Commenters Disagree on Extending Handset Unlocking Comment Deadline

Incompas, Consumer Reports and Public Knowledge urged the FCC to ignore the Competitive Carriers Association’s request for a 15-day delay in the deadline for filing reply comments on proposed handset unlocking rules. The FCC heard little agreement this week in initial comments (see 2409100048). Absent extension, replies are due Sept. 23. “Given the importance of this proceeding” delaying the proceeding would be “harmful to consumers and competitive providers,” the three groups said in a filing posted Friday in docket 24-186: “This proceeding does not have an overwhelming number of comments or technical components to review, which makes the record here manageable to respond to by the current reply comment deadline.” T-Mobile, CCA’s largest member, supported the extension. “The proposed rule would have a significant impact on wireless providers’ business operations and impact important Commission policy objectives concerning digital equity and national security,” T-Mobile said. The “modest” extension that CCA is seeking “would facilitate a more robust round of reply comments that will allow the Commission to make a better-informed decision considering the potential significant impact of its proposed rules,” the carrier said. CCA said the FCC “should ensure all interested parties have sufficient time to meaningfully participate in this proceeding and extend the reply comment deadline to ensure the development of a fulsome and robust record.” If granted, the new deadline would be Oct. 8. Meanwhile, T-Mobile representatives met this week with FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks to raise legal objections to the proposed rules, the same questions that have permeated many FCC proceedings in the wake of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Two years ago, SCOTUS elaborated on a new major questions test for weighing agency decisions in West Virginia v. EPA (see 2206300066). “While well-meaning, the proposed rule would hamper carriers’ ability to offer installment plans -- thereby harming competition and consumer choice, particularly for low-income consumers,” T-Mobile said: “Furthermore, the Commission fails to point to specific statutory authorization for an unlocking mandate," which "would have profound economic consequences, thus raising a ‘major question’ that would require clear statutory authority from Congress.”