NASHVILLE -- States should get involved in the special access debate over the competitiveness of business data services, a Level 3 official said in a session Tuesday at the 2016 NARUC Summer Committee meetings. The California state commissioner moderating the panel said her state cares about the historically federal issue and is following the FCC proceeding. Taking their expected positions on the panel, industry officials for ILECs and cable said the BDS market is competitive, while CLECs and Sprint backed regulation to spur competition.

CTA, CTIA, Mobile Future, NCTA, USTelecom and the Wireless ISP Association jointly urged the FCC to back away from privacy rules for ISPs. The record doesn't support heightened privacy rules for just ISPs, the groups said Monday in a joint blog post. “Opposition to the FCC’s proposed broadband privacy rules continues to grow,” they said. “The recently filed ‘reply round’ comments, new reports, and expert submissions to the Commission, and testimony before Congress all demonstrate a growing consensus that the Commission’s proposed approach is flawed and a new course must be taken -- one that protects consumer data, encourages innovation and growth online, and provides consistent and evenhanded standards for all internet companies.” The post cites numerous filings in opposition to the rules. “Many commenters echoed a fundamental point made by Ghostery in its two visits to the Commission -- that the proposed rules’ opt-in default and other problematic measures will undermine consumer choice and stifle innovation, depriving consumers of new choices, options, and alternatives online.”

Fiber proponents urged the FCC to devise a Connect America Fund subsidy auction to encourage deployment of cutting-edge high-speed networks and services, as initial comments on a Further NPRM were posted Thursday and Friday in docket 10-90. Satellite and some wireless interests suggested the rules should encourage broad deployment and industry participation, and traditional telcos seemed fairly sympathetic to that. Regulators in three northeastern states where Verizon declined initial CAF Phase II support asked the commission to ensure or help their states receive their fair share of support through the auction.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler sent letters to the major carriers asking them to offer call-blocking services to their subscribers “now.” In June 2015, the FCC said carriers have a "greenlight” to offer robocall blocking technology (see 1506180046). Wheeler said Friday in a blog post he has gone further and asked the carriers to put the technology in place. But some industry observers said the fix Wheeler seeks will be a tough challenge for industry.

AT&T Q2 lobbying is staying about as strong as in last year’s, $4.07 million in the disclosure report due Wednesday and $4.1 million the year before. The quarterly spending is far above many entities in the telecom and media sectors (see 1607200077). Comcast, another big spender, reported $3.38 million, down from $3.8 million. USTelecom spending didn’t shift greatly, $1.05 million vs. $1.18 million. Dish Network lobbying spending rose by $30,000 to $470,000. CenturyLink spending dropped greatly, down to $410,000 from $980,000.

Reply comments in the FCC business data service rulemaking are now due Aug. 9. The Wireline Bureau issued an order Thursday extending a July 26 deadline by 14 days. NCTA, USTelecom and ITTA had filed a motion seeking a 21-day BDS reply extension (see 1607190047). "Petitioners cite a number of factors in support of their request, including the voluminous record and a desire for more time to review and consider" a BDS framework proposed by Incompas and Verizon, the bureau order said. "A brief extension will allow parties to provide us with more thorough reply comments that will facilitate the compilation of a complete record in this proceeding, without causing undue delay to the Commission’s consideration of these issues." An NCTA spokesman emailed us: "We appreciate the Bureau's decision to grant this brief extension which will enable parties to participate more fully in this important proceeding." A USTelecom spokeswoman emailed: "We’re pleased the commission recognized the need to allow more time in this complex proceeding. This will give all parties a chance to better analyze the large volume of data, some only recently added to the record." ITTA, Incompas and Verizon had no comment on the extension. Most of the parties also didn't comment on whether there had been discussions to explore the possibility of a broader industry consensus plan -- something NCTA, USTelecom and ITTA had expressed interest in pursuing -- though one representative said he wasn't aware of any such talks.

Cable and telco trade groups asked the FCC for more time to reply in a rulemaking on revising the agency's special access framework for business data services (BDS). In a motion Tuesday in docket 16-143, NCTA, USTelecom and ITTA said the July 26 deadline should be delayed 21 days to give parties more time to address voluminous initial comments and various complexities, including evolving industry data and related BDS market analysis.

The FCC detailed its test to "streamline" voice service discontinuance reviews and other specifics in a tech transition order it released Friday that was approved by commissioners Thursday (see 1607140066). Parties seeking to replace legacy voice services with new IP-based or wireless services can get fast-track treatment if they meet an optional three-pronged test on replacement service adequacy, said the order, which noted a previous proposal for using eight criteria drew concerns. "This straightforward, streamlined approach will promote clarity, certainty, and efficiency. The test encapsulates the important criteria identified in the Emerging Wireline Further Notice, but categorizes them conceptually," the order said. An applicant seeking tech transition discontinuance "may demonstrate that a service is an adequate replacement for a legacy voice service by certifying or showing that one or more replacement service(s) offers all of the following: (i) substantially similar levels of network infrastructure and service quality as the applicant service; (ii) compliance with existing federal and/or industry standards required to ensure that critical applications such as 911, network security, and applications for individuals with disabilities remain available; and (iii) interoperability and compatibility with an enumerated list of applications and functionalities determined to be key to consumers and competitors. One replacement service must satisfy all the criteria to retain eligibility for automatic grant." Fast-track applicants can also show "that, despite not being able to meet the criteria, the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that an adequate replacement nonetheless exists," said the order, which fleshed out specifics of the test over 50 pages of text and rules. Parties still can obtain discontinuance approval under a previous five-factor test. The order also detailed the FCC decision to grant USTelecom's petition for nondominant treatment of ILEC interstate switched access services connecting local callers to long-distance networks. ILECs can now file new tariffs for such services on one day's notice, but to receive deemed-lawful treatment, must give seven days' notice for proposing only a rate decrease and 15 days' notice for all other filings, said the order. The commission expects most associated ILEC filings will continue to be filed on seven or 15-days’ notice. ILECs will be subject to fewer cost-support filing requirements, but are still subject to such duties not tied to nondominant status for interstate switched access service, the order said. They are also still subject to a 2011 order driving intercarrier-compensation rates to zero.

The FCC approved a tech transition order aimed at facilitating upgrades of voice services while preserving core consumer and public safety protections. The order adopted Thursday would set up an optional, "streamlined" test for telecom industry applications to discontinue legacy voice services on a fast track if replacement services are deemed adequate. It also granted a USTelecom bid for ILEC regulatory relief on interstate switched access voice services and a TelePacific request to address a discontinuance timing complication for CLECs. Commissioner Mike O'Rielly dissented in part and approved in part while Commissioner Ajit Pai concurred in part and approved in part, with both questioning the streamlining claims.

Price-cap telcos said the FCC violated the law by refusing to give them relief from legacy USF voice duties in areas where they don't receive new broadband-oriented Connect America Fund support. AT&T and CenturyLink, joined by intervenor USTelecom, Tuesday filed their opening brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which is reviewing their challenges to 2014 and 2015 FCC orders (AT&T, CenturyLink v. FCC, No. 15-1038 and consolidated cases) (see 1601110036 and 1602050029). "The Communications Act requires the FCC to adhere to a basic principle: a carrier required to provide services in high-cost areas must receive support in the form of sufficient payments from a universal service fund. The FCC orders under review violate this principle," the telco brief said. "By the FCC’s own calculation, Petitioners and other carriers face more than $1 billion in annual unfunded mandates under the FCC’s orders." The telcos said Section 214(e)(1)(A) requires USF eligible telecom carriers (ETCs) to provide services that “are supported” by universal service funding. But the FCC rule "leaves in place statewide price cap carrier ETC designations that require those carriers to provide service in high-cost areas where the required services are not ‘supported’ by high-cost funds," their brief said. "Those obligations violate the straightforward text of § 214(e)(1)(A). Likewise, requiring that service be provided in high-cost areas without supporting it with disbursements from the Fund violates the statutory command in 47 U.S.C.§ 254(b)(5) and (e) that funding be ‘sufficient’ to advance universal service. The Act also requires States to designate ‘service area[s]’ for price cap carrier ETCs that are linked to the FCC’s 'universal service obligations and support mechanisms.' 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(5) (emphasis added). Legacy statewide service areas violate this requirement because they are a product of the replaced ‘support mechanisms’ and bear no relationship to the targeted funding mechanism that now determines high-cost support." They also said the FCC violated "the principle of competitive neutrality" and the Administrative Procedure Act. The FCC/DOJ brief is due Sept. 2 (see 1606010042).