Companies large and small, public interest groups and trade associations offered a divided FCC very different takes on whether proposed net neutrality rules would stifle or spur competition, in replies in the net neutrality proceeding. The biggest change from the first comment round, in January, is that many filers focused on the Comcast decision and the complicated question of whether the FCC has authority to proceed with new net neutrality rules or first would have to change the way broadband is classified to gain clear authority.

A recent lobbying push by free conference call providers is set on getting “the truth out” to Washington policymakers about how consumers benefit from a business practice that long-distance carriers decry as “traffic pumping,” Free Conferencing Corp. CEO Dave Erickson said in an interview. But House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher, D-Va., who’s working on a bill banning such arrangements, told us his views have changed “not at all.” Congress and the FCC are both mulling curbs on the practice, which involves revenue-sharing agreements under which rural local exchange carriers pay conferencing companies to send traffic to their exchanges.

A request by Free Press to allow the public to review Form 477 data should be denied, Qwest said in a filing. The National Broadband Plan already recommends that the FCC should “collect more data regarding broadband deployment and adoption and to provide analysis of such data.” The recommendation “encompasses most, if not all, of the relief Free Press is seeking,” the telco said. “Public release of Form 477 data would damage the providers from which that data emanates,” said the American Cable Association, USTelecom and other associations in joint comments. “If such information were made public, it undoubtedly would be used by competitors in developing their own strategies to compete with other broadband providers,” NCTA said in comments.

The FCC is seeking comment on a declaratory ruling to clarify some aspects of the commission’s “lowest corresponding price” rule for the E-rate program. USTelecom and CTIA, the petitioners, are asking the commission to clarify that the rule “applies only to competitive bids submitted by a provider in response to a Form 470,” and that “there are no specific procedures that a service provider must use to ensure compliance” with the rule, the FCC said in a public notice. The current rule doesn’t allow service providers to charge schools or libraries “a price above the lowest corresponding price for supported services,” unless the commission finds that the lowest corresponding price isn’t compensatory. Comments can be filed by May 14, and replies by June 1, the commission said.

NTIA improved its process for taking feedback from existing broadband providers on project proposals in round two, said NTIA Administrator Larry Strickling. In a letter to Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., Strickling called feedback from incumbent providers an “important component” of NTIA’s review, but said “the mere presence of an existing service provider in an area does not mean that adequate service is available, nor does it preclude NTIA’s consideration of a project that will bring substantial benefits to the area.” NTIA streamlined the process for submitting responses in the second round, and will refer to maps from USTelecom showing locations of middle-mile interconnection points throughout the country, Strickling said. The USTelecom maps will reduce the burden on existing providers to supply information proving an area is served, he said. Round two closed March 26. NTIA posted applications summaries on BroadbandUSA.gov and plans this week a list of census block groups and census tracts for which new service has been proposed. After that happens, incumbents will have 25 days to comment, up from 15 days in the first round, he said.

Changes in the telecom industry spurred a partnership between the Telecommunications Industry Association and the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies, which was announced Monday, OPASTCO President John Rose said in an interview. “We want to get outside of being just a carrier [association]. Because of the future of IP networks we must broaden our base of who we work with.” The groups have signed a “friendship agreement” aimed at helping to inform their members and to collaborate on the conventions and trade shows of each association, he said. That “allows us to exchange ideas and information and understand each other’s policies and positions,” said TIA President Grant Seiffert. TIA has similar partnerships with the CEA and other organizations, he said.

The FCC Wednesday extended until April 29 the deadline for replies in the net neutrality proceeding. Comments were due Thursday. CTIA, USTelecom and the Open Internet Coalition had asked for more time to “enable all interested parties to evaluate and consider the legal implications of” the decision Tuesday by the U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit in Comcast v. FCC. “The NPRM’s analysis of the Commission’s authority to adopt the proposed regulations makes references to the analysis articulated in the 2008 Comcast Order,” the groups said. The FCC had already allowed an unusual amount of time for comments and replies. Replies were originally due March 5. The commission sought comment more than five months ago, in an Oct. 22 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The order by Wireline Bureau Chief Sharon Gillett said extensions aren’t routinely granted, but “we find that good cause exists to provide all parties an extension of the reply comment deadline.” “We are certainly supportive of more time so that everyone can digest the Comcast decision and thoroughly consider its implications,” said Public Knowledge Legal Director Harold Feld.

The FCC is likely to change its approach to net neutrality after losing a case Tuesday where enforcement of 2005 principles of ISP conduct was at issue, advocates for and opponents of new mandates told us. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the commission lacked ancillary authority to censure Comcast’s network management practice of blocking peer-to-peer transmissions, as was expected (CD Feb 3 p2). The D.C. Circuit said it was unpersuaded by commission arguments that Sections 1, 230(b), 623, 706 and other parts of the Communications Act made the 2008 order within the scope of its congressional authority. Congress’ role is to facilitate “fresh” discussion on net neutrality, get consensus among all stakeholders and write a law, said House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher, D-Va.

A Global NAPS petition for a declaratory ruling regarding tariff treatment of VoIP traffic drew comments mostly supporting denial, but others, like the Voice on the Net Coalition, want the petition granted. Global asked the FCC to clarify that state commissions can’t subject VoIP traffic to intrastate tariffs, and that if a carrier’s traffic is nomadic VoIP, the remainder of its traffic should be treated as interstate. Large and rural-size carriers and several telecom associations opposed Global’s claims that carriers forwarding VoIP traffic shouldn’t be subject to interstate or intrastate access charges.

Observers questioned the cybersecurity and privacy recommendations in the National Broadband Plan, in a panel discussion at George Washington University Law School late Thursday. The plan calls for a larger cybersecurity role for the FCC, but that might be a reach for the commission, said Jim Harper, the Cato Institute’s director of information policy studies. Just because the FCC handles communications, that doesn’t mean it knows cybersecurity well, he said.