Federal Communications Commission

What does inclusion actually mean for people with disabilities? Communication services can open doors to education, information, jobs, commerce, entertainment, and government services. Being able to connect can break down not only physical, but attitudinal barriers for people with disabilities, promoting greater self-determination and integration into society. But this can only happen if these technologies are designed to be accessible. Now, clearly, technological advances have improved our lives – and dramatically so. But staying ahead of the technological curve becomes a challenge when new innovations for the general public don’t consider the needs of people with disabilities.

From the 1980s until my tenure at the Federal Communications Commission, I was fortunate to be part of a nationwide movement to end discrimination against people with disabilities, an effort that has been compared to the civil rights movements of the 60s and 70s. Our reward was a string of federal laws that require closed captioning, video description, access to mobile and video devices, and a host of other disability protections. Under Chairman Wheeler’s strong leadership, the FCC has implemented these mandates by, for example, adopting rules for high quality captions, text-to-911 access, hearing aid compatibility, and the distribution of free communications devices to low income people who are both deaf and blind. A debt of thanks is owed to the Chairman, the Commissioners, and the incredible teams of FCC employees who have been so dedicated in their commitment to developing these safeguards.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Enforcement Bureau has reached a $450,000 settlement with AT&T to resolve an investigation into whether AT&T operated fixed wireless stations without authorization or without filing required license modification notices. The investigation revealed that AT&T operated numerous common carrier fixed point-to-point microwave stations throughout the United States in ways that differed from the stations’ licenses for periods ranging from three and a half years to over four years.

The Enforcement Bureau began its investigation of AT&T in 2012. In August 2014, during the course of the investigation, AT&T reported to the Commission that it had discovered numerous inconsistencies between the licensed parameters and the constructed facilities of a large number of fixed microwave licenses that it acquired from 2009 through 2012. AT&T did not timely review the acquired licenses, which resulted in the unauthorized operation of many of the stations by its subsidiaries New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC and AT&T Mobility Puerto Rico, Inc. As a result, the Enforcement Bureau investigated the licensing history of approximately 250 AT&T stations to determine the extent of the unauthorized operations. In January 2015, the Commission adopted a Notice of Apparently Liability for Forfeiture to AT&T alleging violations that the company admitted to in today’s settlement. As part of today’s settlement agreement, AT&T has agreed to implement a compliance plan through which it will conduct timely reviews of wireless fixed microwave stations acquired in future transactions to ensure that the stations are operating in accordance with their licensed parameters, file periodic progress reports on its compliance efforts, and correct any noncompliance discovered during the review process within 60 days of its discovery.

The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on Thursday, September 29, 2016. The FCC will consider:

• A Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would leverage advancements in technology to improve wireless emergency alert content, delivery and testing, while seeking comment on further measures to ensure effective alerts.
• A Report and Order that extends to broadcast licensees the same streamlined rules and procedures that common carrier wireless licensees use to seek approval for foreign ownership, with appropriate broadcast-specific modifications. The item also establishes a framework for a publicly traded common carrier or broadcast licensee or controlling U.S. parent to ascertain its foreign ownership levels.
• A NPRM that proposes steps the Commission can take to promote the distribution of independent and diverse programming to consumers. A Report and Order that modernizes the Commission’s rules to allow consumers to use a device of their choosing to access multichannel video programming instead of leasing devices from their cable or satellite providers.
• A seven-item consent agenda.
• Six personnel actions.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) will shortly be initiating the urban rate survey for 2017. The information collected in this survey will be used, among other things, to develop voice and broadband reasonable comparability benchmarks that will be in place in 2017. To obtain statistically valid samples, the Bureau will be collecting the rates offered by providers of fixed services identified using FCC Form 477 data (as of June 30, 2015). There will be separate samples for fixed voice and fixed broadband services with up to 500 urban Census tracts in each. Completed surveys will be due on October 25, 2016. (WC Docket No. 10-90)

The current model of Internet governance has been a tremendous success. Under American stewardship, the Internet has become an unprecedented platform for free expression, innovation, and democratization. That's why two years ago, when the Department of Commerce first announced its intent to relinquish its role in overseeing the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, I argued that the burden of proof was on those favoring this momentous change. When it comes to Internet governance, I do not believe the transition should take place on October 1. Getting it right is far more important than getting it done right now, and additional time to consider the merits of the transition would benefit all stakeholders.

The Commission seems intent to push forward, in the coming weeks or months, with a specious plan imposing new broadband privacy mandates and burdens. Reacting to this impending action, a number of broadband providers have sought to retain the ability to offer consumers incentives in exchange for consumers’ willingness to share a greater level of private information. Seemingly in disagreement, Federal Communications Commission leadership is quoted as saying that they “hope privacy doesn’t become a luxury item.” If data sharing enticements are prohibited, however, it would harm the overall operations of the Internet, increase companies’ costs for offering features and functions, and decrease consumer options. Such an approach tramples on the notion of consumer choice.

In the coming weeks, the FCC will debate internally over whether and what consumer privacy protections to enact. Arguably, the Commission should rethink its insistence to enact new broadband privacy rules, but assuming it moves forward, it should not prohibit private data exchanges that benefit consumers in the form of lower prices, greater service or more features and functions.

I want to take a few minutes to lay out my ideas on how we can close the digital divide—how governments at all levels can make it easier for providers to deploy broadband across the country. I call it a Digital Empowerment Agenda.

The following discussion of network neutrality, cybersecurity, privacy, encryption and the right to be forgotten boils down to an overarching, fundamental debate: how do we ensure the continued functionality and growth of the Internet. Everyone accepts that the Internet has transformed everyday life, but people – both domestically and internationally – do not always agree on the best means to preserve such an important global resource.

Last November, one wireless company announced a zerorating plan, which Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler declared to be “highly innovative and highly competitive”, only to reverse his position a month later, and then start a very public investigation into this offering, along with three others. At this point in time, the FCC has been investigating for ten months, and there appears to be no end in sight. While I disagree with this type of inquisition, the Commission should have the obligation to quickly review these services and inform these providers in writing the status of their offerings, including those that are in the clear. I have had conversations with industry participants that withheld new offerings because it isn’t worth being caught up in an FCC investigation. One company told me that their engineers came up with some new interesting ideas that were shot down almost immediately by their general counsel because of this rule. It is never a good thing when lawyers are dictating technology winners and losers, no offense to the lawyers in the room.

At the Federal Communications Commission, we’re pursuing an aggressive agenda to seize the opportunities of mobile for rural America. Not surprisingly, it starts with competition. Before the end of 2016, I plan to call on my fellow Commissioners to adopt a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Commission’s data roaming framework. Tackling this issue will allow the Commission to provide greater certainty in the marketplace, and promote consumer benefits and competition.

While nurturing competition is always going to be option A for maximizing consumer benefits, that is not an option in many parts of the country. Indeed, many rural areas do not have access to robust rural broadband at all. The FCC has an affirmative responsibility to make sure all Americans have access to our nation’s critical communications networks. The Commission is working to move forward with Phase II of the Mobility Fund, by the end of 2016.

I wish to talk about the ongoing work at the Commission when it comes to that goal, as well as the Connect2Health initiative, which examines the intersection of broadband connectivity, advanced technology and health. The Commission’s universal service programs serve as an important enabler of opportunities for many in our communities that would otherwise be left in digital darkness. My overarching principle when it comes to universal service is the most “bang for the buck.” How can we get the best broadband to the most people while maximizing limited universal service fund dollars.

On October 19th, I will host my #Solutions2020 Policy Forum in Washington, DC to explore solutions to bringing affordable and competitive services to consumers and small businesses. The forum is the culmination of my #ConnectingCommunities tour, which I embarked on less than six months ago. I hope to see you there so that we may continue our dialogue on how best to meet the growing and diverse needs of our communities.