Federal Regulatory Agencies
Here's a look at documents from federal regulatory agencies
Featured Stories
FCC Wireline Competition Bureau Issues Public Notice: Comments Invited on AT&T Section 214 Application to Discontinue Domestic Legacy Voice Service as Part of Technology Transition
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 26-73) on March 31, 2026:
* * *
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, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 26-73) on March 31, 2026:
* * *
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 May 1, 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 listed in the Appendix must be filed with the Commission on or before April 15, 2026. 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 shall be treated as a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding in accordance with the Commission's ex parte rules./5 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 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"); see also 47 CFR Sec. 63.71(f)(2)(i) (stating that "[a]n application to discontinue, reduce, or impair an existing retail service as part of a technology transition, as defined in Sec. 63.60(i), may be automatically granted... if: The applicant provides affected customers with the notice required under paragraph (a)(6) of this section, and the application contains the showing or certification described in Sec. 63.602(b)"); Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, WC Docket No. 17-84, Order, DA 25248, para. 6 (WCB Mar. 20, 2025) (waiving the Adequate Replacement Test's "single replacement service" requirement for a period of two years when a carrier seeks to discontinue a legacy voice service pursuant to section 214(a), thereby allowing carriers to satisfy all three prongs of the Adequate Replacement Test with a bundled service); Technology Transitions, GN Docket No. 13-5, Order on Clarification, DA 25-250, para. 6 (WCB Mar. 20, 2025) (clarifying the applicability of the testing methodology and parameters required for meeting the streamlining criteria when a carrier submits a technology transition discontinuance application relying on the "totality of the circumstances" under the Adequate Replacement Test)).
5/ 47 CFR Sec. 1.1200 et seq.
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-306A1.pdf
FCC Terminates Gigapower Dispute Following Settlement With Rock Hill
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Wireline Competition Bureau has officially ended a regulatory proceeding involving Gigapower LLC, Dallas, Texas and the city of Rock Hill, South Carolina. The decision follows a successful negotiation between the company and local officials, which eliminated the need for federal intervention.
The case centered on the Petition of Gigapower, LLC for Preemption and Declaratory Judgment Ruling Pursuant to Section 253(d) of the Communications Act of 1934 (WC Docket No. 26-1). Gigapower originally filed the petition in late December 2025,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Wireline Competition Bureau has officially ended a regulatory proceeding involving Gigapower LLC, Dallas, Texas and the city of Rock Hill, South Carolina. The decision follows a successful negotiation between the company and local officials, which eliminated the need for federal intervention.
The case centered on the Petition of Gigapower, LLC for Preemption and Declaratory Judgment Ruling Pursuant to Section 253(d) of the Communications Act of 1934 (WC Docket No. 26-1). Gigapower originally filed the petition in late December 2025,seeking a federal ruling to bypass certain local regulations or obstacles encountered during its infrastructure deployment.
In February 2026, the Bureau granted an extension for public comments to provide both sides additional time to reach a private agreement. This pause in the legal process allowed the parties to engage in direct discussions to resolve their differences outside of the federal regulatory framework.
On March 27, 2026, Gigapower submitted a motion to withdraw its request. The company informed the Commission that the parties reached a mutually satisfactory resolution to the dispute. Gigapower indicated that a controversy requiring Commission action no longer exists.
Joseph S. Calascione, Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau, issued the order granting the withdrawal on March 31, 2026. Under the authority of Commission rules, the Bureau dismissed the petition without prejudice. This action effectively terminates the proceeding in WC Docket 26-1, closing the file on the disagreement between the internet service provider and the South Carolina municipality.
-- Vidhi Gianani, Targeted News Service
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-315A1.pdf
SEC Obtains Judgments as to Chicago-Based Investment Adviser, Its CEO for Allegedly Charging Improper Fees
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 25-civ-07491; N.D. Ill. filed July 3, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Eliseo Prisno (a/k/a Jojo Prisno) and PE Capital Investment Management Partners, No. 25-civ-07491 (N.D. Ill. filed July 3, 2025)
On March 10 and March 26, 2026, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered judgments in the SEC's enforcement action against P/E Capital Investment Management Partners and its CEO, Eliseo Prisno.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 25-civ-07491; N.D. Ill. filed July 3, 2025):
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Eliseo Prisno (a/k/a Jojo Prisno) and PE Capital Investment Management Partners, No. 25-civ-07491 (N.D. Ill. filed July 3, 2025)
On March 10 and March 26, 2026, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois entered judgments in the SEC's enforcement action against P/E Capital Investment Management Partners and its CEO, Eliseo Prisno.
According to the SEC's complaint, filedon July 3, 2025, from at least February 2019 through at least July 2023, Prisno and P/E Capital charged more than 200 advisory clients approximately $2.4 million in unauthorized and undisclosed quarterly fees. In some instances, the complaint alleges, Prisno and P/E Capital deceptively accessed client accounts using their clients' login credentials--frequently without their clients' knowledge or consent--to approve such fees.
Without admitting or denying the SEC's allegations, Prisno and P/E Capital consented to entry of the judgments, which permanently enjoin Prisno and P/E Capital from violating the antifraud provisions of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. The judgments also order each defendant to pay disgorgement with prejudgment interest and a civil penalty, with the amounts to be determined by the Court upon motion of the SEC. Finally, the judgment as to Prisno enjoins him from acting as or being associated with any broker, dealer, or investment adviser, either permanently or for a specified duration, to be determined by the Court upon motion of the SEC.
The SEC's litigation is being conducted by Jonathan Polish and Alyssa Qualls of the SEC's Chicago Regional Office, and Daniel Griffin of the Division of Enforcement's Asset Management Unit.
* * *
Resources
* Final Judgment - Eliseo Jojo Prisno (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2026/judg26515-prisno.pdf)
* Final Judgment - P/E Capital Investment Management Partners (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2026/judg26515-pe-capital.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26515
FCC Rejects Deadline Extensions for Supply Chain Reimbursement Program
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Wireline Competition Bureau has denied requests from two entities seeking more time to remove unsecure equipment from their networks. The decision impacts Waxahachie ISD and WorldCell Solutions Inc., Rockville, Maryland, both of which are participants in the federal effort regarding "Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through FCC Programs" (WC Docket No. 18-89).
Under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, the Commission manages a Reimbursement Program to help providers
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Wireline Competition Bureau has denied requests from two entities seeking more time to remove unsecure equipment from their networks. The decision impacts Waxahachie ISD and WorldCell Solutions Inc., Rockville, Maryland, both of which are participants in the federal effort regarding "Protecting Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through FCC Programs" (WC Docket No. 18-89).
Under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019, the Commission manages a Reimbursement Program to help providersreplace equipment that poses national security risks. While the law allows for individual extensions of up to six months, recipients must prove that delays are caused by factors beyond their control.
Waxahachie ISD requested to move its completion deadline from May 8, 2026, to August 8, 2026. The school district cited global memory shortages and high pricing as the primary reasons for the delay. However, the Bureau found the request lacked necessary evidence. The order noted that a single sentence regarding supply chain issues did not explain how these factors specifically prevented the district from meeting the May deadline or what steps were taken to mitigate the problem.
WorldCell Solutions, Inc. sought an extension until August 31, 2026, citing vendor challenges involving network configurations, software updates, and hardware delivery. The Bureau similarly rejected this request, stating the company provided only general statements rather than a breakdown of the obstacles. The Bureau also clarified that the availability of additional funding is not a valid justification for a time extension.
Federal officials emphasized that because participants have received funding, they are expected to show progress. Both petitions were denied without prejudice, meaning the parties could potentially refile with more information. For now, the original May 8, 2026, deadline for the removal, replacement, and disposal of covered equipment remains in place for these providers.
Joseph S. Calascione, Chief of the Wireline Competition Bureau, issued the order on March 31, 2026, to ensure the prompt removal of prohibited technology from the national communications infrastructure.
-- Vidhi Gianani, Targeted News Servoce
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-316A1.pdf
SEC Obtains Consent Judgment as to Ex-CEO of NewAge
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 22-cv-02744; D. Colo. filed Oct. 18, 2022) involving ex-CEO of NewAge Inc.:
* * *
On March 25, 2026, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado entered a final consent judgment as to Brent David Willis in the SEC's civil enforcement action against him.
The SEC's complaint, filed on October 18, 2022, alleged that from approximately July 2017 through April 2019, Willis, while CEO of NewAge, Inc., made numerous false and misleading public statements in press releases, earnings
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 22-cv-02744; D. Colo. filed Oct. 18, 2022) involving ex-CEO of NewAge Inc.:
* * *
On March 25, 2026, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado entered a final consent judgment as to Brent David Willis in the SEC's civil enforcement action against him.
The SEC's complaint, filed on October 18, 2022, alleged that from approximately July 2017 through April 2019, Willis, while CEO of NewAge, Inc., made numerous false and misleading public statements in press releases, earningscalls, investor conferences, and interviews, and aided and abetted NewAge's selective disclosure of material nonpublic information.
Without admitting or denying the allegations in the SEC's complaint, Willis consented to a final judgment that: (1) permanently enjoins him from violating Sections 17(a)(2) and (a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 by, directly or indirectly, making any false or misleading statement, or disseminating any false or misleading documents, materials, or information, concerning matters relating to a decision by an investor or prospective investor to buy or sell securities of any company; (2) permanently enjoins him from aiding and abetting violations of Section 13(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and Regulation FD; (3) orders him to pay a civil monetary penalty of $175,000; and (4) imposes a five-year officer and director bar against him.
The SEC's litigation was led by Damon Taaffe under the supervision of David Nasse. The SEC's investigation was conducted by James Bresnicky and Edward Gerard, and supervised by J. Lee Buck, II and Pei Y. Chung.
* * *
Resources
* Final Judgment (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/litreleases/2026/judg26516.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26516
SEC Charges 2 Individuals in Alleged Fraudulent Scheme to Misappropriate Millions of Dollars From 2 Penny Stock Issuers
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 26-cv-03407; D.N.J. filed March 31, 2026) involving two individuals in alleged fraudulent scheme:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jon Fullenkamp, et al., No. 26-cv-03407 (D.N.J. filed March 31, 2026)
On March 31, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Scott Sand and his business associate, Jon Fullenkamp, with allegedly perpetrating a fraud scheme to misappropriate millions of dollars from two publicly traded, penny stock issuers ("the issuers") for which they
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release (No. 26-cv-03407; D.N.J. filed March 31, 2026) involving two individuals in alleged fraudulent scheme:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jon Fullenkamp, et al., No. 26-cv-03407 (D.N.J. filed March 31, 2026)
On March 31, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Scott Sand and his business associate, Jon Fullenkamp, with allegedly perpetrating a fraud scheme to misappropriate millions of dollars from two publicly traded, penny stock issuers ("the issuers") for which theyeffectively served as senior management.
The SEC's complaint alleges that Sand and Fullenkamp, although not formally identified as part of the issuers' management, exercised extensive control over the issuers, including managing regulatory compliance, financial reporting, and investor relations. According to the complaint, from at least October 2020 through 2023, Sand and Fullenkamp enriched themselves by causing the issuers to enter into sham agreements with an entity secretly controlled by Fullenkamp, and then to issue hundreds of thousands of preferred shares to the Fullenkamp-controlled company pursuant to the sham agreements. As alleged, Sand and Fullenkamp then sold some of the preferred shares to third parties, realizing $2.6 million in proceeds, which they split between them.
The SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, charges Sand and Fullenkamp with violating Sections 17(a)(1) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 10b-5(a) and (c) thereunder. The complaint seeks permanent injunctive relief, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, and civil penalties against Sand and Fullenkamp, and a conduct-based injunction against Sand. As to Fullenkamp, the complaint also seeks a penny stock bar, officer and director bar, and an order requiring surrender for cancellation of all of the fraudulently acquired shares of preferred and common stock.
Fullenkamp, without denying the SEC's allegations, consented to the entry of a judgment, subject to court approval, permanently enjoining him from future violations of the charged provisions of federal securities law, imposing permanent officer and director and penny stock bars, ordering him to surrender for cancellation all fraudulently acquired shares, and ordering him to pay disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and a civil penalty in amounts to be determined by the Court upon motion by the SEC.
Fullenkamp has also been charged in a parallel criminal action by the United States Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey for related conduct.
The SEC's investigation was conducted by Cecilia Connor, Matthew Homberger and David Medway, and supervised by Kingdon Kase and Scott A. Thompson, all of the SEC's Philadelphia Regional Office. The litigation will be led by John Donnelly and supervised by Gregory R. Bockin, also of the Philadelphia Regional Office.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26517.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26517
FCC Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau Issues Public Notice: Applications for National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program Certification Due June 30
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau issued the following public notice (CG Docket No. 10-210) on March 31, 2026:
* * *
Under the National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program (NDBEDP), also known as "iCanConnect," the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) may provide up to $10 million annually from the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Service Fund (TRS Fund) to support programs that distribute equipment to eligible low-income individuals who are deafblind, so that these individuals can access telecommunications
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, April 1 -- The Federal Communications Commission Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau issued the following public notice (CG Docket No. 10-210) on March 31, 2026:
* * *
Under the National Deaf-Blind Equipment Distribution Program (NDBEDP), also known as "iCanConnect," the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) may provide up to $10 million annually from the Interstate Telecommunications Relay Service Fund (TRS Fund) to support programs that distribute equipment to eligible low-income individuals who are deafblind, so that these individuals can access telecommunicationsservice, Internet access service, and advanced communications services./1
In accordance with the NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (CGB) certifies a single entity for each state, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as the sole entity for that jurisdiction eligible to receive reimbursement for NDBEDP activities from the TRS Fund./2 The current certification cycle of the NDBEDP will end on June 30, 2027. Consistent with the Commission's rules, entities interested in participating in the NDBEDP for the next five-year certification cycle (July 1, 2027 - June 30, 2032) must submit applications by June 30, 2026./3
Certifications for the NDBEDP will be granted for a five year period./4 Each entity selected must comply with the NDBEDP rules/5 and will be responsible in that state for distributing equipment and providing related services, such as outreach, assessments, installation, and training, either directly or through collaboration, partnership, or contract with other individuals or entities in-state or out-of-state, including other NDBEDP certified programs./6
WHO MAY APPLY? Any public or private entity may apply for certification to participate in the program and receive reimbursement from the TRS Fund./7 For example, equipment distribution programs, vocational rehabilitation programs, assistive technology programs, schools for the deaf, blind, or deafblind, organizational affiliates, independent living centers, or private educational facilities, may apply./8 Entities based within or outside a state may apply for certification to administer any NDBEDP state program./9
FILING AN APPLICATION: There is no application form, fee, or specified format that must be used to apply for NDBEDP certification. However, all applications, including renewals, must contain sufficient detail to demonstrate the applicant's ability to meet all criteria required for certification and a commitment to comply with all Commission requirements governing the NDBEDP./10 The Commission will review applications and determine whether to grant certification based on the ability of an entity to meet the following qualifications, either directly or in coordination with other programs or entities, as evidenced in the application and any supplemental materials:/11
1. Expertise in the field of deafblindness, including familiarity with the culture and etiquette of people who are deafblind./12
2. The ability to communicate effectively with people who are deafblind (for training and other purposes), by among other things, using sign language, providing materials in braille, ensuring that information made available online is accessible, and using other assistive technologies and methods to achieve effective communication.
3. Administrative and financial management experience in managing programmatic funds, recordkeeping, and generally accepted accounting principles./13
4. Staffing and facilities sufficient to administer the program, including the ability to distribute equipment and provide related services to low-income individuals who are deafblind throughout the state, including those in remote areas.
5. Experience with the distribution of specialized customer premises equipment, especially to people who are deafblind.
6. Experience in training consumers on how to use the equipment and how to set up the equipment for its effective use.
7. Familiarity with telecommunications service, Internet access service, and advanced communications services.
8. If the applicant is seeking renewal of certification, the ability to provide equipment and related services in compliance with the Commission's rules, as demonstrated by the applicant's past performance./14
In addition to these qualifications, an applicant must disclose in its application any relationship, arrangement, or agreement with a manufacturer or provider of equipment or related services that poses an actual or potential conflict of interest, as well as the steps the applicant will take to eliminate such actual or potential conflict or to minimize the associated risks./15 If an applicant for certification learns of a potential or actual conflict while its application is pending, it must immediately disclose such conflict to the Commission./16
Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit applications electronically to NDBEDP@fcc.gov. Applications may alternatively be mailed to the following address:
NDBEDP Administrator
Disability Rights Office
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau
Federal Communications Commission
45 L Street, NE
Washington, DC 20554
After the deadline for submitting applications, CGB will release a public notice listing all of the entities that have applied for certification. CGB will release additional public notices announcing entities selected for certification after conducting its reviews of all applications and supplemental materials received for each state and U.S. territory.
The Commission also reminds currently certified NDBEDP entities that an entity planning to discontinue its participation in the NDBEDP must comply with certain requirements to ensure the ongoing operations of the program being exited, including providing written notice to the NDBEDP Administrator at least 90 days in advance of its intended exit date, submitting a final reimbursement claim, semi-annual report, and final audit report to the Commission, transferring data and equipment inventory to its successor, and notifying consumers./17
ACCESSIBLE FORMATS: 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 and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: NDBEDP Administrator Jackie Ellington, Disability Rights Office, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, at 202-418-1153 or NDBEDP@fcc.gov.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ 47 U.S.C. Sec. 620; see also 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 64.6201-64.6219; Implementation of the Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010, Section 105, Relay Services for Deaf-Blind Individuals, Report and Order, 31 FCC Rcd 9178 (2016) (NDBEDP Permanent Program Order). In this Notice, we use the term "deafblind" unless the term "deaf-blind" appears in statutory or regulatory language or in quotations.
2/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207; see also NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9184, para. 9 (directing the Bureau to certify one entity for each state and territory to receive NDBEDP funding). Collectively, the entities selected to participate in the NDBEDP are referred to as "certified programs" or "state programs."
3/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(b)(2), (e) (providing that a program may apply for certification or renewal of its current certification by filing a new application at least one year prior to the expiration of the certification period).
4/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(e).
5/ 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 64.6201-64.6219.
6/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207.
7/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(a).
8/ Id.
9/ NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9191, para. 25. For example, an out-of-state entity that works with in-state partners to provide services may function well in states that lack sufficient resources. When making its certification selections, CGB will consider the benefits that a local entity can bring to its state's residents, such as through established relationships with state networks and the ability to meet consumers' needs as they arise, especially when weighing the merits of equally qualified applicants. Id., 31 FCC Rcd at 9191, para. 26.
10/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(c); see also NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9187-91, paras. 17-27.
11/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(c)(1)-(7). Applicants may also include letters of recommendation from members of the deafblind community in their state, experts, or others with direct knowledge of the applicants' capabilities and qualifications.
12/ The Commission defines the phrase "expertise in the field of deaf-blindness, including familiarity with the culture and etiquette of people who are deaf-blind" to include expertise regarding the language and communication needs of individuals who are deafblind. NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9187, n.53.
13/ Id., 31 FCC Rcd at 9189, para. 22. Certified programs are reimbursed for the reasonable costs of equipment and authorized related services, up to their funding allocations under this program. 47 CFR Sec. 64.6213(a). Upon certification and at the beginning of each TRS Fund year, certified programs may elect to submit reimbursement claims on a monthly, quarterly, or semiannual basis. 47 CFR Sec. 64.6213(b). Within 30 days after the end of each reimbursement period during the TRS Fund year, each certified program must submit documentation that supports its claim for reimbursement. 47 CFR Sec. 64.6213(c). Because the program operates on a cost-reimbursement basis, applicants should also have the financial resource and the administrative experience to support the equipment purchase, control, and inventory processes, the reimbursement process, and the annual audit. NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9189-90, n.73.
14/ See id. at 9186, para. 14.
15/ 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(d)(1); see also NDBEDP Permanent Program Order, 31 FCC Rcd at 9190, paras. 23-24. The Commission may reject an application for NDBEDP certification, or may require an applicant, as a condition of certification, to take additional steps to eliminate, or to minimize the risks associated with, an actual or potential conflict of interest, if relationships, arrangements, or agreements affecting the applicant are likely to impede its objectivity in the distribution of equipment or its ability to comply with NDBEDP requirements. 47 CFR Sec. 64.6207(d)(1).
16/ Id.
17/ Id., 31 FCC Rcd at 9197, paras. 35-50; see also 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 64.6207(g), (j).
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-317A1.pdf
