NANC, Other FCC Advisory Groups in Limbo
A pattern of cancelled and never-scheduled meetings by FCC advisory panels has state regulators increasingly concerned, they said. The N. American Numbering Council (NANC)hasn’t met since Jan., with 3 meetings through Sept. cancelled by the Wireline Bureau. Panel members - whose mission is to explore numbering issues including area code exhaustion -- are asking why. FCC officials didn’t comment on the mostly empty 2006 NANC calendar.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Other FCC advisory panels also have stopped meeting, in what some see as a pattern. The Network Interoperability & Reliability Council, which in 2004-2005 met 3 times each year, hasn’t met this year. The Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age met in April to discuss designated entity rules for the AWS auction, but otherwise hasn’t met since 2004.
The NANC meeting record is “disturbing,” Comr. Anne Boyle of Neb., a NANC member, told us. “I can’t help but wonder if there are some at the FCC who don’t understand what the NANC does. We are a committee that has a history of anticipating problems, dealing with problems and bringing them to a conclusion before they become controversial.”
The NANC cancellations are getting attention thanks to an e-mail Boyle sent the Commission and copied to the committee distribution list, asking why NANC stopped meeting. She cited concerns about how numbering resources would fare under the Missoula Plan addressing intercarrier compensation reform, as well as VoIP’s effect. Boyle fears the Missoula Plan may spur wireless carriers to seek numbers in all rural markets, to qualify for reduced interconnection rate, she said.
Boyle contacted Martin’s office and others at the FCC but has gotten not satisfactory answer to her questions about why NANC isn’t meeting, she said. “One of the things we were told is that the FCC has a real busy schedule in September,” she said: “Another comment that was sent to us was the FCC didn’t see that there was anything to discuss.” In counterpoint to that claim, Boyle cited the potential effect of intercarrier compensation reform on numbering. “There is an issue that is staring us right in the face, that goes directly to the kind of work that we do, and someone at the FCC has decided that there is no reason to meet,” she said.
The FCC probably lacks the internal expertise to handle complicated numbering matters without NANC’s help, Boyle said. Some carriers would prefer industry oversight, she added: “But that would mean having the fox watch the chicken house.”
Jack Goldberg, vice chmn. of the Conn. Dept. of Public Utility Control, a member of NANC and NRIC, told us he has similar concerns. “Whether there is a deeper plot I have no idea. But I am concerned because these advisory bodies have an important role to play, each of them in their own way,” he said: “I can’t understand why they're not meeting… I worry that means the FCC is just reducing the importance of all these committees. I think that’s going to hurt the FCC.”
Goldberg doubts Martin would scuttle the advisory panels on purpose, he said. “I know he values these advisory groups. I find it hard to believe to believe he would degrade them,” Goldberg said: “A group such as NANC puts together all of the experts in the industry, really in the country, on matters of telephone numbering. There’s a wealth of knowledge and experience… Issues are fully vetted, fully discussed and it’s hard to see how the FCC could not profit from the advice.”
Comr. Curt Stamp of Ia., also on NANC, said working bodies address numbering issues when NANC isn’t meeting, holding regular meetings might make NANC more vital. “If nothing else, we get periodic updates as to what these working groups are doing,” Stamp said: “And I think it puts pressure on the working groups to continue to move issues forward if they know that by the Nov. meeting they have to have a report ready.”
NANC chmn. Robert Atkinson of the Columbia Institute for Tele-Information declined to comment Tues., citing his duty to remain neutral.
The e-mail Boyle sent to the NANC list was an “attention getter,” but lack of regular meetings probably isn’t slowing work on numbering matters, an industry expert said. “While there are plenty of numbering petitions and numbering issues that have been pending at the FCC, in some cases for years, I am not aware of any numbering issues that have been impacted -- for better or worse -- by the lack of NANC meetings,” the source said: “Should a numbering issue arise that is time sensitive, Atkinson has been quick to schedule a conference call outside of the normal NANC meeting schedule to address urgent issues. The lack of such conference calls would seem to confirm… that there are no pressing issues that require NANC resolution.”