Nos. 19-126 and 10-90, Public Notice, 37 FCC Rcd 4897, 4898-4905 (WCB 2022).  We note that in addition to the requirements and rules specified in the public notices, RDOF support recipients must test and certify compliance with the relevant performance requirements in accordance with the uniform framework that has been adopted for measuring and reporting on high cost performance requirements.  See 47 CFR §§ 54.313(a)(6), 54.805(b). 
 including the requirement to deploy voice and broadband service meeting minimum standards to the requisite number of locations by specific service milestones. Specifically, RDOF support recipients must deploy service to an increasing percentage of authorized locations as of December 31st of each year beginning with a 40% milestone as of the third year of receiving support (for carriers authorized in 2022, the end of 2025), 60% as of the fourth year (2026), 80% as of the fifth year (2027), and 100% as of the sixth year (2028).  47 CFR § 54.802(c); Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Order, 35 FCC Rcd at 709-12, paras. 45-55.  The Commission will then adjust the initial defined deployment obligation assigned to each RDOF support recipient based on its determination of the number of locations within the supported area, without increasing or decreasing the authorized RDOF support, within a 35% margin of that support amount, consistent with RDOF requirements and rules.  47 CFR § 54.802(c); Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Order, 35 FCC Rcd at 710-11, paras. 49-50.

Grant of Application
We find, upon consideration of the record, that the proposed transfer will serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity. See 47 U.S.C. § 214(a); 47 CFR § 63.04.

Therefore, pursuant to section 214 of the Act, 47 U.S.C. § 214, and sections 0.91, 0.291, and 63.04 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 0.91, 0.291, and 63.04, the Bureau hereby grants the Application discussed in this Public Notice, subject to Applicants’ compliance with all applicable obligations.
Pursuant to section 1.103 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 1.103, the grant is effective upon release of this Public Notice.  Petitions for reconsideration under section 1.106 or applications for review under section 1.115 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR §§ 1.106, 1.115, may be filed within 30 days of the date of this Public Notice.
For further information, please contact Gregory Kwan, Competition Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at (202) 418-1191; Nissa Laughner, Telecommunications Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau at (202) 418-1358.
-FCC-

2