Read theMandate

Rural Broadband Protection Act of 2025Section 2 › Proposal

Proposals are measured against established standards

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, section 2, Sec. 2. Written by .

Proposals are measured against established standards

The document says “shallWho acts: Federal Communications CommissionHow: statuteSec. 2 in the PDF
What the document says

“reasonable and well-established technical, financial, and operational standards, including the technical standards adopted by the Commission in orders of the Commission relating to Establishing the Digital Opportunity Data Collection (WC Docket No. 19-195) (or orders of the Commission relating to modernizing any successor collection) for purposes of entities that must report broadband availability coverage”

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, Sec. 2

The first of two things the Commission is to evaluate a proposal against. The section directs that the Commission shall evaluate a proposal described in subparagraph (B) against reasonable and well-established standards of these three kinds, and names one source of them: the technical standards the Commission adopted in its orders in WC Docket No. 19-195, Establishing the Digital Opportunity Data Collection, or orders on any successor collection, as those standards apply to entities that must report broadband availability coverage. Those orders are not indexed here.

What the document actually says

“reasonable and well-established technical, financial, and operational standards, including the technical standards adopted by the Commission in orders of the Commission relating to Establishing the Digital Opportunity Data Collection (WC Docket No. 19-195) (or orders of the Commission relating to modernizing any successor collection) for purposes of entities that must report broadband availability coverage”

To require the Federal Communications Commission to establish a vetting process for prospective applicants for high-cost universal service program funding, Sec. 2
That sentence, in plain words

The FCC must judge a plan against known standards. They cover skill, money, and how well a firm can run a network. Some come from its own past rules.

What this is about

The FCC has written standards like these before. It has to use those. It does not make up a fresh test for each person who asks.

No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.

Share this page
How to cite this
  1. The document itself

    Rural Broadband Protection Act of 2025, Public Law 119-89, sec. 2, 140 Stat. 818 (2026).
    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-119publ89/html/PLAW-119publ89.htm

  2. This page

    “Proposals are measured against established standards,” Rural Broadband Protection Act of 2025, section 2, Sec. 2. Read the Mandate, https://readthemandate.org/rural-broadband-protection-act-2025/proposal/sec02-evaluation-standards/ (retrieved August 26, 2026).

Cite the document when the claim is about what the document says. Cite this page when the indexing, the wording or the record of what has happened is what is being relied on.

How to Read This Page

The quotation is the document's own words, exactly as printed, and we check the page number against the Act itself before publishing. The paragraph underneath is our summary, not the document's words. So is the plain English version, which is why it sits beside the quotation rather than replacing it.

All proposals in this section →