The Honorable Tom Wheeler 
Chairman 
Federal Communications Commission 
445 12'h Street, SW 
Washington, DC 20536 
Dear Chairman Wheeler: 
September 12, 2014 
Broadband Internet access has become an essential part of the economic and social fabric in 
many rural communities, as a tool to build businesses, apply for jobs, enhance educational 
opportunities and connect to friends and relatives, With robust broadband service, even a small 
town can rely on its residents' talent and determination to compete with the world, Without it, 
the same community risks being left behind in today's technology-centric economy. 
Phase II of the Connect America Fund (''CAF II'') offers a tremendous opportunity to bring 
speedier, t!ber-fed broadband connections to millions of Americans who wouldn't otherwise 
receive these benefits. Thanks to the Commission's well-publicized efforts, thousands of rural 
communities are now counting on CAF II. And because CAF II represents the ilnal phase of 
Universal Service reform for these areas, its rules will effectively determine, for years to come, 
whether millions of rural residents will have a broadband connection or not Indeed, the June 10 
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) has raised hopes further by more than 
doubling the promised download speeds from 4 Mbps to l 0 Mbps. 
We are writing today to emphasize how important it is to ensure that the final details ofCAF II 
live up to its promise. We are concerned that if the Commission more than doubles the speed 
requirements without allowing the appropriate level of llexibility in other elements of CAF ll. 
the program's overall mission could be endangered. 
To the Commission's credit, the June l 0 FNPRM identities a number of constructive ideas that 
could help ~c1hie:ve the speedier nellWilrK goals without exceeding the ll annual budget. 
the ll funding period must be currem S to 10 years to ali ow 
tor construction the higher-capacity network. the Commission must 
usc the same l 0 'v1bps standard when identifying broadband availability competitors, or 
else communities with just 4 Mbps be lett behind. The Commission also must establish 
be given the !lexibility to substitute extremely high cost locations with unserved locations in 
partially served census blocks. 
We also encourage you to be as precise as possible when targeting support to areas where 
broadband would not otherwise be available. In the "interim" CAF 1 phases, an entire census 
block could be disqualified if a competitive carrier claimed to serve even a small fraction of its 
customers, and many areas were disqualified based on the untested assertions of wireless lSPs 
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, we 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, we still often hear trom 
constituents seeking assistance to bring broadband service to their homes. The concerns they 
raise arc a reminder of how challenging rural broadband policy can be, but also how important it 
is. In keeping with all relevant rules and regulations, we would greatly appreciate your attention 
to this matter, and we look torward to working with you. 
Ed Pastor 
Member of Congress 
Ann Kirkpatrick 
Member of Congress 
Sincerely, 
' ijalva 
Member of Congress