APCO petitioned for reconsideration Thursday of the FCC's 6 GHz order (see 2004230059), as expected (see 2005270044). The agency “failed its purpose of promoting public safety,” APCO said: “Interference to public safety communications is certain to arise from the approach to expanding unlicensed use of the band. Other than acknowledging that incumbent use includes public safety communications, the Order ignores public safety’s reliance on the 6 GHz band and fails to consider that interference will result in irreparable harm.” APCO asked to revise rules to require automated frequency control for all shared use, indoors and outdoors and “evaluate the impacts to public safety in the cost/benefit analysis.” The group asked for stay until the recon petition is addressed. “Public safety agencies extensively use the 6 GHz band for mission critical systems,” blogged Director-Government Relations Jeff Cohen.
Wireless and satellite interests cited concerns about the FCC C-band order, in docket 18-122 petitions for reconsideration posted Wednesday. Change the technical specifications of telemetry, tracking and command filters because they aren't feasible, or give Intelsat's two remote TT&C/gateway sites protected status to use the entire band, the company petitioned. It said out-of-band protection requirements won't adequately protect all earth stations from post-transition interference and need revision, or at least make clear that as long as Intelsat has done everything it can, it won't be held responsible for terrestrial operations' interference. It urged moving of the December 2021 TT&C/gateway site consolidation deadline to 2023 because an 18-month consolidation window is "simply is not achievable given the many time- and resource-intensive activities." Speaking with FCC staffers, Intelsat officials cited filter and TT&C site concerns and said reimbursements shouldn't be limited to satellites operating solely with a C-band payload, since its satellites are typically configured with multiple spectrum payloads and it was going to seek reimbursement for only the C-band payload costs. The company voiced concerns about cable operators being able to select the compression equipment to be installed at their earth stations, when it should be tied to the satellite transponder. Also posted was Intelsat's accelerated relocation election the company announced Tuesday (see 2005260037). The International Telecommunications Satellite Organization's recon petition cited aspects of the C-band order that could hurt international satellite services by limiting international gateway services in the lower portion of the band to four TT&C sites, and only on a secondary basis. It said design and placement of replacement Intelsat satellites could hurt international satellite services customers outside the U.S. C-band operator Eutelsat had petitioned for recon. Charter asked the FCC to tweak the order to require C band flexible use licensees to make TDD synchronization available to citizens broadband radio service (see 2005220042). “Without such synchronization, C-Band base stations will interfere with, and significantly impede, the ability of CBRS base stations to communicate with CBRS user equipment operating in both the Priority Access License and General Authorized Access spectrum blocks,” Charter said. Aviation interests asked to change the order to protect radio altimeters using 3700-3980 MHz (see 2002200030). "‘No action’ regarding the protection of radio altimeters and seemingly requiring the aviation community to ‘protect thyself’ from harmful interference was not supported by the evidence and sharply contrasts with other actions taken in this very proceeding,” the groups said. The Aerospace Industries Association, Airbus, Aviation Spectrum Resources, Aerospace Vehicle Systems Institute, Air Line Pilots Association and Garmin were among signers.
Local government groups asked the FCC to delay a vote on revising wireless infrastructure rules set for the June 9 commissioners’ meeting (see 2005190058). “The proposed Declaratory Ruling, as currently drafted, would dramatically impact the way that local governments across the nation manage their eligible facilities request applications and require major changes to stealth or screening requirements for wireless deployments,” said a filing posted Tuesday in docket 19-250: “Because the item did not arise out of a rulemaking proceeding, the Commission has not had the benefit of local government input.” The letter was addressed to the five commissioners and signed by NATOA, the National League of Cities, National Association of Counties, U.S. Conference of Mayors and National Association of Towns and Townships.
A calendar item for a House Communications Subcommittee teleconference with FCC Chairman Ajit Pai on COVID-19 incorrectly listed the date. It was held May 19. A Brookings Institution webinar on gaps in federal privacy legislation is June 3. The year of ICANN74 is 2022, on June 13-16.
Commissioner Mike O’Rielly isn’t hopeful the FCC will provide much additional clarity soon on the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, he said Tuesday during a Federalist Society teleconference on the aftermath of Barr v. American Association of Political Consultants. The case was argued before the Supreme Court this month, with justices indicating they're unlikely to overturn the entire robocalling law (see 2005060051). O’Rielly and then-Commissioner Ajit Pai criticized a 2015 declaratory ruling on how the law should be interpreted (see 1506180046). Now-Chairman Pai “has done yeoman work to try to get at the illegal robocall issue,” O’Rielly said in response to our question. But O’Rielly isn’t “optimistic near term that we’re going to get any resolution.” FCC staff works hard, but COVID-19 makes some work more difficult, he said. What qualifies as an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS) under the TCPA is “already a mess,” he said: “That’s something that’s been our fault for lack of clarity. It’s an overreach from past commissions.” He has "been very protective of good robocalls because there’s so many that benefit society,” O’Rielly said. People want robocalls from their pharmacy saying a prescription is ready or from a school telling them to pick up their kids, he said. Numerous petitions before the FCC deal “with good robocalls” and need to be addressed, he said. The FCC has “spent too much time going after legitimate calls” and not enough on illegal calls, he said: “Just recently, we’ve done a better job of fixing that direction.” If the FCC isn’t going to act on the larger “big ticket” TCPA questions, it needs to at least address the petitions, he said. “The list keeps growing” and “the majority by far” are by companies that want to make robocalls that will benefit the public, he said. O’Rielly said the FCC should act on a petition by the American Bankers Association and other financial groups seeking clarity that banks, credit unions and customer-facing financial service providers can use ATDS, prerecorded messages and artificial voice for calls involving COVID-19 without violating the TCPA (see 2005220035). O’Rielly said he hasn’t received a single complaint from a March ruling allowing public health authorities to make COVID-related calls (see 2003200074). O’Rielly said he listened to the oral argument in the Supreme Court case, which was streamed. Only part of the TCPA is likely in play, he noted: a 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that declared a 2015 government debt collection exemption unconstitutional and severed the provision from the remainder of the TCPA.
NTIA is joining various aeronautical, satellite and GPS interests (see 2005210043) in asking the FCC to reconsider its Ligado terrestrial wireless plan approval. NTIA, in a reconsideration petition to be posted in docket 11-109, said the commission's approval had numerous procedural and substantive flaws. It said the approval went against the FCC's "long and respectful history" of deferring to NTIA and federal agencies on GPS and national security and was an "unexplained break from the healthy respect." It said the FCC should acknowledge more technical studies and testing are needed to guarantee Ligado's terrestrial network won't cause harmful interference and that none of the company's mitigation proposals or conditions has been tested or evaluated by an independent party. At the very least, Ligado approval should be modified with different downlink power levels and removal of requirements on agencies to work with or share information with Ligado or to identify affected GPS receivers. Ligado should have a dedicated telephone number and email address for federal agencies to report suspected interference to a Ligado network operations center. NTIA said its petition is focused on DOD-related issues, but the FCC "failed to consider the major economic impact its decision will have on civilian GPS users and the American economy." NTIA also asked for a stay to stop L-band deployment by Ligado until its petition is addressed and interference issues resolved. Before deployment, the FCC should "meaningfully test its new and unproven harmful interference metric and overhaul unworkable grant conditions," NTIA said. The FCC said it "appreciate[d] the support that our Ligado Order has received from high-ranking Executive Branch officials like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Attorney General William Barr."
Net neutrality stakeholders didn't budge on three remanded issues (see 1910010018), in replies to the FCC posted through Thursday in dockets including 17-287. "Concerns noted by the Mozilla court on three discrete issues do not justify abandoning the Commission’s decision to return to [Communications Act] Title I classification as the benefits of the regulatory framework ... vastly outweigh any potential costs," USTelecom said. Common Cause, Public Knowledge and New America’s Open Technology Institute want the FCC to retain Title II common carrier authority over broadband and "restore legal certainty for the Lifeline program, empower the Commission to protect public safety during the COVID-19 pandemic." The Greenlining Institute wants the FCC to "acknowledge the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic and the importance strong net neutrality protections" have for public safety. CTIA said "concerns regarding paid prioritization’s impact on public safety are theoretical, have not materialized." The Alarm Industry Communications Committee said "state and local laws often impose service standards that alarm companies may not be able to meet without adequate protection of their use of broadband networks." Verizon said there's ample evidence to find "no reason to revisit its decision to restore the information service classification for broadband." NCTA wants the FCC to conclude its current regime "is fully warranted from the perspective of public safety, pole access, and the Lifeline program." Incompas countered claims there have been no major net neutrality violations since the repeal: "In addition to the fact that there is no longer a federal 'cop on the beat' ... there very well could be violations occurring that customers do not realize." AT&T said the FCC "has ample ancillary authority to extend section 224 rights to standalone broadband providers if it concludes that doing so is necessary for competitive parity in non-certifying states, just as it has ancillary authority to extend Lifeline support to standalone broadband services." ACA Connects said the FCC "cannot and should not upend its entire regulatory framework for broadband merely to cater to the interests of broadband-only providers in invoking" one-touch, make-ready pole attachment rules. The Wireless ISP Association wants the FCC to use its statutory authority to eliminate practices that slow down broadband deployment, such as discriminatory infrastructure access. Other replies came from the Broadband Institute of California at the Santa Clara University School of Law (here), Center for Democracy and Technology (here) Free Press (here) and the California Public Utilities Commission (here), which unsuccessfully sought a longer deadline extension due to the pandemic (see 2005200013). Initial comments came in last month (see 2004210019).
The Commerce Department Bureau of Industry and Security is preparing to issue additional export controls over emerging technologies and is finalizing a long-awaited advance NPRM for foundational technologies, BIS officials said. The upcoming rules will include controls agreed to at the Australia Group, a multilateral export control body, said Matt Borman, Commerce deputy assistant secretary-export administration. Speaking during the first meeting of the Emerging Technology Technical Advisory Committee Tuesday, he said BIS is preparing controls on six emerging technologies agreed to during the 2019 Wassenaar Arrangement. The ANPRM, part of a broader effort that has proved “intellectually challenging” for Commerce officials, is in the “last stages of review within the bureau,” said Rich Ashooh, Commerce-assistant secretary for export administration. Commerce officials expected to release a series of emerging technology controls last year but had delays (see 2004010034). The agency’s first ETTAC meeting was delayed twice as security clearances for members took longer than expected (see 2002250041).
The California Public Utilities Commission believes providers "should not be expected to choose" during a pandemic "between allocating resources to maintaining their networks at the highest levels of service" and competing for USF support in a reverse auction as complex as that for the upcoming Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, the CPUC emailed us. In March, the CPUC asked for a delay of the auction's start date of 120 days or more. Tuesday, a draft auction procedures notice suggested a weeklong delay of the Phase I auction to Oct. 29 (see 2005190058). "The FCC’s proposal to delay the auction by one week does nothing to allay" CPUC concerns, it said Tuesday. "On top of that, the FCC’s challenge process allows no time for the CPUC to rebut challenges from incumbent providers. CPUC staffers estimate the challenges in California equate to hundreds of thousands of housing units, potentially reducing needed federal broadband dollars for our state by hundreds of millions." When asked about the weeklong delay in the draft public notice, an FCC spokesperson emailed that in seeking comment, the commission expected bidding to start Oct. 22 "but noted additional details and dates would be announced in the procedures public notice. If adopted, the procedures public notice has set Oct. 29 for an auction to begin."
FCC commissioners past and present touted the benefits of TV white spaces in helping confront the digital divide and asked stakeholders to keep pressure on the agency to rule on making the spectrum available for broadband soon. Commissioners Mike O'Rielly and Jessica Rosenworcel plus ex-member Mignon Clyburn spoke at a webinar Tuesday. "It can happen this year," O'Rielly said of an FCC TVWS vote. He said the issue has the support of his colleagues but with all the other items on the agenda, it's a matter of priority. Having a statutory deadline helps, said Rosenworcel. O'Rielly preferred to defer to Congress, saying such guidance could be an impetus. Commissioners 5-0 approved an NPRM in February seeking comment on proposals to allow devices to operate with higher power in less-congested areas (see 2002280055). The FCC declined to comment now. Morgan Reed, president of webinar host ACT|The App Association, said Congress should give the FCC the resources it needs to make this possible: "I'm never a fan of unfunded mandates." "We need every type of broadband infrastructure at our disposal" to ensure the U.S. can be connected affordably, Clyburn said. Economies of scale support fiber infrastructure in urban areas, Clyburn said, "but we have a crazy big country, and a lot of it is not dense in population." She acknowledged that "whatever's decided is not going to be perfect." The FCC must be mindful of harmful interference and do what it can to promote flexibility, she said: Regulatory certainty could help encourage equipment manufacturers "to do what they promised." She wants the agency to expedite the tough decisions needed. "We don't have funding mechanisms for some of these investments" in precision agriculture or telehealth, said Nicol Turner Lee, Brookings Institution Center for Technology Innovation senior fellow. Instead of going to current government programs, she said, "maybe we should move past some of these patchworks to fund these smaller projects."