Google has begun including information about the number of national security letters (NSLs) it receives from the FBI, requesting information about the company’s users, every year in its annual Transparency Report, the company said Tuesday in a blog post by Richard Salgado, Google legal director of law enforcement and information security (http://bit.ly/Yb2yHg). “The FBI has the authority to prohibit companies from talking about these requests. But we've been trying to find a way to provide more information about the NSLs we get,” he wrote. Google will report NSL numbers “in broad strokes” -- data for 2009 through 2012 is in increments of 1,000 -- “to address concerns raised by the FBI, Justice Department and other agencies that releasing exact numbers might reveal information about investigations,” Salgado said. There have been between zero and 999 NSLs every year since 2009, according to the report (http://bit.ly/MTrIHh); between 1,000 and 1,999 users/accounts were specified each year, except for 2010, when between 2,000 and 2,999 users/accounts were specified.
Several companies continued to hammer Milwaukee before the Wisconsin Public Service Commission due to the city’s proposed streetcar network, which the companies argue will interfere with their facilities and force expensive relocation. These protesting companies include AT&T Wisconsin, Time Warner Cable, the Wisconsin Cable Communications Association, tw telecom of Wisconsin, PAETEC Communications, McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services and Norlight Telecommunications. The debate has largely devolved into a procedural one, “ongoing for the past 18 months” and with “a number of procedural twists and turns” as the angry utilities say, now relating to whether the PSC has authority over these issues and Milwaukee’s Feb. 18 request for interlocutory review before the PSC. This week the PSC received briefs in response to that Milwaukee request, which questioned the PSC’s authority: “If the Utilities are harmed by the streetcar project, they can seek redress from a circuit court, which does have authority to award compensatory damages,” it said (http://1.usa.gov/102xc8O). The petitioners disagreed. “The City continues to ignore the Commission’s authority to determine the reasonableness of the City’s actions affecting the relocation of utility facilities,” the companies said in their latest Monday filing (http://1.usa.gov/ZdYQNM). “Instead, at every turn, the City is attempting to manufacture opportunities to chip away at the Commission’s jurisdiction.” The Wisconsin Institute of Law and Liberty, in a separate filing Monday (http://1.usa.gov/ZdYQNM), attacked the city of Milwaukee’s earlier arguments as setting up straw men and digging into issues the PSC already addressed. The PSC jurisdictional issues matter due to the potential costs the streetcar project would cause the utilities, the first group of utilities said: “Such a basis for voiding a municipal regulation is clearly evident here, where the City regulations at issue would strap utilities and their ratepayers with 100% of the estimated $70 million in facility relocation costs caused by a streetcar project that is budgeted at $64.6 million.” Other companies also filed objections with some of Milwaukee’s arguments: “The Commission should reject the City’s attempt to cherry pick certain factual questions out of the Issues list and have them excluded from the proceeding,” said Wisconsin Electric Power Co., Wisconsin Gas, American Transmission Co. and ATC Management in a joint filing (http://1.usa.gov/166vWFT).
The ability to send emergency text messages to 911 call centers “is essential to the health and safety of millions of Americans who have barriers to hearing and/or speaking,” the University of California-Berkeley said in a filing at the FCC. “Substantial research documents” that the deaf and hard of hearing “suffer disproportionate rates of death, injury and property loss during disasters and other health emergencies,” the filing said (http://bit.ly/XomM4o). “When these populations cannot text to 911, they may lack access to critical help from first responders, as has been documented in past emergencies."
Copyright owners reiterated that the proposed fee schedule for filing statements of account (SOA) by cable systems and satellite carriers failed to account for significant expenses incurred by the Copyright Office in administering the statutory licenses. The copyright owners, including NPR, urged the Copyright Office to incorporate all of the licensing division’s operating costs in its fee calculation, to calculate the fees necessary to recover about half of the division’s operating costs by using the most recent data available on the number of Form 3 cable systems “and to reject ACA’s [American Cable Association] proposal for a hardship exception,” they said in joint reply comments to the Copyright Office (http://1.usa.gov/166j9mU). The proposed fees for satellite carriers “should also be adjusted to reflect the actual costs of administering the satellite license,” they said. The office lacks the authority under the statute to institute the “hardship” exception proposed by ACA, it said. The office has no basis for excluding certain costs “as ones that, in the Copyright Office’s view, principally benefit copyright owners,” it said. NCTA urged the office to adopt a conservative approach in establishing SOA filing fees. The association also urged the office to reject the copyright owners’ proposal to set the Form SA3 filing fee at $950, it said in its reply comments (http://1.usa.gov/WH4I1C). Instead, the office should establish a Form SA3 filing fee that is less than the $500 per form fee that the office initially proposed, NCTA said. “This cautious approach is warranted since the office has no prior experience with setting filing fees for cable and satellite SOAs.” DirecTV said that although it finds that the proposed schedule isn’t as reasonable as the original proposal, it doesn’t challenge the results and the office should not change it. The DBS company also opposed the copyright owners’ argument that satellite and cable filing fees should recover the “full operating costs” of the licensing division, “which are deducted from the royalty fees they receive from satellite carriers and cable operators,” it said (http://1.usa.gov/13EL7XH). But filing fees paid by copyright users and royalty fee deductions are different, it said: Filing fees are to be based solely on the costs of processing SOAs and royalties, “while royalty fee deductions are to be based on all licensing division operating costs."
CenturyLink still isn’t happy with the telecom reform and subsequent clarifications by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission in recent months. The PUC adopted its new rules, affecting high-cost support and rulings of effective competition, in December and clarified them in February after appeals from multiple stakeholders. But on Monday, CenturyLink filed a second appeal before the PUC (http://bit.ly/14pFKr1), focusing on regulatory obligations surrounding white pages listings. “It remains appropriate to require providers to furnish name, address, and telephone number information for the Automatic Location Identification database providers for the provision of 9-1-1 services and emergency notification services, because of public safety reasons, but white pages listings should not be required of one provider among many” in areas deemed effectively competitive (ECA), CenturyLink told the PUC. “Given the competitive landscape, however, in ECAs, the Commission should no longer regulate white pages directory listings, consistent with the deregulatory policies of Part 3 regulation. Certainly, the Commission should not saddle one competitor with a unique regulatory obligation that does not apply to other market participants.” White page listings shouldn’t be considered an essential part of local telephone service but rather a competitive distinguishing feature and outside the PUC’s regulations, at least in these effectively competitive areas, the telco said.
NARUC has extended the comment deadline on the draft principles set forth by its Telecom Task Force. The group issued the principles Feb. 19 and initially asked for comments by last Friday (CD Feb 20 p13). But the task force extended the commenting deadline through this Friday, a week after the original deadline, the association spokesman told us. The principles (http://bit.ly/10aM9t9) are part of a broader task force mission to revisit questions of federalism.
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Carper, D-Del., said in an interview at the Capitol Tuesday that Thursday’s joint cybersecurity hearing with the Commerce Committee is intended to examine how congressional policy can fill the gaps in President Barack Obama’s recent cybersecurity executive order. “We have an opportunity to drill down on this executive order to find out more about it and to begin hearing from others what’s good and what’s not so good. I liken the president’s executive order … to Medicare … and what Congress needs to do is pass a wraparound plan, not unlike Medigap, to fill in the blanks. My hope is that what comes out of this hearing will be information, guidance and counseling that will enable us to begin to formulate what that wraparound package would be, so we have a full and comprehensive privacy policy.” The committee announced Tuesday that Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and National Institute of Standards and Technology Director Patrick Gallagher will testify at the hearing scheduled for 2:30 p.m. in Room G-50 Dirksen. Also scheduled to testify are Greg Wilshusen, director-information security issues at the Government Accountability Office, and David Kepler, executive vice president of Dow Chemical. Carper would not offer a timeline for when he expects to introduce cybersecurity legislation this session: “We're not that far along yet,” he told reporters. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., recently said he’s planning to introduce a cybersecurity bill in April. Carper told reporters he’s had “some conversations” with House Republican cybersecurity leaders about legislation, including a meeting last week with House Cybersecurity Subcommittee Chairman Pat Meehan, R-Pa., and a meeting with House Homeland Security Chairman Mike McCaul, R-Texas, during a trip to Arizona last month. The House Homeland Security Committee plans a hearing on cybersecurity Wednesday at 10:30 a.m. in Room 311 Cannon. McCaul said in a press release Tuesday the hearing will explore how Congress can “build upon the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to prevent cyberattacks in a way that promotes U.S. commerce, while not hindering its expansion.” Napolitano is set to testify at the House hearing along with Anish Bhimani, chairman of the Financial Services Information Sharing and Analysis Center; Gary Haynes, chief information officer of Centerpoint Energy; Dean Garfield, president of the Information Technology Industry Council; and Michelle Richardson, legislative counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. “We're working to see where we can find common ground,” he said. Carper said some of the elements of last year’s Senate cybersecurity bill, like Federal Information Security Management Act reform, “are pretty non-controversial” and there is “broad agreement” on the need for better cybersecurity workforce training and development: “I think there is an understanding that we need to facilitate and encourage information sharing and we need to be mindful of the jeopardy that critical infrastructure faces.” But Carper said members of his caucus remain concerned about some “privacy issues” and liability protections for the business community: “We need to work those out. Can we? I think we can.”
The House Communications Subcommittee plans an oversight hearing on FirstNet at 10:30 a.m. March 14 in 2123 Rayburn, it said in a news release. Witnesses haven’t been announced. The subcommittee said it will also discuss “other emergency communications systems” used by public safety officials to communicate with the general public. Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., said earlier this year the panel would likely use the FirstNet hearing to take a general look into the effect that natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy had on the nation’s communications systems (CD Jan 24 p3).
The Senate Commerce Committee confirmed it plans an FCC oversight hearing with all five commissioners on March 12 at 2:30 p.m. in 253 Russell, as was expected (CD March 4 p6).
The FCC’s Emergency Access Advisory Committee’s charter ends July 14 instead of June 14, as previously announced, the FCC said Monday (http://bit.ly/YaYSFn). There was some confusion on this point at Friday’s EAAC meeting (CD March 4 p1). The FCC extended the group’s charter by six months in January. Members questioned at the meeting why the new end date was in June instead of July. The group is focusing on how next-generation 911 will work for those with disabilities.