Welcome Back To The Wireless Messaging News

Want to know my sad story for this week?

Well, here goes.

Frontier Communications is my ISP via aDSL. That is an Asymmetrical Digital Subscriber Line. It's not very good but it's the best I can get where I live.

On Wednesday morning I noticed that I could not access the Internet. I drove down to the corner on my way to town, and saw a couple of guys working on the telephone lines. I stopped and told one of them that I thought they had cut my line. He said that they would probably have it reconnected by the time I got back home, but if not, to call Frontier customer service.

Sure enough, later when I got home — still no Internet.

So I called customer service and went through all their voice prompts and then — a live operator, obviously reading from a computer screen — had me do a long list of ridiculous things, most of which had nothing to do with the problem.

Finally convinced that there really was something wrong, a trouble ticket was opened and I was told that a technician would be out to fix the problem in TWO WEEKS.

So today's newsletter is being published by using my iPhone's Hotspot feature — going out over Verizon's cellular telephone network to the Internet.

So a valuable lesson was learned about how to get access to the Internet when our normal connection has failed.

And —oh yes— when reconnected, my subscriber line will be inches closer to the main fiber-optic line that connects the whole town to the Internet. So maybe someday I will be able to get a “fiber to the neighborhood” connection. That class of service doesn't bring fiber all the way to your house — just much closer — and it does result in a much faster connection.

Thanks to the generosity of a newsletter supporter I have a brand new, very fast computer and so with a fast connection to the Internet, I will finally have . . .

. . . oh well I will have to figure out something new to worry about. ha ha ha

See the THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK below — near the end.

Emergency Radio Communications Wireless Messaging Critical Messaging Two-way Radio Technology Telemetry Science Paging Wi-Fi

Wireless Messaging

This doesn't mean that nothing is ever published here that mentions a US political party—it just means that the editorial policy of this newsletter is to remain neutral on all political issues. We don't take sides.

A new issue of the Wireless Messaging Newsletter is posted on the web each week. A notification goes out by e-mail to subscribers on most Fridays around noon central US time. The notification message has a link to the actual newsletter on the web. That way it doesn’t fill up your incoming e-mail account.

There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. Readers are a very select group of wireless industry professionals, and include the senior managers of many of the world’s major Paging and Wireless Messaging companies. There is an even mix of operations managers, marketing people, and engineers — so I try to include items of interest to all three groups. It’s all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology.

I regularly get readers’ comments, so this newsletter has become a community forum for the Paging, and Wireless Messaging communities. You are welcome to contribute your ideas and opinions. Unless otherwise requested, all correspondence addressed to me is subject to publication in the newsletter and on my web site. I am very careful to protect the anonymity of those who request it.

I spend the whole week searching the Internet for news that I think may be of interest to you — so you won’t have to. This newsletter is an aggregator — a service that aggregates news from other news sources. You can help our community by sharing any interesting news that you find.

Editorial Opinion pieces present only the opinions of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of any of advertisers or supporters. This newsletter is independent of any trade association. I don't intend to hurt anyone's feelings, but I do freely express my own opinions.

We need your help. This is probably the only weekly news source about paging and wireless messaging.

GLENAYRE INFRASTRUCTURE

Service Contracts

I would like to recommend Easy Solutions for Support of all Glenayre Paging Equipment. This Texas company is owned and operated by Vaughan Bowden. I have known Vaughan for over 35 years. Without going into a long list of his experience and qualifications, let me just say that he was the V.P. of Engineering at PageNet which was—at that time—the largest paging company in the world. So Vaughan knows Paging.

GTES is no longer offering support contracts. GTES was the original group from Vancouver that was setup to offer support to customers that wanted to continue with the legacy Glenayre support. Many U.S. customers chose not to use this service because of the price and the original requirement to upgrade to version 8.0 software (which required expensive hardware upgrades, etc.). Most contracts ended as of February 2018.

If you are at all concerned about future support of Glenayre products, especially the “king of the hill” the GL3000 paging control terminal, I encourage you to talk to Vaughan about a service contract and please tell him about my recommendation.

Subscribe Here

IT'S FREE

* required field

If you would like to subscribe to the newsletter just fill in the blanks in the form above, and then click on the “Subscribe” button.

There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. It’s all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology.

Prism-IPX Systems is growing and they are looking for more good software developers with communications experience. Additional information is available on their web site.
Click here. 

Advertiser Index

It’s a disaster! Does your cell phone work?

By Igor Gluic General Manager/CTO of Citipage Ltd. Edmonton, Alberta

The sound of silence in a crisis is an eerie thing.

Yet, it’s what residents throughout Atlantic Canada heard in August 2017 when their cell phones went down. It’s frightening to realize the isolation of your situation, especially for those in hospitals and home care or for those in need of emergency attention. First responders know it can be a potentially deadly circumstance.

Four hours is a long time to go without cellular service on the Telus, Bell, Virgin and Koodo networks. That’s how long phone users could not reach family members or municipal authorities. We’re accustomed now to being connected, especially during dire circumstances. The problem was a damaged fibre-optic line in Quebec which led to a digital limbo for mobile phones, text, and data services.

Down south of the border, a tornado that ripped through Joplin, Missouri, in 2011 left a mile-wide path of destruction. The deadliest U.S. tornado since 1947 saw 161 people die and more than 1,000 injured.

St. John’s Mercy Hospital was in the eye of that storm. Their paging transmitter and antenna on top of the hospital were blown off the building. Thank goodness, their paging company had a simulcast network that delivered uninterrupted critical messaging when it was needed most. “The cellular systems in the Joplin area were disabled following the tornado for up to four days,” said Tom Jackson of Midwest Paging. “But our surrounding transmitters kept the paging network up and running for critical messaging to the hospital’s medical personnel and first responders.”

You remember the Katrina Hurricane? One of the lessons learned from that disaster is there’s a need for ongoing communication AFTER the event—when there is no power to run televisions. Battery-operated devices together with an alerting system helps to keep residents attentive to important next steps.

Power failures often coincide with a crisis, making it difficult or impossible to recharge a Smartphone. And, having a smartphone tethered to a charger on a regular basis just isn’t practical during emergency situations. The disposable battery in a pager generally lasts 3 to 4 weeks and is easily replaced. WiFi and Bluetooth enabled cell phones may provide redundancy, but they also significantly cut back on the phone’s battery life. If you forget to enable those features, you may not receive your critical messages at all even when the cellular system is working perfectly just outside the building.

Back to Atlantic Canada. Eddy Ng, professor of organizational behavior and the F.C. Manning chair in economics and business at Dalhousie University, recommends businesses “include telecommunications in their business recovery plans.”

Who’s on your emergency call list?

He suggests companies might want to build in redundancies and managers should ensure employees know what to do in a communications breakdown by providing a plan for call lists, customer notices and policies for hours of operations or reduced services.

All of us in critical messaging need to treat this as a serious wake-up call. Contingency plans need to be created and tested.

New smartphone paging apps are promising emergency medical personnel the same fast, reliable service as pagers. But before you retire your pager, remember that smartphone apps are only as reliable as the cellular or WiFi network they operate on. A comparison of cellular and paging networks and devices shows important differences that can dramatically impact the reliability and speed of critical messaging, as well as patient and public safety.

The danger of dead zones and dropped calls

First, when using a smartphone paging app, your critical messages will be delivered on a cellular system. Those are the same networks that are notorious for dead zones, dropped calls and poor in-building coverage. Cellular systems were not designed for the delivery of critical messaging. In fact, most cellular carriers provide a disclaimer and caution users not to rely on their system for the delivery of critical messaging.

Paging systems also have the unique capability to set up a common group address in any pager so that the same message is sent and received at the same time to as many people as needed in a group. Smartphone apps can’t do that. Mass message delivery with cellular networks can result in different delivery times for each device, often measured in minutes that can be critical for emergency responders.

While new smartphone paging apps tout single device convenience, smart phones have several drawbacks that limit their reliability for critical messaging. The smartphone interface can require users to take several steps to read a critical message, which can be difficult during emergencies.

First responders don’t need complexity with their critical messaging device. With a pager, critical messages do not compete with e-mails, text messages, streaming video and other information received by a smartphone. Pagers are easy to use and solely designed to meet the demands of critical messaging.

Citipage (Canada)

Paging Transmitters 150/900 MHz

The RFI High Performance Paging Transmitter is designed for use in campus, city, state and country-wide paging systems. Designed for use where reliable simulcast systems where RF signal overlap coverage is critical.

• Commercial Paging systems.
• Healthcare Paging systems.
• Public Safety Emergency Services Paging systems.
• Demand Response Energy Grid Management.

Built-in custom interface for Prism-IPX ipBSC Base Controller for remote control, management and alarm reporting.

• Use as a stand-alone unit or in wide area network.
• Mix with other transmitter brands in an existing paging network.
• Adjustable from 20-250 watts.
• 110/240 VAC or 48VDC.
• Absolute Delay Correction.
• Remote Diagnostics.
• Configurable alarm thresholds.
• Integrated Isolator.
• Superb Reliability.
• Improved amplifier efficiency.
• Most reliable high-powered paging transmitter available.

Prism-IPX Systems LLC.

11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Ph: 678-242-5290 Email: sales@prism-ipx.com
prism-ipx.com

Back To Paging

Still The Most Reliable Protocol For Wireless Messaging!

If you are reading this, your potential customers are reading it as well. Please click here to find out about our advertising options.

Providing Expert Support and Service Contracts for all Glenayre Paging Systems.

The GL3000 is the most prolific paging system in the world and Easy Solutions gladly welcomes you to join us in providing reliable support to the paging industry for many more decades in the future.

Easy Solutions provides cost effective computer and wireless solutions at affordable prices. We can help in most any situation with your communications systems. We have many years of experience and a vast network of resources to support the industry, your system and an ever changing completive landscape.

• We treat our customers like family. We don’t just fix problems . . . We recommend and implement better cost-effective solutions.
• We are not just another vendor . . . We are a part of your team. All the advantages of high priced full-time employment without the cost.
• We are not in the Technical Services business . . . We are in the Customer Satisfaction business.

Experts in Paging Infrastructure

• Glenayre, Motorola, Unipage, etc.
• Excellent Service Contracts
• Full Service—Beyond Factory Support
• Making systems More Reliable and MORE PROFITABLE for over 30 years.

Please see our web site for exciting solutions designed specifically for the Wireless Industry. We also maintain a diagnostic lab and provide important repair and replacement parts services for Motorola and Glenayre equipment. Call or  e-mail  us for more information.

SUBSCRIBE HERE

The Wireless Messaging News
Board of Advisors

The Board of Advisor members are people with whom I have developed a special rapport, and have met personally. They are not obligated to support the newsletter in any way, except with advice, and maybe an occasional letter to the editor.

Can You Help The Newsletter?

You can help support The Wireless Messaging News by clicking on the PayPal Donate button above. It is not necessary to be a member of PayPal to use this service.

Newspapers generally cost 75¢ $1.50 a copy and they hardly ever mention paging or wireless messaging, unless in a negative way. If you receive some benefit from this publication maybe you would like to help support it financially?

A donation of $50.00 would certainly help cover a one-year period. If you are wiling and able, please click on the PayPal Donate button above.

Kansas City

Premium Newsletter Supporter

Premium Newsletter Supporter

Canyon Ridge Communications

Premium Newsletter Supporter

ProPage Inc.

Newsletter Supporter

Metropolitan Communications

Newsletter Supporter

e*Message Wireless Information Services Europe

Newsletter Supporter

Lekkerkerk, Netherlands

Newsletter Supporter

Donate to have your company's logo added.

Incyte Capital Holdings LLC
Dallas, Texas

Premium Newsletter Supporter

Le Réseau Mobilité Plus
Montreal, Quebec

Newsletter Supporter

Communication Specialists

Newsletter Supporter

Cook Paging

Premium Newsletter Supporter

MethodLink

Premium Newsletter Supporter

Citipage Ltd.
Edmonton, Alberta

Newsletter Supporter

Click on the image above for more info about advertising here.

Who We Are

Prism-IPX is a leader in providing reliable communications systems using modern designs to meet today’s demands for critical message alerting and delivery. Prism-IPX designs versatile and robust Critical Message Management systems using paging and other wireless technologies for high performance and dependable communications.

What We Make

Prism-IPX Systems products include full-featured radio paging systems with VoIP input, IP based transmitter control systems and paging message encryption. Other options include e-mail messaging, remote switch controllers, Off-The-Air paging message decoders and logging systems.

Contact Us  

Repair and Refurbishment Services

Product Support Services, Inc.
511 South Royal Lane
Coppell, Texas 75019
817-527-6322
sales@pssirl.com
www.pssirl.com

Click on the image above for more info about advertising here.

Internet Protocol Terminal

The IPT accepts Internet or serial messaging using various protocols and can easily convert them to different protocols, or send them out as paging messages.

An ideal platform for hospitals, on-site paging applications, or converting legacy systems to modern protocols.

Additional/Optional Features

• Database of up to 5000 subscribers.
• 4 serial ports on board.
• Up to 8 phone lines (DID or POTS).
• Can be configured for auto-failover to hot swap standby.
• 1RU rack mount unit appliance—no moving parts.
• Easily secure legacy system messages leaving site for HIPAA compliance.
• Only purchase the protocols/options you need.
• Add Paging Encryption for HIPAA compliance on site.

Prism-IPX Systems LLC.

11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Ph: 678-242-5290 Email: sales@prism-ipx.com
prism-ipx.com

Specialists in sales and service of equipment from these leading manufacturers, as well as other two-way radio and paging products:

	Motorola SOLUTIONS
	Motorola MOBILITY

#TBT: Paging Flatlines

By RCR Wireless News on JULY 12, 2018

Editor’s Note: RCR Wireless News goes all in for “Throwback Thursdays,” tapping into our archives to resuscitate the top headlines from the past. Fire up the time machine, put on the sepia-tinted shades, set the date for #TBT and enjoy the memories!

RIP, Paging Industry

By Reily Gregson on July 23, 2001

It’s quiet out there in the paging and messaging industry.

Perhaps too quiet.

WebLink Wireless Inc., Arch Wireless Inc. and Metrocall Inc. are the three largest independent paging and messaging companies in the country, and it seems their fates are intricately entwined. They are all facing subscriber losses in the hundreds of thousands and are weighted down by massive debt and interest payments. And since no outside investor or company has shown any interest in financing or acquiring one of these players, it seems that the three are on their own.

Moreover, for the past several months all three have been quietly laboring away, working to maintain their own financial health, while the nationwide paging and messaging industry seems to be slowly sliding into bankruptcy.

WebLink is perhaps in the worst situation. In May, the company filed for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy restructuring after an ambitious, last-ditch-effort merger with Metrocall fell through. WebLink has remained virtually silent since the filing until Friday, when it announced it won $15 million in debtor-in-possession financing. The money comes from two of the company’s principal lenders, and is secured by a lien on almost all of the company’s assets.

“We have our financing approved by banks, bondholders and the courts,” said Topper Pardoe, WebLink’s senior vice president of marketing.

In WebLink’s announcement, the company said it is considering a variety of options to get out of bankruptcy.

First, the company said it is searching for a new line of financing to support a graceful exit from bankruptcy on its own, without merging with another company or selling itself. While this may be the most preferable way out of bankruptcy, it’s not very likely, most industry watchers agree.

“There ain’t no strategic money out there,” quipped Michael Gill, executive vice president and director of research with Tejas Securities Group Inc.

If there were any financing angels available, they would have made themselves know by now, he said. As the situation now stands, Arch, WebLink and Metrocall have likely tapped every possible source for money and have so far come up dry. The reason, most agree, is that lenders are extremely wary of the current paging and messaging industry.

In the United States, the number of paging and messaging customers has been dropping like a stone over the past year. Most observers expected a drop, but the one they got blew all predictions out of the water. The decline has driven infrastructure provider Glenayre Technologies Inc. out of the business, and paging carriers TSR Wireless L.L.C., PNI Technologies Inc. and WebLink into bankruptcy. And the situation in the United States seems to be reflected across the world, with major paging countries like China, Taiwan and Thailand losing millions and millions of paging subscribers. In South Korea alone, the number of paging subscribers has dropped from close to 3 million to about 500,000 in less than a year.

However, the situation doesn’t seem to be as grim for some of the nation’s smaller paging companies. Many have loudly stated that they are doing just fine and are not suffering under the enormous debt load of the nationwide players. The one-way paging market is still a viable business, these companies argue.

WebLink would likely not agree. Besides a standalone restructuring, the company’s other option is a sale or merger, an alternative WebLink explicitly addressed in its release Friday as a means of getting out of bankruptcy.

“We are continuing to look at various partnerships-mergers, acquisitions, etc.,” WebLink’s Pardoe said.

That option also presents some difficult challenges.

Outside messaging companies such as WorldCom’s SkyTel Communications Inc. or SBC Communication’s Ameritech Paging could potentially move to merge with or purchase WebLink. However, neither of these companies nor any other has made the slightest move to do so. Motient Corp. executives made sure to quickly squelch a rumor several months ago about a merger with Metrocall.

So, for WebLink, that leaves fellow carriers Arch and Metrocall.

“The question is, how will they merge?” Tejas’ Gill said. “Nobody’s got any cash.”

Arch recently filed a complicated and detailed restructuring plan to reorganize its capital structure. Under the plan, Arch hopes to both cut its interest payments as well as eliminate a substantial amount of debt. Arch also included a potential pre-packaged plan for reorganization under Chapter 11 bankruptcy to indicate the severity of its position.

Gill said the plan will likely be modified over the course of the year-and praised it as a good pre-emptive tactic-but said it means Arch likely will be tied up in its own reorganization and unable to merge or acquire another company.

“Anyone trying to merge with them (Arch) is in limbo,” Gill said. The reorganization “has too many moving parts” to entertain a merger.

This assumption also repudiates current rumors about a merger between Arch and WebLink. Officials for both companies had no comment about a potential merger.

All of which leaves Metrocall.

Officials for Metrocall did not immediately return requests for comment, and the company has been virtually silent since the planned merger with WebLink fell through. The company has missed a variety of interest payments over the past few months, and most industry watchers are holding their breath in anticipation of a filing for bankruptcy-a move the company has repeatedly hinted at in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Whether WebLink and Metrocall could merge remains to be seen. Talks between the two companies broke down in May after Metrocall pulled out of its planned merger with WebLink because WebLink was forced to cut 15 percent of its work force and close the last seven of its field sales offices. Metrocall officials said the plan was to enter into bankruptcy conducting business as usual, and WebLink’s moves were anything but. Other unofficial reasons insiders have considered include WebLink’s possible inability to come up with additional financing to continue operating through a bankruptcy merger and arguments over whether the new company should be split evenly or by some other ratio.

Regardless, a merger between Metrocall and WebLink could still be in the works, but if it is still possible or whether it will ever happen is anyone’s guess.

So the situation in the independent paging and messaging industry is an interesting one: All of the players seem to be stuck in molasses. A merger or acquisition between any of the three players most likely is needed to break the current stalemate, but none of the companies are in a position to make such a move.

Will the nationwide paging industry slowly slip into lonely bankruptcy, where it could remain indefinitely?

“It’s a question that people have been asking for a couple of months now,” said Robert Hegblom, a senior analyst with the Strategis Group.

The companies that will survive, Hegblom said, are those that manage to move their business from the low revenues of one-way paging into the more profitable two-way messaging business. They also will need to continue expanding into telemetry and machine-to-machine communications.

“Those are the good markets to be in,” he said.

However, Hegblom asked, “is there room for all those companies?”

Source:

RCR Wireless News

Paging Data Receiver PDR-4

The PDR-4 is a multi-function paging data receiver that decodes paging messages and outputs them via the serial port, USB or Ethernet connectors.

Designed for use with Prism-IPX ECHO software Message Logging Software to receive messages and log the information for proof of transmission over the air, and if the data was error free.

• Option—decode capcode list or all messages.
• Large capcode capacity.
• Serial, USB and Ethernet output.
• POCSAG or FLEX page decoding, special SA protocols.
• Receivers for paging bands in VHF, UHF, 900 MHz.
• Message activated Alarm Output.
• 8 programmable relay outputs.
• Send notifications of a system problem.

• Synthesized Receiver Tuning.
• Selectivity better than 60 dB.
• Frequencies 148-174, 450-470, 929-932 MHz.
• Image Rejection better than 55 dB.
• Spurious Rejection better than 55 dB.
• Channel Spacing 12.5 or 25 kHz.
• Power 5VDC.
• Receiving Sensitivity 5µV at 1200 bps.

Prism-IPX Systems LLC.

11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Ph: 678-242-5290 Email: sales@prism-ipx.com
prism-ipx.com

Wireless Network Planners
Wireless Specialists

R.H. (Ron) Mercer Consultant 217 First Street East Northport, NY 11731
Telephone: 631-786-9359
www.wirelessplanners.com
wirelessplannerron@gmail.com

Brad Dye, Ron Mercer, Allan Angus, Vic Jackson, and Ira Wiesenfeld are friends and colleagues who work both together and independently, on wireline and wireless communications projects.

Click here for a summary of their qualifications and experience. Each one has unique abilities. We would be happy to help you with a project, and maybe save you some time and money.

Note: We do not like Patent Trolls, i.e. “a person or company who enforces patent rights against accused infringers in an attempt to collect licensing fees, but does not manufacture products or supply services based upon the patents in question.” We have helped some prominent law firms defend their clients against this annoyance, and would be happy to do some more of this same kind of work.

Some people use the title “consultant” when they don't have a real job. We actually do consulting work, and help others based on our many years of experience.

“If you would know the road ahead, ask someone who has traveled it.”
— Chinese Proverb

Remote AB Switches

ABX-1 switches are often used at remote transmitter sites to convert from old, outdated and unsupported controllers to the new modern Prism-IPX ipBSC base station controllers. Remotely switch to new controllers with GUI commands.

ABX-1

ABX-3 switches are widely used for enabling or disabling remote equipment and switching I/O connections between redundant messaging systems.

ABX-3

Common Features:

• RJ45 for A, B and Common connectors.
• Manual push button or use Prism IP commands to switch one or more relays.
• Single or Dual Port Control card for IP or Serial connection.
• Form C relay—control local connection.
• Power Loss Indicator.
• Rear Panel Connector for controlling the switch externally.
• Power Source: 5VDC for ABX-1; 12VDC for ABX-3.

Prism-IPX Systems LLC.

11175 Cicero Dr., Alpharetta, GA 30022
Ph: 678-242-5290 Email: sales@prism-ipx.com
prism-ipx.com

Thursday, July 12, 2018	Volume 6 | Issue 135

CTIA Survey Shows It’s Been a Great Decade for Cell Site Growth

CTIA^® yesterday released its Annual Wireless Industry Survey, which found the industry is beginning the transition from 4G to 5G wireless networks with significant growth in cell sites and data-only devices. That growth and continued demand for everything wireless contributed to Americans using an unprecedented amount of mobile data in 2017.

Several key wireless trends are illustrated in the survey: One key finding shows that the U.S. wireless industry is building wireless networks for tomorrow’s 5G services. To further extend coverage and prepare for 5G, a record 323,448 cell sites were in operation at the end of 2017—a 52 percent growth over the last decade. Analysts project that wireless carriers will need to deploy roughly 800,000 modern wireless antennas — small cells — in the next few years, and we are starting to see that investment now.

Another trend has mobile data continuing to skyrocket. Americans used a record 15.7 trillion megabytes (MBs) of mobile data in 2017—nearly quadrupling since 2014, and representing 40 times the volume of traffic in 2010, according to the survey. CTIA related that to being equal to nearly 250 million people simultaneously binge-watching every episode of Game of Thrones in HD.

“This year’s report shows that wireless is on the cusp of a transformation to tomorrow’s 5G networks and the Internet of Things,” said CTIA President/CEO Meredith Attwell Baker, “underscoring the need for continued efforts to modernize infrastructure rules and create a spectrum pipeline that ensures continued U.S. wireless leadership in the global race to 5G.”

According to the association’s research, wireless connectivity is evolving with IoT/5G on the horizon. The survey captures the beginning of the shift from the 4G era to the 5G-connected everything-era. Data-only devices—such as connected cars, IoT devices and wearables—rose to 126.4 million in 2017, up nearly 20 percent year-over-year and 147 percent in the past five years.

More than 400 million mobile devices are in service, meaning there are 1.2 wireless devices for each American. In addition to 15.7 trillion MBs of mobile data, U.S. wireless networks carried more than 2.2 trillion voice minutes and 1.5 trillion text messages.

Wireless provider capital expenditures totaled $25.6 billion in 2017, and since 2010, when 4G networks were launched, capital investment has exceeded $226 billion. For the top-line results of the 2017 survey’s key metrics, click here.

First Nationwide WEA-EAS Test in The Works

By Leslie Stimson, Inside Towers Washington Bureau Chief

FEMA wants to conduct the first nationwide test of the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) system this September. The proposed date of the live test is September 20 (with October 3 as a backup).

A 87-character test message would be originated at 2:18 p.m. and sent to participating commercial mobile carriers. The message to be displayed on handsets would read: “THIS IS A TEST of the National Wireless Emergency Alert System. No action is needed.” That’s according to Al Kenyon, Chief of the Customer Support Branch of the FEMA Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Program Office; He spoke at the Chapter 37 meeting of the Society of Broadcast Engineers Wednesday night.

This will be the first nationwide test of WEA, and the first using the Presidential level code, according to Kenyon. “This test is necessary because it will determine if carrier WEA configuration, systems, and networks can and will process a Presidential WEA, delivering the message via all WEA enabled cell sites with minimal latency,” Kenyon wrote in a letter to the FCC seeking a waiver of its rules, to conduct the test. Commission rules allowing periodic WEA testing won’t change until May 2019.

FEMA also proposes to conduct a nationwide Emergency Alert System (EAS) test two minutes after the WEA test. This would be the fourth nationwide EAS test and the first nationwide joint WEA-EAS test. The FCC in May authorized a joint WEA-EAS test in Minnesota, Inside Towers reported. Sources tell Inside Towers, the nationwide joint test has been regulators’ goal for a while.

If the Commission okays the request, FEMA IPAWS will develop multi-media public announcements to educate the public before-hand. FEMA and Department of Homeland Security employees will be asked to respond to a questionnaire to provide a snapshot of the WEA test message delivery. FEMA will also review any test observations from states or other organizations.

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 kind permission from the firm. The firm's contact information is included at the end of this section of the newsletter.

FINAL REMINDER: Form 481 Due July 16 On June 6, the FCC issued an Order granting, on its own motion, a limited waiver of the filing deadline for the annual FCC Form 481 until July 16. BloostonLaw is experienced in preparing and filing Form 481, as well as meeting the FCC’s requirements to obtain confidentiality for the filings.

Carriers interested in obtaining assistance should contact the firm.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy and Sal Taillefer.

Headlines

FCC Adopts Uniform Broadband Speed Measurements

On July 6, the FCC released an Order establish a uniform framework for measuring the speed and latency performance for recipients of high-cost universal service support to serve fixed locations. Providers are required to submit results to the FCC, and will be subject to reductions in support commensurate with their level of non-compliance. The new requirements will be effective 30 days after the Order is published in the Federal Register, except for those provisions requiring approval by the Office of Management and Budget (i.e., those parts of the Order requiring the submission of information to the FCC).

Specifically, ETCs subject to fixed broadband performance obligations may conduct required testing by employing either (1) Measuring Broadband America testing infrastructure (MBA testing), (2) existing network management systems and tools (off-the-shelf testing), or (3) provider-developed self-testing configurations (provider-developed self-testing or self-testing). A speed test is a single measurement of download or upload speed of 10 to 15 seconds duration between a specific consumer location and a specific remote server location. Similarly, a latency test is a single measurement of latency, often performed using a single User Datagram Protocol (UDP) packet or a group of three Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) or UDP packets sent at essentially the same time, as is common with ping tests.

For speed, we require a minimum of one download test and one upload test per testing hour at each subscriber test location. For latency, we require a minimum of one discrete test per minute, i.e., 60 tests per hour, for each of the testing hours, at each subscriber test location, with the results of each discrete test recorded separately. To capture any seasonal effects on a carrier’s broadband performance, we require that carriers subject to the latency and speed testing requirements conduct one week of testing in each quarter of the calendar year. Carriers must conduct tests between 6:00 pm and 12:00 am (testing hours), including on weekends. Carriers test up to 50 locations per CAF-required service tier offering per state, depending on the number of subscribers a carrier has in a state:

The FCC adopted a separate scaled table for the number of locations that are subject to Mean Opinion Score (MOS) testing.

All high-cost support recipients serving fixed locations, except those carriers submitting high-latency bids in the round-trip latency are at or below 100 ms. High-latency bidders must certify that 95 percent or more of all testing hours measurements are at or below 750 ms. Providers must record the observed latency for all latency test measurements, including all lost packet tests. For speed, we require that 80 percent of download and upload measurements be at or above 80 percent of the CAF-required speed tier (i.e., an 80/80 standard).

Finally, the FCC established a four-level framework that sets forth particular obligations and automatic triggers based on an ETC’s degree of compliance with our latency, speed, and, if applicable, MOS testing standards in each state and high-cost support program. The following table provides a summary of the compliance framework, where x is the carrier’s compliance percentage:

Compliance Levels and Support Reductions

Carriers that serve 50 or fewer subscribers in a state and particular service tier but cannot find five active subscribers for conducting the required testing may test non-CAF-supported active subscriber locations to the extent necessary.

Carriers with questions about the new measurement requirements should contact the firm for more information.

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

FCC Announces Mock Auction Schedule for CAF Phase II

On July 6, the FCC released a Public Notice official announcing the mock auction for qualified bidders in the upcoming Connect America Phase II auction. The mock auction will be held on July 18-19, 2018.

For the mock auction, each qualified bidder will be assigned a set of states and performance tier and latency combinations for which it may bid. A qualified bidder’s assigned states and performance tier and latency combinations in the mock auction will not represent the actual states and performance tier and latency combinations for which it is qualified to bid in Auction 903, but the number of states and tier/latency combinations assigned will equal the number for which the applicant is qualified.

Bidding in the mock auction will begin on July 18, 2018, and end on July 19, 2018. The mock auction will begin with round 1 and proceed through six rounds of bidding, with the following schedule:

The opening base clock percentage for the mock auction will be set at 140 percent. The decrement percentage will be set at 20 percent for the first two rounds, and at 10 percent for the following rounds.

Carriers with general questions about the auction may contact the firm for more information. However, attorneys are not able to discuss bids, bid strategy, or other topics prohibited by the FCC’s anti-collusion rules.

BloostonLaw Contacts: John Prendergast.

FCC Drops Controversial Informal Complaint Rule Revisions After Congressional Letter

On July 11, the Washington Post reported that the FCC has dropped parts of its upcoming Report and Order, to be considered at tomorrow’s Open Meeting, dealing with informal complaints, after Congressmen Frank Pallone, Jr. and Mike Doyle sent a letter expressing concern that the revisions “would eliminate the agency’s traditional and important role of helping consumers in the informal complaint process.” The Washington Post writes:

The move comes after Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel requested that the provisions be struck. Several officials cited the political backlash over the issue as a reason the FCC will not vote on those provisions Thursday, with one official saying the proposal on informal complaints was never a “conservative plot” intended to harm consumers. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal agency deliberations.

Of the proposed revisions, Ars Technica wrote:

Ajit Pai's Federal Communications Commission is proposing that it stop reviewing the vast majority of consumer complaints about telecom companies. Going forward, consumers harmed by broadband, TV, and phone companies would have to pay $225 in order to get an FCC review of their complaints.

However, in reviewing the proposed changes, it is unclear that this is actually the case. The current version of the informal complaint rule reads:

The Commission will forward informal complaints to the appropriate carrier for investigation. The carrier will, within such time as may be prescribed, advise the Commission in writing, with a copy to the complainant, of its satisfaction of the complaint or of its refusal or inability to do so. Where there are clear indications from the carrier’s report or from other communications with the parties that the complaint has been satisfied, the Commission may, in its discretion, consider a complaint proceeding to be closed, without response to the complainant. In all other cases, the Commission will contact the complainant regarding its review and disposition of the matters raised. If the complainant is not satisfied by the carrier’s response and the Commission’s disposition, it may file a formal complaint in accordance with § 1.721 of this part.

The revised version reads:

The Commission will forward informal complaints to the appropriate carrier for investigation and may set a due date for the carrier to provide a written response to the informal complaint to the Commission, with a copy to the complainant. The response will advise the Commission of the carrier’s satisfaction of the complaint or of its refusal or inability to do so. Where there are clear indications from the carrier’s response or from other communications with the parties that the complaint has been satisfied, the Commission may, in its discretion, consider a complaint proceeding to be closed. In all other cases, the Commission will notify the complainant that if the complainant is not satisfied by the carrier’s response, or if the carrier has failed to submit a response by the due date, the complainant may file a formal complaint in accordance with § 1.721 of this part.

Looking at the revision, it appears unclear why the FCC would even change the language in the first place. Ars Technica later updated its story to wonder the same, noting:

A spokesperson for Pai told Ars that the proposal “does not change existing procedures for handling informal consumer complaints.” If there's no change, why change the rule? Pai's office said that the change “would simply align the text of a rule with longstanding FCC practices that have been in place for years under prior Chairmen and Commissions.”

Nevertheless, it appears that the revision has been removed from the item to be considered tomorrow.

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

Law & Regulation

FCC Announces Official Agenda for July 12 Open Meeting

On July 5, the FCC issued a Public Notice announcing the official agenda for the next Open Meeting, scheduled for July 12. At the Open Meeting, the FCC will consider the following items. Linked in each summary item is the draft text of each item expected to be considered at this Open Commission Meeting. One-page cover sheets are included in the public drafts to help summarize each item. The final item may differ.

• Expanding Flexible Use of the 3.7 to 4.2 GHz Band: an Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would continue the Commission’s efforts to make mid-band spectrum in the 3.7-4.2 GHz band available for expanded flexible use, primarily by seeking comment on mechanisms for clearing for mobile use and whether to allow point-to-multipoint use on a shared basis in portions of the band. To inform the Commission’s decision-making on the future of the band, it would also collect information from FSS earth stations and space stations to provide a clear understanding of the operations of current users. (GN Docket Nos. 18-122, 17-183; RM Nos. 11778, 11791)
• Cellular Reform Third Report and Order: a Report and Order eliminating unnecessary rules that apply to cellular service and other licensees. (WT Docket Nos. 12-40, 10-112, 16-138; RM Nos. 11510, 11660)
• Children’s Television Programming Rules: a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking comment on proposed revisions to the children’s television programming rules to provide broadcasters greater flexibility in meeting their children’s programming obligations. (MB Docket No. 18-202)
• Emergency Alert System and Wireless Emergency Alerts: a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to improve emergency alerting, including facilitating more effective EAS tests and preventing false alerts. (PS Docket Nos. 15-91, 15-94)
• Nationwide Number Portability: a Report and Order that forbears from legacy requirements and amends rules to facilitate the move toward complete nationwide number portability to promote competition between all service providers and increase network routing efficiencies. (WC Docket Nos. 17-244, 13-97)
• Formal Complaint Rules Consolidation Order: a Report and Order that consolidates and streamlines the rules governing formal complaint proceedings delegated to the Enforcement Bureau. (EB Docket No. 17-245)

Open Meetings are streamed live at www.fcc.gov/live and can be followed on social media with #OpenMtgFCC.

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

FCC Reminds CAF Phase II Auction Applicants of FCC ETC Designation Process

On July 10, the FCC issued a Public Notice reminding participants in the Connect America Fund Phase II (CAF Phase II) auction (Auction 903) about the process for obtaining designation as an eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or Commission) where a state lacks jurisdiction to do so. Successful bidders must submit proof of their ETC designation in all supported areas within 180 days of the Commission’s announcement of their winning bids.

Petitioners seeking an FCC ETC designation to serve non-Tribal lands must submit “an affirmative statement from the state commission or a court of competent jurisdiction that the carrier is not subject to the state commission’s jurisdiction.” The statement may take the form of a “duly authorized letter, comment, or order, from the relevant state regulatory commission or a court of competent jurisdiction, indicating that the state lacks authority to designate the carrier.” Carriers cannot rely on jurisdictional statements in past orders relating to different carriers or simply challenge the state commission’s jurisdiction in their petition directly. If a state law expressly articulates that it does not have jurisdiction over a relevant type of technology, Commission staff would consider such a statute relevant in its determination of Commission jurisdiction.

Petitioners seeking an FCC ETC designation to serve Tribal lands may petition the FCC directly so long as they have not initiated an ETC designation proceeding before the relevant state commission. The petition must accurately describe and demonstrate that the specific geographic area satisfies the definition of Tribal lands adopted for this purpose and provide fact-specific support for FCC jurisdiction, including citations to relevant case law, statutes, and treaties. Generalized statements of FCC jurisdiction are insufficient and will result in dismissal of the petition (thereby putting the carrier in jeopardy of defaulting on its auction obligations, thereby losing support and facing fines).

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

Industry

FCC Announces Next Meeting of Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee

On July 6, the FCC issued a Public Notice announcing that the next meeting of the Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee (BDAC) will be held Thursday and Friday, July 26 and 27, 2018, beginning at 9:00 a.m. each day. At this meeting, the BDAC will consider and vote on reports and recommendations from its Harmonization Working Group to harmonize the Model Code for Municipalities and Model Code for States adopted by the BDAC on April 25, 2018. In addition, the Ad Hoc Committee for Rates and Fees will give a presentation. The BDAC will also discuss its next steps. This agenda may be modified at the discretion of the BDAC Chair and the Designated Federal Officer (DFO).

The Commission will also provide audio and/or video coverage of the meeting over the Internet from the FCC’s web page at www.fcc.gov/live. Members of the public may submit comments to the BDAC in the FCC’s Electronic Comment Filing System.

Radio Engineer Coalition Disputes Verizon 4G Coverage Claims

On July 5, 4G Unwired, Inc., Monte R. Lee and Company, Palmetto Engineering & Consulting, and CT&T filed an ex parte letter with the FCC stating that, “Verizon’s claimed 4G LTE coverage is grossly overstated and not supported by rational RF engineering practices.” According to the letter, the companies represent “coalition of radio frequency engineering firms that serve mobile wireless carriers across the country.”

The basis of the coalition’s assertion is formed by testing conducted by Panhandle Telecommunication Systems, Inc. (Panhandle), an Oklahoma rural wireless carrier. The letter states that Panhandle’s data collection covered 4,911.84 miles and a total of 402,573 test points. Of the total test points collected, the coalition claims, “357,374 (88.8%) tested below 5 Mbps download speed or did not register 4G LTE service at all on Verizon-designated handsets.”

The coalition points to multiple issues that could have lead to the overstatement of coverage the coalition contends exists: fade margin values, propagation model choice, and clutter factors, among others.

A copy of the letter can be found here.

Senate Subcommittee to Hold Hearing on Rural Broadband

On July 10, the House of Representatives’ Committee on Energy and Commerce announced that the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will hold a hearing on Tuesday, July 17, 2018 entitled “Realizing the Benefits of Rural Broadband: Challenges and Solutions.” Witnesses have not yet been announced.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens and Sal Taillefer.

Deadlines

JULY 16: 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 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 of the previous year. Incumbent carriers filing on a quarterly basis must also file on September 30 (for lines served as of March 31); December 30 (for lines served as of June 30, 2014), and March 31, for lines served as of September 30 of the previous year).

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: FCC FORM 499-Q, TELECOMMUNICATIONS REPORTING WORKSHEET. All telecommunications common carriers that expect to contribute more than $10,000 to federal Universal Service Fund (USF) support mechanisms must file this quarterly form. The FCC has modified this form in light of its recent decision to establish interim measures for USF contribution assessments. The form contains revenue information from the prior quarter plus projections for the next quarter. Form 499-Q relates only to USF contributions. It does not relate to the cost recovery mechanisms for the Telecommunications Relay Service (TRS) Fund, the North American Numbering Plan Administration (NANPA), and the shared costs of local number portability (LNP), which are covered in the annual form (Form 499-A) that was due April 1.

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

AUGUST 1: FCC FORM 502, NUMBER UTILIZATION AND FORECAST REPORT: Any wireless or wireline carrier (including paging companies) that have received number blocks—including 100, 1,000, or 10,000 number blocks—from the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA), a Pooling Administrator, or from another carrier, must file Form 502 by August 1. Carriers porting numbers for the purpose of transferring an established customer’s service to another service provider must also report, but the carrier receiving numbers through porting does not. Resold services should also be treated like ported numbers, meaning the carrier transferring the resold service to another carrier is required to report those numbers but the carrier receiving such numbers should not report them. Reporting carriers file utilization and forecast reports semiannually on or before February 1 for the preceding six-month reporting period ending December 31, and on or before August 1 for the preceding six-month reporting period ending June 30.

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

AUGUST 29: COPYRIGHT STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS. The Copyright Statement of Accounts form plus royalty payment for the first half of calendar year 2014 is due to be filed August 29 at the Library of Congress’ Copyright Office by cable TV service providers.

BloostonLaw contact: Gerry Duffy.

SEPTEMBER 2: FCC FORM 477, LOCAL COMPETITION AND BROADBAND REPORTING FORM. Normally due September 1, this year’s filing falls on a federal holiday, pushing the deadline back to the next business day. Three types of entities must file this form.

1. Facilities-based Providers of Broadband Connections to End User Locations: Entities that are facilities-based providers of broadband connections — which are wired “lines” or wireless “channels” that enable the end user to receive information from and/or send information to the Internet at information transfer rates exceeding 200 kbps in at least one direction — must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which the entity provides one or more such connections to end user locations. For the purposes of Form 477, an entity is a “facilities-based” provider of broadband connections to end user locations if it owns the portion of the physical facility that terminates at the end user location, if it obtains unbundled network elements (UNEs), special access lines, or other leased facilities that terminate at the end user location and provisions/equips them as broadband, or if it provisions/equips a broadband wireless channel to the end user location over licensed or unlicensed spectrum. Such entities include incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers (LECs), cable system operators, fixed wireless service providers (including “wireless ISPs”), terrestrial and satellite mobile wireless service providers, MMDS providers, electric utilities, municipalities, and other entities. (Such entities do not include equipment suppliers unless the equipment supplier uses the equipment to provision a broadband connection that it offers to the public for sale. Such entities also do not include providers of fixed wireless services (e.g., “Wi-Fi” and other wireless Ethernet, or wireless local area network, applications) that only enable local distribution and sharing of a premises broadband facility.)
2. Providers of Wired or Fixed Wireless Local Telephone Services: Incumbent and competitive LECs must complete and file the applicable portions of the form for each state in which they provide local exchange service to one or more end user customers (which may include “dial-up” ISPs).
3. Providers of Interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Service: Interconnected VoIP service is a service that enables real-time, two-way voice communications; requires a broadband connection from the user’s location; requires Internet-protocol compatible customer premises equipment; and permits users generally to receive calls that originate on the public switched telephone network and to terminate calls to the public switched telephone network. Interconnected VoIP providers must complete and file the applicable portions of the form for each state in which they provide interconnected VoIP service to one or more subscribers, with the state determined for reporting purposes by the location of the subscriber’s broadband connection or the subscriber’s “Registered Location” as of the data-collection date. “Registered Location” is the most recent information obtained by an interconnected VoIP service provider that identifies the physical location of an end user.
4. Providers of Mobile Telephony Services: Facilities-based providers of mobile telephony services must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which they serve one or more mobile telephony subscribers. A mobile telephony service is a real-time, two-way switched voice service that is interconnected with the public switched network using an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless handoff of subscriber calls. A mobile telephony service provider is considered “facilities-based” if it serves a subscriber using spectrum for which the entity holds a license that it manages, or for which it has obtained the right to use via lease or other arrangement with a Band Manager.

BloostonLaw contacts: Ben Dickens and Gerry Duffy.

OCTOBER 1: FCC FORM 396-C, MVPD EEO PROGRAM REPORTING FORM. Each year on September 30, multi-channel video program distributors (“MVPDs”) must file with the Commission an FCC Form 396-C, Multi-Channel Video Programming Distributor EEO Program Annual Report, for employment units with six or more full-time employees. Because September 30 falls on a Sunday this year, the filing will be due the following business day on October 1. Users must access the FCC’s electronic filing system via the Internet in order to submit the form; it will not be accepted if filed on paper unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver of the electronic filing requirement. Certain MVPDs also will be required to complete portions of the Supplemental Investigation Sheet (“SIS”) located at the end of the Form. These MVPDs are specifically identified in a Public Notice each year by the FCC.

BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy and Sal Taillefer.

Calendar At-a-Glance

July
Jul. 16 – FCC Form 481 (Carrier Annual Reporting Data Collection Form) is due.
Jul. 20 – Comments are due on FCC Robocalling Report.
Jul. 26 – Comments are due on FCC Mobile Wireless Competition Report.
Jul. 31 – FCC Form 507 (Universal Service Quarterly Line Count Update) is due.
Jul. 31 – Carrier Identification Code (CIC) Report is due.

August
Aug. 1 – FCC Form 502 due (North American Numbering Plan Utilization and Forecast Report).
Aug. 1 – FCC Form 499-Q (Quarterly Telecommunications Reporting Worksheet) is due.
Aug. 1 – Comments are due on Station License NPRM.
Aug. 6 – Reply comments are due on Expansion of 4.9GHz Band Use NPRM.
Aug. 6 – Comments or oppositions due on USTelecom Petition for Forbearance.
Aug. 8 – Comments are due on 2.5GHz Transformation NPRM.
Aug. 16 – Reply comments are due on FCC Mobile Wireless Competition Report.
Aug. 16 – Reply comments are due on Station License NPRM.
Aug. 20 – Reply comments are due on FCC Robocalling Report.
Aug. 29 – Copyright Statement of Accounts is due.

September
Sep. 1 – FCC Form 477 due (Local Competition and Broadband Report).
Sep. 4 – Comments are due on Toll-Free Arbitrage FNPRM.
Sep. 5 – Reply comments are due on USTelecom Petition for Forbearance.
Sep. 7 – Reply comments are due on 2.5GHz Transformation NPRM.

October
Oct. 1 – FCC Form 396-C (MVPD EEO Program Annual Report).
Oct. 1 – Reply comments are due on Toll-Free Arbitrage FNPRM.

EWA Alert

Secure FCC Approval Before
License Assignment or Transfer of Control

July 9, 2018

Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act, wireless licensees are required to obtain prior approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) before consummation (closing) of any transaction between the parties which includes FCC licenses. Licensees considering transactions involving ownership changes such as a corporate merger, internal restructuring or reorganization, or sale of assets should take the appropriate steps to ensure that they comply with Section 310(d) of the Communications Act as well as FCC rules regarding assignments and transfers of control of FCC licenses.

Section 310(d) states:

No construction permit or station license, or any rights thereunder, shall be transferred, assigned, or disposed of in any manner, voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or indirectly, or by transfer of control of any corporation holding such permit or license, to any person except upon application to the Commission and upon finding by the Commission that the public interest, convenience, and necessity will be served thereby.

FCC rules for implementing Section 310(d) are outlined in the Commission’s rules for each radio service. The steps needed to meet FCC requirements also can be different depending on the band involved and whether the license is classified as PMRS or CMRS. To assist private wireless licensees with complying with this section of the Act, the FCC has published an online guide outlining the obligations of the licensees and providing examples of proposed transactions requiring their approval. A licensee’s failure to obtain prior FCC approval in accordance with the Act and the FCC’s rules is subject to possible enforcement action, including monetary forfeitures.

The Enterprise Wireless Alliance (EWA) offers a comprehensive service to assist with transactions involving the assignment or transfer of control of licenses that includes researching the ULS for all licenses held by an organization to assist with due diligence and completing the necessary paperwork according to FCC rules to seek prior FCC approval. In most radio services, the FCC requires the FCC form 603 to be completed and submitted.

To discuss your pending (or past) license transfer of control or assignment, please contact Ms. Robin Cohen, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs & Spectrum Strategies at 703-797-5112 or robin.cohen@enterprisewireless.org

Happiness

“Folks are usually about as happy as they make their minds up to be.” ― Abraham Lincoln

“90 in 90: Croatia vs. England
2018 FIFA World Cup™ Highlights”

Watch 90 minutes of Croatia vs. England in 90 seconds.