Browse by Tags

A bi-partisan group of ten U.S. senators is urging the FCC to delay its vote on making changes to intercarrier compensation fees and the Universal Service Fund (USF), saying more time is needed to asses the potential disadvantages the changes would have on rural customers. One of the many decisions the Federal Communications Commission is set to make on Nov. 4-- besides the $28.1 billion Verizon Wireless-Alltel merger, the Sprint-Clearwire deal to create the new Clearwire and a decision about the future use of white-space spectrum--is whether regulatory changes are needed to intercarrier compensation fees. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has advocated dropping the complex rules that assess fees in favor of a uniform rate. Consumer advocates have argued that this will benefit the major incumbent carriers financially, while pinching smaller rural carriers that depend upon the fees as a major source of income. The senators, mainly from rural states, said in a letter to the FCC, that while the FCC's stated position is to use changes to the USF to expand rural broadband access, the proposed changes might actually hurt that effort. "Instead of rushing a proposal through which has not been open for public review, great care needs to be taken to craft a policy which is comprehensive in nature and mindful of rural telecommunications customers when dealing with intercarrier compensation and USF reform," the senators said in a letter. For more: - see this release Related Articles: FCC plans intercarrier fee rule changes Good, Tough and Timely. Revising Intercarrier Compensation

Last Friday afternoon, the FCC issued a report putting to rest worries about interference from a free wireless broadband service using the AWS-3 spectrum, paving the way for an auction sometime next year. However, opponents of the auction, including T-Mobile, aren’t going to give up without a fight. The original proposal for the spectrum, put forth [...]

In the coming months, the FCC has some decisions to make that will impact the future of wireless broadband--a subject that is near and dear to Chairman Kevin Martin's heart as he'd like to see wireless broadband bridge connectivity for the country's have-nots. Next month, the commission is expected to take up the growing debate over white-space spectrum, that unused TV spectrum that advocates such as Google and Microsoft want used on an unlicensed basis for super-WiFi services. Martin likes the idea, but the FCC faces heavy lobbying pressure from the National Association of Broadcasters and wireless microphone users such as the NFL that fear interference. Recently completed field tests haven't revealed any clear answers over the interference debate. The FCC also is looking to auction spectrum in the AWS-3 band that would require the licensee to dedicate 25 percent of its network capacity to free broadband service, install a network-based Internet filtering system to block pornography and allow open access to third-party devices and applications. Again, the commission is facing some stiff opposition to the plan from operators such as T-Mobile that worry about interference with the AWS-1 band and Republicans who think crafting such rules would create another 700 MHz D-block debacle. And the commission is considering the New Clearwire deal, which involves Sprint pooling its WiMAX assets with Clearwire with the help of millions from Intel, Google and cable operators. That plan is also coming under fire from AT&T, which is accusing the stakeholders of providing inconsistent details on how much usable spectrum the new entity will have and reiterated that it wants the FCC to scrutinize the deal like it would other carrier deals. The question is, can the FCC effectively tackle these decisions before a new administration and Congress comes onto the scene in 2009? The commission is supposed to rule on the New Clearwire deal before the end of the year, but Martin has said the auction will probably not move forward this year because of the intense controversy over the plan. The white-space controversy seems far from resolved as there doesn't seem to be a clear answer over whether these devices cause interference or not. So it's unlikely the commission will come to a consensus on that before the end of the year. What does that mean for the wireless broadband dream? Will it be stuck in limbo? Some of the nation's operators that don't want...

The FCC has asked a federal appeals court to dump the enhanced 911 location accuracy rules, which were approved last November but have not yet been put into effect. The commission said that the public safety community supports a relaxed standard. Recently the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO) and the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) told the FCC that measuring the wireless E911 accuracy at the public safety answer point level was unworkable in practice and that compliance measurements should be accepted at the county level. The mobile phone industry has lobbied for assessing E911 location accuracy by statewide average. However, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has said this method is too lax and would not protect consumers who make 911 calls on their cell phones. For more: - see this RCR story Related articles: D.C. Court puts the brakes on E911 FCC Clarifies E911 Accuracy Requirements

T-Mobile USA sent one of its top executives to Washington, D.C. to plead with the FCC to reconsider its controversial plan to auction a nationwide block of spectrum that would require a licensee to offer free broadband services. On Thursday, T-Mobile's CTO flew to D.C. to meet with the FCC on its proposal. "We're asking the FCC essentially to slow down and give the industry some time to do some testing," said T-Mobile Chief Technology and Innovation Officer Cole Brodman. T-Mobile argues that Internet activity on the AWS-3 band would interfere with its own wireless services. The company paid nearly $4.2 billion in the AWS spectrum auction and it plans to use this spectrum to roll out UMTS in 26 markets by year-end. The commission is proposing to combine the 2155 to 2175 MHz band with the 2175 MHz to 2180 MHz band to create a 25-megahertz swathe of spectrum that would support a nationwide license. The spectrum is referred to as advanced wireless services-3 and would require the licensee to dedicate 25 percent of its network capacity to free broadband service, install a network-based Internet filtering system to block pornography and allow open access to third-party devices and applications. A delay on the proposal for the AWS-3 spectrum auction is likely. Last week FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said that the sale of this spectrum could be put off until early next year. This is bad news for M2Z Networks, which originally proposed the plan. The company is anxious to move ahead with the auction since it is currently subsisting on venture capital. For more: - see this article Related articles: T-Mobile calls for delay of FCC's free wireless broadband initiative Andrew Seybold - A New Wireless Opportunity! Interview with M2Z: Free wireless broadband can work. M2Z interview FCC looks to fast-track free wireless broadband network initiative. Wireless broadband story

Not everyone is happy with last year's FCC rules regarding roaming. The rules require carriers to allow roaming at reasonable rates for the requesting carrier so their customers can roam outside the carrier's network. At issue is the "in-market exception rule," which says that a roaming deal is not required if the competitor holds spectrum rights in an area where it would like to have a roaming agreement for its customers. Smaller operators without national footprints argue that this is unfair because it can take several years for an operator to build out a network in a license area and in some cases, such as with AWS spectrum, the spectrum is encumbered for a number of years preventing the carrier from building there. Now two congressmen have weighed in on the battle. In a letter to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, Reps. Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas) and Mike Doyle (D-Penn) said that the "in-market exception services as a secondary buildout requirement that does not serve our constituents who depend on small and regional carriers to provide competitive choice in the marketplace." For more: - see this RCR story Related story: Small players want review of roaming deals