FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
W ASHINGTON 
OFFICE Of" 
THE. CHAIRMAN 
The Honorable David Vitter 
United States Senate 
516 Hart Senate Office Building 
Washington, D.C. 20510 
Dear Senator Vitter: 
October 30, 2014 
Thank you for your letter regarding the implementation of certain aspects of Phase II of 
the Connect America Fund (CAF II). In your letter, you express concerns that the overall 
mission of the CAF II program could be endangered if the Commission increases the current 
broadband speed benchmark for program recipients to 10 Mbps downstream /1 Mbps upstream 
without allowing flexibility in other elements of program, particularly with respect to the length 
of the term of support. Your views are very in1portant and will be included in the record of the 
proceeding and considered as part of the Commissionls review. 
The universal service program is one of the most important tools at our disposal to ensure 
that consumers and businesses in rural America have the same opportunities as their urban and 
suburban counterparts to be active participants in the United States of the 21 51 century. We are 
focused on updating the universal service high-cost program to ensure that we are delivering the 
best possible voice and broadband experiences to rural areas of states such as Louisiana, within 
the confmes of our Connect America budget, all while providing increased certainty and 
predictability for all carriers, and a climate for increased broadband expansion. 
In April of this year, the Commission adopted a Connect America Fund Phase II Report 
and Order to move forward with Connect America for price-cap carriers. In addition, in an 
associated Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FN PRM), the Commission sought comment 
on a number of the issues you raise, including revising the current broadband performance 
obligations to require minimum speeds of 10 Mbps downstream. As you note, the FNPRM also 
seeks comment on a proposal to allow CAF II recipients more flexibility in meeting their 
performance obligations, including whether we should extend the term of support to longer than 
five years. Many price cap carriers have argued that building networks capable ofproviding 10 
Mbps will take more time and more funding than meeting the current 4/1 Mbps speed 
requirement because it will require extending fiber farther into the network and deploying 
additional equipment. Other commenters argue that extending the Phase II term or support 
beyond five years will delay a competitive bidding process for the areas served by price cap 
carriers. The Commission's staff is reviewing the record and giving all the arguments due 
consideration before we move forward with any decisions. 
Page 2- The Honorable David V itter 
With respect to the points you raise on the importance of prudent use of universal service 
funds and targeting CAF II support to areas where broadband would not otherwise be available, 
the Commission has a responsibility to ensure that the funds we collect to support universal 
service programs are used in the most efficient and effective way possible. To that point, the 
FNPRM proposes to exclude from eligibility those areas served by any provider offering voice 
and broadband services that meet the Commission's service obligations, regardless of whether 
the provider is subsidized or unsubsidized. 
You have also expressed your concern that the Commission ensure that eligible 
households not be excluded from CAF ll funding. We take this concern very seriously. We are 
currently fmalizing the list of census blocks that arc eligible for support. To ensure that this list 
is as accurate as possible, we have a challenge process in place where parties can identify alleged 
problems with the broadband map. As part of that process, the Commission has received a total 
of 178,335 challenges from parties on the served/unserved status of census blocks. Commission 
staff is currently reviewing these challenges and seeking public comment on the challenges. We 
intend to make sure that a fair challenge process is conducted so that all eligible unserved areas 
qualify for funding. 
I welcome a dialogue with stakeholders as to how best to accomplish our shared 
objectives. I look forward to working with you as we continue reforming and modernizing the 
Universal Service Fund high-cost program - as well as other components of the Universal 
Service Fund - to ensure that all Americans have access to robust voice and broadband services. 
I appreciate your interest in this matter. Please let me know if I can be of any further 
assistance.