Sandwich Isles Communications faces $77 million in repayment duties and proposed fines from the FCC for violations and apparent violations of the USF high-cost program in Hawaii, with more repayments to come. The commission also ruled against SIC in a cost dispute with AT&T and the National Exchange Carrier Association (NECA) over an undersea cable. The agency noted Sandwich Isles has continuing obligations to its customers and can't discontinue telecom service without express authorization.

Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker and the Internet Security Alliance praised the Commission on Enhancing National Cybersecurity’s recommendations to the White House on actions the private and public sectors can take over the next decade to improve cyber defenses and raise awareness. The six main recommendation areas aim to provide a cybersecurity blueprint for the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump, backing action on some items during Trump’s first 100 days in office (see 1612020050 and 1612050044). The CENC report “provides a path forward for government, the commercial sector, consumers, and educators to address the challenges before us,” Pritzker said in a statement. “The ideas highlighted in the report … transcend different Administrations, Congresses, and different political and economic cycles. These recommendations comprise an urgent action plan for our country to meet today’s cybersecurity crisis. Success will require that we all work together.” Pritzker is expected to speak about the CENC report during a Tuesday USTelecom event. The suggestions embrace most elements in ISA’s 12-step “social contract” on cybersecurity for the next administration, the group said. “Not only did our own study come to a remarkably similar conclusion, but this finding is consistent with the House GOP Task Force Report on cybersecurity” and President Barack Obama’s 2013 cybersecurity executive order, said ISA President Larry Clinton in a news release. “The degree of consensus on the direction for sound cyber policy across industry and partisan lines is remarkable and bodes well for the prospect to more aggressively fight the ever-greater cyber threat.”

Incoming House Commerce Committee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., faces much deliberation before picking his replacement as chair of the Communications Subcommittee, he told us Friday. But he predicts broad continuity on GOP telecom priorities in the next Congress and anticipates the many legislative initiatives from his own time as subcommittee chairman could be a springboard for Commerce going forward. Telecom and media industry officials issued many statements lauding Walden's ascendance.

The FCC's loss in a court case to AT&T on VoIP issues doesn't undercut the agency on net neutrality rules, the regulator told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The commission responded (in Pacer) Thursday to CTIA's telling (in Pacer) the D.C. Circuit Nov. 23 that the loss five days earlier in AT&T v. FCC (see 1611180063 and 1611180011) had bearing on the association's petition for the full court to reconsider the net neutrality case. AT&T shows the phone and internet networks are distinct, not as a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel found in a 2-1 USTelecom v. FCC net neutrality ruling for the agency that they are "an interconnected, single network," said CTIA, which also backed cases against net neutrality rules. Not so, said the commission, contending AT&T broke no new ground and the facts were understood before the net neutrality ruling. "AT&T confirms that the [USTelecom] panel properly upheld the agency’s classification of mobile broadband as a telecommunications service," said the FCC. "While AT&T largely hinged on exactly how a call is transferred between traditional telephone and VoIP providers, there is no dispute that such a call is in fact transferred, allowing traditional phone users and VoIP users to reach one another." CTIA didn't comment Thursday.

FCC staff gave some states relief from a Friday Lifeline deadline to align state rules with the updated federal low-income program, as expected (see 1611300060). In an order Thursday, the commission granted in part and denied in part 10 waiver requests, including a USTelecom petition covering multiple states and individual requests by California, Wisconsin, Washington and Oregon. The Wireline Bureau order in docket 11-42 didn’t grant waivers for every state USTelecom requested.

The FCC looks likely to give state regulators some relief from a Friday Lifeline deadline, but wireless Lifeline providers appear less likely to get relief, stakeholders told us Wednesday. State commissions in California and elsewhere filed waiver petitions seeking more time to implement an FCC requirement that they adhere to federal criteria in determining consumer eligibility for the federal Lifeline low-income telecom subsidy program (see 1610310028 and 1610210046). Previously, states could add criteria.

New Mexico joined other states seeking waiver of an FCC Dec. 2 implementation deadline for aligning state Lifeline rules with the updated federal low-income program that added broadband as a supported service. In a petition dated Monday, the Public Regulation Commission said it needs seven more months “to make technical, administrative, and operational changes.” An extension will ensure eligible consumers continue to receive Lifeline benefits in the state, the PRC said. An FCC Wireline Bureau official earlier this month said the federal agency will respond soon to USTelecom and state petitions for postponement (see 1611140052).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit surprised many on both sides of the fight over net neutrality rules and broadband reclassification when it upheld the FCC across the board. After Dec. 4, 2015, oral argument on industry challenges to the 2015 rules (see Part III of this Special Report, 1610130014), the D.C. Circuit issued its decision June 14. That ruling was the subject of two Communications Daily Bulletins that day (see 1606140010 and 1606140012) and many more later stories. This final Part IV of the net neutrality Special Report focuses on the court ruling and continuing challenges.

On Oct. 27, 2015, the stage was set for the much-scrutinized court hearing on FCC net neutrality rules and broadband reclassification under Title II of the Communications Act. That day, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit identified judges in the case as David Tatel and Sri Srinivasan, both Democratic appointees, and Senior Judge Stephen Williams, a Republican appointee. As Communications Daily first reported Oct. 28, Tatel was the most-watched judge in the case (see 1510280052). This Part III of our Special Report on net neutrality explores the hearing and continuing legal challenges. Part I was on the rules themselves (see 1609150017) and Part II on pleadings to the court that led up to Dec. 4, 2015, oral argument (see 1609230009). Part IV is on the court's eventual decision (see 1610210015).

Even before the FCC released its net neutrality rules on March 12, 2015, ISP interests signaled they would take the agency to court. The likes of CTIA and NCTA predicted lawsuits, as reported in Part I of this Special Report (see 1609150017). Even FCC officials predicted such suits -- accurately, as it turned out. This Part II focuses on how litigation came to pass. Part III reports how the commission won an initial court case (see 1610130014).