|
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.
|
BloostonLaw Telecom Update
|
Vol. 21, No. 31
|
July 25, 2018
|
FCC Provides List of Counties Where Conditional Lifeline Voice Forbearance Applies
On July 23, the FCC issued a Public Notice announcing the counties in which conditional forbearance from the obligation to offer Lifeline-supported voice service applies, pursuant to the FCC’s 2016 Lifeline Order. The full list can be found
here
. The conditional forbearance is effective September 21, 2018. This forbearance applies only to the Lifeline voice obligation of eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) that are designated for purposes of receiving both high-cost and Lifeline support (high-cost/Lifeline ETCs), and not to Lifeline-only ETCs.
See the full article below for more information.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
Headlines
FCC Authorizes 175 Rate-of-Return Carriers for A-CAM Support
On July 20, the FCC issued a
Public Notice
authorizing 175 rate-of-return companies that elected 210 revised offers of Alternative Connect America Cost Model (A-CAM) support to receive additional model-based support in exchange for extending broadband service to additional locations. A report showing the revised authorization amount and deployment obligations for each carrier that elected a revised offer can be found
here
. These carriers are among the rate-of-return carriers nationwide that previously had been authorized to receive A-CAM support. In addition, the FCC also released a summary report showing the state-level amounts of model-based support and associated deployment obligations for all carriers that have been authorized to receive model-based support. That report can be found
here
.
In 2016, the FCC adopted a voluntary path for rate-of-return carriers to elect to receive model-based support for a 10-year term in exchange for extending broadband service to a pre-determined number of eligible locations. In Public Notices issued on December 20, 2016 and January 24, 2017, the FCC authorized model-based support for 207 rate-of-return companies.
In the 2018
Rate-of-Return Reform Order,
the FCC offered additional support to all carriers that accepted the first revised offers of model-based support. Under this second revised offer, all locations with costs above $52.50 will be funded up to a per-location fund cap of $146.10, with adjusted deployment obligations. On May 7, 2018, the Bureau released a public notice announcing the revised model-based support amounts and corresponding deployment obligations and providing the carriers with 45 days to accept the revised offer. In response, 175 rate-of-return companies submitted letters electing 210 separate revised offers of A-CAM support in 39 states.
Collectively, the net increase in annualized support compared to the previously-elected A-CAM amounts is approximately $36 million. However, this increase will be partially offset by transition payments already disbursed that will be reduced or eliminated going forward due to the per-location cap’s increase. The FCC previously directed USAC to make a one-time lump sum payment from excess cash in its high-cost account to true-up support that would have been disbursed in 2017 and 2018 at the $146.10 per-location support amounts. USAC will calculate both the adjustment to transition payments and the necessary true-up, and adjust the amount of cash it retains in the high-cost account to fund A-CAM to reflect the revised authorizations.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.
Comments on Verizon Petition for Declaratory Ruling Due August 20
On July 20, the FCC issued a
Public Notice
announcing the comment deadlines for Verizon’s
Petition for Declaratory Ruling,
in which it asks the FCC to confirm that if a local exchange carrier (LEC) delivers a call to a two-stage dialing platform, including an Internet Protocol (IP)-enabled platform, the LEC does not perform terminating switched access functions and cannot charge tariffed end office terminating switched access charges for that call.
Comments are due August 20, and reply comments are due September 5.
Verizon explains that this Petition arises from ongoing litigation, including a primary jurisdiction referral from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in March 2018. Carriers interested in participating in this proceeding are invited to contact the firm for more information.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.
FCC Provides List of Counties Where Conditional Lifeline Voice Forbearance Applies
On July 23, the FCC issued a
Public Notice
announcing the counties in which conditional forbearance from the obligation to offer Lifeline-supported voice service applies, pursuant to the FCC’s 2016
Lifeline Order.
The full list can be found
here
. The conditional forbearance is effective September 21, 2018. This forbearance applies only to the Lifeline voice obligation of eligible telecommunications carriers (ETCs) that are designated for purposes of receiving both high-cost and Lifeline support (high-cost/Lifeline ETCs), and not to Lifeline-only ETCs.
The
2016 Lifeline Order
established conditional forbearance from Lifeline voice obligations in targeted areas where certain competitive conditions are met. In particular, the FCC granted forbearance from high-cost/ Lifeline ETCs’ obligation to offer and advertise Lifeline voice service in counties where the following conditions are met: (1) 51 percent of Lifeline subscribers in the county are obtaining broadband Internet access service; (2) there are at least three other providers of Lifeline broadband Internet access service that each serve at least five percent of the Lifeline broadband subscribers in that county; and (3) the ETC does not actually receive federal high-cost universal service support.
The counties listed in the
Public Notice
meet the competitive conditions; and for ETCs that are receiving high-cost support in these counties, the forbearance applies only in areas within the county where the ETC does not receive high-cost support. This forbearance does not grant relief from the Lifeline voice obligation as to those Lifeline subscribers that the high-cost/Lifeline ETC serves as of the date of this Public Notice. Additionally, this forbearance does not preclude ETCs from electing to provide and receive reimbursement for Lifeline-discounted voice service.
This forbearance will apply in the counties identified in the
Public Notice,
to the extent that ETCs are not receiving federal high-cost universal service support in those areas, until 60 days after the FCC issues a
Public Notice
in 2019 updating the list of counties in which conditional forbearance applies.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy, Mary Sisak, and Sal Taillefer.
FCC Seeks Comment on Competition in Audio Programming Marketplace
On July 23, the FCC issued a
Public Notice
seeking comment the state of competition in the communications marketplace, including competition to deliver audio service among broadcast stations, satellite radio, and entities that provide audio content via the Internet and to mobile devices.
Comment deadlines have not yet been established.
Specifically, the
Public Notice
requests comment on the criteria or metrics that could be used to evaluate the state of competition in the audio programming marketplace, as well as comment and information on industry data, competitive dynamics, and trending factors, including:
-
identification and ownership of key Audio Marketplace Participants, as well as the business models and competitive strategies they use;
-
trends in service offerings, pricing, and consumer behavior;
-
the extent of competition among Audio Marketplace Participants, including intra-modal competition (i.e., competition among providers of the same type, such as terrestrial radio broadcast stations) and inter-modal competition;
-
ratings, subscribership, and revenue information, for the marketplace as a whole and for individual Audio Marketplace Participants;
-
capital investment, innovation, and the deployment of advanced technology;
-
requirements for entry into the marketplace; and
-
recent entry into and exit from the marketplace.
In addition, comment is on whether laws, regulations, regulatory practices or demonstrated marketplace practices pose a barrier to competitive entry into the marketplace for the delivery of audio programming or to the competitive expansion of existing providers. Comment is also sought concerning the extent to which any such laws, regulations or marketplace practices affect entry barriers for entrepreneurs and other small businesses in the marketplace for the delivery of audio programming.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Gerry Duffy.
Law & Regulation
Legislation Could Direct FCC to Study Ways to Promote Precision Agriculture Technologies
A bill introduced in the US House of Representatives this week would direct the Federal Communications Commission to study ways to promote rural broadband connectivity and the use of precision agriculture technologies. These technologies allow farmers and ranchers to collect data in real time about their fields, to automate field management, and to maximize resources.
If the bill should become law, this development should be of interest to our law firm’s clients who provide broadband service to communities with significant farming and ranching operations.
The Precision Agriculture Connectivity Act of 2018 requires the FCC to establish a Task Force for Meeting Connectivity and Technology Needs of Precision Agriculture in the United States. The task force's duties would include: (1) identifying and measuring current gaps in broadband Internet access service coverage of cropland and ranch land; (2) assembling a comprehensive guide of all federal programs and resources working to expand broadband Internet access service on unserved cropland and ranch land; and (3) developing policy recommendations to promote the rapid, expanded deployment of fixed and mobile broadband Internet access service on unserved cropland and ranch land.
Many of the latest yield-maximizing and environmentally friendly farming and ranching techniques require broadband connections for data collection and analysis performed both on the farm and in remote data centers, American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) President Zippy Duvall wrote in a June letter urging House Energy and Commerce Committee members to support the bill.
“Today’s farmers and ranchers are using precision agricultural techniques to make decisions that impact the amount of fertilizer they need to purchase and apply to the field, the amount of water needed to sustain the crop, and the amount and type of herbicides or pesticides they may need to apply,” Duvall wrote.
According to the AFBF, FCC data shows that 39 percent of rural Americans lack access to minimum broadband speed service (25 Mbps/3 Mbps), compared to only 4 percent of urban American. We are not aware of any specific FCC information about broadband connectivity on farm and ranch land.
The House bill is identical to a measure that was introduced to the US Senate last January as S. 2343. Both items include findings that precision agriculture technologies can reduce operation costs by up to 25 dollars per acre and may increase farm yields by up to 70 percent by 2050, and that these cost savings and productivity benefits cannot be realized without the availability of reliable broadband Internet access service delivered to the cropland and ranch land of the United States.
The Task Force in question would be selected by the FCC Chairman in consultation with FCC staff and the Secretary of Agriculture, and would include as many as fifteen (15) members, including agricultural producers, providers of rural fixed and mobile broadband Internet access services and telecommunications infrastructure, representatives from the satellite industry, representatives from agricultural equipment, robotics technologies and drone manufacturers, and representatives from State and local governments.
Both the House and Senate bills are reported as having strong bipartisan support. The AFBF supports inclusion of the Precision Agriculture Connectivity Act in the farm bill.
BloostonLaw Contacts: John Prendergast, Gerry Duffy, and Cary Mitchell.
Combined Nationwide Test of WEA and EAS Scheduled for Sept. 20th
The FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, in coordination with FEMA, has announced a nationwide combined test of the Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) and Emergency Alert System (EAS) on Thursday, September 20, 2018, with a back-up date of Wednesday, October 3, 2018.
EAS participants must file the required series of reports starting on August 27, as discussed below.
Nationwide WEA Test
Participating Commercial Mobile Service (CMS) Providers (those commercial mobile service providers that have elected voluntarily to transmit WEA alert messages) should be advised that at 2:18 pm EDT on the test date, FEMA will send a WEA test message to WEA-capable wireless devices throughout the entire United States and territories. The WEA test message itself will state: “THIS IS A TEST of the National Wireless Emergency Alert System. No action is needed.”
Participating carriers should observe the test results in their communities and may report any problems or provide feedback at the FCC’s Public Safety Support Center at
https://www.fcc.gov/general/publicsafetysupport-center
.
Nationwide EAS Test
Two minutes after the Nationwide WEA Test, all participants in the Emergency Alert System
must
take part in the National EAS Test which has been scheduled to take place at 2:20 p.m. EDT. As a reminder, EAS Participants are
required
to comply with the Commission’s EAS rules, and include analog radio and television stations, wired and wireless cable television systems, digital broadcast systems, digital television broadcast stations, Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service, digital cable and digital audio broadcasting systems, and wireline video systems.
We remind EAS Participants that they are required to register with the EAS Test Reporting System (ETRS) and
must
complete the filing of ETRS Form One on or before
August 27, 2018.
On or before 11:59 p.m. EDT, September 20, 2018, EAS Participants must file the “day of test” information sought by ETRS Form Two.
On or before November 5, 2018, EAS Participants must file the detailed post-test data sought by ETRS Form Three.
Filers can access ETRS by visiting the ETRS page of the Commission’s website at
https://www.fcc.gov/general/eas-test-reporting-system
. Instructional videos regarding registration and completion of the ETRS Forms are available on the ETRS page.
Form One
The substance of Form One in ETRS appears to be the same as last year and requests identifying information on a participant’s location, its EAS equipment and monitoring assignments, and contact information for EAS purposes. The FCC requires each EAS participant to file a separate Form One for each EAS decoder, EAS encoder, or unit combining such decoder and encoder functions. Forms can be submitted on a station-by-station basis or on a “batch filing” basis for certain commonly-owned stations. Again, all Form Ones must be filed by no later than August 27.
The ETRS system requires use of an FCC Username obtained from the Commission’s CORES systems.
Form Two
Based on the form as currently available in ETRS (which will not be “live” for filing until
September 20th
),
participants will simply be required to certify whether the station received and retransmitted the national test message.
Form Three
Finally, all EAS participants will be required to file a post-test ETRS Form 3 no later than Nov. 5, 2018. Based on the Form 3 currently available in the ETRS system, participants will be required to identify the specific times at which they received and retransmitted the test message, the source(s) from which they received the test (including which source it was received from first), the language in which the message was received and retransmitted, and any complications they experienced.
Preparing for the Nationwide EAS Test
The Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau encourages EAS Participants to prepare for the Nationwide EAS Test in coordination with their State Emergency Communication Committees, by:
-
ensuring that a copy of the EAS Operating Handbook is located at normal duty positions, or EAS equipment locations, and is otherwise immediately available to operators;
-
reviewing the EAS Operating Handbook for the actions to be taken by operators upon receipt of the test alert, and tailoring any actions as necessary that are specific to the EAS Participants’ facilities;
-
ensuring that EAS equipment can receive and process the national periodic test code, the “six zeroes” national location code, and otherwise operate in compliance with the Commission rules;
-
upgrading EAS equipment software and firmware to the most recent version;
-
reviewing their 2017 ETRS Form One filings to identify and make necessary updates to the information previously provided; and
-
manually synchronizing EAS equipment clocks to the official time provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, if an EAS Participant’s equipment does not automatically synchronize to an Internet time source.
Clients with questions about either the Nationwide WEA Test or the Nationwide EAS Test and any of the associated EAS Test filing/reporting requirements should contact Cary Mitchell.
BloostonLaw Contact: Cary Mitchell.
Comment Deadline Extended for FM Translator Interference FNPRM
On July 18, the FCC granted the Motion for Extension of Time to extend the comment and reply comment deadlines, filed by Beasley Media Group, LLC; Educational Media Foundation; Gradick Communications, LLC; iHeart Communications, Inc.; Neuhoff Corp.; Radio One Licenses, LLC/Urban One, Inc.; and Withers Broadcasting Companies (Petitioners), of the FCC’s FNPRM in MB Docket 18-119.
Comments are now due August 6, and reply comments are now due September 5.
In the
FNPRM,
the FCC seeks comment on several proposals designed to streamline the rules relating to interference caused by FM translators and expedite the translator complaint resolution process, based in part upon the petitions for rulemaking filed by the National Association of Broadcasters and Aztec Capital Partners, Inc. The FCC is also seeking comment on its proposal to specify and clarify the information that must be contained in each listener interference complaint, thus potentially reducing lengthy and resource-intensive disputes over a listener’s
bona fides.
To discourage the filing of poorly substantiated claims, the FCC is proposing to require that a minimum number of listener complaints be submitted with each translator interference claim and that listener complaints beyond a certain contour would not be actionable. Finally, the FCC is seeking comment on streamlining the interference resolution process by applying technical data, rather than relying on listener involvement, to demonstrate resolution of properly documented, bona fide listener complaints.
The FCC proposes to amend the actual interference and predicted interference rules to state that interference will be considered to occur whenever reception of a regularly used signal by six or more listeners, at separate locations using separate receivers, is impaired or is predicted to be impaired, by the signals radiated by the FM translator station.
Finally, in order to simplify and expedite the interference resolution process, the NPRM proposes to require that the FM translator operator, once interference has been initially established through bona fide listener complaints, submit a technical showing that all interference has been eliminated. The NPRM proposes to require that this technical showing be based on the same U/D ratio methodology applicable to § 74.1204(f) complaints.
BloostonLaw Contacts: John Prendergast and Richard Rubino.
Rep. Collins Introduces 911 Integrity Act
On July 19, Congressman Chris Collins (NY-27) introduced legislation that prevents states from diverting fees collected from consumers on their phone bills, which are meant to be used to improve 9-1-1 emergency communications systems. Collins’ bill directs the FCC, in consultation with public safety organizations, and state, local and tribal governments, to determine the appropriate use of funds collected from consumers. Currently, states are able to set their own definition of what is a covered cost for 9-1-1 fees, which has allowed them to divert fees.
“It is completely unacceptable that we have seen states diverting fees meant to make important and necessary improvements to emergency response systems,” said Collins. “Diverting these important fees puts lives in danger, especially in rural areas. I thank Congresswoman Eshoo and Congressman Lance for their support of this legislation and their commitment to making sure all communities across the nation can achieve the highest level of safety.”
“Our 9-1-1 call centers are the first point of contact for Americans in emergency situations, but many of these call centers rely on technology that’s been in place since the time of the first 9-1-1 call 50 years ago,” said Eshoo. “9-1-1 fees collected by states should only be used to upgrade our 9-1-1 infrastructure, not diverted to the general coffers of state governments.”
“My constituents need to know that in an emergency the 9-1-1 call is going to go through,” said Lance. “Lawmakers in Trenton raided the fund set aside to improve the 9-1-1 system and left the account penniless – leaving public safety threatened and taxpayers on the hook. Members of the Communications and Technology Subcommittee are seeking to end this practice. The 911 Fee Integrity Act will empower the Federal Communications Commission to crack down on state governments that divert these funds and shortchange much needed upgrades to bring the critical 9-1-1 system into the 21st Century. And instead of further taxing New Jerseyans, Trenton should first stop diverting the existing fees from their intended use.”
“I commend Representatives Collins, Eshoo, and Lance for introducing the 9-1-1 Fee Integrity Act. Importantly, this legislation assigns the process to designate acceptable purposes and functions for 9-1-1 funds to the Commission, rather than the states as allowed under current law. This is key, as states like Rhode Island, New York, and New Jersey, and territories like Puerto Rico and Guam, have passed statutes over the years actually requiring the diversion of 9-1-1 funds for non-public safety related purposes.”
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Sal Taillefer.
FCC Issues $5,600 Forfeiture for Failure to Renew License
On July 18, the FCC issued a
Forfeiture Order
declaring a monetary forfeiture in the amount of $5,600 to Rufus Resources, LLC (Rufus), licensee of Station KMFR(AM), Pearsall, Texas (Station), for failing to timely file a license renewal application for the Station, and engaging in unauthorized operation of the Station after its authorization had expired.
Rufus failed to file a timely license renewal application prior to its license expiration on January 26, 2017. Rufus continued operating the Station without authorization, then filed a request for special temporary authority (STA) on February 15, 2017, seeking authority to remain on the air despite the expiration of its license. Rufus subsequently filed the Application on March 3, 2017. The STA expired on September 2, 2017, but Rufus did not request an extension of it until May 17, 2018, a month after the
Notice of Apparent Liability
was issued. Rufus responded to the
NAL
on May 17, 2018, requesting a reduction of the proposed monetary because the Station was licensed to San Antonio Radioworks (SAR) when the Renewal Letter was issued; “Rufus had not participated in the license renewal process [and] the issues related to a prior license term were not matters that would be brought to the attention of the licensee or its principals.”
The FCC rejected Rufus’s argument on the grounds that “[i]t is well settled that ignorance of the Rules does not excuse a violation. Additionally, the License Renewal Authorization for the Station’s prior term clearly stated that the Station’s license would expire on January 26, 2017.” The FCC did, however, reduce the forfeiture from $7,000 to $5,600 due to its history of substantial compliance with the FCC’s rules.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Richard Rubino.
Comment Deadlines on IP CTS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry Established
On July 23, the FCC issued a
Public Notice
announcing the filing deadlines for the
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
and
Notice of Inquiry
in its proceeding to modernize and reform the Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service (IP CTS) program.
Comments on the
NPRM
are due September 17, and reply comments are due October 16. Comments on the
NOI
are due October 16, and reply comments are due November 15.
In the
FNPRM
, the FCC seeks comment on how best to fund, administer, and determine user eligibility for IP CTS. Issues include the role that state programs and intrastate carriers can play in the provision of and support for IP CTS, the use of independent third-party hearing health professionals to perform IP CTS user eligibility assessments, and ways to curb provider practices that could be incenting use of IP CTS by people who may not need it. In the NOI, the FCC seeks comment on IP CTS performance goals and metrics to ensure service quality for users.
Carriers interested in participating in the IP CTS proceeding are invited to contact the firm for more information.
BloostonLaw Contacts: Ben Dickens, Gerry Duffy, and Mary Sisak.
Industry
AT&T Reveals Three More Cities for 5G Launch by the End of 2018
On July 20, AT&T announced Oklahoma City, Charlotte, and Raleigh, North Carolina, as three more cities where it plans launch 5G by the end of the year. AT&T Chief Technology Officer Andre Fuetsch said in an interview the mobile 5G network is expected to launch toward the end of the year, but declined to specify a date. AT&T previously said Atlanta, Dallas, and Waco, Texas would also have mobile 5G by the end of the year, as well as six more cities that have yet to be named.
According to Feutsch, the cities were chosen based on where AT&T already held spectrum and were open to AT&T installing the necessary infrastructure. “We worked with the cities that embraced the technology,” he said.
Because 5G-enabled smartphones are not expected to be available until 2019, AT&T plans to introduce a puck-shaped device to allow users to access the 5G network with their current phones.
Deadlines
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 4: 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.
-
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.)
-
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).
-
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.
-
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 FCC 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. 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. 6 – Comments are due on FM Translator Interference FNPRM.
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. 20 – Comments are due on Verizon IP Switching Declaratory Ruling.
Aug. 29 – Copyright Statement of Accounts is due.
September
Sep. 4 – 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 Verizon IP Switching Declaratory Ruling.
Sep. 5 – Reply comments are due on USTelecom Petition for Forbearance.
Sep. 5 – Reply comments are due on FM Translator Interference FNPRM.
Sep. 7 – Reply comments are due on 2.5GHz Transformation NPRM.
Sep. 17 – Comments are due on IP CTS NPRM.
October
Oct. 1 – FCC Form 396-C (MVPD EEO Program Annual Report).
Oct. 1 – Reply comments are due on Toll-Free Arbitrage FNPRM.
Oct. 16 – Reply comments are due on IP CTS NPRM.
Oct. 16 – Comments are due on IP CTS NOI.
November
Nov. 15 – Reply comments are due on IP CTS NOI.
|
This newsletter is
not
intended to provide legal advice. Those interested in more information should contact the firm.
— CONTACTS —
Harold Mordkofsky, 202-828-5520,
hma@bloostonlaw.com
Benjamin H. Dickens, Jr., 202-828-5510,
bhd@bloostonlaw.com
Gerard J. Duffy, 202-828-5528,
gjd@bloostonlaw.com
John A. Prendergast, 202-828-5540,
jap@bloostonlaw.com
Richard D. Rubino, 202-828-5519,
rdr@bloostonlaw.com
Mary J. Sisak, 202-828-5554,
mjs@bloostonlaw.com
D. Cary Mitchell, 202-828-5538,
cary@bloostonlaw.com
Salvatore Taillefer, Jr., 202-828-5562,
sta@bloostonlaw.com
|
|
