The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rejected the National Lifeline Association’s request for emergency stay of the FCC Wireline Bureau increasing the minimum service standard to 4.5 GB a month (see 2011250064), said an order (in Pacer) Monday. The increase takes effect Tuesday, and Lifeline providers say it's an existential threat. The lack of a stay "is disappointing," said NaLA attorney John Heitmann of Kelley Drye. Judges Patricia Millett, Neomi Rao and Cornelia Pillard said petitioners NaLA and Assist Wireless “have not satisfied the stringent requirements for a stay.” Benton Institute for Broadband & Society Senior Counselor Andrew Schwartzman called that D.C. Circuit “boilerplate” for stay rejections. He called it a positive sign for NaLA that the judges requested an FCC response to NaLA’s request for a writ of mandamus compelling the agency to act on reconsideration petitions against a 2016 Lifeline order. "NaLA will continue to work on multiple fronts to preserve free access for Lifeline-eligible consumers to mobile broadband, including by seeking commission review of the bureau’s waiver order," Heitmann said. The timing of Heitmann’s application for review could influence how it's received at the FCC, attorneys said. The current commission doesn't have enough likely yes votes to advance a draft order on the Lifeline increase (see 2011160051). The change in the White House, Pai's stepping down next month (see 2011300032), and the possibility of prospective commissioner Nathan Simington replacing Commissioner Mike O’Rielly (see 2011240061) could change that dynamic, attorneys said.

The Wireline Bureau’s 4.5-a-month GB Lifeline minimum service standard order will “heave” customers and providers “into a new digital divide created by the FCC’s results-driven, record-be-damned decision-making,” said the National Lifeline Association in a brief (in Pacer) filed Wednesday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (see 2011240059). The agency doesn’t use record evidence to rebut claims from providers that the MSS increase will kill the Lifeline program, NaLA said. “Instead, the FCC speculates that a general trend downward in wireless rates will make it possible for carriers to absorb a 50% data increase on December 1 with no increased subsidy.” The FCC’s brief pointed to a T-Mobile statement it will offer a Lifeline plan at 4.5 GB as evidence that the MSS is viable, but T-Mobile -- and thus its Lifeline provider subsidy Assurance -- doesn’t have to buy spectrum like other Lifeline providers do, NaLA said. The 4.5 GB MSS “will create a new chasm with 31% of Lifeline subscribers served by T-Mobile’s Assurance having free access to 4.5 GB while 63% served by wireless resellers (overwhelmingly T-Mobile’s wholesale partners) will not,” NaLA said. The FCC hasn’t shown that freezing the MSS at 3 GB will cause any harms, NaLA said. “All Lifeline stakeholders, including carriers, public interest groups, state commissions and commissioners, and policymakers from both parties, agreed that the FCC should pause the MSS at 3 GB to avoid jeopardizing affordable free Lifeline mobile broadband service and delay any MSS changes.” T-Mobile and the FCC didn’t comment.

The FCC and FTC have begun working with President-elect Joe Biden’s transition review teams, the agencies confirmed. The moves, weeks after news agencies declared that Biden defeated President Donald Trump, follow General Services Administration head Emily Murphy’s Monday decision to allow federal agencies to begin the transition process. The FCC and Biden’s review team for the commission “have made contact,” and the commission “will fully cooperate in the transition process,” a spokesperson emailed. Michael Carowitz, special counsel to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, is “running point on the transition for the Chairman’s Office." Carowitz was previously acting Enforcement Bureau chief and Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau deputy chief. Biden’s FCC team members are House Judiciary Committee Senior Counselor John Williams; former Commissioner Mignon Clyburn; DLA Piper’s Smitty Smith, a former FCC and NTIA staffer; and Paul de Sa, former FCC official and analyst (see 2011160020). FTC Chairman Joe Simons also “instructed Commissioners and staff that the transition is underway,” a spokesperson emailed. It “provides us an opportunity to show both the great work the FTC has done in the past, as well as the FTC’s commitment to continuing that work in the future.” FTC Executive Director David Robbins and Deputy Monique Fortenberry are the commission’s point people working with the Biden team. Biden’s FTC team members are former commission Deputy General Counsel Heather Hippsley, Brookings Institution’s Bill Baer and Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology Associate Director Laura Moy (see 2011100061).

The National Lifeline Association and Assist Wireless haven’t shown (see 2011190054) Lifeline providers will be irreparably harmed by the Wireline Bureau’s minimum service standard order and won’t succeed in their legal challenge against it, the FCC responded (in Pacer) Tuesday pushing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to reject NaLA’s call for an emergency stay. Lifeline provider arguments that raising the MSS from its current 3 GB per month to 4.5 GB per month on Dec. 1 will force companies to charge low-income consumers copays they can’t afford “are of no value without proof,” said the agency. “The Bureau had good reason to be skeptical of arguments that a modest increase in the minimum service standard would render service unaffordable or require providers to impose a co-pay.” Customers will be irreparably harmed by the order “disconnecting them from vital and essential services,” said Judson Hill, who represents Lifeline provider TruConnect. “There’s no evidence of any harm to anybody by staying or enjoining and freezing in place.” The FCC brushed aside NaLA complaints that T-Mobile -- the sole provider to endorse the MSS order’s increase to 4.5 GB, and the only one that owns its own spectrum -- is differently situated from other Lifeline providers. “Whether or not” T-Mobile’s commitment to the FCC to offer a 4.5 GB plan extends to NaLA members, “it provides record evidence that it is possible for a Lifeline provider to offer a service plan without a co-pay that complies with the 4.5 GB per month standard,” the agency said. CTIA and NaLA declined to comment, and T-Mobile didn’t respond to a comment request. NaLA has to respond by Wednesday, the court said. NaLA asked for a ruling on the emergency stay by Monday.

The FCC Public Safety Bureau denied ZTE’s petition for reconsideration of the bureau’s June 30 order designating the Chinese telecom equipment maker as a threat to U.S. national security. The order, which also covers Huawei, bars both companies from participating in the USF (see 2007160051). Huawei also sought reversal (see 2007310048). The FCC denied ZTE’s argument that the FY 2019 National Defense Authorization Act and the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act (HR-4998) limit “authority to implement a prohibition on USF support for ZTE equipment. ZTE has previously raised this argument and we find no grounds on which to reconsider it here.” The company “does not dispute critical facts underlying” the ban, “and those uncontroverted facts, standing alone, are enough to sustain” it, the bureau said. It reviewed “the totality of the evidence, which included legal and political analysis from Congress and the Executive Branch, Chinese law experts, as well as evidence of security threats provided by allied intelligence services and outside cybersecurity experts.” The bureau “determined that either directly [through] the application of the Chinese National Intelligence Law, or indirectly through the application of political pressure, Chinese companies like ZTE are required to cooperate with intelligence agencies by providing customer information and network traffic information.” It said ZTE “has substantial ties to the Chinese government and its military” apparatus. “We continue to find that vulnerabilities and cybersecurity risks plague ZTE equipment,” the bureau said. It “also took into account ZTE’s record of knowingly violating U.S. law, obstructing U.S. investigations, and making false statements to U.S. authorities even after entering a guilty plea for violating U.S. trade sanctions.” The gearmaker didn’t comment. The denial is “another important step in our ongoing efforts to protect U.S. communications networks from security risks,” said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai. He noted plans for commissioners to vote Dec. 10 on rules (see 2011190059) to help U.S. telecom companies replace suspect network equipment proposed in HR-4998. “Now it is more vital than ever that Congress appropriate funds so that our communications networks are protected from vendors that threaten our national security,” Pai said. Lawmakers are pushing to allocate $1.6 billion-$1.8 billion (see 2009140062).

Further R&D into advanced spectrum-sharing and high-band technologies could provide opportunities to better utilize the airwaves for 5G and future generations of wireless networks, GAO reported Tuesday. It suggested lawmakers consider updates to cybersecurity and privacy laws to address the implications of 5G. Lawmakers who sought the study included leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees, House Science Committee Chairwoman Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, and Oversight Subcommittee Chairman Bill Foster, D-Ill. The Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program’s Wireless Spectrum R&D Interagency Working Group and National Institute of Standards and Technology “identified the need for effective automation of interference detection and mediation as especially important as highly directional, active antennas become more common,” the auditor found. Policymakers could promote R&D via grants to academic and research institutions, a public-private partnership or tax credits for industry, GAO said. “For testing and development in real-world settings, new 5G test beds may be necessary, according to NIST, or it may be possible to use existing test beds.” High-band research could “help close the knowledge gaps and increase understanding of any possible health effects, including the effects of long-term exposure to high-band RF energy,” GAO said. Antenna research "could result in improved statistical modeling of antenna characteristics and the generation of data to more accurately represent signal propagation, according to NIST.” R&D generally “can be costly, must be coordinated and administered, is generally considered a long-term investment, and its potential benefits are uncertain,” the report said. “Policymakers would need to identify a new funding source for research or determine which existing funding streams to reallocate. Similarly, funding development work at new test bed facilities would involve significant costs. On the other hand, adapting existing test bed facilities would not require a significant capital outlay, but may require significant coordination.” Some R&D, cybersecurity and privacy matters involving 5G “may be addressed without any intervention from policymakers,” the auditor said: Maintaining the status quo “will likely not fully address” those issues and "may contribute to other 5G challenges,” including “national security risks.”

Connecticut should reject Frontier Communications’ bankruptcy reorganization, said state Attorney General William Tong (D) in a Monday brief at the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA). The record fails to show that Frontier meets statutory requirements for approval, that the company has "the suitability and responsibility to provide safe, adequate or reliable service to the public, or that the transaction is in the public interest,” Tong wrote. PURA should impose conditions if it says yes, said Tong. “Frontier refused to make any commitments to ensure local control, continued capital investment in plant and operation or maintaining its corporate headquarters in Connecticut.” At minimum, include a “most-favored nation” clause so Connecticut can benefit from conditions in other states, the AG said. Minnesota's AG last week sought to get the same Frontier concessions as other states (see 2011200040). Removing more than $10 billion of debt and nearly $1 billion in annual interest obligations will let the carrier invest in network and operations and continue to compete in Connecticut and 24 other states, a company spokesperson emailed Monday: The telco got OKs in 11 states and looks "forward to addressing all appropriate issues in our few remaining approval states, including Connecticut."

Four telecoms asked the FCC for more time to implement call authentication technologies, before the June 30 deadline to meet the secure telephone identity revisited (Stir) and signature-based handling of asserted information using tokens (Shaken) framework. The filings appeared Monday in docket 17-97. AT&T asked for a one-year extension, citing network congestion due to COVID-19 and aging platforms. Lumen said it "remains on track" to meet the deadline but sought an additional six months to accommodate any potential equipment-related delays. UScellular asked for an extension and didn't request a specific time frame because it's transitioning non-IP customers to an IP network. Verizon asked the FCC to declare it's not required to deploy Stir/Shaken for its plain old telephone system customers because it would be "an onerous task with any benefits vastly outweighed by the burdens." The company wants three years to finish upgrading its fiber-to-the-premises-session initiation protocol platform with Stir/Shaken capabilities.

San Francisco will review and respond in court to a T-Mobile lawsuit testing federal deemed-granted rules, a spokesperson for City Attorney Dennis Herrera said Friday. In a complaint (in Pacer) Wednesday at U.S. District Court in San Francisco, T-Mobile sought a declaratory ruling affirming deemed-granted status of 16 applications to modify wireless facilities. The carrier said it filed 27 applications between June 24 and Aug. 14 to modify facilities in ways it described as "minor, frequently involving only swapping existing antennas and perhaps adding a small number of new antennas and associated equipment to existing rooftop installations.” T-Mobile said the upgrades are especially needed due to COVID-19 showing the importance of 5G and distance learning. Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act requires the city to act within 60 days, but it hadn't by late October, T-Mobile alleged. The carrier notified the city Oct. 20 that the applications were deemed granted, but since then, San Francisco issued permits for only 11, leaving 16 still unresolved, it said. It may be the first formal action by a wireless company on deemed-granted in California, emailed Tellus Venture Associates President Steve Blum, a consultant for local governments. The case will clarify what the term means “as a practical matter,” he said. “In theory, T-Mobile could have just started construction. Instead, they've taken it to federal court,” which probably will “result in a preemptive ruling that sets the de facto rules" for California, he said. Best Best’s Gail Karish noted the applications all involve changes to rooftop facilities. Local authorities and carriers often disagree how FCC rules for eligible facilities requests (EFRs) apply to rooftop facilities, and if “proposed modifications actually qualify for treatment as EFRs, or should be categorized as a different type of application with a longer FCC shot clock,” said the telecom lawyer for local governments.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit will hear oral argument Jan. 25 at 9:30 a.m. about Environmental Health Trust, Consumers for Safe Cell Phones and Children’s Health Defense seeking to force the FCC to reopen examination of RF exposure rules (see 2007300056), said a Friday order (in Pacer). “The FCC refused to meaningfully assess the vast amount of reliable peer-reviewed scientific and medical evidence generated after 1996 indicating current and potential health risks from currently-authorized exposures, and gave inappropriate weight to unreliable and conflicted views and opinions by industry-supported sources,” plaintiffs say (in Pacer) in docket 20-1025. The FCC rightly declined last year to initiate a rulemaking to consider revising limits, the agency says (in Pacer). “The agency reasonably relied on the expert advice of other federal agencies and standard-setting bodies and the record as a whole to conclude that no evidence of such effects exists and that no changes in the limits were warranted. That conclusion was neither arbitrary nor capricious, nor does it constitute the ‘rarest and most compelling of circumstances’ in which this Court would disturb an agency’s decision.”