Satellite operators and WTA suggested a variety of changes to rules the FCC adopted between 2001 and 2004, in filings (see here, here and here) posted Friday in docket 16-251. The comments deadline in the Regulatory Flexibility Act rules review is May 15. Intelsat recommended eliminating Section 25.170's requirement for satellite operators to annually report satellites and spectrum unavailable for service, contact information for interference resolution and construction process and expected launch dates of authorized replacement satellites. It said the Section 25 requirement is largely redundant given other filings and notices, and requires something of satellite operators that terrestrial operators don't need to do. It also recommended modification of Section 25.119 rules requiring prior approval of pro forma transfers of control of non-common carrier satellite and earth station licenses, calling it "illogical" non-common carrier licenses holders "must undergo the labor- and time-intensive process of submitting an application for FCC approval" even though the agency recognizes pro forma transfer applications don't raise public interest issues. It recommended discontinuation of Form Schedule S, which contains technical information regarding proposed space station operations -- information that could be provided in spreadsheets and narratives "without having to use the burdensome Schedule S software." EchoStar and its Hughes Network Systems listed six Part 25 rules and two Part 2 rules they said should be eliminated or revised as "duplicative, unduly burdensome and no longer in the public interest." They include 25.111(e), requiring submission of a paper copy of an application to the International Bureau; 25.112 (a)(3), (b), not allowing applications for satellite use of spectrum prior to international allocations for such use; and 25.114, requiring separate space and earth station applications operating in the same network. WTA suggested eliminating or revising several Section 54 reporting requirements. One regulation it singled out for deleting was the Section 54.305 rule that provides high-cost support to a carrier acquiring exchanges from an unaffiliated carrier, with WTA saying it has created "orphan" exchanges that require separate accounting and come with high costs while getting little USF support. WTA also said Form 477 filing requirements should be annually, calling the current, twice-a-year requirement "very time consuming and expensive" for RLECs.

USTelecom asked the FCC to ensure "greater efficiencies" in the video relay service program for the deaf and hard of hearing, and to shore up "the overall sustainability" of the broader telecom relay service fund. In replies on a Further NPRM (see 1703230055), it lauded commission efforts to encourage VRS efficiencies and innovation to address cost issues, but said the agency recognized structural changes were "slow to arrive." Even with FCC 2013-2017 reductions in VRS provider compensation rates, overall TRS funding continues to increase as a "shrinking group of rate-payers" shoulder the costs, leading to a recent TRS administrator proposal to increase the industry contribution rate by 12 percent (see 1705030034), said the group Thursday in docket No. 10-51. Parties filed initial comments last month (see 1704250057). USTelecom said the FCC should reject Sorenson Communication's proposal that VRS become a "mandatory" service for common carriers. ASL Service Holdings (GlobalVRS) said it wasn't surprising Sorenson opposed rivals' VRS compensation proposal to achieve "provider diversity" and TRS stability. (The proposal would raise most rates while cutting further the traffic tier rate affecting Sorenson.) "The dominant provider seeks to solidify its virtual monopolization of the Program," replied ASL Service. "The dominant provider can trace its 'success' not to innovation, superior service, or efficiency, but rather to years of over compensation." Sorensen has concerns on the FNPRM, it replied and told Office of General Counsel officials including acting General Counsel Brendan Carr. In the meeting, it sought "equal treatment to VRS providers that provide more than 500,000 minutes per month." The path in the FNPRM would set Tier III "rates below costs," it replied, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. "If the Commission does not adopt one of Sorenson’s proposals for market-determined rates, the only rate in the record that meets ADA requirements is a $4.19 unitary per minute rate. Even if the Commission intends to push all costs of end user devices onto deaf consumers in violation of the ADA, the only justifiable rate in the record for VRS, without necessary equipment, is $3.73 per minute."

The FCC should stop states from writing broadband privacy rules or regulating VoIP and IP services, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly said Friday in remarks to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Republican commissioner said he has discussed both with Chairman Ajit Pai. More than 10 states are mulling ISP privacy bills responding to President Donald Trump and Congress for using the Congressional Review Act to kill FCC privacy rules (see 1705050042). “It is both impractical and very harmful for each state to enact differing and conflicting privacy burdens on broadband providers, many of which serve multiple states, if not the entire country," said Pai. "If necessary, the Commission should be willing to issue the requisite decision to clarify the jurisdictional aspects of this issue.” O’Rielly slammed the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission, which is battling with Charter over VoIP classification in U.S. District Court in St. Paul (see 1704040043): “Such inappropriate jurisdictional overreaches by states should be nipped in the bud.” O’Rielly, the federal chair of the Joint Board on Separations, acknowledged the FCC hasn’t made a clear statement about VoIP jurisdiction. “The commission should have just declared VoIP to be an interstate information service,” he said. “Arguably, VoIP is just an application not even subject to FCC jurisdiction much less that of individual states.” O’Rielly railed against what he sees as a “progressive agenda” to “vanquish capitalism and economic liberty.” He compared the FCC to ALEC, a conservative group that progressive groups criticized for allegedly writing bills on behalf of big firms: “Like ALEC, the new commission is facing its share of unwarranted and inappropriate criticism.” In revisiting net neutrality with an NPRM to be considered at the commissioners' May 18 meeting, the FCC aims to return to “its previous approach to broadband that enabled staggering innovation, creativity, competition, disruption and consumer benefit,” the commissioner said. The 2015 net neutrality rules weren’t necessary, he said. “All of the propaganda in the world cannot paper over the fact that these new burdens were not in response to actual marketplace events but hypothetical concerns dreamt up by radical activists.” O’Rielly cheered ALEC’s opposition to municipal broadband. “It would be easy, as some have done, to blindly support any means necessary to get more and faster broadband to people they represent,” he said. He said he’s “very aware that many homes in America do not have acceptable broadband today” -- that’s why he wants to modernize USF: “This, I believe is a defensible program and one that we seek to inject with as many market driven aspects as possible, including operating reverse auctions to minimize and narrow the amount of subsidy provided.”

ISPs invested about $5.6 billion, or 3.6 percent, less in 2015 and 16 than they likely would have without Title II Communications Act net neutrality rules, spending about $149 billion total, a Free State Foundation research associate blogged Friday. Michael Horney based the estimate on capital expenditure data on 16 of the largest ISPs for 2014-16, and also cited USTelecom data on broadband capital expenditures (see 1612140074). Free Press, which unlike FSF supports the 2015 FCC rules, disagreed with the analysis, while USTelecom said spending appears to be affected, and Oracle meanwhile seeks a return to pre-2015 rules. "This is not a regression analysis, so I cannot say by how much the regulatory uncertainty and costs imposed in the Open Internet Order negatively impacted broadband investment," wrote FSF's Horney. "If the FCC was right about broadband capital investment not being suppressed by the Open Internet Order, we should have expected the market to continue along or above its trend of investment growth." These "empty claims" are belied by publicly traded ISPs showing a 5.3 percent increase in investments in the two-year period, responded Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood. USTelecom estimates were "flawed and vague numbers," and "Horney descends even further," Wood said. USTelecom’s "initial analysis strongly suggests that investment in 2016 continued to trend downward," the group blogged Friday following FSF. ISPs, usually comprising 90-95 percent of annual industry capital expenditures, spent $71 billion in 2016, down from $73 billion in 2015, wrote USTelecom Vice President-Industry Analysis Patrick Brogan. "Claims by some interest groups that broadband provider capex actually may have increased in 2015 and 2016 depend on figures that ignore accounting adjustments for certain non-material items like leased cellphones and acquisitions, such as AT&T’s merger with DirecTV and a Mexican wireless operation." FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has been doing media interviews and making speeches about his plan to propose to change net neutrality rules (see 1705050025). Oracle meanwhile, backing a proposed return to Title I Communications Act net neutrality rules, sees debate having "inexplicably evolved into a highly political hyperbolic battle, substantially removed from technical, economic, and consumer reality," it wrote Pai Friday in docket 17-108 after previously backing this move. "The stifling open internet regulations and broadband classification that the FCC put in place in 2015," the year of the past net neutrality order, "threw out" the "technological consensus" and "certainty," the software maker said. "Reclassifying broadband internet access as an information service will eliminate unnecessary burdens on, and competitive imbalances for, ISPs. ... It will restore the FTC as the impartial cop on the broadband beat with authority to reach all of the participants." The company was part of a meeting with Pai last month, before he unveiled a draft NPRM to undo Title II common-carrier net neutrality rules (see 1704260002 and 1705050025).

Among media, wireless and wireline industries, cable distribution is likely the best positioned due to strength of its broadband product, S&P Global Ratings reported Thursday. S&P said wireline's fiber-to-the-home (FTHH) service is better than cable broadband, but it's offered only in select markets, and cable ISPs have been adding broadband subscribers while wireline loses DSL and FTHH customers. It said the risk of more government regulation of the cable industry has declined under the Trump administration and FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, but cord-cutting and, longer term, 5G are threats. S&P said the current cord-cutting rate of less than 2 percent a month "is manageable." S&P said the media industry -- despite declining TV and film audiences -- remains strong "because content ... is still the key component underlying the overall media, telecommunications, and cable ecosystem." S&P said it views wireless less favorably due to the competitive dynamics, even though it will benefit from increased mobile video and data demand and from IoT devices and services. It said wireline is weakest because of industry pressures and a weak competitive position. S&P ranked Comcast highest of the 12 cable, telco and media companies, followed by Disney, AT&T, Charter Communications, Verizon and, at the end, Discovery and Viacom. S&P raised its long-term corporate credit rating and debt ratings on Disney to "A+'" from "A" on strong business performance, particularly at its movie and TV studio division and cable networks.

Globalstar has identified more than 100 countries where it's interested in pursuing approval for terrestrial use of its 2483.5-2500 MHz band spectrum and has been looking into the feasibility of each, CEO James Monroe said in an analyst call Thursday. He said the company hired multiple legal, engineering and consulting firms to pursue regulatory approvals in various countries, and it applied in an unspecified number of countries covering 375 million people. He said Globalstar also expects to file additional applications with other countries' regulatory bodies this year. The FCC approved the company's terrestrial low-power service plans in December (see 1612230060). Globalstar reported sales rose 13 percent in Q1 to $24.7 million, while its net loss -- at $20.2 million -- was down from the $26.9 million loss in Q1 2016. Monroe said new one-way and two-way products were running behind schedule. He said the company was in talks with senior lenders about raising $150 million in refinancing to "provide runway beyond 2017." He said the apparent AT&T/Verizon bidding war over Straight Path (see 1705030056) shows "licensed spectrum matters." He said spectrum closely situated to Globalstar's was found in the AWS-3 auction "and not a scrap of that was unpurchased." Added Monroe, "It's not to say unlicensed spectrum doesn't get used -- we all live on Wi-Fi. But you can't run a service you want to charge a reasonable amount of money for on unlicensed."

The FCC is acting to curb what he sees as abuses of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Commissioner Mike O’Rielly told the Association of Credit and Collection Professionals Thursday. Prior decisions by the FCC and the courts “expanded the boundaries of TCPA far beyond what I believe Congress intended, as evidenced by the actual wording of the statute,” O’Rielly said. “As the scope of TCPA has increased, so too has TCPA litigation. Thousands of lawsuits are filed each year against businesses who thought they were taking the right precautions.” O’Rielly said “there is reason for optimism” nonetheless. “With the change in Administration, new leadership at the Commission and a new Bureau head overseeing TCPA, we have the chance to undo the misguided and harmful TCPA decisions of the past that exposed legitimate companies to massive legal liability without actually protecting consumers,” O’Rielly said, according to written remarks. The FCC needs to ensure its focus is on illegal robocalls, he said. “Whether it is an informational call like an appointment reminder or a telemarketing call to a person that has previously provided contact information, these can be beneficial,” he said. “We need to make broader changes to the rules to ensure that all consumers are able to get relevant and timely information. For example, companies that follow industry practices to limit stray calls should be able contact a person until they have actual knowledge that a number has been reassigned.” O’Rielly said the FCC must address what constitutes an autodialer. “One of the most ludicrous arguments made in TCPA proceedings is that callers can simply avoid liability by not using autodialers, manually dialing calls, or by using other forms of communication like email,” he said. “This is a red herring.” In March, the FCC approved an NPRM and notice of inquiry targeting “spoofed” robocalls, refocusing on illegal calls (see 1703230035).

Universal Service Administrative Co. CEO Chris Henderson resigned this week, said a news release Thursday from USAC, which administers FCC USF telecom subsidy programs. Henderson, who had been CEO since September 2014, "led the company through a period of tremendous growth and change focused on enhancing program integrity and improving the stakeholder experience, as part of fulfilling the FCC’s universal service mission," the release said. The board named Vickie Robinson, vice president-general counsel, acting CEO until a permanent replacement can be found. No reason was given for Henderson's departure. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who had often questioned USAC oversight when he was a commissioner, recently blasted USAC management of the E-rate school and library discount program, and asked Henderson to devise a plan to address "serious flaws" by May 18 (see 1704190026). Pai didn't comment Thursday. Commissioner Mike O'Rielly, federal chairman of the federal-state joint board on universal service, said Henderson's departure gave USAC a chance "to clean up its act." O'Rielly issued a statement saying: "USAC as it has been managed is not sufficiently accountable to the Commission, and is not meeting the needs of universal service stakeholders or the public, who pay fees to support USAC’s operations. Absent significant and timely improvements, I believe that all options should be on the table, including putting USAC’s functions out for contract, as the Commission has done in other circumstances.”

The FCC should reject proposals by satellite broadband operators to relax rules adopted in July’s spectrum frontiers order designed to protect terrestrial mobile use of local multipoint distribution service (LMDS) spectrum, the Competitive Carriers Association said. “Satellite Operators tout prospective benefits to rural America, but competitive carriers are already using this spectrum to bridge the digital divide throughout their rural and regional service footprints,” CCA said in a filing Tuesday in docket 14-177. “Competitive carriers also are investing in engineering solutions to optimize LMDS spectrum use. These carriers should not be hamstrung by satellite operations to introduce mobile services on those same frequencies, and their activities merit the Commission’s support.” The CCA refers to an April filing by satellite operators (see 1704130062).

Verizon “fully complied with its contractual obligations” in New York City under its cable franchise agreement (CFA), it said Wednesday. New York City sued Verizon for allegedly failing to meet a 2014 deadline in the CFA to roll out Fios video service to all city residents (see 1703140043). In an answer filed Wednesday at the New York Supreme Court, Verizon denied any wrongdoing. “There was no mystery or misunderstanding about how Verizon planned to build its fiber network: Verizon and the City discussed the approach during their CFA negotiations and the CFA itself specifically refers to the fact that Verizon was in the process of upgrading its existing network. All of the obligations, schedules, forecasts, and assumptions regarding residential cable service that were negotiated and ultimately agreed upon were based on the understanding that Verizon would be upgrading its existing network as it was entitled to do -- without the City’s permission -- in its capacity as a common carrier under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934.” After the agreement, Verizon continued the citywide deployment and passed repeated city audits and inspections, the carrier said. “Since 2008, when the Agreement was negotiated, neither the meaning of the Agreement nor Verizon’s performance under the Agreement has changed,” Verizon said. “One factor alone explains the emergence of this dispute beginning in 2014: a change in Administration, which is now trying retroactively to change the Agreement from what was negotiated to what it wishes it meant.”