CTIA refiled petition last week calling on FCC to eliminate ‘unne...

TV Stations v. FCC decision (CD Feb 20 p1). Last month, D.C. Circuit said it was “better to leave unresolved” interpretation of phrase “necessary in the public interest” that it used in original decision to ascertain whether FCC rules on national media ownership caps should be retained (CD June 24 p1). Some had interpreted that language to mean higher standard for retaining FCC rules under biennial review proceedings. Citing original D.C. Circuit decision in Fox, CTIA had made filing at FCC in May that sought elimination of “unnecessary” regulations in areas ranging from wireless local number portability to Enhanced 911. CTIA had included policies it said didn’t meet strict test of original Fox ruling of being necessary to meet public interest. “It is important to note that the D.C. Circuit did not repudiate the panel’s original analysis,” CTIA said in July 25 filing. “Rather it simply refrained from addressing the issue. Indeed, the panel’s original interpretation remains consistent with the statutory language contained in Section 11,” which covers public interest considerations. Citing extent to which Sec. 11 of Communications Act covered regulations “no longer necessary in the public interest,” CTIA said that language must be interpreted as against keeping regulations it wanted FCC to review. “Even if the Commission rejects the position that Section 11 heightens the standard for retention of rules, it must concede that imposing unnecessary burdens on carriers and introducing market efficiencies without corresponding social benefits does not serve the public interest,” CTIA said. It reiterated call that FCC “act quickly” to review all regulations affecting wireless carriers and to meet its statutory mandate to “repeal or modify” rules that aren’t “necessary in the public interest.”