FCC Sees Conflicting Calls for ITSP Regulatory Fee Reforms
Numerous interstate telecom service providers and related industry groups want reform of FCC interstate telecom service provider (ITSP) regulatory fees, but there isn't consensus how. Much of the debate involves an ITTA set of proposals to reassign Wireline Bureau full-time equivalents (FTEs) to the Wireless Bureau, to combine commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) and interstate telecom service provider (ITSP) regulatory fee categories, or to create a new CMRS fee subcategory under ITSP. Monday was the deadline for comments on FCC FY 2016 proposed regulatory fees, with replies due July 5. "Whatever solution the Commission chooses, it is past time ... to rationalize the amount ITSPs pay in regulatory fees," Frontier Communications said Tuesday in docket 16-166.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Commenters also disagree on the FCC proposal to assess direct broadcast satellite regulatory fees different from those on cable TV and IPTV providers. There was some resistance to FCC proposals on satellite earth station and submarine cable regulatory fees.
ITSPs and toll-free numbers carry close to 40 percent of the regulatory fee burden in the proposed FY 2016 budget, while wireline regulatory resources devoted to it continue to drop in relation to other industry sectors, ITTA said in the docket, advocating combining wireless providers into the ITSP regulatory fee category. The industry group likened it to how the FCC combined interconnected VoIP and DBS providers into fee categories as recognition of the work done by the relevant core bureaus overseeing them.
While the FY 2016 regulatory fee rulemaking tentatively decides to reject the trio of ITTA proposals, CenturyLink urged the agency to reverse that, calling the proposals in line with Communications Act Section 9, which lays out its authority to levy regulatory fees. NTCA also cited a gray area between wireless and wireline resulting in firms generally overseen by the Wireline Bureau having to bear regulatory fees that partially benefit Wireless Bureau entities. NTCA said wireless FTEs dedicated to universal service should be reallocated as indirect FTEs, so Wireline Bureau proceedings that require Wireless Bureau personnel would be allocated among the two proportional to staff involvement. That would be a second-best fix, NTCA added: "To be sure, the bulk of inequities could be addressed by gathering CMRS and wireline services into a common ITSP category."
ITTA for years "has made repeated attempts to shift a disproportionate share of regulatory fees onto [Wireless Bureau] regulatees," CTIA said Monday, saying the wireless industry bears more of the FCC budget than any other when CMRS regulatory fees and spectrum license auction proceeds are counted. The association said the FCC needs to do more review before reclassifying FTEs who work on universal service or numbering issues from direct to indirect. It said the agency should prod Congress to let it tap into excess regulatory fees previously collected to offset future collections.
Frontier laid out several ITSP fee options, including putting wireless carriers in the ITSP regulatory category, or use its net neutrality decision to reclassify broadband as an opportunity for making all providers of interstate telecom service share ITSP regulatory fees, or reallocate wireline FTEs. The NPRM recommends rejecting combining wireless and wireline voice into ITSP, but that "would recognize technological convergence and rationalize the regulatory fee system," Frontier said.
The American Cable Association and Dish Network are opponents on the agency's DBS fee proposal. ACA said Tuesday the disparity between the fee levels paid by cable/IPTV and what's proposed for DBS is baseless. It said the FCC should at the least double the proposed baseline DBS fee for FY 2016 and aim to bring DBS into parity with cable/IPTV in FY 2017, if not for FY 2016. "It is inarguable that cable, IPTV and DBS providers impose roughly the same burden on Media Bureau resources," ACA said.
The FCC hasn't explained what changed over the past year to justify going from a DBS fee of 12 cents per subscriber to 27 cents per subscriber, Dish said. The FCC cited two additional proceedings over the past year that would affect Media Bureau resources -- the requirement that licensees post their public file documents on an FCC-hosted database and the current set-top box NPRM -- but "it is unclear how these two proceedings ... have increased the work load of Media Bureau FTEs sufficient to justify more than doubling the rate that DBS providers must pay," Dish said. It said the proposed hike "leaves DBS providers vulnerable to ... rate shock."
Opposing different fee categories for different types of earth stations, EchoStar said Monday that the Part 25 order issued in December (see 1512170036) axed the annual reporting requirement for blanket fixed service satellite earth station licenses in the 20/30 GHz bands, which in turn cut the administrative burden on FCC staff. With all satellite earth station licenses now imposing "the same, minimal administrative burden" on the commission, the agency should keep the status quo of the same regulator fees on all satellite earth station licenses, it said.
The Submarine Cable Coalition -- pointing to years of the FCC cutting the fees for submarine cable operators in recognition that the regulatory fee assessments on the industry don't line up with the agency's minimal oversight of the industry -- said the proposed 21 percent hike on the operators of the highest-capacity submarine cable systems is unjustified. The group said that hiking fees without a corresponding increase in services contradicts the Communications Act and could prompt submarine cable developers to look at landings in Canada or Mexico instead of the U.S.