FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Bobby L. Rush U.S. House of Representatives 2188 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Rush: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who. apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal Page 2-The Honorable Bobby L. Rush Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing-and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, f any, to ensure that the National Ver/Ier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National VerfJler is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Bobby L. Rush are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission 's strategic plan to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National Verifier on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility,and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order, so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Bobby L. Rush timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National Verifier requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui' s letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai Enclosures FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN June 1.2018 The Honorable Frank Pallone U.S. House of Representatives 237 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Pallone: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program carl help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lifeline Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal Page 2-The Honorable Frank Pallone Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing-and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, 1 directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Frank Pallone are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission 's strategic plan to ensure that the National VerUler is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC' s most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National Verijier on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order, so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Frank Pallone timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National Verifier requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui's letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Enclosures FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON OFFICE OF June 1,2018 THE CHAIRMAN The Honorable Mike Doyle U.S. House of Representatives 239 Cannon House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Doyle: Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the2017 Lfe line Reform Order,which seeks to focus Lifeline support where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21St Century connectivity for all Americans. The Order increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important program. Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the 2016 Lfeline Reform Order called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC' s implementation of the National Verifier had failed key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal Page 2-The Honorable Mike Doyle Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing-and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National VerUler is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National VerijIer is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Mike Doyle are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission 's strategic plan to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National VerJIer on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order,so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Mike Doyle timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National VerJIer requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui' s letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Enclosures THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected U.S. House of Representatives Dear Congressman McNerney: rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 2265 Rayburn House Office Building program. Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as Washington, D.C. 20515 connectivity for all Americans. The program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the The Honorable Jerry McNerney alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to Commission adopted the Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering do so in practice. in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the Turning to the National Verifier itself', as you know, the 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1, 2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support 2016 Lifeline Reform Order Page 2-The Honorable Jerry McNerney Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing--and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National VerJier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply cornmifted to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National VerfIer is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Jerry McNerney are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission strategic plan to ensure that the National VerUler is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National VerUier on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order,so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Jerry McNerney timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National VerfIer requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui's letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai Enclosures THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought coimnent on a wide U.S. House of Representatives variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 Dear Congresswoman Clarke: program. Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century 2058 connectivity for all Americans. The Washington, D.C. Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Commission adopted the Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that do so in practice. in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I Rayburn House Office Building At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the 20515 2017 Lfeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support 2016 Lifeline Reform Order Page 2-The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing-and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National Verj'Ier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National VerifIer is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission 's strategic plan to ensure that the National Verfler is deployed on time going forward Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National VertIer on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back..end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order, so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Conimission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National Verifier requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui's letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai Enclosures THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 21st Century Dear Congressman Butterfield: The Honorable G.K. Butterfield problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide U.S. House of Representatives rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 do so in practice. 2080 Rayburn House Office Building program. Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as Washington, connectivity for all Americans. The Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. program's goal is---or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering Commission adopted the in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the D.C. 20515 2017 Lifeline Refbrm Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support 2016 Lifeline Reform Order Page 2-The Honorable G.K. Butterfield Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing--and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC's to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable G.K. Butterfield are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Conimission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission strategic plan to ensure that the National VerfIer is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National VerUier on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identifying information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lifeline Reform Order,so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable G.K. Butterfield timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National VerJIer requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after USAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui' s letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Ajit V. Pai Enclosures THE CHAIRMAN OFFICE OF Dear Congressman Welch: that barred Lifeline consumers from changing Lifeline providers for a year and protected U.S. House of Representatives where it is most needed and incentivize investment in networks that enable 2Pt Century 2303 The Honorable Peter Welch digital divide, and, like you, I believe the Lifeline program can help do just that. That is why the Washington, D.C. 20515 the Lifeline program's efficacy and integrity by reducing the waste, fraud, and abuse that has run rampant in this program for the better part of a decade. For example, GAO discovered 1,234,929 consumers by barring low-quality services that offered mobile broadband in theory but failed to do so in practice. taxpayer dollars are at stake. That's why the Commission last year sought comment on a wide connectivity for all Americans. The Commission adopted the problems with the program. It simply isn't prudent to sit idly by when hundreds of millions of Lifeline subscribers who apparently were not eligible to participate in the program as well as obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. It is critical to strengthen program's goal is-or should be-to empower consumers, not companies. And that will be our variety of measures to improve the administration of the Lifeline program-from re-empowering in eliminating this waste, fraud, and abuse. But it is not the only one, nor will it solve all the alone constituted more than $137 million in abuse each year. program. Verifier, from improving program audits to adopting a self-enforcing budget. The Lifeline 6,378 individuals who apparently reenrolled after being reported dead. That limited sample Verifier, along with the accompanying information technology, in 2017. Despite the fact that Verifier's launch until USAC could fully test the system for compliance with the Federal state commissions to police Lifeline carriers to partnering with states to stand up the National learned on November 30, 2017 that USAC's implementation of the National Verifier had failed called for the Universal Service Administrative Company to design and establish a National lodestar as we move forward to ensure that unscrupulous companies stop abusing this important key security checks. Accordingly, the Wireline Competition Bureau postponed the National Commission staff was able to negotiate information-sharing agreements with six states on time, I Rayburn House Office Building Thank you for your letter regarding the Lifeline program. I am committed to bridging the At the same time, I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its I agree with you that the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier will be one important tool Turning to the National Verifier itself, as you know, the 2017 Lifeline Reform Order, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Order June 1,2018 WASHINGTON increased consumer choice by eliminating restrictions which seeks to focus Lifeline support 2016 L/eline Reform Order Page 2-The Honorable Peter Welch Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA). Although I was disappointed to learn of this failing-and to learn of it at such a late hour-the Commission cannot ignore its duty to safeguard consumers' personal information. In response to your particular questions: 1. Please provide a comprehensive list ofproactive efforts you have taken as Chairman, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. I am deeply committed to ensuring that the Commission fulfills its obligation to be a responsible steward of the Universal Service Fund. In early 2017, I directed Commission staff to work collaboratively with USAC to ensure the timely establishment of the National Verifier. In May 2017, after the resignation of the Chief Executive Officer of USAC following the flawed roll-out of E-Rate's information technology system, I made clear to Commission staff and the USAC Board that finding a replacement with IT expertise was a priority. On December 13, I approved the appointment of Radha Sekar- an experienced federal information-technology administrator-as Chief Executive Officer of USAC. I also then sought, and received, the unqualified support of USAC's Board of Directors to strengthen its oversight of USAC's information technology and security systems. Since then, the Commission's IT staff have been working hand in hand with USAC' s to ensure that the National Verifier comes into full FISMA compliance. I also directed staff to commence negotiations with several states to come to data-sharing agreements, to ensure that at least five states would be ready for the launch in December 2017. In August 2017, the FCC announced that the initial launch of the National Verifier would occur in six states-Colorado, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. While we continue to pursue additional agreements, the Commission sought comment in the2017 Lifeline Reform Order on additional ways to encourage states to work cooperatively with the Commission and USAC to integrate their state databases into the National Verifier without unnecessary delay. Finally, I have directed our staff to work with our federal partners to facilitate data- sharing agreements for federal programs that qualify consumers for Lifeline. My office worked directly with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to facilitate the first such arrangement, and Commission staff continue to pursue others. 2. Please provide a comprehensive list of what proactive efforts FCC staff have taken, if any, to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time in all US. states and territories. Commission staff support the National Verifier project by overseeing the development of National Verifier processes to ensure compliance with the Lifeline rules and applicable laws; negotiating and entering into data-sharing agreements with existing data sources to enable the National Verifier to cost-effectively verify subscribers' eligibility; updating the Lifeline program's System of Records Notice, Paperwork Reduction Act approvals, Records Schedule, and Privacy Impact Assessment to incorporate the National Verifier; providing guidance to USAC as it develops processes for reverifying consumers as they Page 3-The Honorable Peter Welch are migrated into the National Verifier; providing ongoing feedback and guidance to USAC as it finalizes the online portals that will be used by consumers and service providers to interface with the National Verifier; assisting in finalizing paper and online forms for use with the National Verifier; and reviewing procurements related to the National Verifier, when appropriate. Commission staff have also been actively collaborating with USAC's information technology and security compliance efforts. 3. Please provide the Commission 's strategic plan to ensure that the National Verifier is deployed on time going forward. Commission staff continues to work closely with USAC to ensure timely deployment of the National Verifier. The USAC Board is fully committed to strengthening oversight and delivery of timely, secure, and reliable systems for the administration of the Universal Service Fund. Additional details about plans going forward may be found in USAC's most recent National Verifier Plan submission, which is attached to this letter. The initial launch of the National Verifier will provide valuable lessons for USAC and the Commission, and we plan to use those insights to inform the continued rollout of the system. 4. Please provide a list of dated benchmarks detailing when the Commission plans to meet legal, practical, or deployment related goals for fully implementing the National VerUler on time in all US. states and territories. This is the first time that USAC has developed a database on this scale (nationwide and including over 10 million program participants, based on current estimates) and with this level of personally identif'ing information. Creating the National Verifier involves establishing interfaces with multiple states and federal agencies by first negotiating data- sharing agreements and then creating the electronic interfaces. The process also involves development of a back-end system to manage the complexity of simultaneous calls to multiple interfaces to verify identity and eligibility, and the creation of interactive portals for use by service providers and consumers. USAC has procured vendors to handle certain key aspects of the National Verifier, which itself has taken time and added complexity to the process. Unfortunately, original estimates of the time associated with the deployment of the National Verifier have not tracked with the actual time associated with this work. The Commission did not complete an assessment of potential challenges before adopting the 2016 Lfeline Reform Order, so challenges unanticipated by the initial proposed timelines for deployment have arisen and delayed deployment. For example, one of the most significant challenges has involved addressing FISMA compliance. This process has been more time consuming than USAC originally anticipated and forecasted to the FCC, but it is an area of the utmost importance and one that must be fully addressed before deployment of the National Verifier can occur. Thus, while USAC and the FCC have always had a plan for deployment, this plan has shifted due to the complexities encountered during the development stage, causing initial deployment to be delayed. USAC and the Commission are currently working on adjusting the National Verifier Page 4-The Honorable Peter Welch timeline and setting appropriate target dates for deployment, and expect to make an announcement regarding the revised date soon. In the meantime, Commission staff and USAC continue to work on the expansion of the National Verifier in additional states to minimize the impact of the initial delay. Going forward, USAC has identified additional states and territories that it believes are appropriate candidates for launch in 2018 and is working with these states and territories to obtain data sharing agreements, where applicable, in addition to actively seeking data sharing agreements with federal agencies to maximize automated enrollment opportunities and cost savings. As USAC and the Commission get closer to finalizing plans to launch the National Verifier in additional states, the Wireline Competition Bureau will make announcements regarding the deployment schedule. 5. Please provide the detailed status report on the Commission 's efforts to deploy the National Verifier requested in July and again in October. Attached are USAC's National Verifier Project Updates, issued after LJSAC's quarterly board meetings, also provided in response to Congresswoman Matsui' s letter inquiring about the status of the National Verifier. I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Sincerely, ctA, Enclosures