ISPs working with the FCC on its ongoing broadband speed measurement program are concerned about the introduction of formalized “Principles for Open Measurements,” presented at the agency’s July 25 meeting of stakeholders. ISP representatives we spoke to questioned the value of implementing such formal principles this far into the program, which has already produced two successful Measuring Broadband America reports (CD July 20 p1). ISPs also worried the new principles could turn the group from a flexible and collegial gathering of stakeholders to a more formal and rigid body.

Presentations from NARUC July 21-25 midyear Portland, Ore., meeting were posted online over the course of the last week (http://xrl.us/bnip2t). NARUC staff members have been adding the presentations throughout the conference and in the days since, and any not online by Monday will be soon, a spokesman told us. In Portland, a NARUC staffer estimated all presentations will likely be posted online by Tuesday. There are about a dozen presentations devoted to telecom, from a variety of sources, from the California Emerging Technology Fund to USTelecom to Connected Nation to NARUC’s National Regulatory Research Institute, and subjects include Lifeline reform, the barriers to broadband adoption and deregulation of telecom throughout the states. The NARUC website now also features the complete text (http://xrl.us/bnip29) of the new NARUC resolutions approved July 25, including three on telecom (CD July 26 p12).

All three of this summer’s NARUC telecom resolutions passed the association’s telecom committee unanimously Tuesday. The resolutions will preserve state authority to tax and charge VoIP providers for state USF funds, relay service and E-911; urge the FCC to continue pursuing rural call termination issues and enforcing penalties against violators; and question the agency’s use of what the resolution says is an “arbitrary and capricious” methodology of determining USF funds. The resolution on the FCC’s methodology proved the most controversial, and faced much debate and revision in both the telecom subcommittee and committee. USTelecom voiced multiple objections based on feared delays. Objectors feared delays would result from a resolution provision demanding the FCC refer to the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service for many of its decisions (CD July 25 p8). “The FCC needs to get this [USF fund] model right,” said California Public Utilities Commissioner Catherine Sandoval. Resolution sponsor Commissioner Larry Landis of Indiana discussed USTelecom’s concerns at the Tuesday vote and said last-minute revisions had led the organization to be “satisfied” with the changes, which “may assuage the concerns of USTelecom if not all of their members.” The telecom committee clapped upon passing this third controversial resolution. Telecom Committee Chairman and Vermont Public Service Board Commissioner John Burke said voting was “smoother than usual” given the unanimity of all three votes.

PORTLAND, Ore. -- Multiple challenges emerged for the FCC at a midyear NARUC meeting. Some regulators and officials questioned USF methodology, called for Federal State Joint Board on USF referral of FCC decisions and questioned the broader direction the commission has moved on telecom in recent years. The strains have manifested in broader misgivings that some panelists discussed about the November USF/intercarrier compensation order (http://xrl.us/bnhyb7) as well as a more focused critique and controversy surrounding a quantile regression analysis for the fund.

PORTLAND, Ore. -- The question of wither state regulation was a subtext on all the telecom panels in the initial days of the NARUC midyear meeting. State commissioners observed a declining regulatory role for years and enshrined quite clearly in legislation from the past year, as they said a recent report from the National Regulatory Research Institute (NRRI) made clear. The U.S. is in the midst of “deregulation fever,” concluded a June NRRI report on the various legislatures’ deregulation bills, which “will not subside” (CD June 19 p11). New services that draw on Internet Protocol create new challenges of definition, and regulation no longer covers them in the same way, said commissioners and staff who said they're trying to figure out their roles.

Wireless Internet service providers across the country filed oppositions to CenturyLink’s waiver of rules dictating how it can spend the $90 million in Connect America Fund money the FCC allocated it. Cable associations also opposed the waiver. USTelecom and the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance supported the request, arguing WISP service is closer in capability to satellite service than fixed broadband, and consumers deserve better. CenturyLink had asked for permission to use $32.5 million of the money in areas where it argued the national broadband map was inaccurate and overstated the amount of fixed wireless broadband available (CD July 13 p14). The WISP Association argued CenturyLink’s assertions about poor fixed wireless broadband coverage are “false, flawed and unverified” (http://xrl.us/bngrv4). NCTA said the commission already denied a similar request by the ITTA. This one is “essentially the same” but “even less compelling because CenturyLink makes no attempt whatsoever to determine which locations” in the WISPs’ service area are capable of receiving broadband, NCTA said (http://xrl.us/bngrv6). The American Cable Association said it would be unfair to grant the waiver request, because the issue of whether the national broadband map is accurate should be addressed in a rulemaking, not in a waiver process. “CenturyLink’s waiver petition is based on the premise of the Commission’s order, which is to encourage additional broadband deployment in areas where customers are not served by a reasonably viable alternative,” said Melissa Newman, CenturyLink vice president-federal regulatory affairs. “Our limited waiver -- which is supported by many commenters, including the Washington Public Service Commission, the Minnesota Department of Commerce and other state agencies -- would allow the deployment of real, wired broadband service to thousands of rural households where a reasonable broadband option is not available today. Bringing robust broadband coverage to thousands of new households is a win for consumers and for our national public broadband goals.”

Of the dozens of comments filed this week in response to the FCC’s rulemaking on USF contribution reform, there was little agreement about whether to stick with a revenue-based system for assessing contribution fees, to move to a system that uses connections or numbers, or even whether to assess fees on broadband service. The only universal sentiment that might be teased out of the plethora of comments filed is that, as AT&T put it, the current system is “dysfunctional.” Carriers differed, but generally supported a modified revenue-based system, while VoIP providers preferred a connections-based system.

FCC efforts to establish uniform data specifications for collecting study area boundary information “appear reasonable,” the National Exchange Carrier Association, Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance, NTCA, OPASTCO, USTelecom, Eastern Rural Telecom Association and the Western Telecom Alliance said. They were responding to a public notice seeking comment on proposed data specifications for collecting study area boundaries (http://xrl.us/bnfbvj). The associations are generally against the imposition of benchmark-based limitations on high-cost loop support and proposals to eliminate support in areas served by unsubsidized carriers, but they support the use of more accurate data to accomplish the agency’s goals, they said. Companies might not have enough resources to submit study area shapefiles, so the commission should allow “substantial time” for submission of initial maps, they said. In a separate filing Monday, Nebraska Rural Independent Companies indicated its support of the agency’s data specifications for collecting study area boundaries (http://xrl.us/bnfbd3). The technical specifications in the notice are “adequate,” and reliance on state commissions is “appropriate and useful,” the filing said.

The FCC Wireline Bureau seeks comment on petitions filed by CTIA and USTelecom seeking clarification and reconsideration, or, in the alternative, waiver of three high-cost universal service rules (http://xrl.us/bne89z). The telecom associations have asked the commission to clarify that the broadband reporting obligations in section 54.313(a)(11) of the commission’s rules, and the rule requiring five-year service quality improvement plans and associated progress reports, only apply to carriers receiving Connect America Fund Phase II support. USTelecom also seeks clarification that the Interstate Access Support portion of frozen high-cost support is not subject to the broadband deployment certifications required by section 54.313(c) of the commission’s rules. Comments in docket 10-90 are due Aug. 6, replies Aug. 21.

CTIA and USTelecom want the FCC to clarify certain broadband reporting obligations in the USF/intercarrier compensation rules. The commission previously denied a request by USTelecom to reconsider imposing new reporting requirements on eligible telecom carriers whose support is being eliminated, but “did not discuss considerations for ETCs whose legacy support is being eliminated,” the groups wrote in their petition for reconsideration (http://xrl.us/bnc4oh). The commission also needs to address reporting requirements for incumbent wireline ETCs whose support is subject to elimination, they said. The commission’s third order on reconsideration “leaves unsettled what reporting and related requirements actually apply to wireless and wireline ETCs,” they said. The groups asked the commission to eliminate obligations to collect and file broadband data, which was “potentially called for” in an “ambiguous” section of the order. They also asked the commission to limit the filing of five-year service quality improvement plans and progress reports to ETCs that receive Phase II support, and to eliminate a requirement that an ETC certify that “frozen” Interstate Access Support (IAS) was used for broadband deployment. “This certification is impossible to make because the Commission requires that IAS support be used for other purposes … and carriers cannot spend this funding twice,” they said.