Selected portions [sometimes more — sometimes less] 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 of The Wireless Messaging News with the firm’s permission. Contact information is included at the end of the newsletter.

REMINDER: Study Area Boundary Certifications are due June 30

On June 5, the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau issued a Public Notice announcing the new filing deadline, as well as streamlined filing procedures, for the biennial recertification of study area boundary data. This year’s biennial study area boundary data recertification is due June 30. ILECs and state commissions that have uploaded and certified new boundaries between December 31, 2016 and March 15, 2017 are not required to recertify their data this year. All other ILECs and state commissions responsible for study area boundary information must recertify their information.

Normally due in May, the recertification was delayed this year because the FCC introduced a new, web-based statement of recertification that allows ILECs to electronically recertify their study area boundary data. After an ILEC has confirmed that the FCC’s study area boundary map information is correct, the ILEC must log into the site at https://www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fcc-user-login.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

Headlines

Comments Filed in Broadband Infrastructure Proceedings

Initial comments in the FCC’s wireline (WC Docket No. 17-84) and wireless (WT Docket No. 17-79) were filed on June 15. Reply comments in both proceedings are due July 17.

Highlights from the wireline proceeding comments included:

• NTCA supported condensed make-ready timeframes for pole attachment, revised make-ready cost structure for new attachers, and a pole access complaint “shot clock.” NTCA urged the FCC to create a model “Best Practices” to streamline state and federal permitting processes under the NHPA and NEPA. NTCA also raised the issue of railroad crossing fees for broadband providers. Finally, NTCA asked the FCC to clarify that 214 discontinuance does not apply to expansions to the network, but only actual reductions.
• WTA argued that 214 discontinuance should not apply to broadband upgrades, and supported targeted reductions to 214(a) timelines and procedures. With regard to pole attachments, WTA supported certain revisions, such as requiring pole owners to develop and maintain online data bases listing relevant information regarding their poles and setting a just and reasonable pole attachment rate formula for incumbent local exchange carrier attachers, while also mandating reciprocal access by ILECs and competitive local exchange carriers to each other’s poles. WTA also supported establishing an expedited process for the filing, consideration and resolution of pole attachment complaints.
• Verizon championed its one-touch make-ready approach as an alternative to pole attachment, and argued that the FCC should hold that ILECs are entitled to the same telecom rate as other attachers. Verizon also supported the exclusion of capital costs from pole attachment rates. Verizon supported various revisions to the copper retirement rules, but did not strongly advocate for the elimination of all of them. Verizon also supported non-application of 214 discontinuance requirements where alternative services are available.
• CenturyLink urged caution when it came to revising the pole attachment rules, but supported streamlining and outright repeal of copper retirement, general network change notification, and 214 discontinuance processes.
• USTelecom proposed supported the adoption of a shot clock when it came to pole attachment rules, and urged the FCC to address “prohibitive pole attachment rates charged by municipalities and cooperatives.” USTelecom also argued that the FCC should streamline copper retirement requirements, and limit 214 discontinuance requirements to “low-speed services.” USTelecom also supported preemption as a tool to accelerate broadband deployment.
• AT&T supported some reductions to pole attachment timelines, such as the estimate stage, but opposed reductions to others, such as the survey stage. AT&T also urged caution with regard to the adoption of any “one-touch make ready” approach, which Verizon supports. AT&T supported the elimination of most of the copper retirement requirements, and automatic-grant procedures for 214 discontinuance of legacy services.

An article discussing highlights from the wireless proceeding comments will be included in next week’s edition of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

NTCA and USTelecom Seek Forbearance on Broadband USF Contributions for Rural LECs

On June 14, NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) and the United States Telecom Association (USTelecom) filed a Petition for Forbearance for “targeted, temporary forbearance” from the application of USF contribution requirements for rural local exchange carrier (RLEC) provision of broadband Internet access services (BIAS), pending the completion of comprehensive USF contribution reform.

Specifically, the petitioners refer to the FCC’s 2005 finding that although facilities-based wireline BIAS was an information service, providers that were offering it as a common carrier service may choose to continue to do so, provided that they remain subject to USF contribution requirements. While this allowed those carriers making the election to obtain cost recovery, petitioners argue that it subjected them to disparate and discriminatory treatment. Therefore, the petitioners request that the FCC “treat these specific broadband services the same as all other broadband services are treated pending further final determinations with respect to these issues.”

According to the petitioners, granting the petition:

1. will eliminate the current disparate and discriminatory treatment of one discrete class of broadband as compared to all other similarly situated services;
2. will avoid the anti-competitive implications of a regime that picks “winners and losers” in the broadband marketplace by treating one type of offering differently from all others based merely upon regulation which uniquely handicaps rural
   providers;
3. it would serve the public interest by mitigating to some degree the already high cost of broadband for rural consumers; and
4. is fully consistent with courses of action and clarification with respect to contribution assessments applicable to similar broadband Internet access services as articulated and adopted by the FCC in both its Title II proceeding and more recent USF reform efforts, as well as prior orders in 2002 involving cable modem service and in 2005 involving wireline broadband Internet access service.

Comment and reply comment deadlines for the petition will be established when the FCC puts out Public Notice of the petition.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

FCC Issues Official Agenda for Open Meeting; Deletes One Item

On June 15, the FCC issued a Public Notice announcing the official agenda for its Open Meeting of June 22. At the meeting the FCC will no longer be considering a Declaratory Ruling which would clarify that the "written information" that cable operators must provide to their subscribers via annual notices pursuant to Section 76.1602(b) of the FCC's rules may be provided via e-mail. Items that remain on the agenda are:

• a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would amend the FCC's Emergency Alert System (EAS) rules to add a dedicated event code, "BLU," for Blue Alerts, so that EAS alerts can deliver actionable information to the public when a law enforcement officer is killed, seriously injured, missing in connection with his or her official duties, or if there is an imminent and credible threat to a law enforcement officer.
• a Report and Order that establishes the procedures and standards the FCC will use to review alternative plans submitted by states seeking to "opt-out" of the FirstNet network and to build their own Radio Access Networks that are interoperable with FirstNet.
• a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would amend the Caller ID rules to allow disclosure of blocked Caller ID information to aid law enforcement in investigating threatening calls and continue the waiver of those rules that [are] is currently in effect for Jewish Community Centers.
• an Order and Declaratory Ruling that recommends granting OneWeb's request to be permitted to access the U.S. market using its proposed global non-geostationary satellite constellation for the provision of broadband communications services in the United States.
• a Notice of Inquiry that seeks comment on ways to facilitate greater consumer choice and enhance broadband deployment in multiple tenant environments such as apartment buildings, condominium buildings, shopping malls, or cooperatives. The Notice of Inquiry further seeks comment on the current state of broadband competition in such locations and whether additional FCC action in this area is warranted to eliminate or reduce barriers faced by broadband providers that seek to serve the occupants of multiple tenant environments.
• a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Order that
  • (1) proposes to eliminate the requirement that carriers that complete payphone calls conduct an annual audit of their payphone call tracking systems and file an associated annual audit report with the FCC, and
  • (2) waives upcoming annual audit and associated reporting requirements.
• an enforcement action. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m. ET, and will be webcast live at that time at www.fcc.gov/live.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and John Prendergast.

Law & Regulation

E911 Filings for CMRS Providers Due in August

There are several upcoming E911 indoor location accuracy filing/reporting requirements that apply to all providers of CMRS (interconnected mobile voice) service, regardless of whether or not they have received a PSAP request for E911 service. Providers that recently sought waivers in connection with an E911 location accuracy certification requirement due in early June will need to have secured grants of their pending requests before they are excused from having to submit these filings.

Live 911 Call Data Reports

Tuesday, August 1, 2017 is the deadline for CMRS service providers to submit their next semi-annual Live 911 Call Data Report to the FCC. Reports are filed on a Microsoft Excel template, and for non-nationwide carriers must include call location data for the prior two calendar-year quarters (i.e., January-June 2017) for each location technology used within four geographic morphologies (dense urban, urban, suburban, and rural).

Copies of the report are sent via email to APCO, NENA and NASNA. Non-nationwide CMRS providers that do not provide service or report quarterly live call data in any of the six test cities (i.e., Atlanta, Chicago, Denver/Front Range, Manhattan Borough, Philadelphia, and San Francisco and their surrounding geographic areas) are required to collect and report live call data from the largest county (by population) within their service footprint.

Copies of the FCC’s Live Call Data Reporting Template are available from the FCC’s web site. Please contact us if you would like us to provide you with a copy of the template.

Carriers that are working with West/Intrado as their E911 location vendor should obtain their live call data directly from West, and West should have this data shortly after the calendar quarter ends on June 30th. We are available to review the draft report for completeness and accuracy upon request, but recommend that carriers not wait until the filing deadline to send us their draft reports.

BloostonLaw is also available to assist carriers that wish to seek confidential treatment of their live 911 call data reports. Confidential treatment requests will apply to all subsequent reports filed by that provider.

Initial Implementation Plan and First Progress Report

August 3, 2017 is the deadline for non-nationwide CMRS service providers to prepare and submit to the FCC an Initial Implementation Plan which describes their company’s plans for meeting the FCC’s improved indoor location accuracy requirements, as well as a related First Progress Report which describes their efforts to date toward meeting the plan.

The FCC has not specified a particular format for these filings, so we are working with staff of West to come up with an Initial Implementation Plan document that is based on West’s Location Performance Management (LPM) suite of services. Let us know if you would like our law firm to assist you in preparing these required reports and we will send you a brief questionnaire to help organize and collect the company-specific information that we will need. If your company is working with an E911 vendor other than West, please let us know as soon as possible so we can prepare an appropriate Implementation Plan based on that vendor’s service offering.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Cary Mitchell and John Prendergast.

Democratic Senators Call for Ringless Voicemail Protection for Consumers

Last week, Sens. Ed Markey (D-MA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and others sent a letter to FCC Chairman Ajit Pai urging him to act on a Public Notice the FCC issued back in April regarding a petition to exempt ringless voicemails from the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Ringless voicemails allow the calling party to leave automated voice messages directly in voicemail without the phone ever ringing, effectively bypassing call blocking measures.

According to the senators, “Exempting ringless voicemails from the TCPA’s autodialer protections would allow callers to overwhelm consumers with ringless voice messages without first receiving express consumer consent. Further, consumers would have no way to stop callers from sending ringless voice messages, and callers would not have limits on the quantity or duration of these messages.”

Political news source The Hill reports that Republicans have voiced support for ringless voicemail companies. The Republican National Committee filed a comment to the FCC in May arguing that restrictions on such types of calls could “burden” freedom of speech.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

Industry

Chairman Pai Appoints New Bureau Chiefs

On June 15, Chairman Pai announced that he intends to appoint Donald Stockdale to serve as chief of the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, replacing current acting chief Nese Guendelsberger. According to the News Release, Mr. Stockdale rejoins the FCC from Bates White Economic Consulting where he has been a partner. Prior to that, he worked on telecom regulatory and antitrust issues as a partner at Mayer Brown LLP. Mr. Stockdale first joined the FCC’s then-Common Carrier Bureau (now the Wireline Competition Bureau) in 1994 as an attorney advisor and later as deputy division chief and associate bureau chief for economics. He later served as director of research in the Office of Policy and Planning and finally as deputy bureau chief and chief economist for the Wireline Competition Bureau until he left the agency in 2011. He earned his doctorate in economics and law degree from Yale University and bachelors degrees from Cambridge University and Yale.

On June 20, Chairman Pai announced that the FCC has chosen Tom Sullivan to serve as chief of the FCC’s International Bureau, who had been acting chief until now. Prior to his appointment to acting chief, Mr. Sullivan was an associate bureau chief and the chief of staff for the bureau he now leads. He has served in a variety of positions within the International Bureau and the FCC’s Office of Managing Director. He joined the FCC in 1991 after receiving his Master’s Degree in Public Policy from the University of Michigan. He received his Bachelor’s Degree in Economics and Political Science from the University of Michigan in 1990.

On June 21, Chairman Pai announced that he intends to appoint Rosemary C. Harold to serve as chief of the Enforcement Bureau, replacing current acting chief Michael Carowitz. According to the News Release, Ms. Harold rejoins the agency from Wilkinson Barker Knauer LLP, where she was a partner. Prior to joining the firm in 2011, Ms. Harold was a legal advisor to then-FCC Commissioner Robert McDowell for media and broadband issues and deputy chief of the FCC’s Media Bureau. She began her career as a journalist, working as a reporter and bureau chief for the Miami Herald and an editor at C-SPAN. She earned her law degree magna cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center, her master’s degree from the University of Missouri, and her bachelor’s degree from the College of William and Mary.

Deadlines

JULY 3: FCC FORM 481 (CARRIER ANNUAL REPORTING DATA COLLECTION FORM). All eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) must report the information required by Section 54.313, which includes outage, unfulfilled service request, and complaint data, broken out separately for voice and broadband services, information on the ETC’s holding company, operating companies, ETC affiliates and any branding in response to section 54.313(a)(8); its CAF-ICC certification, if applicable; its financial information, if a privately held rate-of-return carrier; and its satellite backhaul certification, if applicable. Form 481 must not only be filed with USAC, but also with the FCC and the relevant state commission and tribal authority, as appropriate. Although USAC treats the filing as confidential, filers must seek confidential treatment separately with the FCC and the relevant state commission and tribal authority if confidential treatment is desired.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Sal Taillefer.

JULY 3: MOBILITY FUND PHASE I ANNUAL REPORT. Winning bidders in Auction 901 that are authorized to receive Mobility Fund Phase I support are required to submit to the FCC an annual report each year on July 1 for the five years following authorization. This year, July 1 falls on a Saturday; therefore, the report is due July 3. Each annual report must be submitted to the Office of the Secretary of the FCC, clearly referencing WT Docket No. 10-208; the Universal Service Administrator; and the relevant state commissions, relevant authority in a U.S. Territory, or Tribal governments, as appropriate. The information and certifications required to be included in the annual report are described in Section 54.1009 of the FCC’s rules.

BloostonLaw Contacts: John Prendergast and Sal Taillefer.

JULY 31: FCC FORM 507, UNIVERSAL SERVICE QUARTERLY LINE COUNT UPDATE. Line count updates are required to recalculate a carrier's per line universal service support, and is filed with the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). This information must be submitted on July 31 each year by all rate-of-return incumbent carriers, and on a quarterly basis if a competitive eligible telecommunications carrier (CETC) has initiated service in the rate-of-return incumbent carrier’s service area and reported line count data to USAC in the rate-of-return incumbent carrier’s service area, in order for the incumbent carrier to be eligible to receive Interstate Common Line Support (ICLS). This quarterly filing is due July 31 and covers lines served as of December 31, 2013. Incumbent carriers filing on a quarterly basis must also file on September 30 (for lines served as of March 31, 2014); December 30 (for lines served as of June 30, 2014), and March 31, 2015, for lines served as of September 30, 2014).

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.

JULY 31: CARRIER IDENTIFICATION CODE (CIC) REPORTS. Carrier Identification Code (CIC) Reports must be filed by the last business day of July (this year, July 31). These reports are required of all carriers who have been assigned a CIC code by NANPA. Failure to file could result in an effort by NANPA to reclaim it, although according to the Guidelines this process is initiated with a letter from NANPA regarding the apparent non-use of the CIC code. The assignee can then respond with an explanation. (Guidelines Section 6.2). The CIC Reporting Requirement is included in the CIC Assignment Guidelines, produced by ATIS. According to section 1.4 of that document: At the direction of the NANPA, the access providers and the entities who are assigned CICs will be requested to provide access and usage information to the NANPA, on a semi-annual basis to ensure effective management of the CIC resource. (Holders of codes may respond to the request at their own election). Access provider and entity reports shall be submitted to NANPA no later than January 31 for the period ending December 31, and no later than July 31 for the period ending June 30. It is also referenced in the NANPA Technical Requirements Document, which states at 7.18.6: CIC holders shall provide a usage report to the NANPA per the industry CIC guidelines … The NAS shall be capable of accepting CIC usage reports per guideline requirements on January 31 for the period ending December 31 and no later than July 31 for the period ending June 30. These reports may also be mailed and accepted by the NANPA in paper form. Finally, according to the NANPA website, if no local exchange carrier reports access or usage for a given CIC, NANPA is obliged to reclaim it. The semi-annual utilization and access reporting mechanism is described at length in the guidelines.

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

AUGUST 1: LIVE 911 CALL DATA REPORTS FOR NON-NATIONWIDE PROVIDERS. Non-Nationwide Providers that do not provide coverage in any of the Test Cities must collect and report aggregate data based on the largest county within its footprint to APCO, NENA, and NASNA on the location technologies used for live 911 calls in those areas. Carriers should obtain spreadsheets with their company’s compliance data from their E911 service provider (e.g., Intrado / West). This is a recurring report due every six months — on first business day of second month after the six month period for which data is reported.

BloostonLaw Contact: Cary Mitchell.

AUGUST 3: E911 Indoor Location Accuracy - Initial Implementation Plan and First Progress Report. All CMRS service providers must prepare and submit to the FCC an Initial Implementation Plan which describes their company’s plans for meeting the FCC’s improved indoor location accuracy requirements, as well as a related First Progress Report which describes their efforts to date toward meeting the plan. The Commission has not specified a particular format for these filings, so we are preparing a template that will combine both into a single report. Please contact us if you want us to prepare these filings on your company’s behalf.

BloostonLaw Contact: Cary Mitchell.

Calendar At-A-Glance

June
Jun. 22 – Comments are due on FY2017 Regulatory Fee NPRM.
Jun. 23 – Petitions regarding 15-Day Tariff Filings are due.
Jun. 26 – Reply comments are due on remaining VRS FNPRM sections.
Jun. 26 – 7-Day Tariff Filings are due.
Jun. 27 – Replies to Petitions regarding 15-Day Tariff Filings are due.
Jun. 29 – Petitions regarding 7-Day Tariff Filings are due (NOON EST).
Jun. 30 – Replies to Petitions regarding 7-Day Tariff Filings are due (NOON EST).
Jun. 30 – Study Area Boundary Recertifications are due.

July
Jul. 3 – FCC Form 481 is due.
Jul. 3 – Mobility Fund Phase I Recipient Reports are due.
Jul 3. – Comments are due on Robocall Blocking proceeding.
Jul 3. – Reply comments are due on Speed Disclosure Petition for Declaratory Ruling.
Jul. 6 – Comments are due on BDS for Model Based RoR Carrier Petition for Rulemaking.
Jul. 7 – Comments are due on CAF Phase II Census Block List.
Jul. 7 – Reply comments are due on FY2017 Regulatory Fee NPRM.
Jul. 10 – Comments are due on Local Service Rate Floor NPRM.
Jul. 10 – Deadline for MVPDs to Pass Through Emergency Information.
Jul. 11 – Reply comments are due on VRS User Equipment Profile FNPRM.
Jul. 17 – Reply comments are due on Wireless Broadband Infrastructure proceeding.
Jul. 17 – Reply comments are due on Wireline Broadband Infrastructure proceeding.
Jul. 17 – Comments are due on Broadband Title I Reclassification NPRM.
Jul. 21 – Reply comments are due on BDS for Model Based RoR Carrier Petition for Rulemaking.
Jul. 24 – Reply comments are due on Local Service Rate Floor NPRM.
Jul. 31 – FCC Form 507 (Universal Service Quarterly Line Count Update) is due.
Jul. 31 – Carrier Identification Code (CIC) Report is due.
Jul. 31 – International Traffic Data Report is due.
Jul. 31 – Reply comments are due on Robocall Blocking proceeding.

August
Aug. 1 - Live 911 Call Data Reports for Non-Nationwide Providers due.
Aug. 3 – E911 Indoor Location Accuracy Initial implementation plan / first progress reports due.
Aug. 7 – Deadline to file for 3.65-3.7 GHz Grandfathered Protection Zone.
Aug. 16 – Reply comments are due on Broadband Title I Reclassification NPRM.