At June 13 agenda meeting, FCC will consider notice of proposed rulemaking on upper millimeter wave bands that will involve service rules for fixed point-to-point operations at 71-76 GHz, 81-86 GHz and 92-95 GHz. Planned applications for that spectrum include gigabit-per-sec. broadband capacity with fixed wireless applications in areas where fiber capacity can’t reach. Other wireless item is annual report on competitive market conditions for commercial mobile services. On media side, FCC will consider order sunsetting cable exclusive contract provision, as well as possible rulemaking on revising cable rate regulation, including accounting and pricing flexibility rules. Commission also is expected to open inquiry to gather data for its 9th annual report to Congress on status of video competition. Commission also will consider 2 wireline items: (1) Order modifying e-rate rules for unused funding. (2) Report on Telecom Service Priority program.
General Accounting Office (GAO) report that will help guide Sen. Burns (R-Mont.) in developing spectrum management reform legislation is expected next week, his spokesman told us. At Comcare Conference in Washington, Burns said he was looking toward end of year for introduction of bill. He acknowledged there wouldn’t be time to move bill through Congress this session, but said he wanted to get debate started. He said he was working with Sens. Hollings (D-S.C.) and Inouye (D-Hawaii) to develop effective bipartisan bill addressing many aspects of spectrum management. “We think it should be comprehensive,” Burns said. He requested GAO report on U.S. spectrum management system nearly a year ago and it’s expected to examine system comprehensively, spokesman told us. Spokesman for Hollings told us Senate Commerce Committee chmn. believed FCC’s policy on spectrum had “flipped the law,” allowing companies to act as if they owned spectrum, instead of renting it. Spokesman cited NextWave case, saying company was allowed to treat spectrum allocations as though they were company property instead of property that it rented from govt. “If a company fails to make a payment, the license should go back to the government,” Hollings spokesman said. If NextWave case creates precedent on spectrum policy, FCC wold become “moot” in regard to spectrum, spokesman said.
Ore. PUC said it appeared Qwest had complied with all 14 points on Sec. 271 open market checklist for interLATA long distance entry. PUC confirmation of tentative conclusion awaits its review of regionwide operation support systems test, which Qwest passed, and completion of workshop to address any issues that may remain outstanding. Qwest said PUC’s conclusion “clearly acknowledges” that it had opened its local market to competitors. It said action bolstered its hope of filing 271 application for Ore. at FCC this summer, possibly by end of July.
FCC didn’t do “thorough analysis” of cost data before voting to let ILECs raise subscriber line charges (SLCs), said Comr. Copps, who dissented on order that raised SLC cap to $6 (CD June 6 p7). Copps said Commission was required to carefully weigh ILECs’ forward-looking costs before determining whether SLC should be raised. However, “a significant number of carriers” submitted incomplete or questionable data and FCC didn’t do “its own independent analysis,” he said in dissenting statement. For example, he said, some carriers “submitted summary data without disclosing the inputs used, cost models that were not transparent or, in some cases, models that have been rejected by the state commissions.” In addition, he said, National Assn. of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA) filed data to show why cap shouldn’t increase, but used model that FCC “has cautioned may have limits in establishing costs.” Copps said there may be case for increasing cap because “in all probability, there are many areas of the country in which forward-looking costs exceed $5 [former cap].” However, “we need to obtain the data and conduct our analysis before we act,” he said. Copps said he also was concerned about disparities in line charges between rural and urban consumers. Bells have flexibility to vary those charges, and Copps said he would like Commission to take closer look at resulting geographic disparities. Order released late Wed. concluded that “even the most conservative estimate of forward-looking costs shows that a substantial number of lines exceed both the current $5 SLC cap and the… $6.50 SLC cap” set to go into place next year. FCC said that raising cap didn’t mean SLC would rise for all customers. Consumers Union (CU) said Congress should investigate whether FCC action complied with Telecom Act. Consumers were promised more local competition in return for deregulation but haven’t seen it, group said. “People are paying more for local phone service but we don’t see any real competition.” CU said that 2 years ago, SLC was only $3.50 per month and next year it’s scheduled to rise to $6.50 -- 86% increase in 3 years. “The little guy really got the short end of the stick in this case,” said Michael Travieso, Md. People’s Counsel and chmn. of NASUCA’s Telecom Committee. FCC action “will unnecessarily increase local telephone costs,” he said.
Company called N Y Telecom reiterated in FCC filing Thurs. its concerns that Commission open for public comment pending NextWave requests on its PCS license build-out deadlines. NextWave made initial construction filings for most of its C-block licenses in Jan. after FCC returned its previously cancelled PCS licenses last year. U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., reversed FCC ruling that had cancelled NextWave licenses for missed payment. In letter to FCC Wireless Bureau last month, NextWave said its initial construction filings in Jan., and subsequent ones for licenses other than C-block, met FCC rules. It said its construction requirements were timed by operation of law, meaning clock stopped on its build-out requirements during period of Jan. 2000-Aug. 2001, period during which its licenses were cancelled. NextWave said its construction clock stopped from Sept. 17, 2001, to Dec. 31, 2001, period covered by settlement agreement reached by govt., re-auction winners and NextWave that ultimately wasn’t approved by Congress. N Y Telecom has said that NextWave hasn’t met construction requirements and that FCC should open public comment period on NextWave filing. “At the most fundamental level, whatever the merits of NextWave’s arguments for receiving an extension or waiver of Commission’s construction requirements, it has offered no justification for having those arguments considered without an opportunity for public participation,” N Y. Telecom said: “Indeed, NextWave has not even justified why it did not follow the Commission’s rules requiring that extension requests be filed before the construction periods elapsed.”
Involving FCC’s Consumer & Govt. Affairs Bureau in handling broadcast indecency complaints “will only have the effect of extending the period of time required for the Commission to impose forfeitures,” Coalition for Family- Friendly Media said in latest round of comments on agency’s informal complaints rulemaking (CI 02-32). Group was responding to proposal to establish uniform, single point of contact within bureau for consumers to file complaints. However, Coalition said Bureau didn’t have authority to start forfeiture or license revocation proceedings. It also said “the broadcast indecency standard as currently enforced by the FCC is virtually a dead letter. the state of the broadcast medium today is the equivalent of a free-fire zone, where anything goes at almost any hour, and material that is inarguably illegal is allowed to flourish.” The group also charged there had been “disturbing examples” recently of “media intimidation and retaliation against citizens who file indecency complaints.”
Spectrum Policy Task Force formed by FCC Chmn. Powell teed up far-reaching questions for comment Thurs. and provoked concerns by Comrs. Copps and Martin that group had drafted public notice “without Commission guidance.” Detailed notice posed spectrum policy questions ranging from Part 15 overcrowding to whether rural spectrum should fall under different policy rubric than urban areas. But Copps and Martin said in statement that those “critically important issues” would have been better addressed in Notice of Inquiry approved by full Commission. “We also fear that without Commission input critical issues may be left out of consideration,” they said, noting rural spectrum issues were given relatively short shrift. Their concerns were raised at time when Powell-led FCC has created several high-level task forces to address issues such as homeland security and DTV transition.
Broadcasters again asked FCC to delay Sept. 6 deadline for mandatory negotiation period for 2 GHz band relocation (CD Dec 4 p8, July 6/00 p3). In letter to FCC Chmn. Powell, NAB and MSTV said mobile satellite service (MSS) operators had engaged in “no substantive relocation negotiations,” despite approach of deadline. They said FCC was seeking comments on proposals for MSS to use spectrum for terrestrial services or to reallocate spectrum to other wireless services: “If the use for this spectrum does change -- as all interested parties seem to agree it should -- then the relocation plan to facilitate the original MSS allocation must be changed as well.” Broadcasters said relocation was squeezing broadcasters’ ability to use frequencies to relay news reports from remote sites, such as disaster scenes. NAB and MSTV cited recent meeting of FCC’s Media Security & Reliability Council, which it said emphasized importance of media in keeping public informed in times of crisis: “Without the ability to transmit pictures and sound from news events, the immediacy and vibrancy of news coverage would suffer greatly.”
Large number of radio issues will be in forefront during Tues.-Wed. NAB boards’ semiannual meetings at Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington. Among what were described as “problems” radio board would face -- and perhaps take action on some -- were iBiquity in-band, on-channel proposal at FCC for digital audio broadcasts (DAB), signal streaming, satellite terrestrial repeaters, ownership consolidation. On TV side, “there’s a lot taking place” in efforts to push digital transition forward, NAB Pres. Edward Fritts told us. Board business sessions will follow NAB day-long “Service to America” seminar and banquet Mon.
FCC’s Enforcement Bureau set up program to monitor Bell companies’ compliance with Telecom Act requirement that they continue to provide open local markets once they gain Sec. 271 approval. Although bureau has been providing oversight, CLECs have urged FCC to establish more formal program. Bureau said in announcement Thurs. that it had established Sec. 271 Compliance Review Team with responsibility for monitoring Bells “on a more structured and systematic basis.” Team will be staffed by attorneys, auditors and other members of bureau’s Investigations & Hearings Div. (IHD). After Bell company receives Sec. 271 approval, team will scrutinize its performance data and other information to determine whether it still is providing adequate access to local competitors. Process will include compliance reviews 6 and 12 months after approval, focusing on any concerns raised by Commission when it granted Sec. 271 approval. If team determines possible lack of compliance it will initiate investigation. Team’s oversight responsibilities will be divided along Bell company regions, with separate group for each region. Bureau said concerns about possible lack of compliance should be directed to Maureen Del Duca, deputy IHD chief. Team also will serve as point of contact for state regulatory commissions. Formal complaints still may be filed as well. FCC Chmn. Powell said team approach represented “a new phase of Sec. 271 enforcement.” ALTS Gen. Counsel Jonathan Askin said he was “optimistic that this could be a worthwhile process.” He said he particularly liked “date certain” reviews every 6 and 12 months and “clearer points of contact” for raising concerns about Bell compliance.