E-Rate for FY 2025:

Wave 9 of funding commitment decision letters for FY 2025 was released on Thursday, June 19th, for $56.7 million.  Total funding is now $1.33 billion.  Currently, USAC has funded 69.0% of submitted applications, representing 41.2% of the dollars requested.

E-Rate for FY 2024:

Wave 60 for FY 2024 was released on Friday, June 20th, for $355 thousand (for four applicants).  Total funding is $2.70 billion.  Currently, USAC has funded 98.5% of submitted applications, representing 94.3% of the dollars requested.

Cybersecurity Pilot Program – Application Window:

The Form 471 application window for the Cybersecurity Pilot Program opened on March 18th and will close on September 15th, 2025.  Total pilot funding is capped at $200 million for 703* applicants.

Upcoming Dates:

Third FCC Commissioner Approved by Senate

Olivia Trusty, nominated to the Federal Communications Commission by President Trump, was confirmed by the full Senate to fill the remaining term ending June 30, 2025, vacated by ex-Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel.  Ms. Trusty was then confirmed to a new full five-year term beginning July 1, 2025.  The preliminary half-month dance was a little unusual.  It appears to have been designed to bring the FCC up to the three-Commissioner level, constituting a quorum, in time for the FCC’s next open meeting on June 26th.  Without a quorum, the FCC’s ability to take official action, on any major issues, would have been limited (see our newsletter of June 9th).

With three Commissioners — two Republicans and one Democrat — the FCC is still not at full strength.  Traditionally, and by law, there are slots for five Commissioners, three representing the Administration’s party (the Republicans) and two representing the other party (the Democrats).  But now, things get interesting.  The FCC has a quorum, but two empty seats.  Historically, in this situation, the President would nominate two additional Commissioners, another Republican and, with the advice of the Senate minority leader, another Democrat.

There is a question under President Trump, however, as to whether a five-member, three-to-two, FCC Commission is the goal.  Earlier this year, dealing with a similarly structured Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), the President fired the two Democratic Commissioners.  That situation is currently being adjudicated.  Democratic FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, who earlier this year began an independent “First Amendment Tour” supporting freedom of the press (see FCC Release of May 23rd), may not be an Administration favorite if her position as the third quorum vote is no longer required.

Another Supreme Court Decision Impacting the FCC

With the E-Rate community awaiting a Supreme Court decision on the constitutionality of the Universal Service Fund (“USF”) (see our newsletter of June 2nd), which could come as early as this week, the Court did issue a decision last week in the case of McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc v. McKesson Corp. that has so far gone largely unnoticed.  This decision is important because it bears on the FCC’s ability to interpret Federal laws.

Agency interpretation of Federal laws came under attack last year when the Supreme Court overturned a forty-year precedent established in the Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council case that had previously required the courts to defer to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretation of statutory rules deemed ambiguous (see our newsletter of July 1, 2024).  The McLaughlin v. McKesson decision is the first time in which the overturn of the Chevron case has been applied directly to an FCC rule.

In this case, the decision involves the FCC’s interpretation of Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) that gives businesses and consumers the right to sue over the receipt of unsolicited faxes.  McLaughlin had sued McKesson for damages and an injunction to stop online faxes.  The FCC, however, had previously ruled that the TCPA applied only to faxes received through telephone facsimile machines, not to online faxes.  McLaughlin pursued the matter in the lower courts.  Interestingly, the courts, up through the Ninth Circuit, ultimately supported the FCC’s rule.  But they did so while explicitly reserving the courts’ right to review the FCC’s decisions.  Last week, the Supreme Court agreed.

This decision, obviously, does not directly affect E-Rate.  But it does support the primacy of the courts over FCC rules.  The telecommunications industry had urged the Court in the other direction arguing that such a move would introduce regulatory uncertainty.  The decision certainly adds more uncertainty to the upcoming Court decision on USF.

USAC’s Schools and Libraries Cybersecurity Pilot Program Newsletter dated June 18, 2025, focuses primarily on the CBR Form 471 review process and on starting services when funding is approved.
Not surprisingly, USAC lists the following topics likely to be addressed during the review of a Cyber Pilot application:

• Eligibility of the services/equipment requested;
• Cost Effectiveness of the services/equipment requested;
• Ensuring that the requested funding does not exceed the participant’s approved budget;
• Contracts; and
• The competitive bidding process.

The newsletter also discusses the PIA and Selective Review process for cyber applications, basically tracking with the traditional E-Rate process.  The one unusual addition is the following paragraph suggesting how to handle reviews involving highly confidential information.

To the extent the information requested during the application review process might include proprietary or sensitive commercial and financial information, Pilot participants and service providers may request confidential treatment of the information under section 0.459 of the FCC rules. See FCC Instructions for Submitting Confidential Information.

The referenced “FCC Instructions” discuss how to hand-deliver or otherwise send such proprietary information directly to the FCC.  Although we appreciate USAC’s acknowledgement that certain cyber-related information may be highly confidential, we wonder how PIA will respond if, in response to a request, an applicant sends the requested information to the FCC as proprietary rather than sending it directly to PIA.

The newsletter reminds applicants that Pilot funds become available as soon as approved applicants receive their Funding Commitment Decision Letters (“FCDLs”).  The last date to receive service is three years from the date of their first FCDLs.  For month-to-month services, Pilot participants should use their actual service delivery start and end dates on the CBR Form 471. For contracted services, Pilot participants should use their contract start and end dates on the form.

USAC’s E-Rate News Brief dated June 19, 2025, covers the following topics:

• Tips on E-Rate program audits, FY 2025 invoicing, the new Category Two budget factors, and a reminder on the summer deferral period.
• A brief Selective Review overview.
• Requesting a Service Delivery Date extension of the June 30th special construction deadline.
• Reminder to service providers to file their annual Form 473 (“SPAC”).
• Overview of the FY 2025 invoicing process.
• Plans for 2025 training and outreach, including the dates for two in-person training days:
  Denver, CO                September 9 , 2025
  Washington, DC        September 16, 2025
  (Registration to begin June 26th)