Alabama County Foresees 911 Funding 'Chaos' as Industry Backs AT&T on VoIP Question
Industry lined up behind AT&T's BellSouth in a dispute with four Alabama 911 districts over what constitutes interconnected VoIP and whether the FCC should prohibit state and local governments from requiring interconnected VoIP customers pay more in total 911 fees than comparable non-VoIP customers. Madison County, Alabama, warned that requested relief would bring "chaos" to already short 911 funding, in comments posted Friday in docket 19-44. The Wireline Bureau sought comment, citing U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama’s primary jurisdiction referral on a dispute between BellSouth and the Alabama districts (see 1902260072).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
Petitions by a group of Alabama 911 districts and BellSouth “raise two issues, one simple and one that potentially becomes more complex,” CenturyLink said. The districts’ argument they can levy higher 911 fees on VoIP “flouts” the “plain meaning” of language in the New and Emerging Technologies (NET) 911 Improvement Act that “the fee or charge [assessed on a VoIP service] may not exceed the amount of any such fee or charge applicable to the same class of subscribers to telecommunications services,” the carrier said. It said the FCC “need not reach the potentially harder issue, which is determining the regulatory classification of various service in various configurations.”
The Voice on the Net Coalition thinks BellSouth’s interpretation is correct. The company's read “tracks” the language in the NET 911 Improvement Act, the coalition commented. “Congress sought to prevent state and local governments from putting VoIP at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace vis-à-vis non-VoIP services through the imposition of 911 charges,” VON said. “Congress did not want VoIP to be treated differently than non-VoIP services when it comes to 911 charges.”
Retroactive pre-emption “could throw 911 funding into chaos with VoIP service providers and customers that billed and paid 911 charges on a per-telephone number basis seeking refunds of previously remitted 911 charges,” commented Madison County. “BellSouth’s attack on the Alabama 911 Districts’ method of compensating their auditor reveals a striking level of ignorance about the well-documented shortage in funding.” The county called it an “unfair attack by an ultra-wealthy corporate conglomerate that shows a callous disregard for the life-saving mission of 911 districts.”
The Alabama districts “assessed 911 charges on non-VoIP customers per voice channel, while 911 charges on VoIP customers were assessed per phone number,” NCTA said. Members have similar experiences with 911 districts as BellSouth, the group said: “Such an unequal application of 911 charges is impermissible under" the act
Verizon wants clarity as sought by BellSouth. Carriers “are facing dozens of lawsuits in several states regarding 911 charges -- in particular, how 911 charges should be applied to IP-enabled services such as interconnected VoIP,” Verizon said. “Only one of these lawsuits is the subject of this primary jurisdiction referral, but its implications are far-reaching and other cases have been stayed pending the Commission’s decision here. Absent guidance from the Commission, these lawsuits could result in inconsistent state-by-state and even locality-by-locality application of Congress’s and the Commission’s approach to regulatory service classification.”
The FCC “as the expert agency, must act quickly on this Petition to prevent the courts from unwittingly creating policies contrary to the Commission’s,” USTelecom said.
The regulator should decide “traditional police powers of ensuring public safety and imposing taxes and fees are not preempted by unmistakably clear language in 47 U.S.C. § 615a-1,” said Birmingham and Alabama counties Autauga, Calhoun and Mobile. BellSouth wrongly seeks to add a fifth criterion to the four-part test for interconnected VoIP in 47 C.F.R. Section 9.3, “based on what a customer’s order may or may not say rather than on what the customer actually receives,” they said. “If a provider delivers voice service that meets Rule 9.3’s four-part definition, then it constitutes IVoIP, regardless of whether the customer’s order specifically requests VoIP service."
Texas 911 groups warned pre-emption “could have far-reaching implications beyond the parties’ particular disputed matters.” Potential changes on how to interpret interconnected VoIP may be better suited for a 911 rulemaking, said the Texas 911 Alliance, Texas Commission of State Emergency Communications and Municipal Emergency Communication Districts Association. Pre-emption of state laws requiring VoIP to pay higher 911 fees is inappropriate and would infringe upon state authority, they said. “Exact comparisons of each business customer’s bill are not reasonable due to the inherent differences between channelized (e.g., traditional TDM dedicated pathway circuit-switched network) voice services and unchannelized voices services."