Rule2026-01053
Addressing the Homework Gap Through the E-Rate Program; Partial Withdrawal
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 21, 2026
Effective
February 20, 2026
Issuing agencies
Federal Communications Commission
Abstract
In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) reconsiders the E-Rate Wi-Fi hotspot and services rules adopted in July 2024. Specifically, the Commission grants the petition for reconsideration filed by Maurine and Matthew Molak and finds that the best reading of section 254 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (the Communications Act) is that it does not permit funding of off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and the associated wireless internet services with E-Rate program support. In so finding, the Commission rescinds the rules adopted in July 2024. The Commission also denies the two remaining petitions for reconsideration of the Commission's 2024 Hotspots Order. Consistent with the reconsideration, the Commission also withdraws two amendatory instructions published in the Federal Register, but delayed indefinitely.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 13 (Wednesday, January 21, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2492-2496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-01053]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket No. 21-31; FCC 25-62; FR ID 326287]
Addressing the Homework Gap Through the E-Rate Program; Partial
Withdrawal
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; partial withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission
(Commission or FCC) reconsiders the E-Rate Wi-Fi hotspot and services
rules adopted in July 2024. Specifically, the Commission grants the
petition for reconsideration filed by Maurine and Matthew Molak and
finds that the best reading of section 254 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, (the Communications Act) is that it does not permit
funding of off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and the associated
wireless internet services with E-Rate program support. In so finding,
the Commission rescinds the rules adopted in July 2024. The Commission
also denies the two remaining petitions for reconsideration of the
Commission's 2024 Hotspots Order. Consistent with the reconsideration,
the Commission also withdraws two amendatory instructions published in
the Federal Register, but delayed indefinitely.
DATES: Effective February 20, 2026. As of January 21, 2026, amendatory
instruction numbers 4 (for Sec. 54.504) and 9 (for Sec. 54.516) in
the final rule, published at 89 FR 67303 on August 20, 2024, are
withdrawn.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Dumouchel, Telecommunications
Access Policy Division, Wireline Competition Bureau, at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#82e9e3f6e7ace6f7efedf7e1eae7eec2e4e1e1ace5edf4"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2f444e5b4a014b5a42405a4c474a436f494c4c01484059">[email protected]</span></a> or 202-418-7400 or TTY: 202-418-0484. Requests
for accommodations should be made as soon as possible in order to allow
the agency to satisfy such requests whenever possible. Send an email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#84e2e7e7b1b4b0c4e2e7e7aae3ebf2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="187e7b7b2d282c587e7b7b367f776e">[email protected]</span></a> or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at
(202) 418-0530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Order
on Reconsideration, in WC Docket No. 21-31; FCC 25-62, adopted and
released September 30. The full text of this document is available at
the following internet address: <a href="https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-25-62A1.pdf">https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-25-62A1.pdf</a>.
Order on Reconsideration
Introduction
The Commission revisits the E-Rate Wi-Fi hotspot and services rules
adopted in the July 2024 Hotspots Order (Final rule 89 FR 67303, August
20, 2024; Proposed rule 89 FR 67394, August 20, 2024). Specifically,
the Commission grants the petition for reconsideration filed by Maurine
and Matthew Molak (Molak Petition) to the extent provided herein and
find that the best reading of section 254 of the Communications Act of
1934, as amended, (the Communications Act) is that it does not permit
funding of off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and the associated
wireless internet services with E-Rate program support. In so finding,
the Commission rescinds the rules adopted in July 2024. The Commission
also denies the two remaining petitions for reconsideration of the
Commission's Hotspots Order. Finally, the Commission directs the
Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), the administrator of
the Commission's universal service programs, to deny pending
applications for E-Rate support related to the off-premises use of Wi-
Fi hotspots and services; and the Commission directs the Wireline
Competition Bureau (Bureau) to release a public notice with an amended
funding year (FY) 2025 eligible services list that reflects the changes
made in the Order on Reconsideration.
Discussion
On reconsideration, the Commission restores the E-Rate program
rules to those that existed before adoption of the July 2024 Hotspots
Order. The Commission grants the Molak Petition to the extent provided
herein and determines here that extending E-Rate to fund the off-
premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and associated wireless internet service
is not consistent with the best reading of section 254 of the
Communications Act. The Commission therefore rescinds the July 2024
rules.
Citing section 1.429(l)(1)-(2) of its rules, the Schools, Health &
Libraries Broadband Coalition (SHLB) asserts that the Molak Petition
should be dismissed because it does not raise new issues that were not
already addressed by the Commission in the Hotspots Order, fails to
address a material error, and its consideration is not in the public
interest. However, the Commission finds that consideration of the
arguments in the Molak Petition is in the public interest and permitted
by section 405 of the Communications Act and section 1.429 of its
rules. Reconsideration ``is generally appropriate where the petitioner
shows either a material error or omission in the original order or
raises additional facts not known or not existing until after the
petitioner's last opportunity to respond.'' In this instance, the
Commission is persuaded that the Commission's prior decision materially
erred in adopting rules for the E-Rate program that are not consistent
with the best reading of the Commission's statutory authority.
Section 254(h)(1)(B) of the Communications Act requires
telecommunications carriers to provide ``services that are within the
definition of universal service under subsection (c)(3)'' to
``elementary schools, secondary schools, and libraries'' for
``educational purposes'' at discounted rates. The Commission finds that
the off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and associated wireless internet
services does not constitute an educational purpose under the
Communications Act, given the multitude of non-educational ways such
service could be used. The Commission also finds it is unlikely that a
school or library official could certify with any actual knowledge or
certainty that use of the Wi-Fi hotspots by its students and library
patrons would be primarily for educational purposes as required by its
rules. However, even if the Commission agreed that such use could serve
an educational purpose, section 254(h)(1)(B) of the Communications Act
also requires that the services be provided ``to elementary schools,
secondary schools, and libraries.'' In the 2024 Hotspots Order, the
Commission stated that ``because schools and libraries are the
customers and recipients of the services they purchase, [] the services
are therefore provided to them within the meaning of section
254(h)(1)(B), even if used elsewhere.'' The Commission now disagrees.
While entities operating schools or libraries may be purchasing the Wi-
Fi hotspots and associated service, the schools and libraries are not
the recipients of the connectivity provided to student or library
patron homes, and the
[[Page 2493]]
Commission therefore finds this reading to be inconsistent with section
254(h)(1)(B) of the Communications Act. Under the best reading of
section 254(h)(1)(B) of the Communications Act, the services themselves
must be provided to eligible locations--namely elementary schools,
secondary schools, and libraries--to be eligible for support through
the E-Rate program. The Commission has limited statutory authority, and
the rules permitting the off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and
associated wireless internet services are not consistent with the best
reading of section 254(h)(1)(B) of the Communications Act.
The Commission's interpretation of the phrase ``to elementary
schools, secondary schools, and libraries'' as referring to locations
is strongly supported by the statutory context. For one, other
provisions of section 254 reinforce that support for schools under
section 254 is focused on support for services to schools as locations.
Both section 254(b)(6) and (h)(2)(A) link together the references to
schools and ``classrooms.'' That broader context supports the view that
the focus of section 254 is on service to schools as locations. And
interpreting the term ``library'' in context, insofar as schools refer
to locations in the phrase ``to elementary schools, secondary schools,
and libraries,'' the same should be true of libraries.
The Commission's interpretation also is supported by the difference
in section 254's treatment of health care providers. The heading of
section 254(h)(1)(A) refers to ``Health care providers for rural
areas'' and section 254(h)(1)(B) refers to ``Educational providers and
libraries.'' But only in section 254(h)(1)(A) did Congress carry
through that reference to ``providers'' in addressing services ``to any
public or nonprofit health care provider.'' By contrast, Congress chose
not to flow through the ``provider'' terminology used in the heading of
section 254(h)(1)(B), instead addressing services ``to elementary
schools, secondary schools, and libraries.'' Although the services
``to'' school and library locations would be purchased by educational
providers or libraries as organizational entities, the Commission
concludes that its interpretation of the language of section
254(h)(1)(B) best accounts for Congress's different textual choice as
compared to the language used for health care providers in section
254(h)(1)(A).
Section 254(h)(2)(A) of the Communications Act directs the
Commission to promulgate rules ``to enhance, to the extent technically
feasible and economically reasonable, access to advanced
telecommunications and information services for all public and
nonprofit elementary and secondary school classrooms . . . and
libraries.'' The Hotspots Order found that providing support for Wi-Fi
hotspots for students to do homework and access educational resources
supports effective classroom instruction support, such that it
satisfies the ``for . . . classrooms'' requirement. It did so by noting
that the statute uses the word ``for,'' rather than ``at'' or ``in,''
which might more clearly indicate the physical classroom. However, the
Commission disagrees that this language permits the Commission to
authorize support for services that connect to educational resources at
any location. The Commission has long supported E-Rate funding for the
services and equipment necessary to transport information to individual
classrooms, including for equipment in non-instructional buildings that
is essential for the effective transport of information to classrooms
(e.g., a data center housing a network switch). This is the best
reading of the language in section 254(h)(2)(A) of the Communications
Act directing the Commission to enhance access ``for . . .
classrooms.'' Under this reading, the services and equipment must
ultimately transport information to school classrooms. Congress could
not have intended the term ``for . . . classrooms'' to stretch to
services transporting information to students' homes, particularly in
light of the statutory limitation of support to uses that are
``technically feasible and economically reasonable.'' Similarly, the
Commission finds that the statute limits its ability to fund services
purchased by libraries to those that transport information to
libraries, and not that transport information to library patrons at
their homes or other non-library locations. Providing funding for the
purchase of off-premises Wi-Fi hotspots and associated wireless
internet service--particularly for libraries--could extend E-Rate
support with virtually no limits. Instead, the Commission finds that
the best reading of section 254(h)(2)(A) of the Communications Act does
not permit the Commission to fund off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots
and associated wireless internet services.
The Commission's decision to rescind the July 2024 rules is
reinforced by Congress's decisions regarding the Emergency Connectivity
Fund (ECF) program. In creating the temporary ECF program, Congress
expressly provided authorization for funding Wi-Fi hotspots for use by
students, staff, and library patrons at locations other than a school
or library. In particular, it directed the Commission to adopt rules
``providing for the provision, . . . of support under paragraphs (1)(B)
and (2) of section 254(h) of the Communications Act . . . to an
eligible school or library'' for the purchase of equipment or services
``for use by--(1) in the case of a school, students and staff of the
school at locations that include locations other than the school; and
(2) in the case of a library, patrons of the library at locations that
include locations other than the library.'' This is relevant in two
separate ways. First, it illustrates how Congress can and does address
support off-premises from schools and libraries where it wants to do
so. Unlike section 7402, section 254(h) authorizes funding to
elementary schools, secondary schools, and libraries, and for
classrooms. This contrast underscores that the Hotspots Order was not
based on the best reading of the Communications Act. Second, in
connection with a discussion of section 254(h)(1)(B) of the
Communications Act, it used the terms ``school'' and ``library'' in a
manner that clearly referred to locations and that equally clearly
treated off-premises locations as distinct from ``schools'' and
``libraries.'' This reinforces its conclusion that the terms
``schools'' and ``libraries'' are best understood to refer to locations
in the language ``to elementary schools, secondary schools, and
libraries'' in section 254(h)(1)(B) and exclude off-premises locations.
And while not necessary to its analysis of the implications of the ECF
program, the Commission further concludes that the forgoing suggests
that Congress saw section 7402 as a necessary expansion to section
254(h) in order to fund service for off-premises locations.
Moreover, the Commission does not agree, as a policy matter, with
the decision the Commission previously reached. Unlike in the ECF
program, there are no limiting principles to effectively limit the use
of scarce E-Rate funding for the off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and
associated wireless internet service. Specifically, there is no data or
analysis regarding the amount of federal funding that has already been
used to fund federal and state Wi-Fi hotspot lending programs or the
impact of the Commission's decision to use limited E-Rate funding for
this purpose. When Congress established the ECF program it limited the
size of the program by providing an appropriation in a definite amount
available for a fixed time period limited to purchases during the
emergency period, which is not the case for this potentially massive
[[Page 2494]]
expansion of the E-Rate program. The prior Commission's decision also
did not adequately justify the decision to expend funding for this
purpose in light of other spending programs that also covered the same
or similar purposes. Nor did the Commission put sufficient guardrails
in place to ensure that the expansion would operate in the public
interest. It also did not explain its decision with sufficient
reasoning how expanding the program would advance any legitimate
Commission purpose.
Nor does the Commission agree that the record in this proceeding
supported the prior decision regarding off-premises use. Commenters
explained the limits of section 254(h) and raised alarms about the E-
Rate program reaching every location in the country. Additional
commenters expressed concern that inclusion of the off-premises use of
Wi-Fi hotspots as an E-Rate-supported service contravened section 254
of the Communications Act. The Commission agrees with those commenters.
To fund Wi-Fi hotspots in the face of such robust opposition, and with
no clear statutory basis, is inappropriate.
In its opposition, T-Mobile provides a number of policy arguments
in favor of students having access to broadband internet at home. T-
Mobile highlights that there are many strong arguments in favor of
connecting students that are on the wrong side of the digital divide to
make sure they can complete homework assignments, review lessons, or
collaborate with fellow students. But regardless of the potential
policy benefits (or costs), Congress did not provide the Commission
with the authority to use the E-Rate program to support programs that
lend Wi-Fi hotspots to students and library patrons and provide
wireless internet service to such hotspots, and the Commission is
therefore unpersuaded by T-Mobile's arguments.
In conclusion, the Molak Petition urges the Commission to
reconsider the rules adopted in the July 2024 Hotspots Order because
the Commission lacks legal authority to take such an action. The
Commission agrees that funding off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and
associated wireless internet services through the E-Rate program is not
consistent with the best reading of the statutory authority provided to
the Commission in section 254 of the Communications Act and therefore
grant the petition for reconsideration for the reasons and to the
extent provided herein. The Commission is convinced that the Hotspots
Order was not premised on the best reading of the statute.
Because the Commission finds that the Hotspots Order is not
consistent with the best reading of section 254 of the Communications
Act, the Commission also denies the petitions for reconsideration filed
by Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) and SHLB, which sought
to further expand the eligibility of off-premises broadband services to
students, school staff, and library patrons. LAUSD and SHLB sought
reconsideration of the Hotspots Order decision to not support wireless
service to LTE-enabled devices, and SHLB separately sought
reconsideration of the decision to not extend E-Rate eligibility to
alternative wireless technologies, such as private citizens broadband
radio service (CBRS) networks, or to standalone hotspots that could
connect to private networks. Consistent with its findings, these
additional off-premises requests to provide E-Rate support go beyond
the best reading of section 254 of the Communications Act and are
therefore denied.
The Commission now rescinds the 2024 rule amendments made in the
Hotspots Order to the E-Rate rules. In addition, the Commission directs
the Bureau to release a public notice with an amended FY 2025 eligible
services list that reflects the changes made in the Order on
Reconsideration. To effectuate the Order on Reconsideration, the
Commission directs USAC to deny all pending FY 2025 E-Rate funding
requests for off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and wireless internet
services permitted pursuant to the July 2024 Hotspots Order. In
addition, the Commission directs the Bureau, with the assistance of
USAC, to modify the forms, procedures, and outreach materials to remove
references to the eligibility of these services.
Procedural Matters
Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980,
as amended (RFA), requires that a regulatory flexibility analysis be
prepared for rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that
``the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.'' The RFA generally defines
``small entity'' as having the same meaning as the terms ``small
business,'' ``small organization,'' and ``small governmental
jurisdiction.'' In addition, the term ``small business'' has the same
meaning as the term ``small business concern'' under the Small Business
Act. A small business concern is one that: (1) is independently owned
and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of operation; and (3)
satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business
Administration (SBA).
As required by the RFA, the Commission incorporated an Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) in the Addressing the Homework
Gap through the E-Rate Program Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(``NPRM''), released in November 2023. The Commission sought written
public comment on the proposals in the NPRM, including comment on the
IFRA. No comments were filed addressing the impact of the proposed
rules on small entities. In July 2024, the Commission released the
Addressing the Homework Gap through the E-Rate Program Report and
Order, 89 FR 67303, August 20, 2024 and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 89 FR 67394, August 20, 2024 (Hotspots Order) and published
a FRFA, as well as an IRFA for the Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.
On July 31, 2024, Maureen and Matthew Molak filed a Petition for
Reconsideration of the Hotspots Order (Molak Petition), which included
issues impacting small entities. On September 19, 2024, Los Angeles
Unified School District (LAUSD), and the Schools, Health & Libraries
Broadband Coalition (SHLB), Open Technology Institute at New America
(OTI), Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, Consortium for School
Networking (CoSN), and Common Sense Media (collectively SHLB) filed
timely petitions for reconsideration. On August 12, 2024, the
Commission published a notice seeking comment on the Molak Petition. On
September 30, 2024, the Commission published a notice seeking comment
on both the LAUSD Petition and the SHLB Petition. No comments were
filed addressing the impact of these petitions on small entities.
The two statutorily-mandated criteria to be applied in determining
the need for RFA analysis are: (1) whether the proposed rules, if
adopted, would have a significant economic impact, and (2) if so,
whether the economic effect would directly affect a substantial number
of small entities. For the reasons discussed, the Commission has
determined that the rules and policy changes adopted in the Order on
Reconsideration will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities and has prepared this Final
Regulatory Flexibility Certification (FRFC).
In the Order on Reconsideration, the Commission rescinds the rules
adopted in the Hotspots Order. In so doing, the Commission removes any
potential burdens associated with the rules adopted in the Hotspots
Order that
[[Page 2495]]
would have required reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance
obligations for small E-Rate service providers, and does not create any
new burdens in the process. In addition, the Commission has determined
that the impact on the entities affected by the rule change will not be
significant because the Order on Reconsideration is not adopting any
new rules. Thus, the Commission's actions have not created any new
obligations. Further, FY 2025 funding requests for the off-premises use
of Wi-Fi hotspots and/or wireless internet service have not been
processed by USAC, the administrator of the Commission's universal
service programs, and funding for the services permitted in the
Hotspots Order has not been approved for any E-Rate entities. As no
services or equipment have been provided as a result of the Hotspots
Order, the Order on Reconsideration does not create a significant
economic impact on these potential small service providers. Small and
other entities will simply be required to comply with the rules that
were effective prior to the adoption of the Hotspots Order.
Accordingly, based on its application of the two statutorily-
mandated criteria to the rules adopted in the Order on Reconsideration,
the Commission concludes that the removal of the rules adopted in the
Hotspots Order will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The Commission therefore
certifies that the rules adopted in the Order on Reconsideration,
eliminating compliance requirements in the Hotspots Order, will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The Commission will send a copy of the Order on Reconsideration,
including a copy of this Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, in
a report to Congress pursuant to the Congressional Review Act. In
addition, the Order on Reconsideration, and this final certification,
will be sent to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration, and will be published in the Federal Register.
Paperwork Reduction Act. This document does not adopt or propose
new or substantively modified information collections subject to the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition,
therefore, it does not contain any new or modified information
collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25
employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). On December 11, 2025, OMB
approved non-substantive changes to an existing information collection
pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 3507. That submission sought to remove program
certifications that are no longer applicable in the Schools and
Libraries Universal Service Description of Services Requested and
Certification Form 471 (E-Rate FCC Form 471). That submission also
sought to remove certain fields that are no longer applicable to the
Schools and Libraries Universal Service Description of Services
Requested and Certification Form 470 (E-Rate FCC Form 470) and E-Rate
FCC Form 471.
Congressional Review Act. The Commission has determined, and the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, concurs that this rule is ``non-
major'' under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The
Commission will send a copy of the Order on Reconsideration to Congress
and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A).
Ordering Clauses
Accordingly, it is ordered that, pursuant to the authority
contained in section 405 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended,
47 U.S.C. 405, and Sec. 1.429 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.429,
the Order on Reconsideration is adopted.
It is further ordered that the Petition for Reconsideration filed
by Maurine and Matthew Molak on July 31, 2024 is granted to the extent
provided herein.
It is further ordered that the Petitions for Reconsideration filed
by Los Angeles Unified School District and the Schools, Health &
Libraries Broadband Coalition, the Open Technology Institute at New
America, the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, the Consortium
for School Networking, and Common Sense Media on September 19, 2024,
are denied.
It is further ordered that, pursuant to Sec. 1.103 of the
Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.103, the amendments to the Commission's
rules are adopted, effective.
It is further ordered that the Universal Service Administrative
Company is directed to deny all pending funding year 2025 E-Rate
funding requests for the off-premises use of Wi-Fi hotspots and
wireless internet services requested pursuant to the Hotspots Order.
It is further ordered that the Commission's Office of the
Secretary, shall send a copy of the Order on Reconsideration, including
the Final Regulatory Flexibility Certification, to the Chief Counsel of
the Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy.
It is further ordered that the Office of the Managing Director,
Performance Management, shall send a copy of the Order on
Reconsideration in a report to be sent to Congress and the General
Accounting Office pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, see 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
Partial Withdrawal
On August 20, 2024, the Commission published the 2024 Hotspots
Order Final Rules in the Federal Register at 89 FR 67303, delaying the
amendatory instructions 4 and 9 indefinitely until the Commission
published a document in the Federal Register announcing the effective
date for the amendments to Sec. Sec. 54.504 and 54.516. In accordance
with that publication, the 2024 amendments to Sec. Sec. 54.504 and
54.516 are not in the final rules. The Order on Reconsideration
published herein rescinds all of the rules adopted in 2024, and in
order to effectuate the direction to restore the rules to those prior
to the 2024 Hotspots Order, the Commission also withdraws amendatory
instructions 4 and 9 at 89 FR 67303.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 54
Communications common carriers, Hotspots, Internet, Libraries,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Telecommunications,
Telephone.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene Dortch,
Secretary.
Final Rules
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Federal
Communications Commission amends 47 CFR part 54 as follows:
PART 54--UNIVERSAL SERVICE
0
1. The authority citation for part 54 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 155, 201, 205, 214, 219, 220,
229, 254, 303(r), 403, 1004, 1302, 1601-1609, and 1752, unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 54.500 by removing the definitions of ``Wi-Fi'' and
``Wi-Fi hotspot''.
0
3. Amend Sec. 54.502 by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a);
0
b. Removing paragraph (e), and;
0
c. Redesignating paragraph (f) as (e).
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 54.502 Eligible Services.
(a) Supported services. All supported services are listed in the
Eligible Services List as updated annually in
[[Page 2496]]
accordance with paragraph (e) of this section. The services in this
subpart will be supported in addition to all reasonable charges that
are incurred by taking such services, such as state and federal taxes.
Charges for termination liability, penalty surcharges, and other
charges not included in the cost of taking such service shall not be
covered by the universal service support mechanisms. The supported
services fall within the following general categories:
* * * * *
Sec. 54.506 [Removed and Reserved]
0
4. Remove and reserve Sec. 54.506.
0
5. Amend Sec. 54.507 by revising paragraph (f)(4) to read as follows
and removing paragraph (f)(5):
Sec. 54.507 Cap.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(4) For paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section, if the remaining
funds are not sufficient to support all of the funding requests within
a particular discount level, the Administrator shall allocate funds at
that discount level using the percentage of students eligible for the
National School Lunch Program. Thus, if there is not enough support to
fund all requests at the 40 percent discount level, the Administrator
shall allocate funds beginning with those applicants with the highest
percentage of NSLP eligibility for that discount level by funding those
applicants with 19 percent NSLP eligibility, then 18 percent NSLP
eligibility, and shall continue committing funds in the same manner to
applicants at each descending percentage of NSLP until there are no
funds remaining.
0
6. Amend Sec. 54.513 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 54.513 Resale and transfer of services.
* * * * *
(b) Disposal of obsolete equipment components of eligible services.
Eligible equipment components of eligible services purchased at a
discount under this subpart shall be considered obsolete if the
equipment components have been installed for at least five years.
Obsolete equipment components of eligible services may be resold or
transferred in consideration of money or any other thing of value,
disposed of, donated, or traded.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 54.516 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 54.516 Auditing and inspections.
(a) * * *
(1) Schools, libraries, and consortia. Schools, libraries, and any
consortium that includes schools or libraries shall retain all
documents related to the application for, receipt, and delivery of
supported services for at least 10 years after the latter of the last
day of the applicable funding year or the service delivery deadline for
the funding request. Any other document that demonstrates compliance
with the statutory or regulatory requirements for the schools and
libraries mechanism shall be retained as well. Schools, libraries, and
consortia shall maintain asset and inventory records of equipment
purchased as components of supported category two services sufficient
to verify the actual location of such equipment for a period of 10
years after purchase.
* * * * *
(b) Production of records. Schools, libraries, consortia, and
service providers shall produce such records at the request of any
representative (including any auditor) appointed by a state education
department, the Administrator, the FCC, or any local, state or federal
agency with jurisdiction over the entity.
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 54.520 by revising paragraphs (c)(1)(iii)(C),
(c)(2)(iii)(C), and (c)(3)(i)(C) to read as follows:
Sec. 54.520 Children's Internet Protection Act certifications
required from recipients of discounts under the federal universal
service support mechanism for schools and libraries.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) The Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified at 47
U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), does not apply because the recipient(s) of
service represented in the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486
is (are) receiving discount services only for telecommunications
services.
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(C) The Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified at 47
U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), does not apply because the recipient(s) of
service represented in the Funding Request Number(s) on this Form 486
is (are) receiving discount services only for telecommunications
services.
(3) * * *
(i) * * *
(C) The Children's Internet Protection Act, as codified at 47
U.S.C. 254(h) and (l), does not apply because the recipient(s) of
service under my administrative authority and represented in the
Funding Request Number(s) for which you have requested or received
Funding Commitments is (are) receiving discount services only for
telecommunications services; and
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-01053 Filed 1-20-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on January 21, 2026.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.