A Tuesday anti-robocalls hearing gives the House Communications Subcommittee an opportunity to make a public return to bipartisanship as members delve into a group of seven anti-robocalls bills, lobbyists told us. Stakeholders are monitoring the House Commerce Committee's telecom policy agenda for signs of a pivot in its trajectory. The committee's contentious debate over the Save the Internet Act net neutrality bill (HR-1644) culminated in the measure's passage earlier this month (see 1904230069). The hearing begins 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn (see 1904260068).

USTelecom Senior Vice President-Advocacy and Regulatory Affairs Patrick Halley and National Consumer Law Center Senior Counsel Margot Saunders are among those set to testify at the House Communications Subcommittee's Tuesday hearing on anti-robocall legislation, the House Commerce Committee said Friday. Nomorobo Founder Aaron Foss and H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute Chief Information Security Officer Dave Summitt will also testify, the committee said. The hearing is to begin at 10 a.m. in 2123 Rayburn. The hearing will examine seven proposals, including the Stopping Bad Robocalls Act (HR-946), as expected (see 1904230069). The bill would clarify the definition of a robocall, and clarify exemptions to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. It would create a national database of reassigned phone numbers and require FCC-FTC cooperation to reduce abusive robocalls by “at least” 50 percent yearly (see 1902040043).

CTIA, the Competitive Carriers Association and USTelecom urged the FCC reconsider a decision to merge under one contract and a single administrator the administration of the reassigned numbers database “with the already consolidated” North American Numbering Plan Administrator and Pooling Administrator “functions.” Others also sought reconsideration of the order. In December, commissioners voted 4-0 to create a reassigned number database (RND) to help combat unwanted and illegal robocalls to people with new numbers. “Combining the databases under a single contract will not promote the Commission’s desired goals of operational and cost efficiencies; it will actually reduce efficiencies on both accounts,” said the telecom groups in docket 17-59. The groups said instead the FCC should refer the issue to the North American Numbering Council. NANC should have the flexibility “to best satisfy its overarching mandate from the Commission to ‘consider the most cost-effective way of administering the database, with the goal of minimizing costs and burdens for all users and service providers, while ensuring that it will fully serve the intended purpose,’” they said. The Professional Association for Customer Engagement said business landlines and other toll-free numbers shouldn't be included in the database. Including them would “create an unnecessary burden for Providers seeking to comply with the RND’s requirements while accomplishing nothing in achieving the Commission’s goal of protecting consumers from unwanted calls,” PACE said: Adding these numbers “needlessly increases the cost of database administration and neither businesses nor consumers are expected to query the database for such numbers.”

The FCC Wireline Bureau seeks additional “focused” comments by May 9, replies May 16 in the business data services and USTelecom forbearance petition proceedings (see 1904190048), noted Wednesday’s Federal Register. Dockets include 17-144.

The Supreme Court’s decision in a junk fax case, PDR Network v. Carlton & Harris Chiropractic, has major implications for what the FCC does on the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, experts said Wednesday evening at an FCBA seminar (see 1904240063). Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau Deputy Chief Mark Stone said the FCC is exploring many issues on the TCPA, beyond the definition of automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS). The PDR case, No. 17-1705, was argued in March. Justices took up an appellate court ruling that a litigant in a private junk fax lawsuit can't attack the validity of an FCC order that could have been challenged under the Hobbs Act when issued (see 1903250068).

The Senate Security Subcommittee plans a hearing on IoT cybersecurity at 2:30 p.m. April 30 in 562 Dirksen. Witnesses: CTA Vice President-Technology and Standards Michael Bergman, Chamber of Commerce Vice President-Cybersecurity Policy Matthew Eggers, Rapid7 Public Policy Director Harley Geiger, USTelecom Senior Vice President-Cybersecurity Robert Mayer and National Institute of Standards and Technology Information Technology Laboratory Director Charles Romine. The hearing will touch on 5G network security for connected devices and “the manner in which the federal government, businesses community, and consumers can promote and support increased IoT cybersecurity.”

April 25 is the deadline for parties in the USTelecom forbearance petition proceeding and business data service proceeding to object to certain interested parties getting access to confidential information, said FCC Wireline Bureau notices in Friday's Daily Digest (see here and here) on dockets 18-141 and 16-143.

With Verizon partway through its massive copper-to-fiber transition, state consumer advocates are urging the carrier ensure no customers are left behind. The Communications Workers of America wants the same. The latest policy jockeying relates to the wireline IP transition.

The wireline orders approved Friday by FCC commissioners eliminating the rural telco rate floor and granting part of USTelecom's forbearance petition (see 1904120058) are now posted in dockets 10-90 and 18-141, the FCC said Monday (see here and here).

Incompas objected to incorporating any party's highly confidential and confidential business data services information collected in BDS proceedings into the USTelecom forbearance petition proceeding. Tuesday was the deadline for lodging an objection (see 1904030061). “Doing so would be inconsistent with and undermine the Commission’s forbearance rules, and would violate basic principles of procedural fairness,” Incompas said in a Tuesday posting in docket 18-141. “Allowing this additional data to be used in support of the Petition would violate the ‘complete-as-filed’ rule. … USTelecom could have proposed a modification of the BDS Protective Order at the time it filed its petition, but did not do so, even though it bore the burden of production.”