As it has done in past with other applications, Dept. of Justice gave conditional support Thurs. to Verizon’s Sec. 271 application for Va. It recommended FCC approve application, but only after first reviewing issues raised by CLECs on Verizon’s provision of White Pages directory listings. DoJ Antitrust Chief Charles James said “the available evidence suggests that generally Verizon has succeeded in opening its local telecommunications markets” in Va. However, he said, “questions remain about Verizon’s directory listings processes that merit close review by the FCC.” DoJ said Verizon had made improvements in tool used in editing directory listings but “because of phone book publishing cycles, insufficient time has passed to determine the effectiveness of the improvements.” Under Telecom Act, Justice makes competitive analysis of Sec. 271 applications and offers recommendations to FCC. Verizon filed its application Aug. 1 and statutory deadline for FCC to act is Oct. 30. Verizon Vp Sarah Deutsch said that with DoJ’s recommendation and support of Va. State Corp. Commission, company was “confident” FCC would approve application.

FCC is seeking comment on Verizon’s Sec. 271 application for Del. and N.H. involving carrier’s Del. switching rates. Commission said it received proposal from Verizon Aug. 30 on “significant reduction” in its Del. switching rates. It said that during proceeding on Verizon’s application to provide long distance service in N.H. and Del. some parties had raised concerns about Del. switching rates and whether they fell within reasonable Total Element Long-Run Incremental Cost (TELRIC) range. FCC said Verizon had cited Del. PSC proceeding that adopted company’s switching rates and U.S. Dist. Court decision that concluded those rates satisfied forward-looking TELRIC standard. In back-and-forth during proceeding, Verizon volunteered to reduce switching rates to mitigate potential arguments that they exceeded TELRIC range. Company had told FCC that lowered rates were effective immediately. Agency sought comment on whether those reduced rates were “within the range that reasonable application of TELRIC principles would produce.” Comments are due Sept. 10. FCC faces Sept. 25 deadline to act on Verizon’s Sec. 271 application for Del. and N.H. Company had pointed to its reduced switching rates as evidence that its aggregate nonloop rates, including switching rates, were comparable to N.Y. nonloop rates and were within TELRIC range.

Giving ILECs victory, U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., said Thurs. it wouldn’t rehear pair of May 24 decisions that remanded FCC orders on line-sharing requirements and unbundled network elements (UNEs) (CD May 28 p1). In both, court had questioned whether FCC had gone too far in UNE requirements it set for ILECs. However, it also gave competitors victory by agreeing to stay orders until Jan. 2, 2003. FCC and competitors had asked for stay because Commission was reviewing its UNE requirements now and planned to end proceeding by end of year. As part of that review, FCC is looking at some of same issues as court raised.

In emergency petition seeking expedited action, AT&T Wireless, Cingular Wireless and Verizon Wireless urged FCC to declare “unlawful” hotly disputed airborne wireless service planned by AirCell. Experimental license and waiver held by AirCell to operate system using cellular equipment to provide service to airborne customers without causing interference to terrestrial cellular system has been subject of recent back- and-forth in filings at FCC. Last year, U.S. Appeals Court, D.C., remanded AirCell’s waiver to FCC as not being adequately reconciled with record.

Environmental groups petitioned FCC to require environmental assessments under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for 5,797 antenna structures on Gulf Coast that they said were harming migratory birds. Broadcast, public safety and wireless towers challenged by American Bird Conservancy, Friends of the Earth (FOE) and Forest Conservation Council cover coastal region that spans 6 states and includes towers owned by American Tower, Alltel, AT&T Wireless, BellSouth, Crown Castle, Pinnacle Towers and SpectraSite as well as Ala. Power Co., state of Tex., U. of Fla.

With stakeholders in the National Products Stewardship Initiative (NEPSI) all but deadlocked over financing system for collection and recycling of electronics waste (e-waste) such as consumer electronics components, attention is turning to legislation by Rep. Thompson (D-Cal.), first attempt to address issue at federal level. For different reasons, industry, states and environmentalists welcomed Thompson’s efforts that put e- waste issue on national scene, but all of them had concerns with bill as introduced. Proposed Computer Hazardous Waste Infrastructure Program Act (HR-5158) would establish grant program for recycling to be administered by EPA through fees on sale of computers, monitors and laptops. EPA will award grants on competitive basis to state and local govts. and organizations that recycle computers in efficient and environmentally responsible way.

Responding to FCC request for comment on Qwest’s “secret” contracts with CLECs, Ore. PUC told Commission Tues. that it had reviewed 78 such contracts in state and concluded “Qwest should have filed many but not all of these agreements.” Ore. PUC Comr. Joan Smith said in letter to FCC that PUC was working with Qwest “to develop a list of the agreements that should be filed” and if no agreement were reached, PUC could open formal investigation. She said that although AT&T had raised issue of unfiled contracts as part of Ore.’s Sec. 271 proceeding, “we concluded that any impropriety related to failure to file the contracts in question was not significant enough to cause us to delay making an affirmative recommendation to the FCC.” Qwest hasn’t made application to FCC for Ore. yet.

Federal Election Commission held hearing Wed. on its rulemaking that would create carveouts from regulation of what Chmn. David Mason (R) called “a new term” -- “electioneering communications” -- despite fact that underlying law, Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002, is undergoing multiple court challenges. Under BCRA, any electioneering communication on broadcast, cable or satellite airing within 30 days of primary or 60 days of general election for federal office would have to meet strict rules. Any funder of such communication that spent more than $10,000 annually on such communications would need to disclose communication within 24 hours, and corporations and labor groups would be prevented from funding such communications during that window. Guidelines were inserted, according to BCRA’s authors -- Senate Commerce Committee Chmn. McCain (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Feingold (D-Wis.), Reps. Shays (R-Conn.) and Meehan (D-Mass.), and the electioneering communications authors, Sens. Snowe (R-Me.) and Jeffords (I- Vt.) -- to provide U.S. courts with bright line test to ensure law wasn’t overturned on First Amendment grounds. Hanging over FEC hearing, however, was very real possibility that BCRA rulemakings would in part or in whole be rendered moot by courts. FEC is expected to approve final rules on electioneering communications by Sept. 26.

Three wireless carriers petitioned FCC for reconsideration of recent Enhanced 911 order, arguing Commission shouldn’t hold them to “strict liability” standard for Phase 2 deadlines that depend at least partly on factors such as vendors’ supplying compliant products. FCC last month delayed E911 Phase 2 interim handset and network upgrade deadlines for small and medium-sized carriers such as Alltel and Leap Wireless (CD July 29 p4). Dobson Cellular and American Cellular filed petition for reconsideration Mon., challenging what they called “strict liability” determination of order that stipulated small and medium-sized carriers would be deemed noncompliant for failure to meet interim performance benchmarks “without regard to a vendor, manufacturer or other entity’s inability to supply compliant products.” Alltel challenged order on similar grounds, contending that “both as a legal and as a practical matter,” carriers should have chance to show why noncompliance should be excused if deadlines were missed due to reasons beyond their control. Alltel said large carriers had raised similar “extraordinary” circumstances, such as role of LECs in Phase 2 deployment. Today (Wed.) marks FCC Wireless Bureau deadline for certain large LECs to provide information on interconnections needed for E911 deployment.

First day of FCC auction of C- and D-block licenses in lower 700 MHz band Tues. saw bids totaling $51.7 million, with Aloha Partners at top at $23.6 million after 2 rounds. DataCom Wireless was distant 2nd with $4.5 million, followed by MilkyWay Broadband with $3.3 million. Paul Allen-backed Vulcan Spectrum, one of handful of prospective bidders that had upfront payment exceeding $1 million, was 4th with $2.2 million. Vulcan had high bid on single license in Chicago. LIN TV at $1.9 million in high bids. By comparison, first 2 rounds of bidding in NextWave re-auction in 2000, which ultimately raised $16 billion, had brought in nearly $501 million in high bids. Auctions of lower and upper 700 MHz spectrum were scheduled for June 19 until Congress indefinitely delayed all but C- and D-block licenses of lower band, leading that auction to be re-scheduled for Aug. 27. C- and D-block licenses are smaller than other blocks of licenses in lower band and were seen as particularly attractive for smaller, rural carriers. Qualified bidders for reduced pool of licenses in remaining lower band auction had made $64.5 million in upfront payments, down from almost $154 million before Congress had scaled back auction. Meanwhile, FCC Wireless Bureau this week turned down request by Office of Chief Technology Office (OCTO) of Washington, D.C., govt. on lower band auction. OCTO filed petition for reconsideration of lower 700 MHz auction rules, arguing that under public safety auction exemption under Sec. 309(j) of Communications Act, it should be allowed to obtain licenses in band without competing in auction. In order released in June, FCC had turned down OCTO petition. In follow-up waiver request, OCTO had argued that it hadn’t met May 8 short-form filing deadline for lower band auction because it had expected that FCC would respond to its petition for reconsideration before that registration deadline. “OCTO has failed to show why enforcing the short-form filing deadline would frustrate the deadline’s underlying purpose or how grant of the waiver would be in the public interest,” bureau said.