Petitions to Reconsider Rural Health Care Order Filed
On November 12, 2019, five petitions were filed seeking reconsideration of the Federal Communications Commission’s recent 2019 Rural Health Care Order.
Although petitioners commend the Commission for its attempts to reform the Rural Health Care program, they argued that reconsideration of certain aspects of the Order is warranted. The petitioners seek reconsideration of the Order’s rate setting process for the Telecom Program, among other program changes adopted by the Order:
Per the Commission’s rules, any interested person may file a petition for reconsideration in a rulemaking proceeding. The Commission may, upon finding good cause, stay the effective date of a rule pending a decision on the petition for reconsideration.
What happens next? Under the Commission’s rules, the Commission may grant the petition for reconsideration, in whole or in part, or it may decide to deny or dismiss the petition for reconsideration. For any action it takes, the Commission will issue an order stating the reasons for its decision. However, if the Commission’s order modifies any rules adopted by the original order, the 2019 Rural Health Care Order, interested parties may file a petition for reconsideration of the new order.
Although petitioners commend the Commission for its attempts to reform the Rural Health Care program, they argued that reconsideration of certain aspects of the Order is warranted. The petitioners seek reconsideration of the Order’s rate setting process for the Telecom Program, among other program changes adopted by the Order:
- SHLB Coalition - SHLB urges the Commission to reconsider the Order’s funding prioritization system when RHC funding caps are exceeded. SHLB also argues the Commission erred when revising the methodology for setting the Telecom Program’s rural and urban rates, including its delegation of authority on rate-setting to USAC. SHLB also requests clarification or modification of how Medically Underserved Area/Population designations are treated in sparsely populated counties.
- USTelecom - USTelecom requests the Commission reconsider the Order’s median rural rate framework (including the rate ceiling, the inclusion of non-telecommunications as similar services, and the delegation of rate-setting authority to USAC) and the certification rule prohibiting service providers from using commissioned consultants. USTelecom also requests the Commission clarify other administrative rules.
- The State of Alaska - The State of Alaska seeks reconsideration of the Order’s rate-setting mechanism for the Telecom Program as it applies to Alaska’s diverse, rural communities. The State of Alaska argues the new rate-setting rules will underfund telecommunications in the State’s most rural communities.
- Alaska Communications - Alaska Communications argues the Commission should reconsider the Order’s rate-setting process for two reasons. First, in the Telecom Program, capping the compensable rural rate based on a rate medium fails to compensate service providers in the most remote locations. Second, USAC should not have the delegated authority to determine the rural rates that are eligible for support because these decisions require the Commission’s authority and expertise. Alaska Communications also seeks clarification of the new rule permitting non-material site and service substitutions.
- North Carolina Telehealth Network, Southern Ohio Health Care Network - The state health networks ask the Commission to reevaluate the Order’s decision not to increase the Healthcare Connect Fund sub-cap. The state health networks also argue the Commission should revise the Order’s definitions of rural to make them more granular.
Per the Commission’s rules, any interested person may file a petition for reconsideration in a rulemaking proceeding. The Commission may, upon finding good cause, stay the effective date of a rule pending a decision on the petition for reconsideration.
What happens next? Under the Commission’s rules, the Commission may grant the petition for reconsideration, in whole or in part, or it may decide to deny or dismiss the petition for reconsideration. For any action it takes, the Commission will issue an order stating the reasons for its decision. However, if the Commission’s order modifies any rules adopted by the original order, the 2019 Rural Health Care Order, interested parties may file a petition for reconsideration of the new order.
