VTDigger opposed AT&T's joining a case at the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals about the Vermont news publication’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit about FirstNet. The Department of Commerce last week asked the court to reject VTDigger’s appeal (see 1905290068). AT&T asked (in Pacer) Friday to submit an amicus brief “to address Plaintiffs’ claim that, under Section 208, DOC must prepare a ‘Privacy Impact Assessment’ for the Network. Given that AT&T -- not DOC or any other government agency -- will operate the Network and be responsible for handling any personal information transmitted or stored on the Network, AT&T is uniquely situated to help this Court understand the legal and practical implications of Plaintiffs’ Section 208 claim.” Section 208 requires such assessments only of government agencies, but AT&T is the one collecting information, the carrier said. The court can’t redress the claimed injury since AT&T isn’t a party to the case or a government agency, and “relief granted against DOC would be meaningless,” the carrier said. VTDigger said (in Pacer) Tuesday it plans to file an opposition brief because AT&T doesn’t meet the standard for an amicus curiae. The 2nd Circuit should hold the case in abeyance until it resolves AT&T’s motion to participate, then give VTDigger 14 days to file a reply to the Commerce Department brief, the publication said. The department requested (in Pacer) oral argument Wednesday.

FCC Public Safety Bureau Chief Lisa Fowlkes wrote the U.S.’s five largest wireless carriers Wednesday, asking about their plans to meet a Nov. 30 geotargeting deadline for wireless emergency alerts. The letters went to Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint and U.S. Cellular. Commissioners approved 5-0 an order in January 2018 requiring that participating wireless providers deliver alerts to the target area specified by the alert originator with no more than a one-tenth of a mile overshoot (see 1801300027). The letters ask each carrier to “inform the Commission, in writing” of its progress by June 28. The alerts are a “critical tool for federal, state, and local officials warn the public about imminent threats, such tornadoes hurricanes, missing children,” the letters state.

DOJ initiated formal review of the ASCAP and BMI consent decrees Wednesday, as expected (see 1903010052), requesting comment through July 10. The review’s purpose “is to determine whether the decrees should be maintained in their current form, modified, or terminated,” Justice said. First issued in 1941, the ASCAP consent decree was last modified in 2001 and BMI in 1941. “It is important for the Division to reassess periodically whether these decrees continue to serve the American consumer and whether they should be changed to achieve greater efficiency and enhance competition in light of innovations in the industry,” Antitrust Division Chief Makan Delrahim said. DOJ included several questions in the solicitation: Do the decrees serve important competitive purposes, or are they no longer necessary? Do they effectively protect competition? What modifications would enhance competition and efficiency? Would termination serve the public interest? Would a delayed termination be more beneficial? Are “existing antitrust statutes and applicable case law sufficient to protect competition in the absence of the Consent Decrees”? ASCAP CEO Elizabeth Matthews welcomed the news: “A more flexible framework with less government regulation will allow us to compete in a free market, which we believe is the best way for our music creators to be rewarded for the value of their music.” BMI looks “forward to working with the DOJ, licensees and our other music partners to help ensure a smooth process that safeguards a vibrant future for music.” NAB appreciates the “tone” of DOJ’s inquiry regarding the ongoing importance of the framework, CEO Gordon Smith said: “Absent broader legislative reforms, their preservation is essential to a fully functional music marketplace.” The “modification, elimination or even the possible sunset of the decrees at the present time would lead to chaos for the entire marketplace,” MIC Coalition said, noting the decrees have helped mitigate anticompetitive behavior.

Limiting what 833 toll-free numbers might end up in secondary markets and taking a different look at the data responsible organizations (RespOrgs) are supposed to provide about those secondary markets are among suggestions the telecom industry had in FCC docket 95-155 postings Tuesday. Rules authorizing the auction took effect last fall (see 1811260030) and replies are due Monday. Consider rules restricting from the secondary market any toll-free numbers that were obtained for free, even if they were obtained under competitive bidding processes, ATIS Systems SMS/800 Number Administration Committee asked, saying numbers in which there was only one bidder -- and thus free -- shouldn't be eligible for the secondary market. It said defaulted bids should be treated as if they hadn't been submitted, with the second-highest bidder awarded the number for the third-highest bid amount or, if there's no other bidder, for zero, instead of subsequent auction rounds. The group called "unnecessarily severe" the proposed penalty that not submitting secondary market data to Somos within 60 days would mean discontinued access to the toll-free database. Citing "ease of administration," CenturyLink said only contested numbers should be eligible for the secondary market and that possible RespOrg reporting penalties are too severe. It said requiring a bidder participate in the same way for all numbers instead of bidding on some directly and others through a RespOrg would promote auction process integrity. The proposed information-gathering burdens on RespOrgs "go well beyond their current capabilities" and need to be narrowed, Verizon said. It said the FCC should ensure financial burdens of such information gathering and reporting aren't excessive and protect proprietary business information -- such as toll-free number sales prices. A competitive auction of a few 833 numbers is a far more modest undertaking than a spectrum auction, so don't apply such spectrum auction rules on a blanket basis to the participants of the experimental toll-free auction, 1-800 Contacts commented. It said application procedures and qualification requirements must be "much less burdensome" so as not to preclude participation. It said problems include the common control restriction, which isn't needed "given the very minimal chance" of collusion by otherwise independent companies.

Telecom and other groups opposed AT&T proposal to operate using higher power limits in parts of the 3.5 GHz citizens broadband radio service band. They "express, in the strongest of terms, their policy, operational, and legal objections to AT&T’s proposed" Category C antenna, said Tuesday's letter in FCC docket 17-258. The change would let CBRS devices operate at a maximum effective isotropic radiated power of 62 dBm/10 MHz, 31 times maximum EIRP now, the letter said. “On the verge of Initial Commercial Deployments and General Authorized Access use of the band, AT&T’s ‘questions concerning whether the Commission would entertain’ such a proposal should be met with a resounding ‘NO.’” Altice USA, the American Petroleum Institute, Frontier, Motorola Solutions, Windstream and Wireless ISP Association protested the AT&T request. The company didn’t comment.

Increasing FCC partisanship and a decline in hiring engineers and economists are symptoms of a flawed organizational structure, blogged University of Florida Public Utility Research Center Director Mark Jamison for the American Enterprise Institute Monday. The structure “encourages a silo mentality, favors people with legal training over people schooled in analysis, and muffles expert voices,” said Jamison. Similar points were made in a recent letter to the agency urging a reorganization, signed by a host of former FCC officials, advocates and academics -- including Jamison (see 1905300001). The FCC should emphasize functions such as licensing and policy instead of the current bureau division by communications medium, Jamison blogged. He cites drops in production of working papers and hosting of economic symposiums as evidence of a lack of in-house analysis of FCC decisions, plus the number of lawyers at the agency compared to engineers and economists. “Developing good analyses and displaying them in public make it harder for regulatory agencies to justify decisions with conjecture and to bias decisions toward favored constituencies,” Jamison said.

Some LGBTQ organizations are raising red flags about expanded use of 211 for a national three-digit suicide prevention hotline, as the FCC North American Numbering Council recommended (see 1905080020). The Trevor Project (TTP), in a docket 18-336 posting Friday on meetings with Chairman Ajit Pai, Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel and aides to Commissioners Geoffrey Starks, Brendan Carr and Mike O'Rielly, said a 211 designation would require retraining 211 operators to effectively handle calls from LGBTQ youth in crisis. It said an independent N11 or three-digit code for mental health crises would prioritize suicide. TTP also said the FCC's report to Congress required under the National Suicide Hotline Improvement Act should include recommendations that national suicide prevention lifeline counselors be trained in LGBTQ cultural competency and that an integrated voice response to route calls to TTP be established. Adding the responsibility for suicide prevention and mental health crisis calls to 211 raises the risk of delayed access to experienced assistance, LGBTQ advocacy group Equality North Carolina (ENC) said. It said there's a danger in inexperienced 211 call center staffers who are unprepared for mental health crisis calls or in interactive voice response that increases wait times. The FCC instead should designate a currently undesignated N11 code or repurpose a designated-but-low-volume N11 code, it said. Suicide prevention organization Suicide Awareness Voices of Education said suicide prevention and mental health crises need their own N11 dialing code, and dual use of 211 or creation of a 10-digit number "could make things even worse."

Verizon, U.S. Cellular and T-Mobile were the big bidders in the 28 GHz auction, AT&T and T-Mobile in the 24 GHz auction. The FCC released results Monday. In the 28 GHz auction, the first held by the FCC, Verizon bid $505.7 million for 1,066 licenses in 863 markets. U.S. Cellular was a distant second, $129.4 million for 408 licenses in 362 markets. T-Mobile was third, $39.3 million for 865 licenses in 864 markets. Windstream, which bid $6.2 million for 106 licenses, was the only other bidder above $5 million. In the 24 GHz auction, AT&T was the top spender -- winning 831 licenses in 383 markets with bids of $982.5 million. T-Mobile also went big, with $803.2 million for 1,346 licenses in 400 markets. U.S. Cellular was third, bidding $126.6 million for 282 licenses in 102 markets, followed by Starry, which bid $48.5 million for 51 licenses in 104 markets.

FCC Administrative Law Judge Jane Halprin denied a long-stalled application to assign an FM translator station to Lake Broadcasting over the conduct of CEO Michael Rice and lack of evidence showing he's qualified to be a licensee, said a decision released Thursday. The matter concerned a proposed sale of a Montgomery, Alabama, translator in 2012 by Patrick Sullivan to Lake Broadcasting. Since Rice is a convicted sex offender who previously held station authorizations that were revoked partially because of a lack of candor, the deal was designated for hearing. The hearing was held in 2017 before then-Administrative Law Judge Richard Sippel, but Rice abruptly left before the proceeding was over and never presented evidence showing how his previous misrepresentations to the FCC affected his suitability to be a licensee, the decision said. Sippel retired in 2018 without ruling on the case. Halprin said now she isn’t required to hold a new hearing to rule here: “Relevant case law indicates that in such a situation, testimony of witnesses must be reheard only where the disposition of the matter depends on first-hand evaluation of their demeanor and credibility.” The new ALJ said Rice and Lake Broadcasting didn’t present evidence “on the separate issue of Mr. Rice’s propensity to deal truthfully with the Commission in light of his and [Lake Broadcasting’s] past misdeeds.” The issue was exacerbated by Rice’s exit from the hearing, Halprin wrote. “The circumstances of Mr. Rice’s abandonment of the case call into question the level of respect that he has for the Commission’s processes generally.” Rice will appeal the decision, his attorney Jerold Jacobs said in an interview. Rice is seeking to vindicate his right to be a licensee, Jacobs said. Halprin’s decision is limited in scope, and a footnote in the decision explicitly states that she hasn’t ruled on the matter of whether Rice’s sex offender convictions prevent him from being a licensee. “We disagree” with Halprin’s determination that insufficient evidence was presented, Jacobs said. Rice still has a single amateur license from the commission, Jacobs said.

Amazon, or one of the big cable companies, may emerge as the elusive fourth wireless carrier, to satisfy DOJ concerns about T-Mobile's buying Sprint (see 1905300058), analysts said Friday. “We do not have an interest in acquiring divested spectrum from the Sprint/T-Mobile transaction,” a Comcast spokesperson said. “We don’t comment on rumors and speculation,” an Amazon spokesperson said. Analysts cited reports such players are scoping Boost, which the companies agreed to sell (see 1905200051) to get FCC clearance. Other divestitures could be forced by DOJ. Agreement is possible, New Street’s Jonathan Chaplin told us Friday. “It will be a complicated negotiation, but there should be a deal that works for everyone.” Antitrust Division Chief Makan Delrahim “would like to approve the deal, but he has a memo from his staff highlighting competitive harms and he has 17 state [attorneys general] threatening to sue if he does approve the deal,” Chaplin said: “The easiest path forward for him would be finding concessions that address the harms and undercut a case by the state AGs. Establishing a credible fourth competitor would be the perfect solution.” Chaplin said cable will get in anyway. “They will buy spectrum,” he said: “They would also love a better [mobile virtual network operator] MVNO than they have now, one that gives them core network control.” While prospects Amazon might jump into the wireless business have caused market jitters, the threat is limited, said Wells Fargo’s Jennifer Fritzsche. “Spectrum is the life blood of a wireless network -- and while [Amazon] could buy some spectrum divestitures if required to get this done -- it is impossible for us to see how it will amass the necessary spectrum to mirror that of the wireless incumbents,” she told investors. “That the DOJ has forced T-Mobile to contemplate such a transaction suggests the DOJ has signaled that without such a deal, it will file a complaint,” New Street’s Blair Levin told investors. “How much T-Mobile is willing to give up to proceed," he asked. Negotiations are likely just getting started and there are some big questions, Levin said. “We don’t know whether Cable or Amazon are seriously interested or want to see what might be available now or, if the deal doesn’t go forward, from Sprint in the future. ... We don’t know if the Cable players are willing to agree to the terms of a joint venture necessary to make the new entrant a national player.” Barclays' Kannan Venkateshwar noted analysts there have made the case for “convergence between the application layer and the network layer … where we had argued that over the long term, there was a high likelihood of companies such as Amazon and Google getting into wireless.” Amazon and Google are testing in some bands, including the citizens broadband radio service band, Barclays said.