Posts Tagged ‘CMRS’
FCC Launches Discourse on Government Interruptions of Wireless Service
Posted on March 2, 2012The FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau and Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (Bureaus) are seeking comment on issues relating to intentional interruptions of licensed wireless services by government authorities for public safety purposes. Though the Bureaus recognize that uninterrupted wireless services is instrumental to ensuring public safety (noting that 70% of all 911 calls now originate from wireless phones), it also points to limited instances in which wireless service can risk or harm public safety (e.g., to detonate an explosive device, or to organize a violent flash mob). The Bureaus seek comment on what legal or policy guidance, if any, would be appropriate for the FCC to provide regarding government wireless service interruption and pose questions regarding precedent, bases for interrupting service, risks, scope, authority, and legal constraints. Comments are due by April 30, 2012, and reply comments by May 30, 2012.
FCC Requests Comment on CMRS Definition
Posted on February 21, 2012The FCC’s Wireless Telecommmunications Bureau has requested comment on a Petition for Declaratory ruling filed by NextG Networks that seeks to clarify that Distributed Antenna Systems and other “small cell solutions” are not CMRS service as defined by section 20.3 of the Commission’s rules. The issue has been referred to the Commission by the Superior Court of Arizona, County of Maricopa, which has been asked to decide whether the City of Scotsdale, Arizona may impose fees on NextG’s use of the public rights-of-way. A finding that NextG’s service is not CMRS would potentially exempt NextG from the imposition of such fees under Arizona law. NextG argues that the services it provides are akin to backhaul services provided to wireless carriers by telecommunications services providers and that its services are neither mobile services nor the functional equivalent of such services. Interested parties may file comments in Docket No. 12-37 on or before April 2, 2012 and reply comments on or before May 2, 2012.
Court Uphold FCC’s Wireless Siting Shot Clock
Posted on January 25, 2012The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has upheld an FCC declaratory ruling establishing a reasonable time period for state and local governments to act on wireless zoning requests. In response to a petition filed by CTIA, the FCC ruled that state or local authorities must act within 90 days from receipt on any personal wireless service facility siting application requesting collocations and within 150 days from receipt for all other applications. The cities of Arlington, Virginia and San Antonio, Texas appealed the FCC’s ruling, arguing that the FCC lacked statutory authority to adopt the 90-day and 150-day timeframes; the FCC acted arbitrarily and capriciously; and that the timeframes should have been subject to rulemaking notice and comment procedures rather than issued in connection with a declaratory ruling.
The court rejected all of these arguments, finding that an administrative agency generally enjoys substantial discretion to establish new policy by adjudication rather than rulemaking. Although the court expressed doubt as to whether adjudication was proper in this instance, it determined that any failure of the FCC would be deemed harmless error, especially in light of the fact that the Commission put CTIA’s petition out for and received substantial public comment. The court also found that establishment of the 90-day and 150-day periods to be a reasonable interpretation of the Communications Act and gave substantial deference to the Commission’s initial determination that it had statutory authority to act in this instance.
State Authority to Set Reasonable Termination Rate for Intrastate Traffic Exchanged by CMRS Carriers and LECs Upheld
Posted on May 18, 2011The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ruled that the FCC acted reasonably and within the scope of its authority by allowing state regulators to establish reasonable default charges for the termination of intrastate traffic exchanged between local exchange carriers (LECs) and CMRS providers in the absence of an interconnection agreement. The appeal, filed by CMRS operator MetroPCS, arose when North County Communications, a wireline LEC, began billing MetroPCS for terminating intrastate (both local and toll) traffic originated by MetroPCS. The parties had no interconnection agreement in place. North County filed a complaint with the FCC when MetroPCS refused to pay the bills. North County argued that MetroPCS violated its duty to pay for traffic termination under section 20.11 (b) of the FCC’s rules. The FCC decided to hold the dispute in abeyance while parties obtained a ruling from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) establishing a reasonable default termination rate. MetroPCS appealed that decision and unsuccessfully argued that the FCC was required either to establish the reasonable default rate on its own or at least establish guidelines for the CPUC to follow in setting the default rate.
FCC Extends Bill Shock Comment Deadlines
Posted on December 17, 2010The FCC has extended the deadline to file comments on its October Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Bill Shock NPRM) proposing rules for wireless carriers to provide usage alerts and information to help consumers avoid unexpected charges on their bills. This grant comes at the request of several wireless associations, including the Rural Telecommunications Group, Inc., the Rural Cellular Association and CTIA, who jointly petitioned the FCC to extend the comment deadlines in order to prepare full and informed comments on the complex host of issues raised in the Bill Shock NPRM. The new deadlines are January 10, 2011 for comments and February 8, 2011 for reply comments.