The FCC released a draft proposal Tuesday to ban equipment from Chinese vendors Huawei and ZTE from networks funded by the USF. Industry officials largely welcomed the order. Huawei signaled it will fight. Commissioners are scheduled to vote Nov. 19, after Chairman Ajit Pai circulated the item Monday (see 1910280054). The FCC also posted proposed new 911 location accuracy rules.
The FCC released a draft proposal Tuesday to ban equipment from Chinese vendors Huawei and ZTE from networks funded by the USF. Industry officials largely welcomed the order. Huawei signaled it will fight. Commissioners are scheduled to vote Nov. 19, after Chairman Ajit Pai circulated the item Monday (see 1910280054). The FCC also posted proposed new 911 location accuracy rules.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai circulated an order Monday for the Nov. 19 commissioners’ meeting that would bar providers from using USF support to buy from suppliers deemed a threat to national security. Pai mentioned Chinese companies Huawei and ZTE (see 1910280021). FCC officials said the order singles out those two. Pai proposes to seek comment on rules requiring eligible telecom carriers remove from their networks existing equipment from the suppliers and on how to provide financial assistance to carriers to help them transition to a trusted supplier.
Broadcasters aren't expected to have to make sweeping changes to how they maintain political files after an FCC order made clearer what information needs to be in them. The clarification could make it easier to get compliance from advertising agencies that sometimes provide incomplete information. That order and a related one were ostensibly released Wednesday afternoon but not available online that night. The agency said at a little past noon Thursday that the links were working.
State Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service members asked the FCC to expand the contribution base for federal USF programs to include a fee on broadband internet access service, filing in docket 96-45 Tuesday. Commissioners Chris Nelson of South Dakota, Sally Talberg of Michigan and Stephen Bloom of Oregon recommend "a connections-based assessment on residential services and an expanded revenues-based assessment on business services." Having different contribution methodologies for residential and business services is "equitable and nondiscriminatory," they said. Under a new contribution mechanism, the FCC would assess fees on businesses that use virtual private network services, video conferencing, web conferencing, unified communications and business wireless broadband access services. For residential customers, a separate fee should be assessed for voice and broadband connections, they proposed. "A connections-based mechanism will provide stability for the Commission, administrative efficiency for carriers, and transparency for customers." About 50 percent of USF support would come from residential connections, and an initial surcharge for wireline, wireless and broadband would be 55 to 60 cents per connection, they suggested. The state commissioners recommend the FCC establish a firm budget for each of the four USF programs "with those budgets not growing any more than the Consumer Price Index for any given year." They want the FCC to "take specific steps to assure the continued viability of state universal service mechanisms promoted by Congress." It's "up to the FCC to determine what to do with the State Members’ recommendation," emailed South Dakota's Nelson (R), the joint board's state chair. "It became clear to the State Members that it was not going to be possible to get a recommendation from the full joint board, so we moved forward with this release of our work product." The other state Joint Board members didn't comment right away. The contribution factor for this quarter is a record 25 percent (see 1909130003). Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel this summer asked the states to raise their concerns about needed action on revisions to the USF contribution mechanism and not wait for an FCC rulemaking (see 1907110020). Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who chairs the Joint Board, opposes a fee on broadband access or use (see 1906250011). His office didn't comment now. "The filing is very interesting, and we are looking at it closely," said Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition Executive Director John Windhausen.
State Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service members asked the FCC to expand the contribution base for federal USF programs to include a fee on broadband internet access service, filing in docket 96-45 Tuesday. Commissioners Chris Nelson of South Dakota, Sally Talberg of Michigan and Stephen Bloom of Oregon recommend "a connections-based assessment on residential services and an expanded revenues-based assessment on business services." Having different contribution methodologies for residential and business services is "equitable and nondiscriminatory," they said. Under a new contribution mechanism, the FCC would assess fees on businesses that use virtual private network services, video conferencing, web conferencing, unified communications and business wireless broadband access services. For residential customers, a separate fee should be assessed for voice and broadband connections, they proposed. "A connections-based mechanism will provide stability for the Commission, administrative efficiency for carriers, and transparency for customers." About 50 percent of USF support would come from residential connections, and an initial surcharge for wireline, wireless and broadband would be 55 to 60 cents per connection, they suggested. The state commissioners recommend the FCC establish a firm budget for each of the four USF programs "with those budgets not growing any more than the Consumer Price Index for any given year." They want the FCC to "take specific steps to assure the continued viability of state universal service mechanisms promoted by Congress." It's "up to the FCC to determine what to do with the State Members’ recommendation," emailed South Dakota's Nelson (R), the joint board's state chair. "It became clear to the State Members that it was not going to be possible to get a recommendation from the full joint board, so we moved forward with this release of our work product." The other state Joint Board members didn't comment right away. The contribution factor for this quarter is a record 25 percent (see 1909130003). Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel this summer asked the states to raise their concerns about needed action on revisions to the USF contribution mechanism and not wait for an FCC rulemaking (see 1907110020). Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, who chairs the Joint Board, opposes a fee on broadband access or use (see 1906250011). His office didn't comment now. "The filing is very interesting, and we are looking at it closely," said Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition Executive Director John Windhausen.
Six days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled partly for the FCC (see 1910010018), President Donald Trump tweeted that "we just WON the big court case on Net Neutrality Rules! Will lead to many big things, including 5G. Congratulations to the FCC and its Chairman, Ajit Pai." Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel responded: "This is wrong. The court told the FCC it couldn't stop states from making their own #NetNeutrality rules. It also sent a bunch of issues back to the FCC." Many want Congress to step in (see 1910010044).
Six days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled partly for the FCC (see 1910010018), President Donald Trump tweeted that "we just WON the big court case on Net Neutrality Rules! Will lead to many big things, including 5G. Congratulations to the FCC and its Chairman, Ajit Pai." Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel responded: "This is wrong. The court told the FCC it couldn't stop states from making their own #NetNeutrality rules. It also sent a bunch of issues back to the FCC." Many want Congress to step in (see 1910010044).
Industry and consumer group officials continued hoping Monday that lawmakers will reach a bipartisan compromise on net neutrality legislation, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Mozilla v. FCC last week upheld parts of the FCC 2018 order rolling back 2015 reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II (see 1910010018). They didn't stray during a Congressional Internet Caucus Academy event from their longstanding belief that a final statute either should or shouldn't have a basis in Title II and mirror the rescinded 2015 net neutrality rules (see 1910010044).
Industry and consumer group officials continued hoping Monday that lawmakers will reach a bipartisan compromise on net neutrality legislation, after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Mozilla v. FCC last week upheld parts of the FCC 2018 order rolling back 2015 reclassification of broadband as a Communications Act Title II (see 1910010018). They didn't stray during a Congressional Internet Caucus Academy event from their longstanding belief that a final statute either should or shouldn't have a basis in Title II and mirror the rescinded 2015 net neutrality rules (see 1910010044).