TracFone resisted AT&T Lifeline proposals for the FCC to overhaul the USF support program for low-income consumers. TracFone opposed AT&T suggestions that carriers be removed from all Lifeline enrollment functions and that eligibility be initially tied solely to the federal food stamps program, which TracFone said would have a “devastating impact on Lifeline availability.” The comments came in a response posted Tuesday to a Nov. 23 AT&T filing flowing from an NPRM (see 1506180029). Other parties filing recently in docket 11-42 included the Cherokee Nation, Incompas, Lifeline Connects Coalition and Smith Bagley, with many comments addressing proposed minimum service standards for Lifeline broadband/voice coverage.
TracFone resisted AT&T Lifeline proposals for the FCC to overhaul the USF support program for low-income consumers. TracFone opposed AT&T suggestions that carriers be removed from all Lifeline enrollment functions and that eligibility be initially tied solely to the federal food stamps program, which TracFone said would have a “devastating impact on Lifeline availability.” The comments came in a response posted Tuesday to a Nov. 23 AT&T filing flowing from an NPRM (see 1506180029). Other parties filing recently in docket 11-42 included the Cherokee Nation, Incompas, Lifeline Connects Coalition and Smith Bagley, with many comments addressing proposed minimum service standards for Lifeline broadband/voice coverage.
Fletcher Heald lawyer Mitchell Lazarus questioned the FCC Enforcement Bureau’s logic in its recent fine against Mobile Relay Associates, not for causing harmful interference but for failing “to take reasonable precautions to avoid causing harmful interference.” Lazarus summed up the bureau’s arguments in a blog post Tuesday: “The rule says to take precautions, but not what precautions to take. The licensee says it took precautions, but they didn’t work. The Enforcement Bureau says, ‘$25,000, please.’” The bureau could have cited MRA “for unnecessarily long transmissions or for not trunking, charges to which MRA would have had no real defense,” Lazarus said. “The Bureau should not have followed the course it did without first issuing a clear public statement -- or, perhaps better yet, revising its rules -- to make very clear what is and is not permitted.” The bureau released its forfeiture order last week against the Malibu, California-based provider of private land mobile radio services. “MRA argues that its actions did not violate any of the Commission’s rules (Rules) and that imposition of a penalty would be unduly discriminatory,” the bureau said. “We find that MRA’s actions did result in Rule violations and that it is not the subject of disparate treatment.” The firm doesn't represent MRA, Lazarus said. MRA didn't comment.
Tech Freedom will appeal to the Supreme Court if it loses its challenges to the FCC net neutrality and broadband reclassification order at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, said Berin Szoka, president of the group, which intervened in the litigation. “I am chomping at the bit to get this case before the Supreme Court,” he said on a panel organized by Tech Freedom that had both critics and supporters of the order. Other critics, citing comments by three D.C. Circuit judges at Friday’s oral argument (see 1512040058), voiced hope the court would rule against the FCC on at least parts of its order.
Tech Freedom will appeal to the Supreme Court if it loses its challenges to the FCC net neutrality and broadband reclassification order at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, said Berin Szoka, president of the group, which intervened in the litigation. “I am chomping at the bit to get this case before the Supreme Court,” he said on a panel organized by Tech Freedom that had both critics and supporters of the order. Other critics, citing comments by three D.C. Circuit judges at Friday’s oral argument (see 1512040058), voiced hope the court would rule against the FCC on at least parts of its order.
Scientific equipment returned to the U.S. from Antarctica may be eligible for "entry by appraisement" or country of origin marking exemptions, CBP said to Lockheed Martin in a Nov. 17 ruling (here). The company requested CBP's input on the entry procedures for the equipment, which Lockheed handles as the primary logistics contractor for the U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP). "The problem with some of these items for Customs purposes is that it may be difficult or impossible to enter the items under the usual and normal entry procedures because it is not possible to determine their country of origin," said CBP.
Experts believe the California PUC will follow its own schedule, rather than the FCC's shot clock, in reviewing Charter Communications' acquisitions of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. No one expects the deal to be done within the FCC's 180 days, particularly given the volume of data requested by the FCC, Paul Goodman, telecommunications senior legal counsel at the Greenlining Institute, told us. Given the Charter/TWC/BHN size, “this is more like an eight- or nine-month process,” he said, saying the CPUC typically “works hard to match” the FCC schedule. Any California delays (see 1511270047) shouldn’t derail the deal unless Charter starts to see signs federal or state regulators won’t be satisfied with answers or conditions and no sign-off is likely, Goodman said.
Experts believe the California PUC will follow its own schedule, rather than the FCC's shot clock, in reviewing Charter Communications' acquisitions of Bright House Networks and Time Warner Cable. No one expects the deal to be done within the FCC's 180 days, particularly given the volume of data requested by the FCC, Paul Goodman, telecommunications senior legal counsel at the Greenlining Institute, told us. Given the Charter/TWC/BHN size, “this is more like an eight- or nine-month process,” he said, saying the CPUC typically “works hard to match” the FCC schedule. Any California delays (see 1511270047) shouldn’t derail the deal unless Charter starts to see signs federal or state regulators won’t be satisfied with answers or conditions and no sign-off is likely, Goodman said.
Critics of the FCC's undersea cable outage reporting proposal cited unreasonable standards of reporting as a main driver for discontent, in comments on the FCC's proposed rules (see 1509170047). They said if the decision is made to enact outage reporting requirements, the FCC should loosen its rules to ease the burden on licensees. The NPRM (docket 15-206) proposes to "require submarine cable licensees to report to the commission when outages occur and communications are disrupted." Currently, undersea cable notifications are submitted by operators on a voluntary basis using the FCC's Undersea Cable Information System (UCIS).
Critics of the FCC's undersea cable outage reporting proposal cited unreasonable standards of reporting as a main driver for discontent, in comments on the FCC's proposed rules (see 1509170047). They said if the decision is made to enact outage reporting requirements, the FCC should loosen its rules to ease the burden on licensees. The NPRM (docket 15-206) proposes to "require submarine cable licensees to report to the commission when outages occur and communications are disrupted." Currently, undersea cable notifications are submitted by operators on a voluntary basis using the FCC's Undersea Cable Information System (UCIS).