Comments are due Feb. 11 at FCC on Pacific Bell petition for pricing flexibility for dedicated transport and special access services, with replies Feb. 21.
Regulators in some Qwest states said they're moving ahead with privacy dockets they opened in response to company’s account-privacy notices, despite carrier’s recent announcement it was dropping plans to share sensitive customer account information with affiliates. Ariz. Corporation Commission decided to go ahead with formal rulemaking to examine privacy policies relating to customer proprietary network information (CPNI) for all telecom carriers, including privacy notice and verification requirements to ensure customers can make “informed waiver” of privacy rights. ACC also drafted letter to FCC asking it to refrain from prescribing opt-out privacy approach to CPNI, where customer information can be shared unless person explicitly blocks release. ACC urged Commission either to readopt opt-in CPNI policy that information is private unless customer gives explicit consent to its release, or not prohibit states from adopting opt-in privacy rules. Meanwhile, Wash. Utilities & Transportation Commission (WUTC) expressed its “satisfaction” at Qwest’s CPNI policy reversal but said it still would go ahead with its generic CPNI privacy docket to develop privacy rules for all telecom carriers. WUTC also said it favored national policy of employing opt-in approach to account privacy.
House consideration of data deregulation legislation is entirely in hands of House Speaker Hastert (R-Ill.), and it almost certainly will move straight to floor without need for supporters to attach measure to other legislation, several industry observers and congressional staffers said. Although House leadership last month delayed Rules Committee from setting parameters for floor debate on bill (HR-1542) before recess, observers pointed out that Hastert was committed to getting legislation to floor for vote, possibly as early as March. Precursor Group CEO Scott Cleland said “Rules Committee is a creature of the speaker,” so it’s routine matter for Hastert to give go-ahead to Chmn. Dreier (R-Cal.) to determine how many amendments would be accepted and to set ground rules for debate: “This is all about the availability of floor time.”
Three FCC commissioners and NTIA Dir. Nancy Victory will appear during “Regulatory Face-Off” panel April 9 at NAB convention in Las Vegas. Participants are Comrs. Abernathy, Copps and Martin (Chmn. Powell is doing separate interview during show) -- www.nab.org/conventions.
Wireless engineering consulting firm V-Comm urged FCC to require all ultra-wideband vendors to make “precommercial versions” of their equipment available for testing. In ex parte filing this week, V-Comm said additional compatibility testing with existing wireless systems was needed “prior to the broad acceptance of UWB systems.” Such testing should involve joint company participation to make sure that proposed UWB systems were compatible with existing wireless systems, V-Comm said. UWB vendors should make precommercial versions of their equipment available for testing before FCC adopts UWB rules, V-Comm argued, and “prior to the commercialization and proliferation of UWB systems.” FCC is expected to include UWB item on agenda for Feb. 14 meeting. “Currently, UWB vendors have little incentive to participate in joint testing or provide equipment to interested parties, at this time or in the future,” V-Comm said in report submitted to FCC. “In most cases, these vendors have completed internal tests, submitted test results to the FCC and are representing that their technology can co-exist with existing wireless systems.” V-Comm said such “internal testing” wasn’t reliable because those vendors didn’t operate wireless systems. Tendler Cellular wrote to FCC Chmn. Powell this week, also raising potential interference concerns. Tendler said UWB could prevent GPS receiver from locking up on GPS satellites.
FCC terminated its consideration of issues raised by Fixed Wireless Communications Coalition (FWCC) to impose conditions upon Fixed-Satellite Service (FSS) earth stations in bands that are shared on co-primary basis with Fixed Service (FS) operations. Commission said record lacked necessary information on how to achieve more equitable sharing of spectrum. FWCC’s petition said it sought to maximize efficient use of radio spectrum for both satellite and point-to-point terrestrial. FWCC said band sharing had been disadvantageous to FS and gave 2 reasons that satellite earth station operators received preferential access to shared spectrum: (1) Commission licensed earth station for entire allocated band with no loading requirements, while point-to-point terrestrial operations were limited to frequencies actually needed and were subject to stringent spectrum efficiency requirements. (2) Commission licenses earth stations for full 360 of azimuths, so earth stations can deny coordination to terrestrial stations even in directions in which earth station isn’t currently operating. FWCC requested that, where FSS earth station was using spectrum that was shared with point-to-point terrestrial services, FCC should change its policy from authorizing an FSS earth station to use the entire frequency band, to requiring it to use no more than twice amount of spectrum for which it was able to demonstrate actual need. FWCC also asked that FCC require an FSS earth station licensed for more than minimal amounts of spectrum that’s shared with FS operator to meet minimum loading standards. It also proposed to require FSS earth station to accept interference in previous coordinations. Commission’s FWCC/Onsat/Hughes NPRM rejected FWCC’s specific proposals to achieve more equitable sharing. It did propose to achieve greater equity by amending rules to indicate, under certain circumstances, that FSS earth station licensee must demonstrate that it was using, had recently used or had plans to use requested spectrum in near future. FWCC rejected that, saying such procedures could result in disputes over earth station’s demonstrated use of frequencies when FS applicant was attempting to finalize coordination and begin operations.
XtremeSpectrum CEO Martin Rofheart told reporters Tues. that issue of peer-to-peer networking appeared to be “in play” in intragovt. policy discussions that continued to intensify on ultra-wideband (UWB). NTIA submitted UWB policy recommendation to FCC earlier this month that would restrict intentional emissions below 4.2 GHz and restrict peer-to-peer networking of UWB devices (CD Jan 24 p5). UWB item has been expected to be included on agenda of FCC’s Feb. 14 meeting and discussions between NTIA and FCC have ramped up to meet that target. On issue of peer-to-peer networking, Rofheart said at media briefing that based on company’s recent discussions with govt. officials, issue of peer-to-peer networking still was part of discussion. Rofheart stressed that XtremeSpectrum’s position on UWB was in line with that of Dept. of Defense, which has asked NTIA to advocate that there be no intentional UWB emissions below 4.2 GHz, except for imaging systems. “We are well aware of DoD’s positions and DoD is well aware of XtremeSpectrum’s position,” Rofheart said. Prohibiting intentional UWB emissions between 3.1 GHz and 4.2 GHz is overly conservative and not backed by research as being necessary, Rofheart said, but XtremeSpectrum agreed to that as way to move embattled proceeding along. “There is a lot to be said for simply getting on with commerce,” he said. Peer-to-peer networking issue is important for XtremeSpectrum because that capability allows 2 battery- operated UWB devices to use high-data radio frequency link to exchange information. “There should be no peer-to-peer restriction, that would kill the industry,” Rofheart said. “But the emission mask is one that would allow it to occur.” FCC appears to be on track to have UWB item on agenda of Feb. 14 meeting, Rofheart said.
People for the American Way (People) said it planned to file suit today (Wed.) in U.S. Dist. Court, N.Y.C., against FCC, challenging proposed $7,000 indecency fine against KBOO(FM) Portland, Ore., for airing “Your Revolution” by Sarah Jones. As result of Commission’s ruling, other stations have refused to air Jones’ work, suit will charge. Fine of $7,000 was assessed last May and KBOO petition for reconsideration is pending at Commission. People said “Your Revolution” is protest against alleged degrading treatment of women in popular culture. Jones and People will discuss suit at Thurs. news conference in Washington. Meanwhile, FCC this week announced $14,000 fine against KNDD(FM) Seattle for alleged indecent statements made on its morning show last spring. Alleged indecency involved discussion of male genitals.
At NCTA’s request, FCC said it would postpone deadline for reply comments on cable horizontal and vertical ownership rules. Comment and reply deadlines for rulemaking already had been delayed once because of holiday conflicts. Latest deadline date is Feb. 19, deferred from Feb. 4. NCTA had complained to FCC that it needed at least 2 more weeks to prepare economic analyses that could respond to initial round of comments. Commission said it agreed to delay “in the interest of developing a full and complete record and in the interest of not prejudicing any party.”
FCC ordered Shop At Home to comply immediately with Commission’s rules setting minimum amount of programming that must carry closed-captioning. It also directed company to file reports to Commission each quarter on its compliance in 2002-2003 benchmark period. Commission warned that if network didn’t comply, it would be subject to penalties. National Assn. of the Deaf (NAD) filed complaint. Shop At Home said that, as new network, it was exempt and that expense would be too burdensome. But NAD pointed out that company’s own Web site said it was established in 1986. Rules do allow networks launched after Jan. 1, 1998, some leeway, but Commission found Shop At Home’s claims of newness “unreasonable.” Shop At Home Gen. Counsel George Phillips said company began closed-captioning Jan. 1 and there would be “no problem” meeting number of hours required in current quarter. Phillips said company knew it would have to comply by Jan. 1, and only question was whether it would have to comply before that.