California state lawmakers plan to probe Verizon slowing Santa Clara County firefighters’ service, at a hearing Friday, State Capitol offices said Thursday. At a Wednesday hearing, Assembly Communications Committee members advanced two net neutrality bills after discussing the throttling of public-safety service during the state's largest wildfire (see 1808220059). A lobbyist repeated the carrier’s defense that it was a customer service mistake that has nothing to do with net neutrality.
The California Public Utilities Commission should thoroughly review T-Mobile’s acquisition of Sprint and get commitments from the companies, said the Office of Ratepayer Advocates (ORA) and two consumer groups in protest filings last week. The CPUC “must rigorously investigate the effects on California's voice and broadband markets,” including if the deal will hurt competition and raises antitrust concerns, ORA said in docket A.18-07-011. The application fails to identify benefits specific to California or to Sprint's wireline wholesale and enterprise customers, ORA said. CPUC should “conduct a detailed analysis of the entire transaction, including both wireless and wireline entities,” urged The Utility Reform Network and the Greenlining Institute. “Although Joint Applicants attempt to argue that two of the biggest facilities-based, national wireless carriers ... do not meet the intrastate revenue thresholds or are not otherwise required to submit to a public interest review, the Commission should use the Section 854 (b) and (c) criteria to determine if the transaction is adverse to the public interest or might require certain conditions to ‘protect and promote the public interest.’” Applicants should show how the deal is in the public interest, particularly for low-income, minority and rural customers, and how it will affect public safety and emergency communications, the consumer groups said. Low-income consumers are more likely to use Sprint or T-Mobile than AT&T or Verizon, and the deal could reduce Lifeline competition, they said. Sprint has a good record on supplier diversity, but T-Mobile doesn’t, they said. Sprint and T-Mobile, which didn’t comment Monday, are seeking CPUC OK for T-Mobile to take Sprint's wireline business and to add its name to Sprint's California wireless registration. "It is bold indeed to say that reducing the number of competitors makes a market more competitive," Tellus Venture Associates President Stephen Blum blogged Monday. If Sprint and T-Mobile can't make that case "with hard evidence -- as opposed to the rhetoric they’ve relied on so far -- then the CPUC should block the merger," said the telecom consultant for local governments.
The federal indictment of Rep. Chris Collins, R-N.Y., won’t set back growing momentum to end 911 fee diversion, with House Communications Subcommittee Vice Chairman Leonard Lance, R-N.J., and Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., ready to keep Collins’ 911 Fee Integrity Act (HR-6424) moving, FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly said in an interview. Increasing national attention by Congress and the FCC is putting pressure on states to stop using 911 funds for unrelated purposes, lawmakers and other officials told us.
The Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee could be hard pressed to wrap up a report on infrastructure and disasters by the beginning of March when its two-year charter expires, industry officials said. The FCC is soliciting members of a new BDAC working group, with nominations due Sept. 6. If the group starts meeting in October, it would have to turn around a report in five months, which would be unusually fast for a report by a Federal Advisory Committee Act committee.
The Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee could be hard pressed to wrap up a report on infrastructure and disasters by the beginning of March when its two-year charter expires, industry officials said. The FCC is soliciting members of a new BDAC working group, with nominations due Sept. 6. If the group starts meeting in October, it would have to turn around a report in five months, which would be unusually fast for a report by a Federal Advisory Committee Act committee.
The National Association of State 911 Administrators said the FCC should beef up 911 reliability rules. Industry commenters questioned the need for annual certification requirements. Replies in docket 13-75 largely tracked initial comments in which APCO and the National Emergency Numbering Association urged the FCC to impose new 911 reliability rules and industry backed streamlining existing rules (see 1807170034). The Public Safety Bureau sought comment in June on 911 network reliability and whether current rules should be “modified to adapt to advancements in technology or other changes.” NASNA said the current reporting requirement for covered 911 providers is working. “The annual certification process is useful to state 911 administrators,” NASNA said. “It enables them to know what each individual provider has warranted on record. When issues arise, it enables them to work with the covered 911 service provider and the Commission to resolve those issues.” Less frequent certifications wouldn’t work, the group said: “A lot can change in a network in the course of 12 months.” AT&T urged overhauling the rules, "to eliminate wasteful, low-utility reporting practices." Such information "is almost never used by any of the intended beneficiaries,” it noted. Alternatively, the FCC could narrow the scope of the information required and reduce the frequency of reporting to every three years, AT&T said. ATIS would support eliminating the certification requirement: “There is no evidence that this requirement has had any significant impact to network reliability or resiliency.” T-Mobile said the FCC should leave the current rules in place. “The importance of the issue is reflected in the size of the record compiled when the Commission first considered adopting rules to improve the reliability and resiliency of 911 communications networks,” the carrier said.
APCO conference attendees agreed numerous questions remain on FirstNet, in interviews there last week. APCO featured FirstNet and partner AT&T (see 1808090002). Many predicted FirstNet’s growth will be relatively slow and a large number of agencies will stick with their current providers. FirstNet is in the first year of its five-year buildout plan. The network is growing since it launched last year, with 110,000 subscribers at the most recent count, and board members expressed optimism during their meeting Monday (see 1808130063).
Parties urged the FCC to ensure a Lifeline national verifier has electronic interfaces that will ease verification of consumer low-income eligibility. State regulators and consumer advocates were supportive, and the National Lifeline Association (NaLA), Sage Telecom, Sprint and TracFone Wireless expressly backed Q Link Wireless' emergency petition to direct Universal Service Administrative Co. to implement machine-to-machine application programming interfaces for the national verifier (see 1807050046). No opposition was filed in comments posted Friday and Monday in docket 17-287. The FCC and USAC declined comment Monday.
Parties urged the FCC to ensure a Lifeline national verifier has electronic interfaces that will ease verification of consumer low-income eligibility. State regulators and consumer advocates were supportive, and the National Lifeline Association (NaLA), Sage Telecom, Sprint and TracFone Wireless expressly backed Q Link Wireless' emergency petition to direct Universal Service Administrative Co. to implement machine-to-machine application programming interfaces for the national verifier (see 1807050046). No opposition was filed in comments posted Friday and Monday in docket 17-287. The FCC and USAC declined comment Monday.
Federal judges blocked, for now, FCC restrictions on enhanced tribal Lifeline subsidies that bar resellers and residents of non-rural areas from the extra low-income USF support. The commission's 2017 order "will be stayed pending further [court action] insofar as the Order purports to limit eligibility for the Tribal Lifeline enhanced subsidy to 'facilities-based' service providers, and to limit eligibility for that program to 'rural areas,'" said the Friday ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in National Lifeline Association v. FCC, No. 18-1026, and a consolidated case. They said petitioners showed a "likelihood of success on the merits" of their challenges, and that they'll suffer "irreparable injury absent a stay." Some said the decision further complicated an FCC proposal to ban resellers from Lifeline support in general.