Disputes Flare in Net Neutrality Remand Comments; Some Cite COVID-19

Some want more clarity about the FCC's role regulating broadband, said comments posted through Tuesday. The agency asked to refresh dockets including 17-287, on how broadband service's reclassification as an information, not telecom, service affects authority over Lifeline, pole attachment agreements and public safety. Commenters disagreed whether the FCC should reconsider based on the public safety considerations.

Some want to know next steps. Public Knowledge and a few other groups including the National Hispanic Media Coalition asked whether the FCC plans to issue an NPRM or order. "Once the FCC reclassified broadband as an information service, its authority to offer Lifeline support to standalone broadband providers was called into question," said PK, et al. "The FCC has not, and could not, prove why it is worthwhile to get rid of the clearest authority for subsidizing standalone broadband with Lifeline funds when it has repeatedly discussed the value of broadband."

Excluding broadband-only providers from Lifeline would hurt low-income people, Incompas said. "The digital divide is negatively affecting millions of Americans in the best of times and the COVID-19 stress test simply confirms that the Commission’s existing universal service programs" aren't fulfilling statutory objectives, AARP said. "Treating broadband as a telecom service provides the clearest authority for Lifeline support of standalone broadband," said Free Press.

Stop the phase-out of Lifeline support for voice minutes "because affordable voice service remains important for low-income Americans, especially for public safety and remaining connected" during COVID-19, the National Lifeline Association said. Comcast wants to stop the voice support phase-out, saying the agency can still support Lifeline stand-alone broadband if it does phase out voice.

Requiring an ISP to add a voice service to qualify as a Lifeline eligible telecom carrier "is both a trivial cost to the provider and a clear benefit to consumers," Charter Communications said. Consumers shouldn't be adversely affected by the classification, it said.

The FCC doesn't have discretion to provide Lifeline support to carriers that provide broadband service over facilities-based broadband-capable networks "just because they also can support some type of voice service," NARUC said. Not everyone agrees.

"Although the Commission’s current rules limit Lifeline participation" to designated ETCs, the FCC could amend them to broaden eligibility, USTelecom said. "Explain the legal underpinnings for supporting broadband through the Lifeline program by applying the same basic legal principles that underlay its 2011 decision to support broadband in the high-cost programs," CTIA asked.

Retreating from a light-touch regulatory regime wouldn't be justified "even if there were evidence that a smattering of broadband-only providers have been prevented from entering and competing in the marketplace," NCTA said. It's "up to each company to decide which mix of services to provide, taking into account ... the regulatory treatment of each service," ACA Connects said. "This is not an anomaly ... but an ordinary fact of life for businesses in the communications sector."

Giving all providers of broadband service "equal access to critical network infrastructure would remove a significant barrier to broadband deployment for many WISPs," the Wireless ISP Association said.

One-touch, make-ready is "critical to reducing the time and expense associated with deployment of broadband facilities," Google Fiber said. Classification of broadband as an information service means investor-owned utilities and regulated attachers don't have to let new entrants use those procedures, it said.

Los Angeles, California's Santa Clara County and the county’s Central Fire Protection District said they're unable to fully respond due to their work on the pandemic, seeking an order rethink. The FCC declined to give public safety interests the extra 60 days they sought to comment (see 2004200042). “The Commission has misapprehended the fundamental and critical public-safety questions at stake in this proceeding, focusing instead on narrow technical questions that will generate an incomplete and misleading factual record,” the California governments said: The order “necessarily increases risk to public safety because its repeal of the Net Neutrality Rules prevents the Commission from ensuring the robust and reliable transmission of public health and safety-related communications between and among local governments and their residents. Instead, the Order permits broadband providers to prioritize profit.”

“Thoroughly consider any potential impacts to public safety communications,” APCO asked. “Consider the public’s need to make voice calls, send texts, or convey multimedia or other broadband-enabled data to 9-1-1,” APCO said: “Protect the ability of public safety entities to communicate with each other and the general public, whether through official alerting platforms … or other commercial platforms.”

The California Public Utilities Commission said the deregulation hurts public safety. The IoT is “deeply intertwined with many facets of society, including Critical Infrastructure,” the CPUC said: “The safety and reliability of these systems depends on instantaneous, nondiscriminatory access to communications.”

The order “had no impact on many existing services dedicated to public safety’s mission-critical communications needs, because those services were never within the scope of the Title II Order,” CTIA countered. The FCC was explicit that the “mass market” covered by 2015 rules “does not include enterprise service offerings or special access services,” the wireless association said.

Prioritization of traffic is essential to FirstNet, with its “ruthless preemption” for public safety communications, the Public Safety Broadband Technology Association commented. “First responders need this level of preemption,” the organization said: “This becomes even more critical when an emergency crosses state lines.”