DAVID B. McKINLEY, P.E. 1ST DISTRICT, WEST VIRGINIA 412 CANNON H OUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON. DC 20515 TEL: 1202)225-4172 FAX: 1202) 225-7564 www.mckinley.house.gov Co-CHAIR. CONGRESSIONAl ARTHRITIS CAUCUS Co-CHAIR. CONGRESSIONAL Y OUTH CHALLENGE CAUCUS Co-CHAIR. HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDINGS CAUCUS August 1, 2014 (!Congress of tbe Wniteb ~tates ~ou~e of l\epre~entatibe~ The Honorable Tom Wheeler Chairman Federal Communications Commission 445 1i11 Street, SW Washington, DC 20536 Dear Chairman Wheeler: COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE SuBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND POWER SUBCOMMITIEE ON COMMERCE, MANUFACTURING AND TRADE SUBCOMMITIEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND THE ECONOMY Broadband Internet access has become an essential part of the economic and social fabric in many rural communities, as a tool to build businesses, expand opportunities for jobs and education, and connect with friends and relatives. With robust broadband service, even a small town in West Virginia can compete with the rest of the world. Without it, these small town communities risk being left behind in today's technology-centric economy. Phase II of the Connect America Fund ("CAF II") offers a tremendous opportunity to bring faster, fiber-fed broadband connections to thousands of West Virginia in rural areas who wouldn't otherwise have it. Thanks to the Commission's well-publicized efforts, thousands of rural communities are now counting on CAF II. As CAF II represents the final phase of Universal Service reform, its rules will effectively determine, for years to come, whether millions of rural residents will have a broadband connection or not. The June 10 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking has raised hopes further by more than doubling the promised download speeds from the 2011 USF/ICC Transformation Order, from 4 megabytes per second (MBPS) to 1 0 megabytes per second. The final details of CAF II must live up to its promise. I am concerned that if the Commission more than doubles the speed requirements without allowing the appropriate level of flexibility in other elements ofCAF II, the program's overall mission could be endangered. To the Commission's credit, the June 1oth notice identifies a number of constructive ideas that could help achieve the speedier network goals without exceeding the budget: • CAF II funding period must be extended from the current 5 years to 10 years to allow adequate time for the construction of the higher-capacity network; PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER 800 • The Commission must use the same 10 Mbps standard when identifying broadband availability from competitors, or else communities with just 4 Mbps will be left behind; • Establish network build-out parameters consistent with the goal of providing quality broadband service to as many people as possible within CAF's limited funding framework; and • Providers must be given the flexibility to substitute extremely high-cost locations with unserved locations in partially served census blocks. When targeting support to areas where broadband would not otherwise be available, I encourage you to be as precise as possible. In the "interim" CAF I phases, an entire census block could be disqualified if a competitive carrier claimed to serve even a small fraction of its customers. Many areas were disqualified based on the untested assertions of wireless ISPs with line of sight and capacity issues that made them a poor substitute for fiber-fed networks. Now that we are in the final phase, I hope the CAF II standards can reach those unserved customers, and also require competitive carriers to meet a reasonable standard of verification before depriving a community of CAF II support. Despite years of federal efforts to overcome the digital divide, our office often hears from constituents seeking assistance to bring broadband service to their homes. The concerns they raise are '!- reminder of how challenging rural broadband policy can be, but also how important it is. Thank you for considering my concerns, and I look forward to working with you. Sincerely, fJ.JVt7 • McKinley, PE of Congress