The following items have been adopted by the Federal Communications Commission and deleted from the list of items scheduled for consideration at the March 31, 2020 Open Meeting. 

1. Call Authentication Trust Anchor (WC Docket No. 17-97); Implementation of TRACED Act Section 6(a)—Knowledge of Customers by Entities with Access to Numbering Resources (WC Docket No. 20-67): The FCC will consider a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would (1) adopt rules requiring originating and terminating voice service providers to implement the STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication framework in the Internet Protocol portions of their networks; and (2) propose additional measures to combat illegal spoofing, including measures to implement portions of the TRACED Act.
2. Rules Governing the Use of Distributed Transmission System Technologies (MB Docket No. 20-74); Authorizing Permissive Use of the “Next Generation” Broadcast Television Standard (GN Docket No. 16-142): The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would seek comment on whether to modify the FCC’s rules governing the use of distributed transmission systems by broadcast television stations.
3. Significantly Viewed Stations (MB Docket No. 20-73); Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative (MB Docket No. 17-105): The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would seek comment on whether to update the methodology for determining whether a television broadcast station is “significantly viewed” in a community outside of its local market.
4. Revision of the FCC’s Part 76 Review Procedures (MB Docket No. 20-70); Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative (MB Docket No. 17-105); Revision of the FCC’s Program Carriage Rules (MB Docket No. 11-131): The FCC will consider a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would seek comment on whether to modify the Commission’s rules governing the resolution of program carriage disputes between video programming vendors and multichannel video programming distributors.
5. Eliminating Ex Ante Pricing Regulation and Tariffing of Telephone Access Charges (WC Docket No. 20-71): The FCC will consider a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would propose to (1) eliminate ex ante pricing regulation and require detariffing of various end-user charges associated with interstate access service, and (2) prohibit carriers from separately listing these charges on customers’ telephone bills.
6. The FCC will also consider a Personnel Action #20-1 through #20-5. 

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai circulated a draft order for implementing a $200 million telehealth program in line with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, which President Donald Trump recently signed into law. The FCC hopes to start distributing awards within the month for projects that would help patients receive health services remotely under the COVID-19 program. Also in the draft order is final language for a pilot program that would make $100 million available for telehealth projects from the Universal Service Fund. 

Senior FCC officials noted they are hoping the Office of Management and Budget will use emergency procedures to approve the application form for the COVID-19 program given the special circumstances, no such allowance is expected for the pilot project. Money for the COVID-19 program will be available until it or the pandemic is exhausted. The pilot project is meant to run over the course of three years. In the interest of getting the funds out faster, the FCC plans to process applicants for the COVID-19 program on a rolling basis, making awards as applications come in, officials said. Awards for the pilot project will all be made all at once following a set deadline. Officials said, unlike with the pilot project, the process for the COVID-19 program would not involve a competitive bidding process and that they don’t anticipate any single award would exceed a million dollars, in order to encourage many applicants to participate. 

Another significant difference is that while the COVID-19 program would allow applicants to use funds to purchase connected devices for monitoring patients, the pilot project will not. Under both programs, funds can be used to purchase telecommunications and information services. Also, the COVID-19 program would cover 100% of the costs of a telehealth project while the pilot project would cover 85 % of total costs

President Donald Trump held a call with top communications company CEOs to check in with those working to maintain and extend essential connections in a pandemic-driven world of sheltering- and quarantining-in-place. According to the White House, the President thanked them and their employees for their work to keep the country connected for work, education, shopping and bridging the physical distances with virtual socializing. The President talked about the strength of a free-market based network system that remained strong. The President called the system the envy of the world and thanked them for not only keeping the networks running, but extending free service and waiving bills and late fees for low-income residents. He said they were answering his call for an all-of-America response to the virus pandemic.  

In order to help consumers meet their urgent communications needs during this unprecedented emergency, the Federal Communications Commission should consider the following actions during the COVID-19 pandemic and for a reasonable period thereafter as unemployed and low-income Americans get back on their feet:

• Suspend the prohibition on duplicative support to ensure that all students and adults in a household have access to the broadband connections they need to while limiting interactions outside the home.8 At a minimum, act to allow the program to support one fixed and one mobile broadband connection per household.
• Modeled after its response to Hurricane Katrina, the FCC should establish a temporary emergency Lifeline program separate from the existing Lifeline program. The emergency Lifeline program could support a discount of up to $25 per connection per month up to the total monthly service charge per connection (up to 180 days). A participating carrier could opt to make any fixed or mobile communications service(s) or service package(s) that include voice and/or internet, available for discounts. To participate in the emergency Lifeline program, a carrier would be required to be designated as an Emergency Lifeline ETC subject to expedited procedures and temporary duration.
  • To be eligible, a consumer would need to be unemployed, a gig worker no longer deriving an income, or any person otherwise no longer receiving a paycheck as a result of the COVID-19 emergency. The FCC would determine the documentation sufficient to demonstrate satisfaction of these criteria or eligibility under the existing Lifeline program.

The many changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have given the world’s communications networks an impromptu stress test. Data demand has surged and shifted. “Peak hour” — the busiest period of the day on a network — now hits at different times and extends for longer durations. Signs of stress have shown up in other parts of the world so Americans have begun asking: Do our networks have the capacity to meet this surge in demand? Here’s the bottom line. America’s Internet infrastructure is strong and resilient. We track a range of network performance data from a diverse set of sources — from Internet providers themselves to third-party traffic monitors. The data show that the recent surges in Internet traffic are well within the capacity of US networks.

Everything from meetings at the office to happy hours with friends are all now occurring in digital space. All of this internet use is putting more pressure on our broadband infrastructure. Just in the past few weeks, data demands have risen in nearly all categories. The previous peak has become the new average, and the surge is starting to threaten the quality and speed of content downloads. As shelter-in-place directives spread and demand increases, the question lingers of whether our broadband infrastructure can support the new normal. Even while internet users often pay for service they don’t need, our internet infrastructure threatens to be insufficient in this time of crisis. How should policymakers reconcile these opposing truths? To start, it’s important to understand that the definition of “need” is evolving. We must better understand how to build networks and policies that respond to large influxes in demand. Three important factors about network deployments should influence the current policy debates:

1. While many industrial processes increase in incremental, constant steps, networks largely improve through big transitions to next-generation technologies.
2. Networks should be built for peaks, not averages.
3. The real upside for the economy and society comes with new applications that will take advantage of the increased bandwidth. 

We have an opportunity to explore what we can do with today’s broadband capabilities. While the crisis will teach many important lessons about our networks and their coverage, it would be a waste not to reexamine how we can improve our economy, our society, and critical public goods by better utilizing the abundant bandwidth we have while once again preparing for a future that’s more online than ever.

[Blair Levin is a nonresident senior fellow with the Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. He serves as the executive director of Gig.U: The Next Generation Network Innovation Project, an initiative of three dozen leading research university communities seeking to support educational and economic development by accelerating the deployment of next generation networks.]

With Comcast's network performing so well during the pandemic, why did Comcast's data cap exist in the first place? The answer has always been "money," of course—a Comcast executive once acknowledged in a Twitter reply that imposing data caps is a business decision, not one driven by technical necessity. But it might be useful to re-examine Comcast's previous justifications for the data cap now that the arbitrary limit is temporarily gone and Comcast could face public pressure to make it go away forever. Comcast's official line is that it imposes a data cap to ensure "fairness" among its customers, which is not the same thing as saying data caps are necessary to prevent network congestion. But Comcast has occasionally spoken of Internet data as if it's a depletable resource, like water or gas.

Now that Comcast has done the previously unthinkable—waive its data caps throughout the nation, for two full months, the company is naturally facing calls to make the change permanent. Sen Ron Wyden (D-OR) said, "If there was any doubt that data caps weren't necessary to manage network loads, that argument is settled—families are using far more data in their homes as a result of the pandemic, without issue. Data caps have always been about socking consumers with extra fees to pad Big Cable's profit margins. Even after the COVID-19 emergency passes, ISPs should do away with unnecessary data caps." Federal Communications Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said, "Over the long term, we will have to assess the lessons learned from the use of so much connectivity during this pandemic, including the role of data caps going forward."

Corey Shepherd teaches fifth graders in rural Alaska in a school district the size of Indiana. The terrain there is so rural that only airplanes and snowmobiles connect the district’s 11 tiny villages. Shepherd is one of more than 7,000 teachers in her state trying to make the most of teaching her students since the governor closed schools to in-person learning to stop the spread of the coronavirus. One method she isn’t relying on: online learning. “Around half of my students have access to the internet on some device at home,” Shepherd said. “Internet service is very expensive in rural Alaska and comes with data caps. Internet service is also prone to interruptions due to weather.” For those who already have service, there’s help: Across the nation, many internet providers have agreed to waive late fees and end disconnects for families in financial hardship. But millions without high-speed internet at home have been left to fend for themselves as governments shut down their school buildings and mandate distance learning.