Federal Regulatory Agencies
Here's a look at documents from federal regulatory agencies
Featured Stories
SEC Obtains Final Judgment Against Defendants in Fraudulent Securities Offering
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 1:23-cv-00434; M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Melton, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00434 (M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023)
On October 2, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained final judgment against Greensboro resident Marshall E. Melton and his limited-liability company, Integrated Consulting & Management, LLC, in connection with charges related to a fraudulent securities offering.
The SEC's complaint, filed on May 30, 2023 in the United States
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 1:23-cv-00434; M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Melton, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00434 (M.D.N.C. filed May 30, 2023)
On October 2, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission obtained final judgment against Greensboro resident Marshall E. Melton and his limited-liability company, Integrated Consulting & Management, LLC, in connection with charges related to a fraudulent securities offering.
The SEC's complaint, filed on May 30, 2023 in the United StatesDistrict Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, Greensboro Division, alleged that the defendants raised between approximately $1.03 and $1.49 million from seven investors, six of whom had an average age of 75 when they first invested. The SEC alleged that Melton told investors that he would use their funds to buy and renovate properties in downtown Laurinburg, North Carolina, to generate rental income and resale proceeds and provide returns for investors. The complaint, however, alleged that Melton's representations were false, that he never paid the investors their promised returns or returned to their invested amounts, and that Melton misappropriated nearly two-thirds of investor funds for his own use.
On April 17, 2025, the Court awarded summary judgment in favor of the SEC on all three of its liability claims, finding that the defendants violated Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. See Litigation Release No. 26292 (Apr. 24, 2025).
The final judgment permanently enjoins the defendants from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and permanently enjoins Melton from participating in the issuance, offer, purchase, or sale of any securities, including any security related to interests in real estate, unless the security is either listed on a national securities exchange or traded through an established over-the-counter market and the trade occurs in Melton's personal accounts. The final judgment also orders the defendants, jointly and severally, to pay disgorgement of $916,341 and pre-judgment interest of $312,460.84, and orders Melton to pay a civil penalty of $472,902.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26438
SEC Obtains Final Consent Judgments as to Texas Residents Regarding $1 Million Offering That Targeted African American Community
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 3:25-cv-02635-L, 4:25-cv-4622; N.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025, S.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kevin L. Jefferson, No. 3:25-cv-02635-L (N.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025)
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Demetrius L. Early, No. 4:25-cv-4622 (S.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025)
On November 21, 2025, U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of Texas and the Southern District of Texas respectively entered final consent judgments in the SEC's
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 3:25-cv-02635-L, 4:25-cv-4622; N.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025, S.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kevin L. Jefferson, No. 3:25-cv-02635-L (N.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025)
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Demetrius L. Early, No. 4:25-cv-4622 (S.D. Tex. filed Sept. 29, 2025)
On November 21, 2025, U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of Texas and the Southern District of Texas respectively entered final consent judgments in the SEC'scivil enforcement actions against Texas residents, Kevin L. Jefferson and Demetrius L. Early. Jefferson and Early consented to the entry of the judgments without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations and have agreed to pay a total of more than $1.1 million to settle charges that Jefferson, with Early's assistance, raised over $1,000,000 from more than 65 investors through a fraudulent offering of unregistered securities, targeting members of the African American community in the greater Shreveport, Louisiana, and Dallas and Houston, Texas metropolitan areas and elsewhere.
The SEC's complaints, filed on September 29, 2025, alleged that from at least January 2023 through December 2023, Jefferson and Early, one of Jefferson's primary sales agents, solicited investors to purchase membership interests in Jefferson's Cashflow Creation Club, telling them Jefferson would make foreign currency exchange ("Forex") trades on their behalf. Allegedly, Jefferson promoted himself as an expert Forex trader and represented to investors that they would earn 3 to 5% monthly returns of approximately $6,000 per month, and that they should expect to grow those monthly returns up to approximately $83,000 by the end of the year. The complaints alleged that instead, Jefferson used approximately $170,000 of investor funds towards purported investment-related expenses, misappropriating nearly 85% of investor funds to pay undisclosed sales commissions to Early (and others) and for his personal expenses.
Without admitting or denying the allegations, Jefferson and Early consented to the entry of final judgments, which permanently enjoined them from violating the registration provisions of Section 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and enjoined Jefferson from violating the antifraud provisions of Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The final judgments also ordered Jefferson to pay $580,913 in disgorgement plus prejudgment interest of $35,490, and a $236,451 civil penalty, and ordered Early to pay $205,267 in disgorgement plus prejudgment interest of $22,529, and a $75,000 civil penalty. The final judgments additionally prohibit Jefferson and Early from participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any securities (with the exception of trading in their personal accounts) and acting as or being associated with any broker or dealer.
The SEC's investigation was conducted by Dan Cristol and Mark Dee and supervised by Jason R. Berkowitz, Fernando Torres, and Glenn S. Gordon of the SEC's Miami Regional Office. The SEC's litigation was led by Pascale Guerrier and supervised by Teresa J. Verges, also of the Miami Regional Office.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint - Kevin L. Jefferson (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2025/comp26440-jefferson.pdf)
* Final Judgment - Kevin L. Jefferson (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2025/judg26440-jefferson.pdf)
* SEC Complaint - Demetrius L. Early (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2025/comp26440-early.pdf)
* Final Judgment - Demetrius L. Early (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2025/judg26440-early.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26440
SEC Obtains Final Consent Judgment as to Oppenheimer & Co. Regarding Alleged Failure to Comply With Municipal Bond Offering Disclosure Requirements
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 22-cv-07801; S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 13, 2022) involving Oppenheimer and Co. Inc.:
* * *
On December 10, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final consent judgment in the SEC's civil enforcement action against New York-based Oppenheimer & Co. Inc..
According to the SEC's complaint, from June 2017 to April 2022, Oppenheimer sold the relevant municipal bonds in purported reliance on the "limited offering exemption," which, upon satisfying specific requirements,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 22-cv-07801; S.D.N.Y. filed Sept. 13, 2022) involving Oppenheimer and Co. Inc.:
* * *
On December 10, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered a final consent judgment in the SEC's civil enforcement action against New York-based Oppenheimer & Co. Inc..
According to the SEC's complaint, from June 2017 to April 2022, Oppenheimer sold the relevant municipal bonds in purported reliance on the "limited offering exemption," which, upon satisfying specific requirements,exempts certain municipal securities offerings from the general requirement of providing disclosures to investors. The complaint alleged that Oppenheimer sold securities in hundreds of municipal offerings in purported reliance on the limited offering exemption when it had not satisfied the exemption requirements. The complaint also alleged that Oppenheimer made deceptive statements to issuers by representing that it would and did comply with the exemption requirements, and that Oppenheimer lacked policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that it complied with the limited offering exemption when acting as underwriter in these municipal bond offerings.
Without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations, Oppenheimer consented to the entry of a final judgment permanently enjoining it from violating Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) Rules G-17 and G-27, and Exchange Act Section 15B(c)1. The final consent judgment also orders Oppenheimer to pay a $1.2 million civil penalty.
The investigation was conducted by Laura Cunningham and supervised by Ivonia Slade and Rebecca Olsen. The litigation was led by Devon Staren and supervised by David Nasse. The SEC appreciates the assistance of the MSRB.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26435
SEC Charges Canadian Citizen, 3 Entities With Fraudulent Securities Offerings Targeting Retail Investors
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 25-cv-06811; E.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 10, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nathan Gauvin, et al., No. 25-cv-06811 (E.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 10, 2025)
On December 10, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Canadian citizen Nathan Gauvin and three entities he controls--Blackridge, LLC, Gray Digital Capital Management USA, LLC, and Gray Digital Technologies, LLC--for orchestrating two fraudulent securities offerings that raised over $18 million from investors
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 25-cv-06811; E.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 10, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Nathan Gauvin, et al., No. 25-cv-06811 (E.D.N.Y. filed Dec. 10, 2025)
On December 10, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Canadian citizen Nathan Gauvin and three entities he controls--Blackridge, LLC, Gray Digital Capital Management USA, LLC, and Gray Digital Technologies, LLC--for orchestrating two fraudulent securities offerings that raised over $18 million from investorsacross the United States and abroad. Gauvin allegedly misappropriated approximately $6.3 million of investor funds and used fabricated credentials, false performance metrics, and fictitious account statements to lure investors into his schemes.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Gauvin gained a following on Discord by falsely presenting himself as a successful investment professional managing over a billion dollars in assets through Blackridge, which in reality was a mere shell entity. From September 2022 to November 2024, Gauvin and his entities allegedly raised approximately $18.1 million from investors through an unregistered offering of interests in the "Gray Fund," a purported diversified investment fund advised by Gray Digital and Gauvin. The complaint alleges that Gauvin and Gray Digital falsely claimed that the Gray Fund generated double-digit monthly returns and held over $78 million in assets, when, in fact, the fund actually had a monthly compounded return of approximately 1.4% and its assets were far lower than claimed. The complaint further alleges that Gauvin misappropriated investor funds to finance a lavish lifestyle, including using hundreds of thousands of dollars for purchases of custom jewelry, luxury concierge services, real estate, and art.
In a second scheme which began in May 2024, Gauvin allegedly offered "seed stock" in Gray Digital Technologies at $30,000 per share, falsely claiming the company had a $60 million valuation and more than $12 million in annual revenue. In reality, the complaint alleges that Gray Digital Technologies had no operations, assets, or revenue. According to the complaint, Gauvin raised at least $60,000 from two retail investors and then ceased communicating with them about this offering.
The SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, charges Gauvin, Gray Digital Capital Management USA, LLC, and Gray Digital Technologies, LLC with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933; Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder; and Gauvin and Gray Digital Capital Management USA, LLC with violating Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder. Blackridge, LLC is charged with violating Sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act, Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5(a) and (c) thereunder.
The SEC's investigation was conducted by Clemon Ashley, Ayesha Ahmed, and Matilda Singleton and supervised by Samantha Martin and Jaime Marinaro, and the litigation will be led by Matt Gulde and supervised by Keefe Bernstein, all of the Fort Worth Regional Office.
The SEC appreciates the assistance of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2025/comp26439.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26439
NRC Renews Browns Ferry Operating License
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
NRC Renews Browns Ferry Operating License
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed for a second time the operating licenses of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2 and 3 for an additional 20 years, bringing to 10 the number of reactor licenses renewed this year.
Browns Ferry's three boiling-water reactors are located in Athens, Alabama. Their renewed facility operating licenses will expire in December 2053 for Unit 1, June 2054 for Unit 2, and July 2056 for Unit 3.
"This is a strong example
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
NRC Renews Browns Ferry Operating License
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed for a second time the operating licenses of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2 and 3 for an additional 20 years, bringing to 10 the number of reactor licenses renewed this year.
Browns Ferry's three boiling-water reactors are located in Athens, Alabama. Their renewed facility operating licenses will expire in December 2053 for Unit 1, June 2054 for Unit 2, and July 2056 for Unit 3.
"This is a strong exampleof how independent oversight and effective collaboration can deliver results that support our energy future," said Jeremy Groom, Acting Director of the NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. "The NRC confirmed that Browns Ferry's reactors can safely operate for up to 80 years, and TVA's responsiveness helped us complete our rigorous review nearly 3 months ahead of schedule."
The NRC's review of the Tennessee Valley Authority subsequent license renewal application requesting authorization to operate from 60 to 80 years proceeded on two parallel tracks. The NRC issued a safety evaluation in July 2025, and a final supplemental environmental impact statement in August 2025. These documents, as well as other information regarding the Browns Ferry subsequent license renewal application, are available on the NRC website. Additional information about the license renewal process can also be found on the NRC's website.
Previously in 2025, the NRC renewed operating licenses for Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3; V.C. Summer Unit 1; Point Beach Units 1 and 2; and Perry Unit 1.
* * *
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission was created as an expert, technical agency to protect public health, safety, and security, and regulate the civilian use of nuclear materials, including enabling the deployment of nuclear power for the benefit of society. Among other responsibilities, the agency issues licenses, conducts inspections, initiates and enforces regulations, and plans for incident response. The global gold standard for nuclear regulation, the NRC is collaborating with interagency partners to implement reforms outlined in new Executive Orders and the ADVANCE Act to streamline agency activities and enhance efficiency.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.nrc.gov/sites/default/files/cdn/doc-collection-news/2025/25-065.pdf
FCC Wireline Competition Bureau Issues Public Notice: Comments Invited on Section 214 Applications to Discontinue Domestic Non-Dominant Carrier Telecommunications And/Or Interconnected VOIP Services
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket Nos. 25-333, 25-334, 25-336) on Dec. 12, 2025:
* * *
Unless otherwise specified, the following procedures and dates apply to the application(s) (the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s)) listed in the Appendix.
The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau), upon initial review, has found the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed herein to be acceptable for filing and subject to the procedures set forth in Section 63.71 of the Commission's rules./1
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket Nos. 25-333, 25-334, 25-336) on Dec. 12, 2025:
* * *
Unless otherwise specified, the following procedures and dates apply to the application(s) (the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s)) listed in the Appendix.
The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau), upon initial review, has found the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed herein to be acceptable for filing and subject to the procedures set forth in Section 63.71 of the Commission's rules./1The application(s) request authority, under section 214 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,/2 and section 63.71 of the Commission's rules,/3 to discontinue, reduce, or impair certain domestic telecommunications service(s) (Affected Service(s)) in specified geographic areas (Service Area(s)) as applicable and as fully described in each application.
In accordance with section 63.71(f) of the Commission's rules, the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed in the Appendix will be deemed granted automatically on January 12, 2026, the 31st day after the release date of this public notice, unless the Commission notifies any applicant(s) that their grant will not be automatically effective./4 We note that the date on which an application for Commission authorization is deemed granted may be different from the date on which applicants are authorized to discontinue service ("Authorized Date"). Any applicant whose application has been deemed granted may discontinue their Affected Service(s) in their Service Area(s) on or after the authorized discontinuance date(s) specified in the Appendix, in accordance with their filed representations. Accordingly, pursuant to section 63.71(f), and the terms outlined in each application, absent further Commission action, each applicant may discontinue the Affected Service(s) in the Service Area(s) described in their application on or after the authorized discontinuance date(s) listed in the Appendix for that application. For purposes of computation of time when filing a petition for reconsideration, application for review, or petition for judicial review of the Commission's decision(s), the date of "public notice" shall be the later of the auto grant date stated above in this Public Notice, or the release date(s) of any further public notice(s) or order(s) announcing final Commission action, as applicable. Should no petitions for reconsideration, applications for review, or petitions for judicial review be timely filed, the proceeding(s) listed in this Public Notice shall be terminated, and the docket(s) will be closed.
Comments objecting to the application(s) listed in the Appendix must be filed with the Commission on or before December 29, 2025/5. Comments should refer to the specific WC Docket No. and Comp. Pol. File No. listed in the Appendix for the Section 214 Discontinuance Application. Comments should include specific information about the impact of the proposed discontinuance on the commenter, including any inability to acquire reasonable substitute service. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Filers should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket number.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial courier, or by the U.S. Postal Service. All filings must be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary are accepted between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. by the FCC's mailing contractor at 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial courier deliveries (any deliveries not by the U.S. Postal Service) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. Filings sent by U.S. Postal Service First-Class Mail, Priority Mail, and Priority Mail Express must be sent to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding(s) shall be treated as a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding(s) in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules./6 Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding(s) should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.
For further information, please see the contact(s) for the specific discontinuance proceeding you are interested in as listed in the Appendix. For further information on procedures regarding section 214 please visit https://www.fcc.gov/general/domestic-section-214-discontinuance-service.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ 47 CFR Sec. 63.71.
2/ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 214.
3/ 47 CFR Sec. 63.71.
4/ See 47 CFR Sec. 63.71(f)(1) (stating, in relevant part, that an application filed by a non-dominant carrier "shall be automatically granted on the 31st day... unless the Commission has notified the applicant that the grant will not be automatically effective.").
5/ Comments are normally due 15 days after the Commission releases public notice of the proposed discontinuance. 47 CFR Sec. 63.71(a). For purposes of computation of time, if the comment deadline falls on a weekend or officially recognized Federal legal holiday, however, comments will be due on the next business day. See 47 CFR Sec. 1.4(e) and (j).
6/ 47 CFR Sec. 1.1200 et seq.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-1042A1.pdf
FCC Wireline Competition Bureau Issues Public Notice: Comments Invited on Section 214 Application to Discontinue Domestic Dominant Carrier Telecommunications Services
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 25-337) on Dec. 12, 2025:
* * *
Unless otherwise specified, the following procedures and dates apply to the application(s) (the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s)) listed in the Appendix.
The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau), upon initial review, has found the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed herein to be acceptable for filing and subject to the procedures set forth in Section 63.71 of the Commission's rules./1 The application(s)
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 25-337) on Dec. 12, 2025:
* * *
Unless otherwise specified, the following procedures and dates apply to the application(s) (the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s)) listed in the Appendix.
The Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau), upon initial review, has found the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed herein to be acceptable for filing and subject to the procedures set forth in Section 63.71 of the Commission's rules./1 The application(s)request authority, under section 214 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,/2 and section 63.71 of the Commission's rules,/3 to discontinue, reduce, or impair certain domestic telecommunications service(s) (Affected Service(s)) in specified geographic areas (Service Area(s)) as applicable and as fully described in each application.
In accordance with section 63.71(f) of the Commission's rules, the Section 214 Discontinuance Application(s) listed in the Appendix will be deemed granted automatically on February 10, 2026, the 60th day after the release date of this public notice, unless the Commission notifies any applicant(s) that their grant will not be automatically effective./4 We note that the date on which an application for Commission authorization is deemed granted may be different from the date on which applicants are authorized to discontinue service ("Authorized Date"). Any applicant whose application has been deemed granted may discontinue their Affected Service(s) in their Service Area(s) on or after the authorized discontinuance date(s) specified in the Appendix, in accordance with their filed representations. Accordingly, pursuant to section 63.71(f), and the terms outlined in each application, absent further Commission action, each applicant may discontinue the Affected Service(s) in the Service Area(s) described in their application on or after the authorized discontinuance date(s) listed in the Appendix for that application. For purposes of computation of time when filing a petition for reconsideration, application for review, or petition for judicial review of the Commission's decision(s), the date of "public notice" shall be the later of the auto grant date stated above in this Public Notice, or the release date(s) of any further public notice(s) or order(s) announcing final Commission action, as applicable. Should no petitions for reconsideration, applications for review, or petitions for judicial review be timely filed, the proceeding(s) listed in this Public Notice shall be terminated, and the docket(s) will be closed.
Comments objecting to the application(s) listed in the Appendix must be filed with the Commission on or before January 12, 2026./5 Comments should refer to the specific WC Docket No. and Comp. Pol. File No. listed in the Appendix for the Section 214 Discontinuance Application. Comments should include specific information about the impact of the proposed discontinuance on the commenter, including any inability to acquire reasonable substitute service. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Electronic Filers: Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Filers should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments. Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket number.
Paper Filers: Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each filing. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial courier, or by the U.S. Postal Service. All filings must be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. Hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary are accepted between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. by the FCC's mailing contractor at 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the building. Commercial courier deliveries (any deliveries not by the U.S. Postal Service) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. Filings sent by U.S. Postal Service First-Class Mail, Priority Mail, and Priority Mail Express must be sent to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
This proceeding(s) shall be treated as a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding(s) in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules./6 Persons making ex parte presentations must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period applies). Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the presentation. If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments already reflected in the presenter's written comments, memoranda or other filings in the proceeding, the presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum. Documents shown or given to Commission staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed consistent with rule 1.1206(b). In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, searchable .pdf). Participants in this proceeding(s) should familiarize themselves with the Commission's ex parte rules.
People with Disabilities: To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.
For further information, please see the contact(s) for the specific discontinuance proceeding you are interested in as listed in the Appendix. For further information on procedures regarding section 214 please visit https://www.fcc.gov/general/domestic-section-214-discontinuance-service.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ 47 CFR Sec. 63.71.
2/ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 214.
3/ 47 CFR Sec. 63.71.
4/ See 47 CFR Sec. 63.71(f)(1) (stating, in relevant part, that an application filed by a dominant carrier "shall be automatically granted on the 60th day... unless the Commission has notified the applicant that the grant will not be automatically effective.").
5/ Comments are normally due 15 days after the Commission releases public notice of the proposed discontinuance. 47 CFR Sec. 63.71(a). For purposes of computation of time, if the comment deadline falls on a weekend or officially recognized Federal legal holiday, however, comments will be due on the next business day. See 47 CFR Sec. 1.4(e) and (j).
6/ 47 CFR Sec. 1.1200 et seq.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-25-1044A1.pdf
