APCO, the National Emergency Number Association, USTelecom and others jointly asked the FCC to extend the deadline for filing comments on its Nov. 21 911 governance NPRM. “The Notice raises a large number of jurisdictional, governance, and legal authority questions with implications to every aspect of 9-1-1 service,” the group said. “Given the scope and complexity of the issues raised in the notice, the Joint Petitioners believe that an extension of the comment filing deadlines would be in the public interest.” Comments should be due no earlier than March 23, replies no earlier than April 21, the filing said. Comments are currently due Monday, replies April 7. The filing was posted Friday in docket 13-75.

The FCC has not only “failed to pursue meaningful solutions” to making sure broadband is being deployed in a timely and reasonable fashion, but exacerbated the problem by “arbitrarily raising” the broadband benchmark speed and imposing Communications Act Title II regulation on broadband in the net neutrality order, NCTA said in comments filed Friday. Responded to the agency’s January notice of inquiry (see 1501290043) on improving broadband deployment, the comments hadn't been posted in docket 14-126. USTelecom also filed comments on the NOI Friday, which, according to its blog, focused on removing “outdated legacy regulations” and “restrictive local rules and regulations.” The commission failed to “effectively implement many of its own prior recommendations,” including adding broadband to Lifeline and implementing the Remote Areas Fund (RAF) to deploy broadband to unserved areas, NCTA said. The commission should immediately revoke offers to ILECs for high-cost USF support that don't meet the new 25 Mbps download/3 Mbps upload standard, it said. The funding should be offered on a competitively neutral basis to any qualified broadband provider willing to provide the new speed, NCTA said. The agency should also implement the RAF and issue an NPRM to create a broadband Lifeline program, the filing said. An independent third party should also examine why there hasn’t been more progress extending broadband deployment to unserved areas, even though more than $28 billion in federal funding has been spent on the goal since 2010, the filing said. USTelecom urged the agency to grant its October 2014 forbearance petition (see 1410070050), reforming state and local regulations “that impede a provider’s ability to roll out broadband services,” and ensure that broadband providers can deploy fiber in multi-dwelling units. The FCC should “promote efficient and carefully targeted broadband deployment in rural areas” through the Connect America Fund and develop “’sooner rather than later’ a long-term universal service solution for rate-of-return carriers,” USTelecom said.

The FCC should reconsider its Feb. 3 policy statement creating treble damages in calculating fines for violations of federal payment rules, said Comptel, CTIA, NCTA and USTelecom in a joint petition Friday that also seeks a stay. The policy statement makes a “substantial rule change” affecting the USF, Telecom Relay Service Fund, local number portability, North American Numbering Plan and regulatory fee programs, USTelecom said in a blog post. The commission didn't follow proper notice and comment requirements, USTelecom said. Tripling damages is “’arbitrary and capricious,’” it said.

Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said he wants to wait until the Senate Intelligence Committee’s much-anticipated redraft of the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) “winds its way” through committee markup before taking further action within Senate Homeland Security on cybersecurity information sharing legislation. Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Vice Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., have been circulating a draft of the bill that includes more privacy protections than the bill's 2014 version, but most major privacy advocates already have opposed it publicly. The 2014 CISA cleared Senate Intelligence but never got a full Senate vote. Burr and Feinstein expect to introduce the bill and hold a closed-session markup as soon as Tuesday and definitely before the end of the month, an industry lobbyist told us. Johnson said during a USTelecom event Friday that he wants to “see the reaction” to the reintroduced CISA post-markup. Once “more people evaluate it,” Senate Homeland Security “will hop into the fray” and hold additional hearings, Johnson said.

Consumer groups are optimistic the FCC is moving toward adding new hurdles before providers can retire copper phone lines, attorneys representing the groups told us. Some critics of the proposed change, including former FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell and Free State Foundation President Randolph May, also said changes to Section 214 discontinuation rules may be coming, citing the commission’s controversial decisions on net neutrality (see 1502260043) and municipal broadband (see 1502260030). Those orders “do not bode well for a forward-thinking modernization approach to the IP transition,” McDowell told us Friday, as Monday’s deadline for reply comments in the IP transition rulemaking approached (see 1411210037). The rulemaking involves an array of issues, including setting requirements on backup battery power.

A little-noticed provision in the FCC net neutrality order (see 1502270045) would let small rural broadband providers opt to continue to be partially regulated under the old Communications Act Title II rules instead of the order’s “light-touch” version that forbears from several provisions of the section, the agency and attorneys representing the providers told us. The providers and groups like NTCA and the National Exchange Carriers Association lobbied for the provision, fearing a change in their classification could jeopardize their eligibility to receive USF support for providing telecom service, said Michael Romano, NTCA senior vice president-policy, and Jeffrey Dupree, NECA vice president-government relations. Continuing to be under the old Title II rules also would not weaken what the providers can count under rate-of-return rules.

Despite FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s and Commissioner Mignon Clyburn’s remarks Thursday in approving net neutrality rules, small rural broadband providers are subject to Communications Act Title I, which regulates information services, not to Title II common-carrier regulations as Wheeler and Clyburn claimed, USTelecom Senior Vice President-Law and Policy Jonathan Banks wrote in a blog post Friday. In answering fears the agency would regulate broadband rates after reclassifying broadband under Title II, Clyburn said at the commission meeting that the agency hadn't regulated the rates of 700 rural broadband providers, even though they were subject to “full panoply of Title II regulation.” The “hideous complexities” of the commission’s telecom regulations, Banks said, led the companies to provide Title II wholesale transport services they “’sell’” to themselves, while providing Title I broadband service to customers wanting Internet access, Banks wrote. The Title II wholesale service “is fully and completely regulated by the commission, including rate regulation, down to the penny,” Banks wrote. The “misunderstanding illustrates the lack of clarity and understanding around the debate of Title II being a workable regulatory model for achieving an open and vibrant Internet,” Banks wrote. The rural broadband providers have to contribute to the USF based on their Title II revenue, he said. Clyburn noted that the rural providers make USF contributions, but said, “amazingly, the sky has not fallen and things are OK.” Clyburn’s office did not comment Monday. The Title II regulations Banks referred to don't include the forbearance in the "light touch" net neutrality regulations the commission approved, an agency spokesman said.

The FCC approved rules reclassifying broadband as a common carrier service Thursday by a 3-2 vote before a standing-room only crowd at FCC headquarters. After months of fighting and a failed last stand by FCC Republicans, there were few surprises left by the time commissioners voted. The action now shifts to the courts and to Congress, industry officials said.

The FCC’s expected vote Thursday to reclassify broadband as a Communications Act Title II service has the potential to unintentionally expand its regulatory authority on communications sector cybersecurity, ex-agency officials said in interviews. They conceded it’s unlikely the commission has any plans to exercise that authority in the near future given the strong likelihood of legal challenges to new net neutrality rules. Industry lawyers have said the FCC can claim authority on cybersecurity at least via Title I, and could stake a claim via Title II and Section 706 (see 1406240037). FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler has been championing improving cybersecurity risk management within the communications sector since last year via voluntary private sector-led work in the Communications Security, Reliability and Interoperability Council’s (CSRIC) Working Group 4 and the Technological Advisory Council (see 1406130056).

While the FCC is expected to approve proposed net neutrality rules Thursday, discussions were continuing there on some significant details in the order reclassifying broadband. A change apparently sought by Commissioner Mignon Clyburn to remove a specific legal relationship between edge providers and ISPs appears to be out, said a commission official Wednesday. Neither Clyburn nor the agency would comment.