Industry Disagrees on Bluebird S. 253 Petition

Industry disagreed whether the FCC should grant Bluebird's petition to preempt the rights-of-way fees charged Columbia, Missouri, as a violation of Communications Act Section 253, in comments posted Thursday in docket 21-323. The telco's fees are "significantly higher than comparable charges for right-of-way access and far exceed charges previously struck down by the commission as excessive," said the Wireless ISP Association. Granting the petition "will signal to other municipalities that excessive and non-cost-based right-of-way access fees place unequal burdens on other providers," WSIPA said. The city's ROW requirements are "unlawfully discriminatory and materially inhibit or limit the ability to compete on a fair and balanced regulatory basis," said Crown Castle Fiber. Effects of the alleged ROW practices "would extend beyond Bluebird and have a chilling effect on other providers seeking to offer competitive broadband service," said NTCA. Preempt uncapped linear foot ROW fees "at minimum," said C Spire: "Linear foot ROW fees are both prohibitive and unrelated to cost." NATOA, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities, National Association of Counties and National Association of Towns and Townships disagreed. "Reject the invitation to play the role of the judiciary with respect to the application of Section 253(c) in this dispute," the groups said. The Northern Dakota County Cable Communications Commission; Shreveport, Louisiana; and Minnesota Association of Community Telecommunications Administrators said similar. "Reject the intractable and legally baseless approach suggested by the petition" and the potential violations "warrant careful scrutiny," said ACA Connects.