A court gave the FCC, DOJ and allies until Oct. 3 to respond to appeals of a three-judge panel ruling that upheld the commission's net neutrality and broadband reclassification order. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued an order (in Pacer) Tuesday granting respondents' unopposed motion for the extension from the previous Sept.12 deadline (see 1608170046). Alamo Broadband, AT&T, CTIA, NCTA, the American Cable Association, USTelecom, CenturyLink and Tech Freedom and other intervenors filed petitions for rehearing the case (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063) (see 1607290052).

Telecom and media industry money is flowing to incumbents in the competitive Senate Commerce Committee member re-election races, according to the latest Federal Election Commission records. Money favors the incumbents generally, whether the seats are safe or not, especially benefiting the coffers of Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune, R-S.D. Telecom-affiliated unions are backing Democratic challengers.

Heavy regulation of business data services would discourage investment by incumbent telcos and upstarts in an increasingly competitive market, said speakers at a USTelecom panel Thursday. Cable and ILEC representatives called potential BDS constraints dangerous, and a union representative voiced concern about proposals for rate cuts, starting with a "flash cut" of 20 percent. "Not good for investment. Not good for jobs," said Debbie Goldman, Communications Workers of America telecom policy director.

A federal court asked the FCC, DOJ and allies to respond by Sept. 12 to appeals of a panel decision that upheld net neutrality and broadband reclassification. The agencies have a 30-page limit for their response and supporting intervenors 15 pages, said the order (in Pacer) Wednesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (USTelecom v. FCC, No. 15-1063 and consolidated cases). Absent further order, the D.C. Circuit said it won't accept replies. Alamo Broadband, AT&T, CTIA, NCTA, the American Cable Association, USTelecom, CenturyLink and Tech Freedom and other intervenors filed petitions for the D.C. Circuit to rehear the case (see 1607290052).

Significant AT&T money now backs the House speakership of Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis. The carrier’s political action committee has given far more, by many tens of thousands of dollars, to Ryan’s joint fundraising committee than it has to past speakers and also more than the PACs of other major telecom and media players are giving to Ryan’s effort -- or to anyone at all in the political realm, according to Federal Election Commission records. Ryan is intent on laying out a 2017 agenda including telecom policy overhaul, with the possibility of a revived Telecom Act rewrite in the works (see 1608080022).

The FCC said its 2015 tech-transitions order on discontinuances of legacy telecom services was a reasonable exercise of its statutory authority and agency discretion under deferential court precedent. The "task requires a delicate balancing of different policy goals" as the commission seeks to promote innovative IP-based, broadband offerings while ensuring continued consumer access to affordable and dependable service, said the FCC and DOJ in responding to arguments by USTelecom, which is challenging the order. "The FCC decisions at issue here, strike the appropriate balance," said an FCC/DOJ brief (in Pacer) Monday to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. (United States Telecom Association v. FCC, No. 15-1414.)

USTelecom said its survey of smaller businesses showed cable is seen as an alternative for data networking, "which is analogous" to what the FCC defines as business data services (BDS). "Cable is widely perceived by business customers with 5 and 100 employees as a competitive alternative for their business internet access and data needs," said a filing Monday by USTelecom in docket 16-143. The filing included more methodological information about the USTelecom survey, in response to questions from FCC staff in a recent meeting. The survey asked representatives of businesses with five to 100 employees about their use of business internet access service and data networking services, "which correspond to services termed by the Commission as 'best efforts' service" and BDS.

The FCC and supporters defended a 2015 pole-attachment order putting new downward pressure on rates that is being challenged in court by electric power companies, which own poles. In a joint reply brief to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals posted Tuesday, the FCC/DOJ said the commission has "broad authority" to regulate pole-attachment rates under Section 224(b) of the Communications Act (Ameren Corp., et al., v. FCC, No. 16-1683). They said that mandate was affirmed when the D.C. Circuit in 2013 upheld a 2011 FCC order that aimed to drive telecom rates down to lower cable rate levels in American Electric Power, which said the commission used its discretion reasonably to eliminate market distortions. After finding the rules weren't working as intended, the FCC in November adjusted cost allocators to bring the telecom and cable rates into closer parity at the lower levels (see 1511240071). "The rules, as amended, share the same structure and the same purpose as the 2011 rules. Accordingly, they are no less lawful than the rules at issue in American Electric Power, and this Court should follow the D.C. Circuit’s reasoning in that case to avoid a circuit split," said the FCC/DOJ, requesting an oral argument. Intervenors USTelecom plus NCTA, Incompas and Level 3 filed briefs backing the FCC actions (here and here in Pacer). The order "encourages broadband deployment, narrows the unjustified discrepancy that existed between the 'just and reasonable' rates that may be charged" competitors, and continues to fully compensate pole owners, USTelecom said. Both intervenor briefs said oral argument isn't necessary. "This challenge merely repackages the prior challenge rejected by the D.C. Circuit," USTelecom said. In their May brief (in Pacer), the power companies also said oral argument isn't necessary, "because the issues and relevant authority are clear." The commission's "conflation of the two cost formulas violates congressional intent and the canon against surplusage," said Ameren, American Electric Power Service, CenterPoint Energy Houston Electric and Dominion Virginia Power. "The FCC's definition of 'cost' is also arbitrary and capricious because it gives an infinite number of meanings to the same term in the same subsection of the same statute." If the 8th Circuit orders oral argument, they said, 15 minutes will be sufficient for each side, the same as the FCC/DOJ requested.

Battle lines remained fairly clear in the FCC business data service rulemaking, as dozens of replies were posted Tuesday and Wednesday in docket 16-143. Most wireless parties, CLECs, business customers and consumer advocates said the FCC needs to take new steps to regulate a BDS market often dominated by incumbent telcos with pricing power. ILECs and free-market advocates said new regulation would be unjustified and harmful in a business broadband market with robust and growing competition, particularly from cable companies, which recently updated their deployment data. Cable interests and others said BDS regulation shouldn't sweep in upstarts.

Parties that want the FCC to revisit its Lifeline USF overhaul answered critics of their petitions for reconsideration or clarification, which were the subject of recent oppositions and other initial comments (see 1608010028). Every petitioner filed a reply -- CTIA, General Communication Inc. (GCI), Joint Lifeline ETC Petitioners, the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates (NASUCA), NTCA/WTA, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, TracFone and USTelecom. CenturyLink and New America's Open Technology Institute (OTI) also replied. Replies were posted in docket 11-42 Monday and Tuesday, with CTIA's filing the first to post (see 1608080042).