Case Background
On November
17, 2025, LTE Wireless Inc. (LTE Wireless) filed a petition with the Florida
Public Service Commission (Commission or FPSC) seeking designation as a
facilities-based wireless eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC). This
designation is sought for the purpose of receiving federal low-income support
to provide Lifeline services on a statewide basis. LTE Wireless is a South Dakota
corporation, registered to do business in Florida as a foreign corporation,
with principal offices in New York.
LTE
Wireless represents itself as both a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) and
a facilities-based provider. The company contends it obtains wireless network
access as an approved MVNO of T-Mobile, pursuant to a reseller agreement with
Prepaid Wireless Group (PWG), a Mobile Virtual Network Aggregator. PWG
furnishes integrated communications solutions, including MVNO enablement,
carrier access aggregation, and voice, text, and data services. LTE asserts it
also provides retail broadband Internet access to end users utilizing
T-Mobile’s network. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defines MVNOs
as providers that resell mobile wireless services purchased wholesale from
facilities-based service providers.
LTE
Wireless asserts that it qualifies as a facilities-based provider based on its
ownership of two switches. LTE Wireless states that it provides commercial
mobile radio service (CMRS) and prepaid wireless telecommunications services
through a combination of resold services and its own facilities. LTE Wireless
currently offers prepaid wireless service in Oregon, South Dakota, and New
York, but does not yet provide service in Florida. LTE Wireless further represents
that it was formerly a nationwide participant in the Affordable Connectivity
Program (ACP). LTE Wireless is independently owned, with
Mr. Faizel Hassad serving as its CEO and Manager. As a CMRS provider, LTE
Wireless is regulated as a common carrier pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 153(11).
LTE
Wireless states that it was recently granted ETC designation in Missouri and
Minnesota, and asserts that it has never been denied ETC designation. LTE
Wireless also disclosed it withdrew its ETC petitions in Washington, Utah,
Iowa, and New Mexico. Upon independent review, staff discovered
that LTE Wireless had not disclosed that it also withdrew its ETC petition in
New York on February 3, 2025. LTE Wireless submitted a letter to the New York
Department of Public Service in connection with that withdrawal stating it
would reapply once it had an FCC compliance plan. However, a year later, LTE Wireless had
filed a separate application for ETC designation in New York without an FCC
compliance plan, asserting that it is both a facilities-based CLEC and an MVNO.
In a related
docket, PWG — which provides integrated communications solutions for LTE
Wireless — filed a petition for ETC designation in Florida. PWG claimed it satisfied the
facilities-based requirements. However, despite repeated requests over a
seven-month period, PWG failed to provide sufficient information regarding its
facilities. Staff filed its recommendation to deny PWG’s
petition on December 20, 2024, after which PWG withdrew the petition.
Section 214(e)(2)
of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 gives state public utility commissions
the primary responsibility for designating ETCs. Section 364.10, F.S., allows
the Commission to approve wireless Lifeline ETC petitions by requesting
carriers. LTE Wireless acknowledges 47 C.F.R. § 54.201(i), which prohibits
state commissions from designating carriers as Lifeline only ETCs that provide supported
services exclusively through resale absent an FCC approved compliance plan. LTE Wireless asserts that it meets all
requirements for designation as an ETC under 47 C.F.R. § 54.201.
LTE Wireless further acknowledges and affirms that, if approved, it will comply
with Section 364.105, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 25-4.0665,
Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), which govern Lifeline service and provide
for a transitional discount for customers who no longer qualify for Lifeline.
Discussion
of Issues
Issue 1:
Should LTE Wireless be granted an ETC designation to
provide Lifeline service throughout the
State of Florida?
Recommendation:
No. LTE Wireless should not be granted an ETC
designation to provide Lifeline service throughout the State of Florida. (Day,
Deas, Mallow, Fogleman)
Staff Analysis:
Legal Standard
ETC designation is necessary for
telecommunications companies to participate in the federal Lifeline program. Section 364.10, F.S., allows the
Commission to approve wireless Lifeline ETC petitions by requesting
carriers. Specifically, Section 364.10(1)(a) and (3)(a), F.S., provide that the
Commission has the authority to designate a commercial mobile radio service
provider as an ETC for the limited purpose of providing Lifeline service. Federal
rules outline the requirements for ETC designation.
To obtain ETC designation to provide Lifeline services, federal rules require
that carriers:
1)
Be a common carrier;
2)
Offer the services that are supported by the federal
universal support mechanisms either using its own facilities or a combination
of its own facilities and resale of another carrier’s services;
3)
Advertise the availability of its Lifeline service
through a media of general distribution;
4)
Provide voice grade access to the public switch network
or its functional equivalent;
5)
Offer minutes of use for local service at no additional
charge to end users;
6)
Provide access to the emergency services available by
local government or other public safety organizations;
7)
Provide Broadband Internet Access Service;
8)
Demonstrate financial and technical capability to
provide Lifeline service; and
9)
Not charge Lifeline customers a monthly
number-portability charge.
In addition, Florida law requires ETCs to:
1)
Offer a discounted transitional basic
telecommunications service;
and
2)
Participate in the Lifeline Promotion Process.
The burden
of proof with respect to these requirements rests with the applicant.
Analysis
Public Interest
Determinations
State commissions are required to determine that an ETC
designation is in the public interest. In staff’s questions to LTE Wireless, the company was asked whether it had ever been
the subject of a public investigation, formal allegation, or finding of
noncompliance by a state commission. LTE Wireless responded that it had never
been the subject of any such action.
Upon review, staff identified that in Iowa Utilities
Commission (IUC) Docket No. M‑4633, the IUC documented that LTE Wireless
failed to timely file required annual reports in 2021, 2024, and 2025. The IUC
issued notices in 2024 and 2025 warning that continued noncompliance could
result in civil penalties and the involuntary cancellation of LTE Wireless’s
telecommunications registration.
LTE Wireless subsequently filed the required reports after receiving notice, thereby
avoiding civil penalties and cancellation each time. In November 2025, in
connection with LTE Wireless’s petition for ETC designation in Iowa, the IUC
cited this history and requested an explanation as to why its “past
noncompliance should not weigh against the IUC’s consideration in this matter.”
LTE Wireless did not respond before withdrawing its petition on January 8,
2026.
Florida ETCs are expected to comply with annual data
requests and investigations regarding customer complaints and to respond fully,
accurately, and in a manner sufficient to permit effective regulatory review. It
appears that LTE Wireless has a repeated history of noncompliance in Iowa and
that it has failed to disclose key information in response to Florida staff
inquiries. Accordingly, staff questions
whether designating LTE Wireless as an
ETC in Florida would be in the public interest.
Facilities
Requirement
Federal rules require that a carrier designated as an ETC
offer Lifeline services using either its own facilities or a combination of its
own facilities and the resale of another carrier’s services. State
commissions may not designate a carrier that offers supported services
exclusively through the resale of another carrier’s facilities. As previously discussed, LTE Wireless represents
itself as both an MVNO and a facilities-based provider. LTE Wireless states that it resells
T‑Mobile services through PWG. LTE Wireless further explained that PWG
provides LTE Wireless with both its voice and data services. Based on LTE
Wireless’s explanation of the services it provides, LTE Wireless would rely exclusively
on the services of other carriers to provide Lifeline. While LTE Wireless asserts
that it has “two switch locations that will provide call routing for domestic
USA calls,” it does not make clear how these switches function or provide any
value within the context of the underlying wholesale service provisioned by the
T-Mobile. Therefore, staff believes that
LTE Wireless does not meet the facilities requirement under federal rules.
Conclusion
Staff believes that
LTE Wireless’s history of noncompliance in another state demonstrates that
designation in Florida would not serve the public interest. Furthermore, LTE
Wireless has not proven that it
satisfies the federal facilities requirement. Therefore, staff recommends that
LTE Wireless’s petition for ETC designation in Florida be denied.
Issue 2:
Should this docket be closed?
Recommendation:
If no person whose substantial interests are affected
by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the issuance of
the Proposed Agency Action Order, this docket should be closed upon the
issuance of a consummating order. (Farooqi)
Staff Analysis:
If no person whose substantial interests are
affected by the proposed agency action files a protest within 21 days of the
issuance of the Proposed Agency Action Order, this docket should be closed upon
the issuance of a consummating order.
