An FCC report showing a bump in 911 fee diversion in 2020 frustrated former Commissioner Mike O'Rielly and the National Emergency Number Association (NENA). The agency reported that some states diverted more than $207 million in 2020. Don’t adopt a safe harbor or grace period to comply with the fee diversion order, said CTIA in comments posted Friday in docket 20-291 (see 2112210037). CTIA opposed petitions for reconsideration from Colorado’s Boulder Regional Emergency Telephone Service Authority and City of Aurora 911 Authority, saying the requests would “undermine Congress’s intent.”
A draft FCC NPRM would require ISPs to disclose certain information to consumers through a broadband label, if approved during the agency's January meeting, said a fact sheet Thursday (see 2201050057). Other drafts include an order updating the E-rate program's rules to ensure tribal libraries' access to the program, an order updating political programming rules, an NPRM updating equipment authorization rules, and an order resolving "pending issues" on white space spectrum.
The FCC has a "robust agenda" for the agency's January meeting, Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel blogged Wednesday. This year is "going to be a busy and productive year at the FCC," she wrote. On tap is a proposal to establish "simple-to-understand broadband labels," an order addressing E-rate for tribal libraries, and updates on political programming, white space spectrum and equipment authorization rules.
With enrollment now open for the FCC’s affordable connectivity program and the transition from the emergency broadband benefit program underway, some consumer advocacy groups told us they're concerned that EBB-enrolled households could face a bill shock or lose their benefit entirely if required to affirmatively opt in to receive the new benefit. Several questions remain because the FCC hasn't issued rules for the new program and the higher subsidy amount is set to end March 1.
Alternative connect America cost model I (A-CAM), rural broadband experiment, and Alaska plan support recipients may continue pretesting 70% of Universal Service Administrative Co.-selected samples for the first two quarters of 2022, said an FCC Wireline Bureau order Monday in docket 10-90 granting in part NTCA’s request for an extension of a similar waiver (see 2012210050). It on its own extended similar relief to A-CAM II, Connect America Fund broadband loop support and CAF II auction recipients. The bureau "[agreed] that the global semiconductor shortage has caused delays in both the manufacture and the delivery of equipment,” encouraging carriers to "move as swiftly as possible to test their full sample size." The bureau granted REV Broadband's request to waive pretesting requirements for its subsidiaries receiving CAF broadband support loop support for Q1, citing the "lingering effects of Hurricane Ida." It denied NTCA's request to adopt a "simplified waiver process" and extend the pretesting period for A-CAM, rural broadband experiment, and Alaska plan carriers.
Provider participation in the FCC’s affordable connectivity program is likely to be at a higher level than for the emergency broadband benefit program, we’re told (see 2112090061). Some industry groups said more providers may elect to participate since the new program is designed to be longer term than EBB.
Industry and advocacy groups are preparing comments by the Jan. 18 deadline for an FCC notice of inquiry on its report to Congress on the future of USF (see 2112160074). The document is due by August on the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s impact on existing programs and what they should look like moving forward.
Industry and deaf and hard of hearing advocates asked the FCC to let IP relay providers recoup costs for outreach and marketing to users from the Telecom Relay Service Fund, in comments posted Tuesday in docket 03-123 (see 2108050038). The move to establish a new compensation methodology stemmed from a 2018 petition for rulemaking by T-Mobile, the sole remaining IP relay provider.
Disagreement continued between inmate calling service providers and advocates on the ICS rate-making process, in replies posted Monday in docket 12-375 (see 2109290074). Permanent caps “should be substantially lower than the current interim caps,” said the Prison Policy Initiative, asking the FCC to “prioritize the issue of USF relief for ICS customers.” PPI finds “that facility size does not correlate to costs and should be considered by the FCC as a rebuttal to the ICS providers’ argument that size impacts costs,” said 33 organizations led by the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. Make a list of ancillary fees that can and can’t be charged to ICS users, said NCIC. The fee caps the FCC previously adopted “have been subverted by certain ICS providers,” it said. All security and surveillance costs “are not inextricably intertwined with telecom costs,” said Worth Rises. Global Tel*Link said they’re “an integral part of ICS.” Consider a "brief pause" on additional reform to "allow for the collection of accurate and reliable data," said Pay Tel. The National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates backed comments opposing security and surveillance costs being included in the rate-setting process. Require providers refund account holders after inactivity or an incarcerated person’s release, said the Wright Petitioners, Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, United Church of Christ and Public Knowledge. The record “unanimously confirms the commission’s legal authority under Section 225 of the [Communications] Act extends to incarcerated people with disabilities,” said deaf and hard of hearing advocates led by Telecommunications for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. ICS providers and facilities “can readily provide modern forms of TRS, including VRS,” the groups said. ZP Better Together recommended a registration system for VRS providers to create an account to provide services to a correctional facility.
The FCC made several changes to its final NPRM establishing a central online portal for E-rate's competitive bidding process, according to our analysis of the draft (see 2112140062). Commissioners approved the item during the agency's December meeting, held on Tuesday. Among the changes are questions on whether a bidding portal would "help to promote fair and open competitive bidding and reduce fraud." The item also seeks comment on "how great the risk is that applicants or service providers may alter or ignore qualified bids to affect the bidding process." The NPRM asks whether the bidding portal should be treated as a "repository for bids that would permit applicants to upload bids received after the fact, but would not require service providers to submit bids through the portal." It also seeks comment on how the portal would interact with state and local procurement rules or procedures. There's a question about moving the portal's launch date to 2024 instead of the initially proposed 2025, a change sought by Commissioner Brendan Carr.