Industry groups and ISPs sought several adjustments in FCC requirements on broadband data collection (BDC). Some asked the FCC to permanently remove the rule requiring that a professional engineer (PE) certify availability data. Others sought clarification on the process for providers seeking to restore locations on their availability maps after a challenge process removed such locations. Comments were posted through Tuesday in docket 19-195 (see 2408300036)

Broadband deployment continues in a timely manner and adoption rates are rising, ISPs said in comments about the FCC's annual Section 706 report on the state of competition in the broadband marketplace (see 2409060058). In addition, some urged that the commission refrain from including metrics on pricing and adoption rates in its final analysis. Others said the FCC should refine the broadband data collection (BDC) process and national broadband map.

The U.S. Supreme Court will take up early in its new term whether reimbursement requests submitted to the Universal Service Administrative Co.-administered E-rate program are “claims” under the False Claims Act (FCA). On Nov. 4, justices will hear Wisconsin Bell v. U.S., a case from the 7th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court (see 2405220039).

The FCC's reclassification of broadband as a Title II telecom service under the Communications Act is a "straightforward" violation of the major-questions doctrine, ISPs told the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in a reply brief filed Wednesday (docket 24-7000). USTelecom, NCTA, CTIA, ACA Connects, the Wireless ISP Association, and several state telecom groups argued the provision of internet access has "always been the core driver of the information-service classification and that function remains unchanged today" (see 2409120032). The FCC "offers little more than its say-so to support its contrary view," the coalition said, adding that its "forced forbearance and strained reclassification of mobile broadband" underscores "how poorly broadband fits into the Title II scheme." The groups argued that the FCC "lacks any good explanation from departing from its prior view" that the costs of reclassification outweigh any benefits and hasn't addressed the major questions doctrine's "obvious political salience." Congress didn't clearly authorize the FCC to classify broadband as a telecom service, the groups noted, adding it should remain a Title I information service because it includes domain name systems and caching, which are "integral information-processing components." The coalition also argued the FCC lacked statutory authority to classify mobile broadband as a commercial mobile service under Title II because it's not part of the public switched network, or the ten-digit telephone network, which is "distinct" from the public internet.

California should shed carrier of last resort (COLR) obligations in many parts of the state, carriers that are subject to those regulations said in comments posted this week at the California Public Utilities Commission. Just don’t extend the rules to other kinds of companies, warned a cable broadband association, whose members are free from such regulations. However, consumer advocates said COLR obligations remain necessary and should be updated to include high-speed internet service, not just voice.

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) is considering regulating telecommunications companies with age-verification rules that normally are reserved for social media platforms.

The FCC is getting lots of advice on potential changes to its draft order tackling robocalls and robotexts, set for a vote on Thursday (see 2409050045). Republican Commissioners Brendan Carr and Nathan Simington have mentioned concerns about the order but aren't necessarily expected to dissent on what is usually considered a top consumer priority, industry officials said Friday.

Title I or Title II of the Communications Act would bar the New York Affordable Broadband Act (ABA), said amici supporting ISP groups in briefs Friday at the U.S. Supreme Court. NCTA, a cable industry group that didn’t join the original May 2021 challenge that several national telecom associations filed in a district court, said the ABA “would impose unprecedented and unlawful rate regulation on broadband services.” The Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council (MMTC) also condemned the state law. “If the ABA becomes effective, it will achieve the opposite of what it purports to accomplish, making it harder for communities of color to subscribe to broadband.”

There's "no viable proposed timeline" for larger make-ready pole orders that account for "the fundamental realities of broadband deployment," USTelecom told the FCC in a letter Friday in docket 17-84. The commission sought comment on the item in a December Further NPRM (see 2312130044). USTelecom noted such orders are "more complicated and time-consuming," making it "impossible" to determine how long an order for more than 3,000 poles will take (see 2408210034). Timelines for larger pole orders must account for "workforce limitations," workflow management, and coordination between pole owners and attachers, USTelecom said, adding it's "impossible to predict solely from the number of poles involved" how long a make-ready request for more than 3,000 poles will take, it said. "That there are real-world obstacles to deployment is a reason to ensure that any timeline includes a robust good faith exception capturing all situations where the pole owner cannot meet the timeline due to circumstances beyond its control," USTelecom said. The group also opposed several proposals from other groups on cost-allocations for pole replacements, one-touch, make-ready mandates and professional engineer certification requirements.

Verizon faced tough cross-examination Friday as consumer advocates hammered the company’s petition for Connecticut deregulation. Paul Vasington, the carrier's senior director-regulatory and government affairs, said during a Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) virtual hearing that the market where the ILEC seeks deregulation has reached “full potential” competitively given many VoIP and wireless options. However, officials from the Connecticut Office of Consumer Counsel (OCC) questioned whether Verizon competitors offer services that are the functional equivalent of landlines.