Commenters Disagree on Shortening Stir/Shaken Extension
The Electronic Privacy Information Center and the National Consumer Law Center urged the FCC to look closely at small carriers before deciding on their deadlines for implementing Stir/Shaken rules. The Competitive Carriers Association said carriers acting in good faith need…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
maximum time. In May, the FCC agreed to move up the deadline a year for some small carriers to June 30, 2022, but asked about which should still benefit from the later deadline (see 2105200072). “Because of the ongoing plague of fraudulent robocalls that are still bombarding our telephone lines, we urge the Commission to take an aggressive response in regulating the providers that are bad actors,” EPIC and the NCLC said. “Only permit extensions to providers who have a history of strict compliance with all of the Commission’s requirements,” they said: “Compel participation in a more robust monitoring regime of providers who are dumping the dangerous calls into the American telephone network and impose penalties on providers who transmit these providers’ calls.” Shorten the deadline only for “bad actors,” CCA said: “The challenges that prompted the Commission to grant additional time for small providers are still present. An added complication that some small carriers are wrestling with is the implementation of the" rip-and-replace program "which may require substantial changes to their networks and adds an additional hurdle to compliance.” ACA Connects also cited challenges small providers face. “In no event are ACA Connects members inclined to wait until the last minute to get the process underway,” the group said. “A sudden curtailment of the STIR/SHAKEN deadline would disrupt current plans that were developed on the basis of the June 30, 2023, deadline, which could increase overall implementation costs as providers rush to find solutions they can implement on a compressed timeline.” Comments were due Friday and posted Monday in docket 17-97.