Congress should remove federal preemption language from the American Privacy Rights Act (see 2405080055) and allow state attorneys general to continue enforcing state laws, 15 Democratic AGs wrote Congress Wednesday. AGs signing the letter were from California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont and Washington, D.C. “We encourage Congress to adopt legislation that sets a federal floor, not a ceiling, for critical privacy rights and respects the important work already undertaken by states,” they wrote. California AG Rob Bonta (D) said his state is “at the forefront of privacy protections and must retain the ability to respond to privacy concerns as tech rapidly innovates. We urge Congress not to undercut the important protections that states have established.”
The California Public Utilities Commission set next steps for foster youth and broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) programs through two 4-0 votes at a livestreamed meeting Thursday. The vote on extending the CPUC’s current foster youth pilot program beyond July came after multiple delays as the agency and stakeholders considered how to ensure a seamless transition. And even with the first volume of California’s BEAD plan done, much work remains to achieve maximum broadband across the state, California commissioners said.
The FCC gave net neutrality supporters some of what they were looking for on 5G network slicing, one of the most contested issues before commissioners, providing further clarity (see 2404190038), a comparison of the order and a draft shows. The FCC posted the order late Tuesday. The commission approved it 3-2 at a contentious meeting last month.
The California Public Utilities Commission could freeze the state LifeLine specific support amount (SSA) for wireline and wireless providers at $19 until it adopts another method for calculating the SSA, Administrative Law Judge Robyn Purchia said in a Monday ruling in docket R20-02-008. Purchia sought comments on the possible freeze by June 3. Replies will be due June 14. Carriers in January comments resisted a CPUC staff proposal for updating the method (see 2401250051). “We agree with parties’ recommendations to further analyze market conditions, customer impacts, pilot results, and the regulatory landscape,” Purchia wrote. “However, we also see a need to de-link the SSA from the highest [carrier of last resort] basic rate before rates increase again in 2025.”
Minnesota won’t craft a law that might put the state's $652 million allocation from NTIA’s broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program in jeopardy, Senate Broadband Committee Chair Aric Putnam (D) pledged shortly after midnight Tuesday. Up late considering a labor budget bill that included an industry-opposed broadband safety proposal, senators voted 35-32 to reject amendments from Sen. Gene Dornink (R) that would have scrapped the worker safety plan.
Most comments support an Enterprise Wireless Alliance petition at the FCC seeking modifications to Part 90 rules to eliminate the assignment of frequencies within the band's 809-816/854-861 MHz portion to specific pools of eligible entities (see 2402280033). Public safety groups opposed the change.
Indian Peak Properties seeks to vacate the FCC’s March 7 order denying its petitions for declaratory ruling, said its petition for review Monday (docket 24-1108) in U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit. Indian Peak's petitions had sought a federal preemption under the commission’s over-the-air reception devices (OTARDs) rule of a decision by Rancho Palos Verdes, California, to revoke, under local ordinances, the company’s conditional use permit for the deployment of rooftop antennas on a local property. The FCC’s order denying Indian Peaks that relief was premised on a new “human presence” rule for OTARDs, the petition said. That means FCC staff found that Indian Peak failed to plead facts sufficient to establish a regular human presence at the property where the antennas were deployed. But such a “substantive rule” under the Administrative Procedure Act requires a notice-and-comment rulemaking to be legal and effective, said Indian Peak's petition. But “no notice was given, and the public was afforded no opportunity to comment on the new rule,” it said. Instead, the order announced this rule when it denied Indian Peak’s application for review before the commission, it said. The order also upholds FCC staff’s refusal to declare a proceeding, and hold in abeyance state court litigation, it said, The order thus “upholds staff’s violations of FCC rules of procedure,” it said. With its appeal, Indian Peak seeks reversal of these “arbitrary and capricious agency actions that are contrary to law,” and remand to the FCC “for treatment not inconsistent” with the D.C. Circuit’s opinion, it said. On remand and with the FCC’s grant of Indian Peak’s petitions, the local zoning ordinance would be preempted, and the company would be able to replace the disputed antennas on the rooftop of the property, it said.
A proposal that the FCC launch a rulemaking authorizing 5/5 MHz broadband deployments in the 900 MHz band received support in comments, which were due Thursday in docket 24-99. But commenters stressed that the relocation process must be voluntary, and that the rules must protect incumbents from harmful interference. The filings offer a snapshot of how 900 MHz is used today.
Vermont’s net neutrality law seems in good shape legally following two significant, late-April decisions by the FCC and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said experts on the statute. ISP groups must decide what to do with their 2018 lawsuit at U.S. District Court of Vermont now that the case can resume following the 2nd Circuit ruling.
The California Public Utilities Commission won’t shorten time to respond to consumer advocates’ petition to modify state LifeLine rules in light of the federal affordable connectivity program (ACP) ending. Comments will be due May 23, CPUC Administrative Law Judge Robyn Purchia ruled Tuesday. The California Broadband & Video Association (CalBroadband) had opposed fast comments on multiple petitions by The Utility Reform Network and the CPUC’s independent Public Advocates Office (see 2404240063, 2404230020 and 2404150062). “We are persuaded by the due process concerns raised by CalBroadband,” said Purchia said in docket R.20-02-008.