More parties are seeking to file amicus briefs supporting petitioners challenging the FCC net neutrality order, motions filed Tuesday revealed in USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063 at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (available via Pacer). Petitioners challenging the order's net neutrality rules and broadband reclassification as a telecom service under Title II of the Communications Act are Alamo Broadband, the American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, Daniel Berninger, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association. The Business Roundtable, National Association of Manufacturers and U.S. Chamber of Commerce to file an amicus brief that would argue the FCC regulation "will reduce broadband investment and stifle innovation." The Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy seeks to address the "underlying economic issues" and show the commission "incorrectly assessed both the costs and benefits of a Title II regulatory regime" and "explain and quantify how the FCC's actions will negatively impact investment in the Internet." University of Pennsylvania Law professor Christopher Yoo seeks to show the order "contradicts the technical principles that determined" the Supreme Court's 2005 ruling upholding the commission's previous Title I cable broadband classification in NCTA v. Brand X. Richard Bennett, who says he is a co-inventor of Wi-Fi and modern ethernet architecture, seeks to explain how the Title II broadband reclassification "effectively bans Quality of Service modes of communications unique and essential to the functioning of the Internet, and are vital for real-time communication, High-Definition voice, video conferencing, and the Internet of things." He also plans to show the agency ruling "displays a lack of expertise on the subject matter" and made other errors, including by ignoring that broadband Internet access service is "part of an integrated whole that includes a larger and more important information processing component." The Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council seeks to support AT&T, CenturyLink, CTIA, NCTA and USTelecom by arguing that the commission "failed to adequately consider evidence that Title II regulation will: 1) impose a regulatory paradigm that will adversely affect broadband access, deployment and adoption in historically disadvantaged communities where mass market broadband services are not ubiquitous; and 2) endanger the progress made under the FCC's previous regulatory paradigm toward narrowing the digital divide for vulnerable populations and creating workforce development in these communities." Three other parties made filings on Monday announcing their intent to submit amicus briefs supporting petitioners (see 1507140035).

The FCC process reform to-do list is narrowing as it's made numerous changes over the past year in how it operates, Chairman Tom Wheeler's special counsel Diane Cornell said a blog post Monday. Those changes cover the gamut from a revamped consumer help center and accelerated processing of applications for review to every bureau having developed and implementing backlog reduction plans and expedited processing of cellular license applications. Improvements in the works include an updated electronic comment filing system to roll out this summer and ongoing improvements to FCC.gov's searchability and navigability, Cornell said. "This is good progress, but there’s much more to be done -- internal process reform initiatives will continue over the months to come," she said . "We plan to deploy new IT tracking and collaboration tool capability, more electronic filing and automated processes, and adopt many more proposals that would eliminate or streamline outdated rules." The process reform work follows a report and recommendations put out by the agency in early 2014 on improving internal operations.

FCC broadband reclassification "will likely have significant adverse effects" on Internet investment, according to a study by Kevin Hassett, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and Robert Shapiro, a senior policy fellow at the Georgetown Center for Business and Public Policy, which circulated the paper Tuesday. The authors acknowledged research support from Washington think tank NDN but said the views were their own. The data show broadband service spread more rapidly than computers or dial-up service "and with virtually no regulatory intervention," the study said, but applying Title II of the Communications Act to broadband Internet access service will "likely increase costs and regulatory hurdles for providers" and could lead to "substantial price increases and consumer costs," with a negative impact on investment. The authors cited a 2015 Progressive Policy Institute policy memo by Hal Singer that suggested Title II regulation reduced telecom company investment by 5.5 percent per year in past years compared with what it otherwise would have been. Hassett and Shapiro also cited their own 2014 AT&T-backed study that suggested Title II regulation could reduce future telecom investment by 12.8 to 20.8 percent. The authors noted the FCC net neutrality order questioned the assumptions of that study, but they rejected commission criticisms and called some of them irrelevant. The authors also cited a University of Pennsylvania paper by Christopher Yoo that compared certain broadband metrics of the U.S., when broadband was more lightly regulated, with those of Europe, which was more heavily regulated, and found that America had higher access and investment levels, and lower consumer costs at speed tiers below 12 Mbps (with higher U.S. costs for higher speed levels justified by higher bandwidth use). "This suggests that it is reasonable to expect large negative effects on investment from Title II regulation," Hassett and Shapiro said. "Substantial" uncertainties arising from Title II litigation and FCC forbearance decisions would likely further depress investment, the authors said. "We should expect that ISPs will reduce some of their planned capital investments, at least until the FCC establishes how, to what extent and toward whom the new regulations will be applied, and the legal challenges to those decisions have been resolved." FCC enforcement of specific complaints -- including over IP interconnection, a vast new area of jurisdiction -- and the 2016 election and likely FCC leadership changes will prolong the uncertainties, they added. "Sorting this out could take years or even decades, not unlike the more than 70 years it has taken to give effect to Title II," they said. "These multiple sources of uncertainty extend beyond the enduring and compounding negative effects of the regulation, such as the increased costs, prohibited practices, and delayed innovation." FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has disputed that the net neutrality and the Title II broadband order is discouraging investment (see 1506260024 and 1505200033).

Harold Furchtgott-Roth, Mobile Future and the Washington Legal Foundation (WLF) plan to file amicus briefs in support of petitioners challenging the FCC net neutrality order in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). Furchtgott-Roth, a former FCC commissioner, and WLF intend to file a brief Aug. 6 in support of petitioners Alamo Broadband, the American Cable Association, AT&T, CenturyLink, Daniel Berninger, CTIA, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless Internet Service Provider Association, their notice filed Monday said. It said all the parties, including the FCC and Justice Department, consented to the filing of the brief. Mobile Future intends to file an amicus brief in support of CTIA and AT&T, its motion filed Monday said. Mobile Future said it plans to address points "unique to mobile broadband providers" that may not be fully discussed by the main group of petitioners, which includes both mobile and fixed providers, some of which oppose mobile broadband arguments to be made by CTIA. Mobile Future said it was "impractical" for it to join with other parties in an amicus brief.

The Telecommunications Industry Association plans to support challenges to the FCC net neutrality order, the group said in an emailed news release Monday. TIA filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to file an amicus brief on Aug. 6 in support of various petitioners in the case, including USTelecom (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063). TIA said it would argue that the FCC decisions to reclassify broadband Internet access service under Title II of the Communications Act and craft an Internet conduct rule were "arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with the law."

The May FCC order requiring pay-TV carriers to pass through emergency alerts on a secondary audio stream to mobile devices streaming their content (see 1505210056) takes effect Aug. 10, the Media Bureau said in a public notice posted Friday in docket 12-107. Aug. 10 is also the deadline for comments on some other proposed aspects of the rule, such as whether school closing information should be included on the secondary audio stream; and whether the FCC should require multichannel video programming distributors to provide “a simple and easy to use activation mechanism” for accessing the emergency information on the secondary stream. Reply comments on those matters are due Sept. 8, the PN said.

The FCC is lifting the sunshine period on the upcoming Incentive Auction Procedures Public Notice, according to a public notice released late Friday. Parties will be able to make presentations to FCC officials about the Procedures PN until 7 p.m. Wednesday, the PN said. The lifting of the sunshine period is related to the FCC's expected release of additional information about the Incentive Auction interference simulations that the commission released data from in May, an FCC official told us. The Procedures PN is on the agenda for Thursday's open meeting.

The FCC Friday posted the dates for its 2016 meetings. The commission meets for the first time Jan. 28 and holds its last meeting Dec. 15. In between it meets Feb. 25, March 31, April 28, May 26, June 16, July 14, Aug. 4, Sept. 29, Oct. 27 and Nov. 17.

FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn dismissed the notion Internet access is not a necessity when she addressed the National Action Network Wednesday in a speech that appeared to answer comments made recently by Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who disputed that Internet access is a necessity (see 1506250035). Clyburn said the FCC is looking to update its voice-oriented Lifeline USF support program for the digital age. "But let me warn you, any proposed transition will not come easy, for there are those who publicly proclaim that Internet access is 'not a necessity'!" she said, according to her remarks as prepared for delivery. "Not a necessity … during a time when the majority of Fortune 500 companies post new job listings strictly on websites? And where if you are fortunate enough to secure a position, your new boss expects you to have an e-mail address? Not a necessity … where, in a growing number of states, those who are income-eligible can only apply for benefits or aid online? Not a necessity … when most colleges and universities post and accept student admissions electronically? Not a necessity … as the evidence grows daily, on how technology is bridging long-standing gaps when it comes to the delivery, quality of service, and cost efficiencies for access to health care and wellness? And when you make that face-to-face appointment or conduct business in person, when was the last time you bought or referred to a folded map when you traveled to that destination?"

The FCC assembled a steering committee and working team to oversee review of Charter Communications' buy of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. Heading the interbureau steering committee in docket 15-149 will be General Counsel Jonathan Sallet, with the committee including International Bureau Chief Mindel De La Torre, Media Bureau Chief Bill Lake, Wireless Bureau Chief Roger Sherman and Wireline Bureau Chief Matthew DelNero. Heading the working team will be Owen Kendler, on detail with the FCC Office of General Counsel from the Department of Justice, where he most recently was assistant chief of its Antitrust Division's Telecommunications and Media Enforcement Section. The senior economist on the working team will be William Rogerson, former FCC chief economist. The working team will report to the steering committee.