Federal Communications Commission

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) provides an initial agenda and session participant information for the workshop on “Public Safety Imperatives for All-IP Networks” scheduled for April 17, 2014 and April 18, 2014 in Washington, DC. This workshop will explore the impact of the technology transition on key public safety, emergency response, and national security functions.

In recognition of Older Americans Month, the Federal Communications Commission’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau will host a workshop on May 22, 2014, in Washington, DC.

The workshop will provide information on online safety, communicating during emergencies, and how broadband and other technologies can be used to facilitate aging in place and telehealth. The event will include technology demonstrations.

Acting on the Federal Communications Commission’s commitments, I took my first trip to Indian Country as FCC Chairman, visiting the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota.

I had several meetings with Oglala Lakota leaders to discuss topics ranging from economic development to healthcare, but the greatest emphasis of my visit was education, specifically how the FCC’s E-Rate program can help expand digital learning opportunities, including for our nation’s rural and Tribal populations. I heard from teachers, students, and administrators at Loneman School and Little Wound School about how E-Rate has helped provide basic Internet access to their school, but also how E-Rate can, and needs to do even more.

In particular, these schools need more bandwidth to enable opportunities like remote tutoring and taking advanced math and science courses online, and they need Wi-Fi connectivity that can support mobile devices like tablets and digital textbooks. They also need an E-Rate program that’s more user-friendly.

In the past, Loneman, like too many schools, missed out on E-Rate support because of confusion with the program’s rules. All of our students, whether they are attending a Tribal school in South Dakota or a public school in South Carolina deserve to have full access to modern digital learning tools. That’s why modernizing E-Rate to simplify the program, improve its efficiency, and deliver faster, Wi-Fi connectivity to schools and libraries is one of the Commission’s highest priorities.

The Department of Justice charged three men with allegedly defrauding the FCC’s Lifeline program of approximately $32 million.

Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler issued this statement:

“The FCC is working hard to combat fraud in the Lifeline program, and I applaud our Office of Inspector General, the FCC’s Lifeline policy and enforcement teams, and the program administrator, USAC, for their considerable contributions that helped lead to the criminal fraud indictment. I particularly appreciate the continuing support provided by our law enforcement partners at the DOJ and FBI.

"Lifeline helps ensure that all Americans can afford phone service, providing connections to jobs, family and 9-1- 1. But we will not tolerate abuse of this program, and are gratified to see the results of our hard work to battle fraud.”

On April 9, 2014, Commissioner Ajit Pai of the FCC delivered remarks at the Spring Conference of WTA -- Advocates for Rural Broadband. During his address, he emphasized that the Federal Communications Commission must take seriously the promise of the Communications Act to “make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States . . . a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wide and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges.”

He then offered a number of proposals for doing just that:

• Rate Floor. Freeze the FCC-imposed rate floor indefinitely and reexamine the underlying policy.
• QRA Benchmarks. Strike the QRA benchmarks from the books.
• Helping Small Carriers Gain Scale. Streamline FCC review of transactions involving geographically adjacent rural carriers seeking to merge.
• Reducing Paperwork Burdens. Small carriers are facing death by 1,000 paper cuts.

I want to focus on three opportunities: the opportunities to provide over-the-top services built around news and information; the opportunities inherent in the Incentive Auction; and the opportunities created as we contemplate a transition to new TV sets using OFDM [orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing].

I believe that broadcasting is positioned to be not only the reluctant object of competition, but the instigator as well. We are at an inflection point where broadcast licensees can move from being the disrupted, to being the disruptor. When I look at broadcasting I see the traditional public trust where you received spectrum and in return provided important public benefits. But I also hope we can see local broadcast licensees as a growing source of competition in the digital market.

Your content represents far more than the potential for retransmission fees. It can be the basis for a fixed and mobile-delivered cable-like service. The open Internet represents the same kind of expansive opportunity for local licensees. Essential to the open Internet are the concepts that a network provider -- and here we are increasingly talking about your cable friends -- cannot block lawful content or unfairly target content and other edge providers. The open Internet rules should be seen as an Open Sesame for the expansion beyond your local license; to move from the “television” business to the “information” business. But your window of opportunity won’t stay open forever. The cable and Internet companies are all are embracing something new that looks startlingly like your model. Again, that’s why the open Internet initiative is important.

Of course, there is the pesky little matter of how you pay for this kind of pivot. Here, again, the ongoing policy activities of the FCC can be helpful. Which brings me to the second big opportunity I wanted to highlight -- the Incentive Auction. An under-considered and under-appreciated aspect of the Incentive Auction is the idea of spectrum sharing. Spectrum sharing will allow you to maintain your existing business while taking home an auction check.

The third opportunity I want to talk about is using a new television standard as the entry point to the broadband economy for broadcasting. As NAB correctly says, broadcast licensees are “licensed to serve.” This means that when it comes to broadcast licensees our job is to fulfill the instructions of the Congress to promote competition, diversity, and localism.

That is the root of our recent decision on JSAs [joint sales agreements] and SSAs [shared service agreements]. Simply put, where sidecar agreements serve the public interest by advancing the goals established by Congress, they are appropriate. When entanglements between separately owned stations serve as end runs around our local television rules, however, it is appropriate to push the stop button.

On April 8, 2014, Comcast and Time Warner Cable filed applications seeking Federal Communications Commission approval to transfer of control of the licenses and authorizations held by Time Warner Cable and its wholly-owned and controlled subsidiaries to Comcast.

We note that the applications have not yet been accepted for filing. When they are, we will issue a separate public notice announcing that fact and setting forth a pleading schedule.

The Federal Communications Commission's Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau provides guidance to licensees of state channels in the 700 MHz narrowband spectrum (769-775/799-805 MHz), regarding their upcoming interim substantial service benchmark showing.

These licensees must demonstrate by June 13, 2014 that they are providing or prepared to provide “substantial service” to one- third of their population or territory. The Commission has designated ninety-six channel pairs (12.5 kHz bandwidth) in the 700 MHz narrowband spectrum for use by states, the District of Columbia, and US territories (State Licensees). Each State Licensee receives a geographic area license (State License) covering the geopolitical boundaries of its jurisdiction.

The Commission established a five-year interim benchmark and a ten-year final benchmark for State Licensees to establish specified levels of substantial service within their statewide license areas. The due date for the five-year interim benchmark showing is June 13, 2014. By this date, State Licensees must certify that they are providing or are prepared to provide “substantial service” to one- third of their population or territory.

“Substantial service” is defined as the construction and operation of facilities on state channels which is “sound, favorable, and substantially above a level of mediocre service which just might minimally warrant renewal.” A State Licensee is deemed “prepared” to provide substantial service if it certifies that a radio system has been approved and funded by the deadline date.

The Federal Communications Commission has launched a database designed to eliminate waste from duplicative subscriptions in the Lifeline phone service subsidy program nationwide.

The National Lifeline Accountability Database, a cornerstone of the FCC’s comprehensive efforts to combat waste fraud and abuse in the Lifeline program, already has identified $169 million in annualized savings by flagging existing duplicates for elimination while preventing enrollment of new duplicates.

“The National Lifeline Accountability Database makes smart use of technology to help prevent waste, fraud and abuse,” said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler. “The database is preventing new duplicates and has rooted out remaining ones. I commend the industry for working with us to implement this effective solution to eliminating wasteful duplicates.”

Overall, the comprehensive reform package from 2012 is on track to save $2 billion through elimination of duplicates, tightened eligibility review, increased oversight of providers, elimination of unnecessary subsidies for initial phone connections, and more.

The topic I will discuss is now Internet governance. Before the eye rolling begins, I believe this issues extremely important to the entire communications industry.

And let me give you the key take away: We should all maintain a deep skepticism about the US Government’s recent announcement that it plans to transition away from its oversight of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).

A recent Bloomberg article on the ICANN 49 meeting probably summed it up best, and I quote: “A group of nerds and wonks [has been] having some hideously boring meetings in Singapore. You should care: What they produce could change the nature of the Internet.”

Those who have raised concerns about the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s (NTIA) announcement have been labeled as Republican partisans, but even former President Bill Clinton is concerned about NTIA’s plan.

First, and foremost, the fatal flaw in NTIA’s announcement is the potential involvement of foreign governments or quasi-governmental bodies in Internet governance.

Second, from the point of view of maintaining the stability of the Internet, even with ICANN’s flaws, the current oversight structure by NTIA has been an incredible success.

Third, past history and current events show us that numerous foreign governments are more than willing to meddle with the Internet and its use by their citizens. While it is clear that foreign governments will not hesitate to interfere with Internet services and applications when doing so suits their national needs, they also will not hesitate to point out the hypocrisy if and when the United States adopts its own controls over the Internet.

This is an added reason why I am concerned that the FCC will press forward with new network neutrality regulations. At this pivotal moment for Internet freedom, the FCC’s network neutrality proceeding could severely contradict and undermine the US government’s international position. FCC action sends the wrong message: that it is acceptable for nations to impose the strong arm of the government on the Internet. In addition to our domestic concerns, we must also consider the influence of our decisions on other countries, given the strength of our voice worldwide. In conclusion, I urge all of you to follow closely, with a critical eye, NTIA’s and ICANN’s proposals as they develop.

The United States created the Internet and shared it with the world. Now we have an obligation to safeguard it from harm.