If a company gets consent for autodialing its customers’ numbers, and those numbers are subsequently reassigned unbeknownst to the company, that company should not be liable for violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Comcast told FCC Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau officials Tuesday (http://bit.ly/1bPyH4T). Comcast was supporting a similar petition filed by United Healthcare Services in CG docket 02-278. “In this situation, it is unfair and inappropriate for it to be subject to TCPA liability,” Comcast said, explaining it has faced lawsuits in these kinds of situations.

The American Cable Association doesn’t oppose collection of data to examine special access markets, but certain aspects of the proposed data collection “are excessive for smaller cable operators” and violate the Paperwork Reduction Act, ACA told an aide to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler Thursday, an ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/MBf8Br). ACA proposed that the collection only require those operators to provide data they collect in the normal course of business. On Phase II of the Connect America Fund, ACA said the program shouldn’t provide support to price-cap LECs in areas where unsupported competitive providers have built qualifying broadband service. Competitive providers should also “be given the opportunity to receive support in eligible areas in states where price cap LECs refuse support since competitive providers often can deploy broadband service more efficiently and effectively than the price cap LECs,” ACA said.

More than 25 percent of Windstream’s Lifeline customers have not been accepted by the National Lifeline Accountability Database, the telco told FCC Wireline Bureau officials Wednesday, an ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/1cmZDXq). That’s about 15,000 customers, most of whom are rejected because of problems with addresses, the carrier said. Frequently, however, the error messages “do not guide Windstream to the actual reason for the rejection,” and the addresses often come up valid when put into the U.S. Postal Service database, it said. Windstream asked the bureau to delay the deadline for migration of Lifeline customers into the national database “so companies have time to begin address reconciliation.” Windstream also asked the bureau to work with Universal Service Administrative Co. “to develop more specific and accurate error messages” for the national database, and to delay Lifeline audits until after migration is complete.

Rural telco Nex-Tech met with FCC Commissioners Ajit Pai and Mike O'Rielly and an aide to Chairman Tom Wheeler to discuss the need for stand-alone broadband support (http://bit.ly/1cn2ks0). “Providing support for loops that are used to provide standalone broadband services would promote and accelerate the ongoing IP evolution,” it said Wednesday. Nex-Tech also discussed “continuing concerns” with regression analysis-based caps on high-cost loop support, and urged the commissioners “to ensure that greater visibility and predictability can be obtained as soon as possible.”

Vonage has been seeking to negotiate direct IP interconnection agreements with ILECs, but “those agreements have been hampered by AT&T’s misinterpretation of the Commission’s VoIP access charge rules,” Vonage told FCC Wireline Bureau officials Feb. 11, said an ex parte filing posted online Tuesday (http://bit.ly/1cn0YNP). “Vonage seeks IP interconnection agreements because the exchange of traffic in IP delivers substantial public interest benefits including cost reduction, improved service quality, and the ability to deliver advanced services such as HD voice.” But “at least one incumbent LEC is unwilling to enter into a direct IP interconnection arrangement unless that arrangement imports the asymmetrical compensation structure that AT&T has argued, incorrectly, was adopted by the Commission” in its 2011 USF/intercarrier compensation order, Vonage said. It said it generally prefers to seek bill and keep arrangements when signing direct interconnection agreements with other IP providers. Vonage urged the bureau to take “swift action to enforce the symmetrical compensation provisions” adopted by the FCC, lest an “asymmetrical approach to VoIP intercarrier compensation” give ILECs “perverse incentives to perpetuate legacy TDM technology."

CLECs opposed a CenturyLink petition for forbearance of dominant carrier and Computer Inquiry tariffing requirements on enterprise broadband services. In comments filed Thursday in WC docket 14-9, the competitive providers said CenturyLink’s petition only confirmed the importance of wholesale last-mile access policies to provide choice for business consumers. The telco had sought forbearance from dominant carrier regulation of packet-based special access services offered by legacy CenturyTel and legacy Embarq. It’s the second time in a year CenturyLink has asked for such forbearance, and the commission “must put a stop to this wasteful gamesmanship,” said tw telecom, Level 3, Integra, EarthLink and Cbeyond (http://bit.ly/1cmV0fO). The competitive providers urged the commission to use the “traditional market power framework” to evaluate CenturyLink’s petition. Under that framework, or any other “reasonable standard,” the ILEC has failed to demonstrate sufficient competition in the relevant markets to justify forbearance, they said. The correct policy response to CenturyLink’s petition is to reform last-mile access policies for all providers, Comptel said (http://bit.ly/1cmXfjp). Commission forbearance grants have generally put “next generation competition at risk,” the association of CLECs said. Reforming last-mile access will promote investment, and CenturyLink’s claim that no advantages come from “incumbency in fiber deployment” is false, Comptel said. Sprint also opposed the petition. “Nothing has changed since the last time CenturyLink requested forbearance,” the carrier said (http://bit.ly/1cmXQSb). “It retains market power in the provision of enterprise broadband services because of its control of critical last-mile facilities in its service areas, and it has failed to demonstrate that its requested relief is justified.” CenturyLink had asked to be treated like other major providers of enterprise broadband service, which it said are uniformly regulated as nondominant. The widely varying regulation that applies to CenturyLink services undermines its ability to compete, the ILEC said in its December petition: “About the worst mistake a regulatory agency can make is to treat similarly situated competitors unequally” (http://bit.ly/1cnb01r).

The FCC’s proposed reduction in USF rate-of-return support “would negatively impact Big Bend’s operations at a time when the impacts of USF-[intercarrier compensation] reforms are still being implemented and the full impacts are not known,” the Texas telco told officials from several commissioners’ offices and the Wireline Bureau last week, an ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/1ghtkKO). The bureau’s May staff report recommended reducing the rate of return to between 8.06 and 8.72 percent; that would be “a threat to financial stability” and would harm Big Bend’s ability to get new loans to build out broadband, the telco said. “Service and customers in rural, remote, and high-cost areas like Big Bend’s service area will suffer due to lack of ability to maintain and invest in new network.”

Newest FCC Commissioner Mike O'Rielly took to the official agency blog Wednesday to share his thoughts on E-rate changes (http://fcc.us/1nwynre). There’s widespread agreement that the program is “due for an overhaul,” and O'Rielly supports that effort, he said, with six provisos: E-rate “must not increase costs on consumers” by increasing USF contributions; it “must be offset by reductions elsewhere” within the fund. E-rate “must be refocused on broadband access.” E-rate matching requirements must be consistent with other federal programs; the current local match of as little as 10 percent is “much lower” than other federal programs and “can distort decision making,” O'Rielly said. E-rate funding must leverage private sector networks, “not overbuild them.” E-rate funding “must not over supply,” but rather give schools flexibility to “choose the speeds that best meet their needs.” Finally, O'Rielly said, E-rate program administration must be revised. “By streamlining processes, requiring productive oversight, and providing significant outreach, we can make school participation in E-Rate easier, stretch program dollars, and ultimately benefit more students.”

"Consumers should cheer the recent appeals court decision voiding the FCC’s net neutrality rules,” said a report published by the Heritage Foundation Wednesday (http://herit.ag/1nwzasd). “Despite the Chicken Little claims of its supporters, broadband consumers were hurt, not helped by the agency’s restrictions,” said the report, written by senior research fellow James Gattuso. “Rather than guarding against market abuses by dominant firms, the rules have been invoked in attempts to hinder innovation, impede competition, and block consumer price protections.” The report urged congressional lawmakers and FCC officials to “not restore these unnecessary and harmful regulations."

Neustar asked the FCC to “immediately rectify” the Local Number Portability Administration selection process. In a petition filed Wednesday (http://bit.ly/1aVQlmy), the company asked the commission to amend the request for proposal “to include input from all industry constituencies,” to “clarify rules governing the LNPA to ensure the selection process proceeds in a transparent and impartial manner,” and to “direct the [North American Portability Management] to pursue additional proposals consistent with the revised RFP.” The current process for selecting the next LNPA “is flawed in its design and implementation,” said current LNPA Neustar, which holds the contract through next year. Wireline Bureau Chief Julie Veach said Tuesday the bureau wouldn’t intervene and direct multiple rounds of bidding (CD Feb 12 p7). Neustar’s petition cited that letter, but only for the proposition that the bureau concurs there have been “concerns over the fairness of this process so far.” Veach had asked the North American Numbering Council to ensure its ultimate recommendation on the LNPA selection process responds directly to the concerns raised. “Given the critical significance of the issues raised herein, Neustar respectfully requests that the Commission take action on the broader set of concerns framed in this Petition, particularly the fact that the RFP criteria no longer reflect the current and evolving needs of the stakeholders as well as emerging technological challenges,” it said. Problems are myriad, Neustar said: RFP criteria are “inadequate”; there’s a “mismatch” between the RFP’s specifications and the technical requirements being provided; it doesn’t account for “critical” IP transition requirements and “new technology developments”; and it doesn’t enforce the “network compact” touted by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. “The longer the Commission waits to resolve these questions, the more serious potential delays and implementation challenges will become,” said Neustar. “Swift action by the FCC can correct these problems while there is still time to preserve the level of service that service providers and consumers have come to expect from the LNPA.” Wiltshire Grannis communications attorney John Nakahata, counsel for Telcordia, called Neustar’s petition “an Olympian effort to change the rules and get a do-over after flubbing its last run.” Neustar could win two ways, Nakahata told us by email. “Delay would allow it to continue to collect its over-inflated sole source fees of nearly $470 million per year. The Commission should recognize this petition for what it is -- a meritless, last-ditch desperation ploy by a company that had an opportunity for input into every stage of the process."