The FCC’s long-awaited BRS/EBS order has been withdrawn from circulation so new Comr. Tate can get up to speed on its complex issues, industry sources said this week. The order involves leasing spectrum assigned to educational institutions for wireless broadband use. Meanwhile, lobbying continues. Motorola defended itself against the Assn. of Home Appliance Mfrs. (AHAM) charges that its recent data on the interference threat from microwave ovens and other IMS devices were based purely on “discredited” information and an NTIA study that tested old gear. A group representing ITFS license holders urged an end to secrecy on the terms of leases filed at the FCC.

More than a dozen constitutional law experts disputed the Justice Dept.’s defense of the Bush Administration’s secret, warrantless electronic spying on U.S. citizens, saying in a letter that DoJ’s argument “fails to identify any plausible legal authority for such surveillance.” Former FBI Dir. William Sessions, onetime Deputy Attorney Gen. Philip Heymann and a handful of lawyers who worked in the executive branch under President Bush told Congressional leaders this week that the National Security Agency (NSA) program “appears on its face to violate existing law.”

A La. state appeals court dealt a big blow to a municipal broadband project in Lafayette, La., striking down a city bond ordinance that would have raised $125 million to finance the Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) broadband venture. The 3rd La. Court of Appeals overruled a lower court, saying the bond ordinance violated anti- subsidy provisions of the state Local Government Fair Competition Act. Lafayette can’t proceed with the bond issue, planned for March, until it “complies with applicable law,” said the court. It was weighing a BellSouth appeal challenging a part of the bond ordinance under which LUS could have pledged residual revenue from other utility services to guarantee timely repayment of its telecom bonds. The provision, included to get lower interest rates, would be an illegal cross subsidy absent a requirement that the telecom bonds go into default first, BellSouth said. The city argued that revenue pledges could be activated at any time so long as the telecom unit repaid the pledge at market interest rates. The court flatly rejected the city’s argument. It said the law is very specific in requiring that telecom bonds be repaid “solely” with revenue from telecom services. The court said the law requires a bond default to activate a revenue pledge. It characterized the city’s plan for backing up its telecom bonds as a “revenue assignment,” which is prohibited. The court ensured fair competition by upholding the state law’s subsidy provisions, BellSouth said. Disappointed city leaders said they are mulling their next step. Options include an appeal to the state Supreme Court, a bond ordinance rewrite and revising the municipal competition law.

A La. state appeals court dealt a big blow to a municipal broadband project in Lafayette, La., striking down a city bond ordinance that would have raised $125 million to finance the Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) broadband venture. The 3rd La. Court of Appeals overruled a lower court, saying the bond ordinance violated anti- subsidy provisions of the state Local Government Fair Competition Act. Lafayette can’t proceed with the bond issue, planned for March, until it “complies with applicable law,” said the court. It was weighing a BellSouth appeal challenging a part of the bond ordinance under which LUS could have pledged residual revenue from other utility services to guarantee timely repayment of its telecom bonds. The provision, included to get lower interest rates, would be an illegal cross subsidy absent a requirement that the telecom bonds go into default first, BellSouth said. The city argued that revenue pledges could be activated at any time so long as the telecom unit repaid the pledge at market interest rates. The court flatly rejected the city’s argument. It said the law is very specific in requiring that telecom bonds be repaid “solely” with revenue from telecom services. The court said the law requires a bond default to activate a revenue pledge. It characterized the city’s plan for backing up its telecom bonds as a “revenue assignment,” which is prohibited. The court ensured fair competition by upholding the state law’s subsidy provisions, BellSouth said. Disappointed city leaders said they are mulling their next step. Options include an appeal to the state Supreme Court, a bond ordinance rewrite and revising the municipal competition law.

A La. state appeals court dealt a big blow to a municipal broadband project in Lafayette, La., striking down a city bond ordinance that would have raised $125 million to finance the Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) broadband venture. The 3rd La. Court of Appeals overruled a lower court, saying the bond ordinance violated anti- subsidy provisions of the state Local Government Fair Competition Act. Lafayette can’t proceed with the bond issue, planned for March, until it “complies with applicable law,” said the court. It was weighing a BellSouth appeal challenging a part of the bond ordinance under which LUS could have pledged residual revenue from other utility services to guarantee timely repayment of its telecom bonds. The provision, included to get lower interest rates, would be an illegal cross subsidy absent a requirement that the telecom bonds go into default first, BellSouth said. The city argued that revenue pledges could be activated at any time so long as the telecom unit repaid the pledge at market interest rates. The court flatly rejected the city’s argument. It said the law is very specific in requiring that telecom bonds be repaid “solely” with revenue from telecom services. The court said the law requires a bond default to activate a revenue pledge. It characterized the city’s plan for backing up its telecom bonds as a “revenue assignment,” which is prohibited. The court ensured fair competition by upholding the state law’s subsidy provisions, BellSouth said. Disappointed city leaders said they are mulling their next step. Options include an appeal to the state Supreme Court, a bond ordinance rewrite and revising the municipal competition law.

In the January 4, 2006 issue of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Bulletin (CBP Bulletin) (Vol. 40, No. 2), CBP issued notices: (a) proposing to revoke one classification ruling on microwave popcorn, and (b) proposing to revoke one classification ruling on Everolimus. CBP states that it is also proposing to revoke any treatment it has previously accorded to substantially identical transactions that are contrary to its position in these notices of proposed revocation.

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has issued a final rule, effective December 8, 2005, to amend its regulations at 7 CFR Part 305 and 319 in order to relieve certain restrictions on various fruits and vegetables, among other things.

A La. appeals court has until Jan. 5 to rule on BellSouth’s challenge to a Lafayette, La., bond ordinance that’s to raise $125 million for the Lafayette Utilities System’s (LUS) municipal broadband service project. The 3rd La. Court of Appeals held hearings Dec. 29. At issue is a revenue pledge in the bond ordinance that allows LUS to loan the telecom unit funds from general utility revenues to cover payments on the telecom bonds if the telecom unit has insufficient revenues for a payment. A lower court upheld the ordinance but BellSouth appealed. BellSouth argued that under the 2004 La. Local Govt. Fair Competition Act, such revenue-pledge loans are legal only to cover nonrecurring startup expenses, not ongoing debt service costs. BellSouth also said the city’s revenue pledge arrangement isn’t lawful unless the bonds go into default first. It said a revenue pledge that kicks in to cover a bond payment in order to avoid a default is an illegal cross-subsidy. But the city argued that the law allows revenue-pledge loans for any purpose, at any time, so long as the telecom unit repaid the loans with interest at prevailing market rates. The city said state law allows revenue pledges to obtain better interest rates on bonds, and doesn’t require a bond default before a revenue pledge can be activated. The city said the law allows it to engage in any lawful business practice that private companies can, and said revenue transfers among affiliates, with market-rate payback mechanisms, are a common commercial business practice. The city also argued that BellSouth should have challenged the bond proposition, not the implementing ordinance, so its suit wasn’t timely filed. But BellSouth said it had no problems with the ballot proposition, and its dispute lay in the details of the enabling ordinance. Meanwhile, the La. PSC urged the appeals court to remand the matter back to a trial court, saying BellSouth’s appeal of the bond ordinance is a “collateral attack” on the PSC’s rules to level the playing field between the city’s broadband unit and private telecom providers. In those rules, the PSC agreed with the city’s interpretation of state law regarding revenue pledges and said such pledges wouldn’t be an improper cross subsidy. No party, including BellSouth, appealed the PSC rules. The PSC said state law requires that appeals of PSC rules be brought first to the 19th Judicial Circuit Court, and it would strenuously object to any ruling by the state appeals court that would overturn the PSC’s fair-play rules.

Even with matters pending at the FCC, the regulatory focus for the BPL industry will turn increasingly to the states in 2006, said industry officials. “The states are going to have the most activity” this year, said Brett Kilbourne, regulatory dir. of the United Power Line Council (UPLC). FCC action is awaited on petitions for reconsideration of its BPL rules as well as a plea by the UPLC to classify BPL as an information service on the lines of DSL and cable modem. Industry officials said they are also following efforts in Congress to rewrite the Telecom Act.

Even with matters pending at the FCC, the regulatory focus for the BPL industry will turn increasingly to the states in 2006, said industry officials. “The states are going to have the most activity” this year, said Brett Kilbourne, regulatory dir. of the United Power Line Council (UPLC). FCC action is awaited on petitions for reconsideration of its BPL rules as well as a plea by the UPLC to classify BPL as an information service on the lines of DSL and cable modem. Industry officials said they are also following efforts in Congress to rewrite the Telecom Act.