Commitments And Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2018
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	(17) Commitments and Contingencies: Although from time to time we make short-term purchasing commitments to vendors with respect to capital expenditures, we generally do not enter into firm, written contracts for such activities. In June 2015, Frontier accepted the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) offer of support to price cap carriers under the Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II program, which is intended to provide long-term support for broadband in high cost unserved or underserved areas. This program provides $332 million in annual support through 2020 to make available 10 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream broadband service to approximately 774,000 households across certain of the 29 states where we operate. To the extent we do not enable the required number of households with 10 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream broadband service by the end of the CAF Phase II term in 2020 or we are unable to satisfy other FCC CAF Phase II requirements, we would be required to return a portion of the funds previously received. Frontier’s frozen high-cost phasedown support is expected to be $6 million in 2018. On April 20, 2017, the FCC issued an Order that significantly altered how Commercial Data Services are regulated. Specifically, the Order adopted a test to determine, on a county-by-county basis, whether price cap ILECs, like Frontier’s DS1 and DS3 services, will continue to be regulated. The test resulted in deregulation in a substantial number of our markets and is allowing Frontier to offer its DS1 and DS3 services in a manner that better responds to the competitive marketplace and allows for commercial negotiation. The areas that remain regulated may be subject to price fluctuations depending upon the price cap formula that year. Multiple parties have appealed the Order, which is pending in the 8th Circuit. Frontier cannot predict the extent to which these regulatory changes will affect revenues at this time. On April 30, 2018, an amended consolidated class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on behalf of certain purported stockholders against Frontier, certain of its current and former directors and officers and the underwriters of certain Frontier securities offerings. The complaint is brought on behalf of all persons who (1) acquired Frontier common stock between February 6, 2015 and February 28, 2018, inclusive, and/or (2) acquired Frontier common stock or Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock either in or traceable to Frontier’s offerings of common and preferred stock conducted on or about June 2, 2015 and June 8, 2015. The complaint asserts, among other things, violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in connection with certain disclosures relating to the CTF Acquisition. The complaint seeks, among other things, damages and equitable and injunctive relief. We dispute the allegations in the complaint described above and intend to vigorously defend against such claims. Given that this matter is in the early stages of litigation, we are unable to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss, if any, that may result from this matter. In addition, we are party to various other legal proceedings (including individual, class and putative class actions as well as governmental investigations) arising in the normal course of our business covering a wide range of matters and types of claims including, but not limited to, general contracts, billing disputes, rights of access, taxes and surcharges, consumer protection, trademark and patent infringement, employment, regulatory, tort, claims of competitors and disputes with other carriers. Such matters are subject to uncertainty and the outcome of individual matters is not predictable. However, we believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters, after considering insurance coverage or other indemnities to which we are entitled, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. We accrue an expense for pending litigation when we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal defense costs are expensed as incurred. None of our existing accruals for pending matters, after considering insurance coverage, is material. We monitor our pending litigation for the purpose of adjusting our accruals and revising our disclosures accordingly, when required. Litigation is, however, subject to uncertainty, and the outcome of any particular matter is not predictable. We will vigorously defend our interests in pending litigation, and as of this date, we believe that the ultimate resolution of all such matters, after considering insurance coverage or other indemnities to which we are entitled, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or our cash flows. In October 2013, the California Attorney General’s Office notified certain Verizon companies, including one of the subsidiaries that we acquired in the CTF Acquisition, of potential violations of California state hazardous waste statutes primarily arising from the disposal of electronic components, batteries and aerosol cans at certain California facilities. We are cooperating with this investigation. We have accrued an amount for potential penalties that we deem to be probable and reasonably estimated, and we do not expect that any potential penalties, if ultimately incurred, will be material in comparison to the established accrual.

(17) Commitments and Contingencies:

Although from time to time we make short-term purchasing commitments to vendors with respect to capital expenditures, we generally do not enter into firm, written contracts for such activities.

In June 2015, Frontier accepted the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) offer of support to price cap carriers under the Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II program, which is intended to provide long-term support for broadband in high cost unserved or underserved areas. This program provides $332 million in annual support through 2020 to make available 10 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream broadband service to approximately 774,000 households across certain of the 29 states where we operate. To the extent we do not enable the required number of households with 10 Mbps downstream/1 Mbps upstream broadband service by the end of the CAF Phase II term in 2020 or we are unable to satisfy other FCC CAF Phase II requirements, we would be required to return a portion of the funds previously received. Frontier’s frozen high-cost phasedown support is expected to be $6 million in 2018.

On April 20, 2017, the FCC issued an Order that significantly altered how Commercial Data Services are regulated. Specifically, the Order adopted a test to determine, on a county-by-county basis, whether price cap ILECs, like Frontier’s DS1 and DS3 services, will continue to be regulated. The test resulted in deregulation in a substantial number of our markets and is allowing Frontier to offer its DS1 and DS3 services in a manner that better responds to the competitive marketplace and allows for commercial negotiation. The areas that remain regulated may be subject to price fluctuations depending upon the price cap formula that year. Multiple parties have appealed the Order, which is pending in the 8th Circuit. Frontier cannot predict the extent to which these regulatory changes will affect revenues at this time.

On April 30, 2018, an amended consolidated class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on behalf of certain purported stockholders against Frontier, certain of its current and former directors and officers and the underwriters of certain Frontier securities offerings. The complaint is brought on behalf of all persons who (1) acquired Frontier common stock between February 6, 2015 and February 28, 2018, inclusive, and/or (2) acquired Frontier common stock or Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock either in or traceable to Frontier’s offerings of common and preferred stock conducted on or about June 2, 2015 and June 8, 2015. The complaint asserts, among other things, violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, in connection with certain disclosures relating to the CTF Acquisition. The complaint seeks, among other things, damages and equitable and injunctive relief. We dispute the allegations in the complaint described above and intend to vigorously defend against such claims. Given that this matter is in the early stages of litigation, we are unable to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss, if any, that may result from this matter.

In addition, we are party to various other legal proceedings (including individual, class and putative class actions as well as governmental investigations) arising in the normal course of our business covering a wide range of matters and types of claims including, but not limited to, general contracts, billing disputes, rights of access, taxes and surcharges, consumer protection, trademark and patent infringement, employment, regulatory, tort, claims of competitors and disputes with other carriers. Such matters are subject to uncertainty and the outcome of individual matters is not predictable. However, we believe that the ultimate resolution of these matters, after considering insurance coverage or other indemnities to which we are entitled, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

We accrue an expense for pending litigation when we determine that an unfavorable outcome is probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal defense costs are expensed as incurred. None of our existing accruals for pending matters, after considering insurance coverage, is material. We monitor our pending litigation for the purpose of adjusting our accruals and revising our disclosures accordingly, when required. Litigation is, however, subject to uncertainty, and the outcome of any particular matter is not predictable. We will vigorously defend our interests in pending litigation, and as of this date, we believe that the ultimate resolution of all such matters, after considering insurance coverage or other indemnities to which we are entitled, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or our cash flows.

In October 2013, the California Attorney General’s Office notified certain Verizon companies, including one of the subsidiaries that we acquired in the CTF Acquisition, of potential violations of California state hazardous waste statutes primarily arising from the disposal of electronic components, batteries and aerosol cans at certain California facilities. We are cooperating with this investigation. We have accrued an amount for potential penalties that we deem to be probable and reasonably estimated, and we do not expect that any potential penalties, if ultimately incurred, will be material in comparison to the established accrual.