Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

Local govts. will oppose any federal action to harmonize public rights-of-way (ROW) regulations to spur broadband deployment, but will consider state legislation on lines of recently enacted Mich. ROW legislation. That was view that emerged from Washington panel Thurs. organized by Advisory Committee to Congressional Internet Caucus at which industry called for broad national action to lay down contours of “appropriate” local govt. management of ROW and assessment of fees. What’s needed is dialog between local govts. and industry and not one-size-fits-all approach, said Marilyn Praisner, vice chmn. of FCC’s Local & State Govt. Advisory Committee (LSGAC). While problem of delays in granting permits and charging ROW fees in excess of actual costs is “selective,” it has developed into one of national scope and calls for national action, said Martin Stern, co-founder of Telecom Industry Rights-of-Way Working Group (I-ROW).

CTIA told Office of Management & Budget (OMB) Tues. that FCC never conducted cost-benefit analysis of pending wireless local number portability (LNP) requirements. CTIA responded to OMB public notice that sought comment on draft report to Congress on costs and benefits of federal rules. OMB has been examining possible reform measures under fiscal 2001 Treasury and General Govt. Appropriations Act -- so-called Regulatory Right-to-Know Act. CTIA said that in general it supported institutionalizing formal regulatory impact analysis that would include assessment of costs and benefits of regulation and examination of regulatory alternatives. Verizon Wireless petitioned FCC in July 2001 for forbearance on requirement that commercial mobile radio service providers support wireless LNP in top 100 metropolitan statistical areas by Nov. 24, 2002. State PUCs have urged Commission to reject forbearance request, citing negative impact on consumers. CTIA told OMB that wireless LNP requirement carriers estimated price tag of $900 million for installation and $500 million in annual recurring costs for maintenance. “But the Commission has never conducted a cost-benefit analysis or considered the competitive alternatives that this investment could support.” CTIA also said wireline LNP requirement had created $3 billion in end-user costs “while consumers have not received commensurate benefits.” Association itemized regulations it had asked FCC to consider modifying or changing in its 2002 biennial review. Wireless group petitioned FCC recently to eliminate “unnecessary regulations” in policy areas such as wireless LNP. Group cited recent U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., decision that involved biennial review of broadcast ownership rules. FCC Chmn. Powell raised concerns that biennial review standard could evolve under Fox ruling from agency’s having to prove why it eliminated regulation to also include why rules should be kept (CD Feb 21 p1). CTIA reiterated to OMB what it already had told FCC in biennial review, that “the public interest requires that the Federal Communications Commission review, on an expedited basis, all regulations affecting CMRS carriers.”

FCC and state commissions should be required to balance national security policy with competitive policy, USTA Senior Vp-Law & Policy Daniel Phythyon said in USTA-sponsored Web conference Thurs. He detailed recommendations recently approved by USTA national security policy committee. Policy since Telecom Act of 1996 may be “inconsistent” with goal of building networks secure from both physical and cyber attacks, he said. “Telecom policy is driven to maximize competition” but open telephone “network configured to maximize competition is not necessarily a secured network,” he said: “The FCC needs to consider how new rules impact the security of networks.” USTA supports govt.-industry cooperation on development of national policy for security of telephone and data networks, Phythyon said: “This seems to be a no-brainer in this country where the government has relied on privately owned communications networks for more than 100 years,” but many other countries have govt.-owned networks. Security of U.S. networks is interrelated with those of other countries, he said. Other points: (1) Each service provider should bear responsibility for national security. Example given was background checks for technicians who work for CLEC that’s colocated in ILEC central office. ILEC shouldn’t be responsible for CLEC employees, he said. (2) Mandate to carriers for national security should be funded by govt. agency that requests it. (3) Regulations on national security “must be coordinated among all government entities with jurisdiction to avoid duplicative, unnecessary and inconsistent requirements.” Sept. 11 greatly expanded govt. agencies working on national security, Phythyon said: “It is difficult to get your arms around everything going on in Washington, let alone the state and local agencies crucial to the national security effort.” USTA encourages federal govt. to focus on what agencies are most important to “make sure they coordinate with the necessary state and local governments,” he said.

BOSTON -- FCC notion of limits to spectrum capacity are outdated, network pioneer told telephony conference here Tues., arguing that in wireless network with smart end devices and multiple repeaters, spectrum capacity actually increased as more users were added. David Reed is creator of Reed’s Law, scaling law for group-forming network architectures, and used to work for Interval Research on consumer media technology. He admitted his argument was “counterintuitive,” but laid out for attendees at Connectivity 2002 by pulver.com that FCC was “wrong” in limiting spectrum allocations rather than encouraging spectrum users to coordinate their services to maximize spectrum use and minimize interference. He said Commission already was running into difficulties with its existing spectrum model in such challenging areas as spread spectrum, software-defined radio, ultra-wideband.

Comcast and AT&T Broadband defended their merger to FCC, saying combination of nation’s first- and 3rd-largest cable companies would be in public interest, wouldn’t violate Communications Act and would “have no anticompetitive effects in any relevant market.” In turnabout, American Cable Assn. (ACA) jumped on board in favor of merger, telling FCC that deal wouldn’t threaten livelihood of country’s more than 900 small and rural cable operators. Comcast and AT&T Broadband, in 328 pages of reply comments, said dozens of people and entities who filed opposing comments last month (CD April 30 p1) based their assertions on “unfounded fears, rank speculation and thinly disguised pursuit of private agendas.” Opponents, who included coalition of 38 national and state groups such as Consumer Federation of America, said proposed $72 billion merger would create corporate behemoth that would raise prices, offer fewer choices in programming, preclude competition on Internet and among Internet service providers (ISPs), dictate technology standards, put customer service needs last. But companies rejected those arguments and said they already had proved otherwise.

FCC could hasten telecom facility deployment on tribal lands by heightening awareness of its Tribal Bidding Credits program, Space Data CEO Gerald Knoblach said. Program reduces costs for winners of wireless auction bids as long as those companies receive commitments from federally recognized tribes to allow deployment of wireless facilities on tribal lands. “Carriers’ carrier” Space Data, which is deploying national network of “balloon-borne wireless repeaters,” has had “generally” positive experience in acquiring such bidding credits, Knoblach said in written comments submitted for joint hearing by Senate Commerce and Indian Affairs committees: “The tribes we have contacted were not fully aware of the bidding credit process… In some cases we have been perceived somewhat skeptically as trying to get something for nothing… Space Data recommends that the FCC place increased emphasis on publicizing the bidding credit process and encouraging the tribes to support such efforts since they have the potential of improving communications to tribal lands on a nonexclusive basis.” FCC Consumer & Govt. Affairs Bureau Chief Dane Snowden said at May 14 hearing that Commission was launching outreach program next month to educate tribes on availability of telecom support programs (CD May 15 p1).

Senate Indian Affairs Committee Chmn. Inouye (D-Hawaii) ordered FCC to file report with panel on Commission’s role in protecting tribal lands from alleged illegal encroachment by wireless tower companies. Joint hearing with Senate Commerce Committee Tues. began with testimony from FCC Consumer & Govt. Affairs Bureau Chief Dane Snowden, who outlined existing and anticipated FCC initiatives to increase Indian Country access to telecom services. Although most members and panelists focused on issue of low penetration rates and measures being taken to address underserved areas, tone of hearing took abrupt turn. William Day, chmn. of United South & Eastern Indian Tribes’ Culture & Heritage Committee, said he questioned legality of FCC’s allowing cell tower companies to satisfy agency’s tribal governmental consultation obligations. This obligation involves determining the impact of telecom infrastructure on tribal lands, including sacred sites. Day lauded Congress for balancing efforts to spur electronic communications deployment on tribal lands and respect for tribal sovereignty: “Unfortunately, your work has been thwarted -- grossly thwarted -- by the Federal Communications Commission and its allies.”

U.S. Supreme Court gave FCC and competitive LECs clean- sweep victory Mon. as it upheld agency’s TELRIC pricing model and its rule requiring Bell companies to bundle uncombined elements when requested by CLECs. TELRIC (Total Element Long-Run Incremental Cost) model guides state regulators in setting prices that ILECs charge when they lease parts of their networks to competitors. Ruling reversed one by 8th U.S. Appeals Court, St. Louis, that had overturned those 2 FCC rules.

Issue of potential impact that communications towers have on migratory birds has emerged with increasing frequency in federal antenna siting decisions fought by environmental groups, according to industry sources and environmental groups. Ruling earlier this month by U.S. Dist. Court, D.C., may pave way for groups battling tower siting to sue under Migratory Bird Treaty Act, several industry sources said. Despite Commission ruling earlier this year that Friends of the Earth and Forest Conservation Council lacked standing to file petitions objecting to dozens of proposed antenna structures, groups since Jan. have filed new objections that highlight harmful impact to migratory birds. Meanwhile, several months after govt.-industry group set accelerated timeline for working out way to streamline siting decisions for communications towers, document is now before FCC after Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)-led process didn’t produce agreement.

Dobson Communications said it received refund of $91.2 million of nearly $109 million that carrier paid to participate in NextWave re-auction last year. Dobson subsidiary DCC PCS was high bidder on 14 licenses in that PCS auction. Commission on March 27 returned 85% of NextWave re- auction deposits to carriers that bid. Verizon Wireless said earlier this week it had received $1.5 billion of deposits for 216 licenses. It has challenged FCC in U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., and U.S. Court of Federal Claims to obtain rest of deposit and for ruling that auction contract for licenses under dispute is void (CD April 9 p1). Dobson said that as result of partial refund, it had unrestricted cash of $230 million. Carrier plans to announce first quarter results May 8.