Connect with us

FCC

NARUC Panel Explores Network Neutrality

WASHINGTON, February 15, 2011 – The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Committee on Telecommunications convened a panel of industry experts Monday morning to discuss the Federal Communications Commission’s recently issued Open Internet Order and its legal ramifications.

Published

on

WASHINGTON, February 15, 2011 – The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Committee on Telecommunications convened a panel of industry experts Monday morning to discuss the Federal Communications Commission’s recently issued Open Internet Order and its legal ramifications.

The panel of experts ranged from industry representatives such as Mike Skerivan from Fairpoint, a local exchange carrier, to Harold Feld from the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge. All of the participants agreed that while the Open Internet Order is not perfect, the Commission needed to act on the issue of network neutrality.  With the Order issued, the FCC can now move onto other issues.

Jennie Chandra, Senior Policy Counsel at Windstream a rural broadband provider expressed her disappointment that the Order separated wireline and wireless providers. Chandra claimed that the order forces wireline providers to follow rules from which wireless providers are exempt, such as network management techniques. By separating wireline and wireless, a serious market imbalance will occur, she claimed, adding that while the market for wireless continues to grow, it should face the same regulations as wireline since it provides the same service.

Feld stated that the order, while powerful, could have gone further to protect consumers and he would have preferred to see the implementation of Chairman Genachowski’s Third Way proposal. The Third way would have allowed the FCC to  forge a middle ground between using ancillary authority under Title I regulation and stricter Title II requirements. In contrast the Open Internet Order relies heavily on Title I.

When asked about Verizon’s recent appeal against the FCC challenging the Order, Feld said that the suit was filed prematurely. Verizon, he said, must wait for the Federal Register to publish the Order before the carrier can pursue any legal action. The publishing date will most likely be in three months due to a backlog at the Office of Management and Budget.  The agency must review the order to ensure it follows paperwork reduction and transparency rules.

Rick Cimerman from National Cable & Telecommunications Association postulated that “Verizon wanted the case to be heard in the [United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit] since they ruled against the FCC in the BitTorrent Comcast case.”

Commissioner John Burke from the Vermont Public Service Board asked the panel what they thought of the bills currently in Congress.

“If the House bill in opposition to network neutrality were passed it would never pass the Senate, ” said Chandra, adding that if the bill did somehow make it through Congress, the President would not likely sign it.

Cimerman noted that at least for now, net neutrality simply is not a priority item for most of Congress.

“Network neutrality is an important issue to [the telecommunications community],” he said, “but the House is more concerned with overturing healthcare and financial reform.”

Feld brought up the point that the House could undermine the Open Internet Order by underfunding the FCC or simply preventing  the FCC to use any of its budget for the enforcement of the rules. He then agreed with Cimerman that the house could use its budgetary authority to undermine network neutrality that this is highly unlikely due to the importance of other issues.

Rahul Gaitonde has been writing for BroadbandBreakfast.com since the fall of 2009, and in May of 2010 he became Deputy Editor. He was a fellow at George Mason University’s Long Term Governance Project, a researcher at the International Center for Applied Studies in Information Technology and worked at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. He holds a Masters of Public Policy from George Mason University, where his research focused on the economic and social benefits of broadband expansion. He has written extensively about Universal Service Fund reform, the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program and the Broadband Data Improvement Act

FCC

FCC to Consider ‘Rapid Response Team’ for Pole Attachment Disputes at December Meeting

Proposed rules would also put more limits on when utilities can pass full replacement costs to telecom companies.

Published

on

Photo of a utility pole by Scott Akerman.

WASHINGTON, November 28, 2023 – The Federal Communications Commission is considering setting up a “rapid response team” to resolve pole attachment disputes, according to a public draft of the proposed rules.

The Rapid Broadband Assessment Team, or RBAT, would be available to resolve disagreements that “impede or delay broadband deployment,” according to the proposed rules. The team would be responsible for quickly engaging both sides of a pole attachment dispute and working to find a solution, which can include staff-supervised mediation.

If the parties cannot come to an agreement, the RBAT can place their dispute on the commission’s “Accelerated Docket,” meaning the FCC would adjudicate the issue in under 60 days. Not all disputes are eligible for the Accelerated Docket, as the tight time constraint makes it difficult to resolve novel or complex cases.

The commission is also considering requiring utility companies to provide attachers with their most recent pole inspection information. That’s an effort to avoid disputes before they start, according to the proposed rules.

Expanding broadband networks often involves attaching equipment to poles owned by utility companies. The arrangement has led to ongoing disputes on replacement costs and other issues between telecommunications and utility companies.

The FCC has authority under the 1996 Communications Act to set the terms of those pole attachment deals and is looking to have a system in place for expediting disputes ahead of the Biden administration’s $42.5 billion broadband expansion effort. That authority only stretches to the 26 states that have not passed their own laws on pole attachments.

Pole replacement costs

On pole replacement costs, one of the more contentious pole attachment issues, the proposed rules place more limits on when a utility can force an attacher to pay in full for a replacement pole. The commission’s standing policy prevents pole owners from passing off replacement costs if the new pole is not “necessitated solely” by an attacher’s equipment.

Since the commission first sought comment on the issue in 2022, telecommunications companies have argued that utilities unfairly pass the entire cost of replacement on to them, even when poles are already unsafe and would need to be replaced regardless. Utilities say they would not normally replace the poles being used by telecom companies, either because they are structurally sound or to phase out old lines, and don’t benefit from the installation of newer poles.

The draft rules would expand the commission’s definition of a “red tagged” pole, the replacement of which cannot be allocated entirely to an attacher. Under current FCC rules, a red tagged pole is one that is out of compliance with safety regulations and has been placed on a utility’s replacement schedule.

The updated definition would do away with the compliance requirement, defining a red tagged pole as one flagged for replacement for any reason other than its inability to support extra telecom equipment.

The proposed rules also explicitly clarify some situations in which replacements are not “necessitated solely” by new telecom equipment, including when a pole fails engineering standards or is already on a replacement schedule.

In addition, the rules specify that when an already defective pole needs to be replaced with a larger pole to accommodate new equipment, the attacher would only be responsible for the extra cost of the larger pole, not the cost of an equivalent pole.

If the proposed rules are approved, the FCC would also look for comments on processing bulk pole attachment applications and on changing rules on when attachers can do their own work to prepare a pole for attachments.

The measures will be voted on at the commission’s December 13 meeting.

Continue Reading

FCC

FCC Aims to Combat Video Service ‘Junk’ Fees

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel proposes a new way to eliminate junk fees.

Published

on

Photo of Jessica Rosenworcel courtesy the FCC

November 21, 2023 – The head of the Federal Communications Commission announced Tuesday a proposal to eliminate video service junk fees incurred by cable operators and direct broadcast satellite service providers.

The proposal by Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel would prohibit cable operators and DBS providers from charging subscribers early contract termination fees and require those providers to issue a prorated credit or rebate for remaining days in a monthly billing cycle after cancellation. 

It will be voted on at the commission’s open meeting next month. 

“Because these fees may have the effect of limiting consumer choice after a contract is enacted, it may negatively impact competition for services in the marketplace,” said a press release. 

“No one wants to pay junk fees for something they don’t want or can’t use.  When companies charge customers early termination fees, it limits their freedom to choose the service they want,” said Rosenworcel. 

In October, President Joe Biden addressed his administration’s effort to combat junk fees, part of a larger goal to provide consumers choice by way of cost reduction outlined in an executive order on which was signed into effect in July of 2021. 

Continue Reading

FCC

FCC to Vote on Pole Attachments at December Meeting

Telecom and utility companies have been clashing on replacement costs.

Published

on

Photo of utility poles from Flickr user Chic Bee.

WASHINGTON, November 21, 2023 – The Federal Communications Commission announced on Tuesday that it will consider rules on pole attachments at its December meeting.

The commission first sought comment on the issue in March 2022. It asked stakeholders for input on how costs should be allocated when utility poles need to be replaced to accommodate new telecommunications equipment. 

Utility and telecom companies have strong positions on the issue. They have submitted over 4,100 comments to the FCC so far and are continuing to lobby, with AT&T and the cable company trade group NCTA meeting with commission staff in recent weeks.

Telecommunications companies have argued to the FCC that utilities unfairly pass the entire cost of replacement on to them, even when poles are already unsafe and would need to be replaced regardless. Utilities, for their part, say they would not normally replace the poles being used by telecom companies, either because they are structurally sound or to phase out old lines, and don’t benefit from the arrangement.

The commission has authority over the pole attachment deals between utility companies and telecom carriers. That does not include publicly owned utilities or broadband providers that solely provide internet. State laws also preempt the FCC’s authority – 24 states have their own guidelines for such deals.

FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement that the proposed rules would “make the pole attachment process faster, more transparent, and more cost-effective.” The commission did not respond to a request for comment on the specifics of the rules.

Lawmakers and industry groups have been pushing the commission to issue rules since the comment period ended last year. In April, more than a dozen major telecom companies pushed the commission to issue rules ahead of projects funded by the Biden administration’s $42.5 billion broadband expansion program, citing potential hold ups from pole disputes.

Canadian regulators ruled on the issue in February, requiring pole owners to bear at least half the cost to replace a pole before attaching telecom equipment. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission found that pole owners do stand to benefit from newer poles.

Continue Reading

Signup for Broadband Breakfast News



Broadband Breakfast Research Partner

Trending