FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
WASHINGTON 
OFF IC E O F 
T HE C H A I RMAN 
The Honorable Scott Peters 
. U.S. House ofRepresentatives 
241 0 Rayburn House Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20515 
Dear Representative Peters: 
June 17, 2014 
Thank you for writing to express your concerns regarding the need to reinstate rules to 
preserve an open Internet for all Americans. I .share a sense of urgency expressed by many on 
this matter and moved with dispatch to initiate a proceeding to consider new open Internet rules 
to replace those that were vacated by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Verizon case. As 
you know, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ("Notice") adopted by the Commission in May 
2014 begins that process. Therein, we ask a number of questions about the rules we need to 
adopt, as well as the appropriate legal foundation for such rules . Your letter touches on some of 
the most important issues presented in the Notice, and I will ensure that it is included in the 
record of the proceeding and considered as part ofthe Commission's review. 
The· Commission has struggled for over a decade with how best to protect and promote an 
open Internet. While there has been bipartisan consensus, starting under the Bush 
Administration with Chairman Powell, on the importance of an open Internet to economic 
growth, investment, and innovation, we find ourselves today faced with the worst case scenario: 
we have no Open Internet rules in place to stop broadband providers from limiting Internet 
openness. The status quo is unacceptable. The Commission has already found, and the court has 
agreed, that broadband providers have economic incentives and technological tools to engage in 
behavior that can limit Internet openness and harm consumers and competition. As such, the 
Commission must craft meaningful rules to protect the open Internet, and it must do so promptly. 
I can assure you that I will utilize the best tools available to me to ensure the Commission adopts 
effective and resilient open Internet rules. Unless and until the Commission adopts new rules, 
broadband providers will be free to block, degrade, or otherwise disadvantage innovative 
services on the Internet without threat of sanction by the FCC. 
With respect to the legal foundation of the rules, I believe that the Section 706 framework 
set forth by the court provides us with the tools we need to adopt and implement robust and 
enforceable Open Internet rules. 
The Commission also is seriously considering the use of Title II of the Communications 
Act as a basis for legal authority. The Notice explains that both Section 706 and Title II are 
viable solutions to the authority issue, and seeks comment on the benefits of each approach, as 
well as the benefits of one approach over the other, to ensuring that the Internet remains an open 
platform for innovation and expression. Additionally, the Notice seeks comment on other 
Page 2-The Honorable Scott Peters 
proposals suggesting the Commission could apply both Section 706 and Title II to component 
parts of broadband Internet access services and asks about the extent to which forbearance from 
certain provisions of the Act or our rules would be justified so that the regulatory treatment of 
broadband providers is appropriately balanced. 
With respect to the substance of the rules, the proposals and questions in the Notice are 
designed to elicit a record that will give us a foundation to adopt strong, enforceable rules to 
protect the open Internet and prevent broadband providers from harming consumers or 
competition. I am especially sensitive to concerns about paid prioritization anangements, and 
the potential such anangements have for creating an Internet that is fast for a few, and slow for 
everyone else. Let me be crystal clear: there must only be one Internet. It must be fast, robust 
and open for everyone. The Notice addresses this issue head-on, even asking if paid 
prioritization should be banned outright. It also proposes clear rules of the road and aggressive 
enforcement to prevent unfair treatment of consumers, edge providers and innovators. Small 
companies and startups must be able to reach consumers with their innovative products and 
services, and they must be protected against harmful conduct by broadband providers. 
The Notice includes a number of proposals designed to empower consumers and small 
businesses who may find themselves subject to harmful behavior by a broadband provider. For 
example, the Court of Appeals did uphold our existing transparency rule, and the Notice 
proposes to strengthen that rule to require that networks disclose any practices that could change 
a consumer's or a content provider's relationship with the network. The Notice proposes the 
creation of an ombudsperson to serve as a watchdog and advocate for start-ups, small businesses 
and consumers. And the Notice seeks comment on how to ensure that all parties, and especially 
small businesses and start-ups, have effective access to the Commission's dispute resolution and 
enforcement processes. 
Again, I appreciate your deep interest in this matter and look forward to continued 
engagement with you as the proceeding moves forward. 
r;;,%trt 
Tom Wheeler