FCC got strong message from small telcos and some state PUCs Tues. in comments opposing agency’s idea of moving all intercarrier compensation to bill & keep regime. Although proposal is supported by large ILECs, rural and state interests expressed fear that it would harm universal service, threaten state independence, encourage more cream-skimming and raise consumer rates. FCC has been eying idea of making intercarrier charges more uniform for more than year and recently issued notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) asking for views. Plan would be to replace patchwork of compensation schemes -- such as reciprocal compensation and access charges -- with one form of payment, probably bill & keep. Bill & keep essentially means neither carrier pays other.
FCC electronic filing requirements and procedures once again are under attack by attorneys and engineers who are required to use Consolidated Database System (CDBS) for most of their filings on behalf of clients. Making matters worse, according one lawyer, is that “there’s a complete lack of communication” on electronic filings between bureaus. Such communication is “absolutely necessary” for system to work, lawyer said, because, for example, Wireless Bureau handles broadcast auxiliary applications while Mass Media handles all other TV-radio applications. Principal complaint of lawyers was that attachments to electronically filed documents weren’t properly put with applications they referred to until days, sometimes weeks, later. Electronic filing system was criticized year ago (CD July 5 p1/00), and recently was shut down for overhaul (CD June 15 p10).
Settlement rates agreement reached late Wed. by Telefonos de Mexico (Telmex) and WorldCom provoked immediate opposition Thurs. from AT&T, which said proposed rates still were “well above” 4 cent per min. cost of providing service. AT&T, contending proposal didn’t conform with Mexico’s World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments, said it planned to oppose proposal at FCC. But deal appeared to have forestalled, for now, U.S. Trade Representative’s taking action by deadline today (Fri.) for carrying concerns over Mexico’s telecom market any further at WTO. USTR official told us U.S. still wasn’t backing down from earlier filing at WTO that would mark first step toward dispute resolution panel if govt. chose to take that route.
FCC concluded certain wireless carrier practices, such as charging customers for dead time and for unanswered or unconnected calls, weren’t per se unjust or unreasonable under Sec. 201 of Communications Act. Commission responded to petition for declaratory ruling filed by plaintiffs in class action complaint against GTE. At issue were practices of: (1) Charging customer for dead time, which includes “noncommunication” air time such as after party has ended call but before subscriber pushes “end” button. (2) Charging for unanswered or unconnected calls. (3) Measuring time of call from time “send” button is pushed. (4) Rounding up charges to next min. Class action suit in U.S. Dist. Court, Tampa, had charged violation of Fla. Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Court referred billing practice complaints to FCC for declaratory ruling and stayed rest of proceedings until Commission could act. While FCC denied plaintiff’s petition Fri., it didn’t rule out possibility that in certain cases “in the context of the related contractual services and marketing practices of the CMRS [Commercial Mobile Radio Service] provider, these practices may be found to be in violation of Section 201.” FCC agreed with carriers that charging “for the time a network is engaged but no actual conversation occurs is related to the costs associated with the network functions that occur even if a call is not completed.” Such costs can include those related to setting up trunk or interconnecting with LEC, order said. Agency acknowledged wireline carriers didn’t charge for unconnected calls when line was busy or unanswered nor for call setup time. For wireless service, on other hand, charges typically start from moment that “send” button is pressed. Commission said: “It appears that in this instance, a competitive, deregulated market has enabled carriers to adopt different types of services and billing practices.” In competitive market, consumers can factor in different practices carriers use for when call begins to make service decisions, it said. FCC said it already had found that practice of rounding up rates to next min. for completed calls was not per se unjust or unreasonable. Complaints against GTE, now part of Verizon Wireless, didn’t provide details that indicated rounding-up practices at issue were unjust or unreasonable, it said.
Eight Mich. CLECs plus CLEC trade groups CompTel and ASCENT urged Mich. PSC to “carefully consider” last week’s Ameritech notice of its intent to file with FCC for Sec. 271 interLATA long distance authority by Oct. CLEC interests said Ameritech’s filing (Case U-12320) “unilaterally announces a new plan of action” for PSC’s review of 271 application that disregards process and timetable that PSC and all other parties agreed to in Feb. 2000 for 271 review. CLECs said new procedure Ameritech was attempting to establish didn’t include list of mandatory conditions PSC said last year that Ameritech must meet before it sought agency’s endorsement. CLECs criticized Ameritech for deciding to file its entire body of checklist compliance evidence at once instead of taking items one at time, as PSC originally intended. Ameritech indicated compliance filing would be made this week. CLECs asked PSC to: (1) Change company’s new proposal, defer compliance filing until 3rd-party operation support system (OSS) test neared completion. (2) Allow CLECs at least 6 weeks for comments at each comment-reply cycle in schedule instead of Ameritech’s proposed 4 weeks. (3) Reject carrier’s proposed changes in KPMG Consulting’s OSS test evaluation process. (4) Set date certain for company to file 3 months’ actual performance data.
With nod to growth of high-speed wireless devices in unlicensed spectrum, FCC unanimously approved further notice of proposed rulemaking at Thurs. agenda meeting to update its Part 15 rules for spread spectrum systems. Changes, sought by group of companies including 3Com, Cisco and Texas Instruments, would reduce amount of spectrum that must be used for frequency hopping spread spectrum systems at 2.4 GHz. Proposal responds to petition for partial reconsideration or clarification filed by 3Com and others over Aug. 2000 decision. That order had altered Commission’s Part 15 rules spectrum to allow spread spectrum devices in 2.4 GHz band to use wider frequency hopping channels for first time. Proposal adopted by FCC Thurs. also would eliminate processing gain requirement for direct sequence spread spectrum systems and would allow new digital transmission technologies to operate under same rules as spread spectrum systems. In general, proposal appears to update Part 15 rules to allow operation of technologies that employ smart hopping techniques to avoid interference in band. In general, changes aim to address coexistence of increased applications in 2.4 GHz, including by wireless technologies based on Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and HomeRF wireless networking systems.
Some wireless technology developers are recommending FCC set aside 5 GHz of spectrum or more when Commission finalizes proposal for service rules for spectrum at 92 GHz. Expectation is that as early as this fall FCC will launch rulemaking, although industry already has been bouncing ideas off Commission for what developers would like to see in that spectrum. On issue whether band should be made available on unlicensed basis or via licenses, panel organized by Wireless Communications Assn. (WCA) has floated idea of hybrid approach that would license some segments and allow others to be unlicensed at more restricted power levels, said Donny Burt, vp-advanced technology, e-xpedient/CAVU. Among “last mile” technologies that can be offered in that band, developers said, are gigabit ethernet-based systems that can connect buildings and extend metropolitan area networks.
Regulatory authority over unwanted e-mails on wireless devices appears to be murky, with industry groups and consumer advocates questioning whether FTC or FCC potentially have mandate in that area and agencies themselves saying they don’t. Lack of clarity on regulatory purview is expected to drive at least some attention in Congress this year on wireless spam. While spamming incident involving short message service (SMS) on as many as 170,000 mobile phones in Phoenix has drawn widespread attention in recent weeks, analysts and industry representatives said problem still was rare in industry searching for broader consumer use of wireless Internet applications.
Bipartisan group of 5 senators urged FCC Chmn. Powell to reject interpretation of Sec. 310(a) of Communications Act that Sen. Hollings (D-S.C.) has backed for evaluating proposed VoiceStream-Deutsche Telekom merger. Without naming Hollings, senators referred to requests agency has received to interpret Sec. 310(a) to bar telecom carrier with substantial govt. ownership from indirectly owning U.S. wireless licensee. Sens. Smith (R-Ore.), Lugar (R-Ind.), Cantwell (D-Wash.), Brownback (R- Kan.) and Murray (D-Wash.) signed letter. “In our view, such an interpretation of the law would place the United States in direct violation of its commitments under the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement on basic telecommunications and the General Agreement on Trade in Services,” senators wrote to Powell. “We believe it is crucial that the FCC not back away from or undermine from or undermine that agreement.” WTO commitments obligate U.S. to not bar foreign telecom companies, including foreign govt.- backed carriers, from entering U.S. market or obtaining controlling interest in U.S. wireless licenses, senators wrote. Hollings’s interpretation of Sec. 310 and how it applies to DT- VoiceStream deal has become touchstone of ex parte filings at FCC on pending merger. He has argued that Sec. 310(a) supersedes Sec. 310(b) of Communications At in cases in which foreign govt. has indirect control of radio licensee, barring approval of indirect foreign govt. interest that confers control of U.S. license. VoiceStream and Deutsche Telekom wrote FCC Comr. Tristani Mon., contending that if Hollings’s interpretation had been followed, Commission wouldn’t have approved Vodafone AirTouch merger or Vodafone-Verizon wireless venture.
NorthPoint “reached out” to its ISP customers Mon. to see whether there was any way to provide interim service to consumers in wake of Cal. PUC order to do so but “we don’t want to inflate anyone’s hopes,” NorthPoint attorney Michael Olsen said. Cal. PUC, which on Fri. ordered NorthPoint to continue service to Cal. customers for at least 30 days, understands company’s situation and “I don’t think it wants us to do the impossible,” Olsen added. NorthPoint is operating on skeleton staff, already has disconnected many of its customers and is nearly out of money, he said. Cal. PUC restraining order, along with other efforts to delay NorthPoint’s demise, are aimed at giving customers more time to find new service providers.