FCC process reform legislation could be dead on arrival in the Senate, even with House passage seen likely. The House plans to vote Tuesday on HR-3309 by Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore. But the Senate Commerce Committee majority said it has no plans to take up the bill. Former FCC Chairman Reed Hundt, a Democrat, said the bill “appears likely to [inflict] upon the FCC the unfortunate obstacles to sensible bipartisan decision-making that plague the Congress.”

Eligible telecommunications carriers like Verizon need more time to work with state commissions to determine the impact of the new federal rules on state Lifeline programs, Verizon said Friday in a letter supporting an extension of the deadline to comply with some Lifeline and Link-Up rules(http://xrl.us/bmy9w9). Once those determinations are made, carriers must then modify their billing systems, the letter said. State notice requirements lengthen the time needed to implement tariff changes, Verizon said. An attached chart said the notice requirement can range from 30 to 60 days in states requiring a tariff filing for Lifeline changes. Carriers of all stripes supported the USTelecom petition for a six-month extension (CD Mar 22 p10).

Tension exists between language in the Universal Service Fund/intercarrier compensation order that requires all frozen support be used for network investment while stating frozen interstate access support (IAS) funding will continue to be treated as legacy IAS, lawyers for AT&T reported telling FCC Wireline Bureau officials Monday (http://xrl.us/bmy4wd). The telco said it supports USTelecom’s position that providers should “immediately be relieved of their legacy eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) designations and obligations where and when they do not receive high-cost support,” said the ex parte filing. The company wants the commission to clarify that new reporting requirements don’t apply to competitive ETCs and frozen support recipients whose high-cost support is being eliminated; that tribal contact requirements apply only to recipients of Tribal Fund support; and that, when the new standardized federal reporting rules apply to a ETC, the commission will preempt all legacy state universal service fund reporting requirements that would otherwise apply to that ETC.

Nothing brings disparate interests together like the prospect of a six-month extension to comply with new FCC rules. Often at odds, post-paid wireline carriers, pre-paid wireless carriers and state commissions unanimously supported a waiver request by incumbent local exchange carriers to postpone until Oct. 1 the implementation of several rules established in the Lifeline Order -- as long as the waiver applies to everyone else, too. The petition, filed by USTelecom, the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance, NTCA, OPASTCO, the Western Telecommunications Alliance and the Eastern Rural Telecom Association, asked the FCC to waive the effective date of a new rule implementing a flat $9.25 Lifeline benefit and eliminating the Link-Up discount on non-Tribal lands from April 2 until Oct. 1 (CD March 12 p9).

The FCC wants to know if 19-year-old procedures need updating for how the agency processes pay-TV complaints that a rival withheld a channel. A rulemaking notice released late Tuesday -- in time to avoid a vote at Wednesday’s commissioner meeting (CD March 21 p17) -- asked how or whether to consider allegations of volume discounts or across-the-board cost hikes for programming meant to price all but programming the cable operator owns out of the market. The item contained a few proposals. It recommended a 45-day period for various types of anti-exclusivity complaints made under the 1992 Cable Act to be answered, and to the extent types of programming like regional sports networks (RSN) can’t be withheld, the HD version must be provided to a multichannel video programming distributor.

The FCC should reconsider its decision to use “collected” revenue when calculating “Price Cap Baseline Revenues” because it’s “operationally unworkable and fundamentally unfair,” representatives from Frontier, Windstream, FairPoint, CenturyLink, AT&T and Verizon told the Wireline Bureau Thursday, said an ex parte filing (http://xrl.us/bmxzoh). They agreed with USTelecom’s December petition for reconsideration of the Universal Service Fund/intercarrier compensation order. The petition said allocating collected revenue between originating and terminating access “would be difficult, if not impossible” (http://xrl.us/bmxzpz). A more suitable measure to calculate the price cap baseline is billed revenue, the companies said, because it’s commonly used in the industry for similar issues “including price cap tariff filings.” Such revenue is a “reasonable proxy” for calculating appropriate price cap baseline revenue “given the levels of phantom traffic and the reductions in billed access minutes and revenues due to arbitrage schemes that places what is properly access traffic on local trunks, avoiding access billings on that traffic,” they said. The companies also discussed the appropriate calculation of the residential rate ceiling contemplated in the order. “This approach is consistent with the Commission’s pricing rules, which generally recognize the practical necessity of implementing rules on a study area basis,” they said.

The FCC sought comment on a petition for waiver and clarification of the January Lifeline reform order filed by USTelecom, the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance, NTCA, OPASTCO, Western Telecommunications Alliance and Eastern Rural Telecom Association (http://xrl.us/bmxwiy). The group asked the commission to waive for “post-paid ETCs” the effective date of several rules established in the order, and sought an extension of the deadline to Oct. 1 (CD March 12 p9). Comments are due March 20 in docket 12-23.

Timeframes for implementation of the FCC Lifeline order are “unrealistic and could harm the very consumers the program is intended to benefit,” said a petition by USTelecom, the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance, NTCA, OPASTCO, Western Telecommunications Alliance and Eastern Rural Telecom Association (http://xrl.us/bmxmxs). They asked the commission to postpone until October the effective date for establishment of the interim flat-rate reimbursement amount of $9.25, for elimination of Link Up in non-tribal lands for eligible telecom carriers and for calculation of the Link Up discount for residents of tribal lands. “These tasks cannot realistically be completed within the relatively short time period (less than 60 days) contemplated under the Order,” the petition said. Petitioners sought clarification of several aspects of new certification requirements under Section 54.407(d) of the rules.

The White House offered a scathing criticism of an alternative cybersecurity bill introduced Thursday by a group of Republican senators. Meanwhile, AT&T and USTelecom hailed the Strengthening and Enhancing Cybersecurity by Using Research, Education, Information, and Technology (SECURE IT) Act, which competes directly with the Senate Cybersecurity Act (S-2105). The SECURE IT Act is sponsored by GOP Sens. John McCain or Arizona; Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas; Chuck Grassley of Iowa; Saxby Chambliss of Georgia; Lisa Murkowski of Alaska; Dan Coats of Indiana; Ron Johnson of Wisconsin; and Richard Burr of North Carolina.

USTelecom, CTIA and NCTA urged House and Senate leaders to spurn federal “top-down” cybersecurity regulations in lieu of industry best practices. Their appeal came in a letter sent Wednesday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. It would be “disastrous” for Congress to adopt any plan that “slows industry response time to hostile cyber activity,” said the letter signed by NCTA President Michael Powell, CTIA President Steve Largent and USTelecom President Walter McCormick. “Shifting to a regulatory approach will divert resources and attention from deterrence to compliance with particular rules that will quickly become outdated,” the letter said. “Wherever possible, the government should rely on industry best practices to establish appropriate cybersecurity measures rather than impose prescriptive rules,” it said. The industry groups outlined six priorities that Congress should consider as it works to secure private and public systems from cyberthreats. In addition to avoiding federal cybersecurity mandates, lawmakers should promote “effective sharing of cyberthreat information” between the government and the private sector, it said. “Legislation that removes the current legal barriers to information sharing and establishes the appropriate safeguards for the use of such information would greatly improve cybersecurity.” The government should also update the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA), promote cybersecurity investment, increase public cybersecurity awareness and ensure that all industry stakeholders have a role in cybersecurity defense, the letter said. Momentum for cybersecurity legislation has been building following the introduction of S-2105, the Cybersecurity Act, and the Strengthening and Enhancing Cybersecurity by Using Research, Education, Information, and Technology (SECURE IT) Act (see separate report in this issue). Separately, a spokesman for USTelecom said it’s unlikely that lawmakers will vote on cybersecurity legislation until the next congressional work period.