The Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act has “worked as intended,” and potential increases in complaints and lack of enforcement action are likely due to increased streaming during the pandemic and that 2019 had the fewest complaints since the act’s implementation, ACA Connects said in comments posted Friday in docket 21-181. The deadline was Thursday (see 2105210043). Comments from ACA and NCTA were the only recent filings from major industry trade groups posted in the docket Friday. It’s likely that many of the complaints the agency has received are either not specific enough to meet the act’s requirements or concern commercials on streaming services, and thus aren't actionable under the rules, ACA said. “It is important that the Commission understand the nature of the complaints before reaching any conclusions about the nature of the problem.” Enforce existing rules, ACA said, “rather than saddling a whole industry with increased regulation to solve a problem that may not exist in any meaningful measure for most.” A "number of companies have chosen to go above and beyond” FCC Calm Act rules in monitoring commercials, NCTA said. “Given the successful track record of the Commission’s rules implementing the CALM Act, there is no need for any changes.”

Regulatory fees for non-geostationary orbit satellites and a fight between cable and direct broadcast satellite operators dominated comments posted at the FCC Friday in docket 21-190 on proposed changes to regulatory fees. SpaceX slammed the FCC for trying to “allocate increased NGSO regulatory fees based on the 12 GHz rulemaking proceeding, which the NGSO operators strongly urged the Commission not to initiate.” Allocating fees “to the victims of such an effort” would be “inequitable” and “set a precedent that encourages speculation and gamesmanship,” SpaceX said.

A federal judge peppered New York with questions on how the state’s law requiring $15 monthly low-income plans squares with the FCC 2018 net neutrality order. Judge Denis Hurley asked no questions of the ISPs challenging the policy at a teleconferenced oral argument Thursday in U.S. District Court for Eastern New York. Meanwhile, large telcos are seeking DSL exemptions from the law at the Public Service Commission.

As the C-band phase 1 transition moves into filtering for MVPD earth stations, we're told filter supplies are expected to be more than sufficient. Intelsat and SES have largely cleared the band's lower 120 MHz, they told an ACA Connects webinar Thursday. Tom McNamara, Intelsat vice president-C-band transition management, said the satellite operator's completing that clearing last weekend was "a big milestone."

ISPs’ lawsuit against New York’s broadband affordability law raises similar preemption issues to cases industry lost in other venues, but law experts disagreed in interviews which side would win. Plaintiffs at U.S. District Court for Eastern New York (case 21-cv-2389) make the same arguments that failed in Maine ISP privacy and California net neutrality cases, which are “structurally almost identical” to the New York case, argued Stanford Law School professor Barbara van Schewick. Former FCC General Counsel Thomas Johnson countered that 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals case law gives ISP plaintiffs an “additional arrow in their quiver.”

The Biden administration said Thursday it expects deliberations over how to respond to Senate Republicans’ infrastructure counteroffer to continue into Friday, amid conflicting evaluations about prospects for a deal (see 2105190069). House Commerce Committee Republicans bowed the American Broadband Act to counter President Joe Biden’s proposal to spend $100 billion on broadband. The counterproposal includes $65 billion. More than 40 groups and companies launched the Broadband Equity for All coalition to press lawmakers to create a permanent federal broadband benefit program to succeed the FCC-administered $3.2 billion emergency broadband benefit program.

As the FCC is expected to have voted on emergency connectivity fund rules by this week (see 2104300084), stakeholders raised concerns prioritizing retroactive purchases and not taking a tech-neutral approach could shut many schools and libraries out. “There are a lot of good things about the order,” Schools, Libraries, Health & Broadband (SHLB) Coalition Executive Director John Windhausen told us. He cited not requiring competitive bidding and excluding smartphones. “Rules tend to favor hot spot deployment,” he said, and don't "give the schools and libraries the flexibility to look at other technologies that may serve their market better.” The FCC declined to comment Friday. Dozens of advocates, industry groups and providers spoke with staff to lobby for more flexibility. Schools and libraries should be allowed to use ECF funds for smartphones, T-Mobile told Wireline Bureau staff. Samsung agreed and told acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioner Geoffrey Starks' staff that smartphones “support video conferencing platforms, internet browsing, e-mail, document editing and sharing, and other software necessary to ensure full participation in remote learning activities.” Qualcomm told Rosenworcel’s staff it's “disappointed” with the decision. Whether schools and libraries that have already purchased services and equipment should get priority for reimbursement was a sticking point for education advocates (see 2104260070). The draft rules appear to favor retroactive purchases, Windhausen said. Prospective purchases should be given priority, ACA Connects told Commissioner Nathan Simington's and Commissioner Brendan Carr's staffers, because it would otherwise "be inequitable." One application filing window that prioritizes future purchases would "provide more certainty that support would be available for the upcoming school year," said Verizon. CTIA disagreed and echoed T-Mobile's call to include smartphones. The State E-rate Coordinators’ Alliance recommended starting retroactive reimbursement March 1, 2020, instead of the proposed July 1, 2020. Final rules should allow eligible schools and libraries to use funds for constructing self-provisioned networks, said Motorola, because “the limited exception to permit funding of network construction where there is no commercially available option is administratively unworkable." ENA Services recommended tweaking the language to require schools and libraries only certify that they were unaware of existing services to be reimbursed for new construction. NTCA agreed that a limited exemption for self-provisioning should be granted and raised concerns about allowing reimbursement for purchasing hotspots.

Jessica Rosenworcel's tenure as FCC acting chairwoman has featured bipartisan unanimity. Former commissioners and others don't see her running out of noncontroversial agenda items soon. They told us to expect issues that could be contentious, such as revisiting net neutrality and new orbital debris rules, to be back-burnered until a third Democratic commissioner is appointed, breaking the current 2-2 balance. Current commissioners credit Rosenworcel including them in decision-making and communicating with them.

Cable ISPs and connectivity experts told us not to expect federal stimulus spending for broadband to make a huge dent in adoption gaps due to lack of connectivity, though it could reduce the number of people dropping service in the near term due to pocketbook issues. Some see the FCC Emergency Connectivity Fund potentially having longer-term ramifications, and much depends on finalized ECF rules due Monday. Many hope to see a more-permanent version of the emergency broadband benefit program emerge.

ISPs and Vermont agreed to keep net neutrality litigation on ice. The challenge to Vermont's law and executive order by ACA Connects, CTIA, NCTA and USTelecom at U.S. District Court in Vermont (case 2:18-cv-00167-CR) has been on hold pending resolution of the same associations' challenge to California’s law. That freeze would continue until the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals resolves industry’s appeal of U.S. District Court in Sacramento denying their preliminary injunction in February (see 2104130072), said Friday's stipulation (in Pacer). The pact would let Vermont require ISPs to adhere to net neutrality in contracts after April 22, though it wouldn’t be enforceable during the stay.