Selected portions of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update, and/or the BloostonLaw Private Users Update —newsletters from the Law Offices of Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy & Prendergast, LLP are reproduced in this section with the firm's permission. 
| BloostonLaw Telecom Update | Vol. 17, No. 42 | October 22, 2014 |
Headlines Comment Sought on Broadband Speed, Latency Testing for High-Cost Support Recipients On October 16, 2014, the FCC issued a Public Notice seeking further comment on the methodology to be used to measure compliance by high-cost support recipients with their broadband speed and latency performance obligations regarding service to fixed locations. Comments will be due 30 days after the Public Notice appears in the Federal Register. Regarding broadband speed measurement, the FCC proposed a format similar to the testing process it adopted for latency testing by price cap carriers in 2013. Specifically, broadband speed measurements must be made once per hour during the peak 7:00 PM to 11:00 PM period for four consecutive weeks at a minimum of 50 randomly-selected customer locations within the recipient’s supported service area in a state. At least 95 percent of the observations are required to be at or above the required minimum speed. The FCC also asks whether broadband speed testing should be performed by internal network management system tool, and/or by external measurement tools (such as Speedtest/Ookla or Network Diagnostic Tests by M-Labs). It also lists the Measuring Broadband America (MBA) program as an option. By way of background, in October 2013, the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau established a round-trip latency standard of 100 milliseconds (ms) or less during the peak period (7:00 PM to 11:00 PM) between the customer premises and the nearest designated Internet core peering interconnection point (IXP) for price cap carriers that accept CAF Phase II model-based support. It set up a testing process that entailed measurements for at least two consecutive weeks during peak hours for at least 50 randomly-selected customer locations within a recipient’s service area in each state. Such measurements could be performed via existing network management systems, ping tests, other commonly available network measurement tools, or participation in the Measuring Broadband America (MBA) program. The MBA program currently tests the speed and latency of the wireline services of 15 large broadband providers via white-box devices deployed at individual customer locations. The FCC asks whether the MBA program could accommodate significant numbers of additional large and small broadband service providers, and whether it would be feasible and cost-effective for rate of return (RoR) carriers and other small providers to pay the white-box and administrative costs of MBA program participation. Regarding latency measurement, the FCC asserts that the latency testing options adopted for price cap carriers “should provide at least one readily achievable method suitable for small, rural carriers.” Clients will recall that the FCC proposed to extend its latency requirement to RoR carriers and to winners of reverse auctions in price cap areas in its June Omnibus USF Order. In the October 16 Public Notice, the FCC notes that rural carriers have expressed concern that they have no control over latency measurements that include middle mile facilities operated by unrelated carriers, but states that it has rejected similar arguments by price cap carriers because: (a) testing only part of a network will not measure the quality of service received by end users; and (b) price cap carriers have a number of options to influence the quality of service they receive from transit and peering providers. The FCC asked whether the same reasoning is applicable to RoR carriers. RoR clients should let us know of instances where RBOCs and other large carriers have been somewhat less than cooperative in responding to requests for improved middle mile and similar facilities. Thus far, the Public Notice appears to be yet one more instance of the FCC imposing increased compliance costs upon RoR carriers that are already struggling to upgrade their broadband facilities and services in the face of budgeted high-cost support at 2011 levels and intercarrier compensation decreasing at 5 percent per year. Repeated assertions that increased reporting and testing costs decrease the net resources available for broadband deployment seem to be ignored. However, it is worth noting that the Public Notice does contain an alternative FCC-Developed Testing Program whereby USAC would contract and pay for some or all of the equipment and services necessary to conduct broadband speed and latency testing. The FCC estimates that such program would cost $4.2 million during its first year and $5.9 million per year thereafter, and that USAC could pick up at least $1.3 million per year of the costs. Finally, the FCC indicated that broadband speed and/or latency audits could be triggered by failures to file the required annual certifications and/or by failures of the test measurements to meet the minimum standards. It also asked whether complaints by customers and/or public watchdog organizations should trigger audits. FCC Issues Paging and Radiotelephone Compliance Reminder; Asks for Comment on Technical Changes The FCC has issued a Public Notice, reminding Part 22 licensees of several rules that the FCC must feel are not always being followed; and the Commission’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau is seeking comments on any technical or operational flexibility that the Commission may provide that might result in more intensive use of the band. Comments are due December 17, 2014 and reply comments are due January 19, 2015. Clients trying to make more effective use of their Part 22 channels for dispatch, data and other services should take this opportunity to advocate rule changes that would help this cause. In the meantime, it is advisable that Part 22 licensees check to ensure their compliance with the following rules that the FCC is focused on, since a warning shot such as the Public Notice is likely to be setting the stage for enforcement efforts. Licensees authorized in the Part 22 Paging and Radiotelephone Service generally have the authority to operate various voice and data services, and they must comply with all applicable Part 20 and 22 rules. While the small number of channels allocated under Part 22 were originally intended for paging and the now defunct IMTS service, licensees have been looking to make more creative use of this spectrum now that the demand for traditional paging service is at an all-time low. Several companies are using these frequencies for trunking, sometimes pursuant to an FCC waiver, to fill the void left by Nextel. The FCC is reminding licensees to obey are the following Part 22 Rules unless they have been granted a waiver by the FCC: - Channel bandwidth . Unless otherwise indicated, all channels have a bandwidth of 20 kHz and are designated by their center frequencies in megahertz. The paging channel spacing may be more than 20 kHz, but the authorized channel bandwidth as specified by the rules is 20 kHz (10 kHz to each side of the center frequency).
- Emission limitations . Under Part 22, the power of any emission outside of the authorized operating frequency ranges must be attenuated below the transmitting power by at least 43 + 10 log (P) dB. Alternative out of band emission limits may be established at specified frequencies (band edges) in specified geographical areas pursuant to a private contractual arrangement among all affected licensees and applicants, and must be disclosed to the FCC, upon request.
- Effective radiated power limits . The effective radiated power (ERP) of transmitters operating on paging channels must not exceed the limits in section 22.535.
- Permissible operations . The channel assignments listed in section 22.531 are allocated for one-way paging operations. Paired channels listed in section 22.561 are for one-way or two-way mobile operations.
- Permissible communications paths . Mobile stations may communicate only with and through base stations. Base stations may communicate only with mobile stations and receivers on land or surface vessels.
- Equipment authorization . All the equipment operated in Part 22 paging must have been certified by the Commission under applicable Part 22 paging rules.
- Protection of existing service. Pursuant to section 22.537 or section 22.567, all facilities authorized to operate pursuant to a paging geographic area authorization (i.e., an auction license) must provide co-channel interference protection to all authorized site-based co-channel facilities of incumbent licensees within the paging geographic area.
- Equipment authorization. All the equipment operated in Part 22 paging must have been certified by the Commission under applicable Part 22 paging rules.
- Protection of existing service. Pursuant to section 22.537 or section 22.567, all facilities authorized to operate pursuant to a paging geographic area authorization (i.e., an auction license) must provide co-channel interference protection to all authorized site-based co-channel facilities of incumbent licensees within the paging geographic area.
- Canadian border: Licensees planning to operate transmitters north of Line A are first required to obtain Canadian clearance by filing an application for modification of their license(s), including the technical parameters of the planned site, in order for the Bureau to coordinate planned operations with Industry Canada.
The Wireless Bureau recognizes that additional technical and operational flexibility may promote more intensive use of the licenses, and therefore seeks comment on whether it is appropriate to update the Paging and Radiotelephone Service rules to provide flexibility in the types of uses and technologies that can operate on these channels (such as narrowband equipment, or using offset frequencies between the traditional channels). For example, the FCC recently modified its Part 90 Private Radio rules to permit the use of Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA) equipment in certain portions of two bands – the 450-470 MHz portion of the UHF band (421-512 MHz), and Business/Industrial Land Transportation 800 MHz band channels (809-824/854-869 MHz). However, use of TETRA equipment on Part 22 frequencies may violate channel bandwidth and emission limitations rules. The Bureau asks whether the Part 22 rules should be updated to permit technologies like TETRA. As a further example, licensees planning to deploy transmitters north of Line A are required to first obtain Canadian clearance. Some licensees, who are unable to get Canadian clearance on the center frequency, may wish to use offset frequencies in order to get Canadian approval. Use of frequency offsets may violate channel bandwidth and emission limitation rules. The Bureau asks whether flexibility in channel bandwidths would be useful in these instances and under what conditions. Interested clients that wish to file comments or participate in group comments should contact us promptly. VoIP Phone Systems Can be Subject to Hacking, Leaving Businesses with Huge Losses News outlets are reporting that over the past year, communications fraud involving VoIP systems has resulted in almost $4.75 billion dollars in fraudulent phone calls to premium-rate telephone numbers in foreign countries such as Somalia, Gambia and the Maldives. The scams are reportedly perpetrated by hackers without the knowledge of the business owner by breaking into the Internet connected phone network over a weekend or holiday when the businesses are typically closed and routing hundreds of calls to premium-rate telephone numbers that have been leased by criminal organizations. Because hackers are using high speed computers, they are able to make hundreds of calls at the same time, which increase the charges to the unwary business exponentially. In some cases, small businesses have been saddled with fraudulent phone charges as high as $200,000. As a result of this fraudulent activity, there have been calls from Congress for the FCC and law enforcement to take action against fraudsters, but to date, there apparently has not been much movement or interest. If you are using a VoIP system for your telephone system, it is critical that you have protections in place to prevent hackers from gaining access to your system over the Internet. Protections can include disabling any call-forwarding features, and requiring strong passwords for voice mail systems and for placing international calls. Essentially, experts are saying that VoIP phone systems should be treated like any other computer device that is connected to the Internet. Our clients providing VoIP-based services will also want to work with liability counsel about communicating this risk, and potential remedies, to their customers. Part 90 Class B Signal Booster Registration Due Nov. 1; FCC Modifies Technical Rules The FCC has announced that Part 90 licensees and signal booster operators that operate or intend to operate Part 90 Class B private land mobile (non-consumer) signal boosters will be required to register existing signal boosters with the Commission by November 1, 2014. Part 90 Class B signal boosters are devices that are designed to increase signal penetration for licensed Part 90 radio facilities. Any new Class B signal boosters installed on or after November 1, 2014 must be registered before the device can be operated. Registration will be made electronically and paper filings will not be accepted. The use of a Part 90 Class B signal booster after November 1, 2014 could result in the imposition of substantial monetary forfeitures for unauthorized operation of a transmitter. If you have a signal booster that requires registration, please contact our office for assistance. In a related matter, the FCC recently released its Order on Reconsideration and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in which it modified the rules that affect the manufacturing and distribution of service provider signal boosters (which are typically used for cellular systems) and for consumer signal boosters. The most relevant change that could affect our clients is the labeling restriction for consumer signal boosters. This restriction requires that the sentence “[t]his device may ONLY be operated in a fixed location for in-building use” be listed in four locations: (1) in any on-line listing, in point-of-sale marketing materials; (2) in any user/owner’s manual or installation instructions; (3) on the packaging; and (4) on a label affixed to the booster itself. Additionally, the FCC has added technical requirements for mobile provider-specific Consumer Signal Boosters, which include: stronger noise limits, stronger gain limits if the device is directly connected or using direct contact coupling; and maximum gain limitations for signal boosters of 58 dB (for frequencies below 1 GHz) and 65 dB (for frequencies above 1 GHz) if an inside antenna is used and the booster has both an automatic gain adjustment based on isolation measurements between the booster donor and server antenna with automatic feedback cancellation. Finally, the Commission has indicated that it will apply the “antenna kitting rule” to all Provider-Specific Consumer Signal Boosters so that all boosters are sold together with antennas, cables, and/or coupling devices that meet the FCC’s requirements for use with signal booster equipment.
Law & Regulation FBI Requests CALEA Revisions To Require Surveillance “Backdoor” For Cellphones FBI Director James Comey has asked Congress to update the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (“CALEA”) to require smart phone developers to build “backdoors” for law enforcement surveillance into all devices. This appears to be a response to the customer data encryption standards recently adopted by Apple and Google.
As clients remember, CALEA was a major mid-1990s initiative to enable law enforcement to access wireline and wireless voice networks for surveillance purposes. Whereas law enforcement interest in CALEA has appeared to wane during the last decade, the FBI seems to be exploring a potential revival and expansion of CALEA in order to improve its surveillance access to smart phones and other new technologies. Opponents are raising privacy concerns, as well as fears that the presence of surveillance “backdoors” would hurt the sales of smart phones in the United States as well as in international markets.
With the current Congress terminating at the end of 2014, no specific CALEA amendments will be introduced until the next Congress organizes itself in January 2015. Any such CALEA modifications will be controversial. Their scope and potential enactment, plus the speed of their consideration, will depend much upon the composition of the next Congress as well as future domestic and international events. FCC Initiates Inquiry on Fifth Generation (5G) Mobile Services The FCC last week adopted a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) to examine the potential use of spectrum bands above 24 GHz (so-called “millimeter wave” or “mmW” spectrum) for extremely high-speed Fifth Generation (5G) mobile services. Initial comments on the item ( FCC 14-154 ) are due December 16, 2014 with reply comments due by January 15, 2105. “Today’s NOI begins our formal inquiry into this technology – asking many detailed questions about how it works, and how it is different from current technology,” said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler in a prepared statement. “The NOI also is designed to develop a record about how these technologies fit into our existing regulatory structures, including how they can be authorized, to make sure we are facilitating and not unduly burdening their further development.” By way of background, most mobile networks today use spectrum bands below 3 GHz primarily due to the favorable propagation characteristics of that spectrum and suitability of these lower frequency spectrum bands to current technology. For example, Cellular Radiotelephone Service uses the 845-890 MHz bands, Personal Communications Service and Advanced Wireless Services utilize spectrum in the 1.7-2.1 GHz range, and the Broadband Radio Service utilizes spectrum in the 2.5 GHz range. However, as technology has developed, some equipment manufacturers are now developing ways to provide non-line-of-sight services in spectrum bands previously thought to be limited to fixed point-to-point or point-to-multipoint use (such as 24 GHz, LMDS, 39 GHz and the 79/80 GHz bands). These higher frequency bands are most likely to be used in areas where traffic demands exceed available capacity, such as urban areas, event venues, and other locations experiencing congestion due to high density use. Among other research, field trials of mmW mobile service are being conducted at New York University and the University of Texas with funding from the U.S. Army and Samsung. Those trials found that 39 GHz mobile base stations can sustain 100 percent coverage in cells with a 200-meter radius in high-density urban areas. As of yet, there no consensus definition of 5G, but researchers believe it should accommodate an eventual 1000-fold increase in traffic demand, supporting high-bandwidth content with speeds in excess of 10 gigabits per second (Gb/s); end-to-end transmission delays (latency) of less than one-thousandth of a second; and, in the same networks, sporadic, low-data-rate transmissions among an “Internet of things.” Standards bodies and industry groups are working to complete the preparation of 5G technical standards in the 2016-2018 timeframe, with initial deployment of services using these technologies expected around 2020. The purposes of the FCC’s proceeding include learning about the development status of enabling technologies that are essential to build mobile broadband networks in frequencies above 24 GHz, identifying mmW bands that could be suitable for the provision of so-called 5G mobile services, and exploring the technical challenges that deployment of a new generation of mobile technology will present. We will follow this proceeding with interest and keep our clients apprised of developments and opportunities as they arise.
Industry FCC Releases Internet Access Services Report; Local Telephone Competition Report On October 16 the FCC released its Internet Access Services Report and its Local Telephone Competition Report. These reports summarize information about Internet access and telephone services in the United States as December 31, 2013, respectively, as collected by FCC Form 477. According to a press release on the two reports, highlights include: - The number of connections with downstream speeds of at least 10 Mbps increased by 104% over December 2012, from 60 million to 122 million connections, including 64 million fixed connections and 58 million mobile connections.
- The number of mobile subscriptions with speeds over 200 kbps in at least one direction grew from 169 million to 197 million – up 17% from December 2012.
- In voice services, there were 85 million end-user switched access lines in service, 48 million interconnected VoIP subscriptions, and 311 million mobile voice subscriptions, or 444 million retail local telephone service connections in total as of December 31, 2013.
- Over the three years between December 2010 and December 2013, interconnected VoIP subscriptions increased at a compound growth rate of 15%, mobile voice subscriptions increased at a compound annual growth rate of 3%, and retail switched access lines declined at 10% a year.
A copy of the full Internet Access Services Report can be found here , and a copy of the full Local Telephone Competition Report can be found here . Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Releases Report on 911 Outages At its October 17 Open Meeting, the FCC considered a Report and Recommendations item prepared by the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (Bureau) regarding a series of 911 outages that took place on April 9. Specifically, the report addresses an outage caused by a software coding error in a 911 call-routing facility in Englewood, Colorado, which caused the facility to stop directing emergency calls to eighty-one 911 call centers (Public Safety Answering Points or PSAPs) in seven states: California, Florida, Minnesota, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington. The outage reportedly resulted in a loss of 911 service for more than 11 million people for up to six hours. Over 6,600 calls to 911 never reached a PSAP, though fortunately no one died in the incident. Recommendations include: - Develop and Implement NG911 Transition Best Practices : The transition to NG911 introduces new technologies, service arrangements and business relationships into the 911 ecosystem, adding complexity that heightens the risk of a widespread outage with the potential to affect multiple states. The Bureau’s inquiry has shed light on a number of measures that providers can take to improve service reliability during this transition. The Bureau recommends that the Commission charge CSRIC with developing and refining a comprehensive set of best practices in this area.
- Further FCC Proceedings on 911 Reliability : The Commission should conduct further proceedings as necessary to ensure that reliability of 911 service in the United States continues to promote the safety of life and property by maintaining pace with evolving technologies and challenges, and that both incumbent 911 service providers and new entrants remain fully accountable to the public they serve.
- Intergovernmental and Stakeholder Information Sharing : The transition to NG911 creates a need for closer coordination of evolving practices and expectations regarding 911 among all governmental and commercial entities, as well as a broad-based understanding among all stakeholders regarding the status of deployment of NG911 from all stakeholders involved.
- Situational Awareness : All parties involved in 911 end-to-end call completion, as well as appropriate public safety authorities, need to take steps to improve situational awareness during an outage.
• Exercise of Enforcement Powers : The Commission should use enforcement action as necessary to safeguard reliable end-to-end 911 service. 911 service providers must remain vigilant and ensure compliance with the Commission’s 911 requirements, including outage reporting requirements, particularly as they transition to NG911 networks. - Contractual Relationship Monitoring : Primary 911 service providers should monitor their contractual relationships to establish clear operational roles and responsibilities for situational awareness and information sharing, and exercise operational oversight with respect to their subcontractors and implement the appropriate mechanisms to retain meaningful controls.
A full copy of the report can be found here . Calendar At-a-Glance October
Oct. 1 – FCC Form 477 due (Local Competition and Broadband Reporting) .*
Oct. 14 – Deadline for applications for rural broadband experiments .*
Oct. 27 – Comment deadline for FirstNet RFI.
Oct. 27 – Comments are due on the Healthcare Connect Fund Public Notice. November
Nov. 1 – Deadline for Part 90 Licensees and Signal Boosters to register existing signal boosters.
Nov. 3 – FCC Form 499-Q (Quarterly Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet) is due.
Nov. 3 – Reply comments are due on IP Captioning proceeding.
Nov. 7 – Deadline for Rural Broadband Experiments Applications (6 p.m. EST).
Nov. 7 – Nominations and statements of interest for PSAP Architecture Task Force are due.
Nov. 10 – Auction 97 Mock Auction.
Nov. 10 – Responses to CAF Phase II Challenges are due.
Nov. 10 – Reply comments are due on the Healthcare Connect Fund Public Notice.
Nov. 10 – Comments on electronic delivery of license authorizations and ASR registrations are due.
Nov. 13 – Auction 97 begins.
Nov. 14 – Comments are due on USDA Notice on Changes to Guaranteed Loan Program Regulations.
Nov. 14 – Comments are due on Part 32 Accounting Rules NPRM. December
Dec. 1 – Deadline to Increase Residential Rate Floor to $16.
Dec. 15 – Deadline for Special Access Data Collection.
Dec. 15 – Reply comments are due on Part 32 Accounting Rules NPRM.
Dec. 17 – Comments are due on Part 22 Technical Changes. January
Jan. 19 – Reply comments on Part 22 Technical Changes are due. * These deadlines have been suspended indefinitely. New deadlines have not been set at this time. | 
David George and Bill Noyes
