Author: pmg

We’ll be picking up the tab, say city officials.

Federal price cap will undercut existing agreements, says just about every big city in America.

By Kieren McCarthy in San Francisco, Sept 22, 2018 | Original The Register article here .

A plan to impose a federal price cap and one-size-fits-all model for the roll out of next-generation mobile networks has been met with fury by US cities. New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Chicago, Las Vegas, San Diego, Seattle and dozens of other cities have responded in anger to a public comment period on two proposals from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Those proposals would override the cities’ ability to charge mobile operators for positioning 5G cell towers on their property and instead impose a single, federal fee. The FCC claims that the proposal will remove $2 billlion in "unnecessary fees" and lead to $2.5 billion in additional network investment. The plans – which the FCC intends to vote on next week – would also oblige local governments to make a decision on applications for new cell sites within three months and would remove several common reasons for denying such applications.

While the FCC claims this would be a great development, the local and state governments whose authority would be undermined by the proposal are notably less excited.

The city of Chicago states [pdf] :

"We disagree with the Commission’s flawed and overreaching effort to mandate how cities manage small cell deployments. We respectfully request that the Commission delay consideration… until the document reflects a balanced approach respectful not just of industry demands but also of cities’ obligations to fairly, safely, and efficiently manage the public way and other public assets."

Continue reading “US Cities React in Fury to FCC’s $2 Billion Dollar Gift to Telecoms”

by John C. Dvorak, formerly of PC Magazine | Read the Original “No Agenda” post here.

As you all know, I was unceremoniously fired from PC Magazine on Sept. 20th, 2018. I just figured it was the new people coming in and I was an unneeded throwback to the old regime. This sort of thing happens a lot. Then one of the No Agenda producers noticed a recent column of mine was pulled from the magazine and redirected to someone else’s column about the same subject.

---

S4WT Comment: Dvorak’s original PC Magazine article, The Problem With 5G, is preserved here:

Here’s how Dvorak tweeted the news:

Yesterday I was fired from PC Magazine under the bogus notion that the columns were put on hiatus and I could call next year. So after 36 years of loyalty I get no phone calls from “friends” Vivek Shah or Dan @dancosta but a curt email telling me I’m out. It’s rude.

— John C. Dvorak (@THErealDVORAK) September 21, 2018

Continue reading “John Dvorak: 5G Got Me Fired”

By Susan Crawford, Sept 27, 2018; Original Wired article here

. . . and the FCC Is mad about it . . .

This is a story that defies two strongly held beliefs. The first — embraced fervently by today’s FCC—is that the private marketplace is delivering world-class internet access infrastructure at low prices to all Americans, particularly in urban areas. The second is that cities are so busy competing that they are incapable of cooperating with one another, particularly when they have little in common save proximity.

These two beliefs aren’t necessarily true. Right now, the 16 very different cities that make up the South Bay region of Southern California have gotten fed up with their internet access situation: They’re paying too much for too little. So they are working together to collectively lower the amounts they pay for city communications by at least a third. It’s the first step along a path that, ultimately, will bring far cheaper internet access services to the 1.1 million people who live in the region.

You might think this is impossible. It’s true that many city officials have argued that regional collaborations are resource-intensive and bound to fail. That’s the case in the Boston area, where a city official in Malden (7 miles from Boston City Hall) bluntly told researchers, "I couldn’t support regional government at all. Each community has its own unique set of circumstances and facts and issues."

The South Bay partnership suggests a promising alternative: Maybe cities can cooperate and save money without compromising their local autonomy.

At this same moment, though, the FCC is on a march to

• Smother local authority by blocking states from regulating any aspect of broadband service,
• Support barriers to municipal networks,
• Deregulate prices for lines running between cities, and
• Remove local control over rights-of-way that could be used to bring cheaper access into town.

The FCC would like to bar other regions from acting in just this kind of sensible way.

Continue reading “Cities Are Teaming Up to Offer Broadband”

From The FCC Live Stream

Warning: Massive Federal Overreach Committted by the FCC This Morning . . .

Previous Statement by U.S. Conference of Mayors CEO and Executive Director Tom Cochran on recent FCC proposals diminishing local government ownership rights over local rights-of-way and other public property:

“The U.S. Conference of Mayors strongly opposes recent proposals by the Federal Communications Commission to grant communications service providers subsidized access to local public property and to dictate how local governments manage their own local rights-of-ways and public property. This unprecedented federal intrusion into local (and state) government property rights will have substantial adverse impacts on cities and their taxpayers, including reduced funding for essential local government services, as well as an increased risk of right-of-way and other public safety hazards.

We believe the courts will conclude that FCC’s proposals are based on misguided interpretations of federal law. Congress previously addressed and resolved these issues resoundingly in favor of local and state governments and their property rights. The Conference and its member cities reject efforts by this unelected federal regulatory agency to improperly invade state and local government authority by compelling local elected officials to subsidize, or ‘gift’, local public property to a small, favored group of private businesses. According to FCC’s own estimates, just one of these actions — the proposed small cell rules — threatens future revenues to local (and state) governments by billions of dollars over the next decade.

The Conference of Mayors strongly opposes these proposals and calls on the agency to change them; absent such changes, the Conference and its members will seek relief in federal court to overturn this unprecedented overreach by the FCC.”

SECRETARY: THE THIRD ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PRESENTED BY THE WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU AND IS ACCELERATING WIRELESS BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT BY REMOVING BARRIERS TO INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT. ACCELERATING WIRE LIN BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT DEPLOYMENT. CHIEF OF THE BUREAU WILL GIVE THE INTRODUCTION.

CHAIRMAN PAI: IF YOUR TEAM IS READY THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

>> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS. I’M PLEASED TO PRESENT A DECLARATORY RULING AND THIRD REPORT IN ORDER AND COMMISSION’S ACCELERATING WIRELESS BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT BY REMOVING BARRIERS TO INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROCEEDING. I’M JOINED AT THE TABLE BY STPHFRPLT LISTING NAMES]

AND ADDS TO THE STAFF AT THE TABLE I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYONE LISTED ON THE SLIDE FOR THEIR WORK ON ITEM. DARRELL WILL NOW PRESENT THE ITEM.

>> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONERS. WE PRESENT TO YOU TODAY A DECLARATORY RULING FOR STATE AND LOCAL IMPEDIMENTS TO EMPLOYMENT OF 5 G AND OTHER SERVICES. IT WILL REAFFIRM THE CALIFORNIA STANDARD FOR SPWRPT BEING SECTIONS 253 AND 332 OF THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT. UNDER THAT STANDARD A STATE OR LOCAL REQUIREMENT CONSTITUTES AN EFFECTIVE PROHIBITION VIOLATIVE OF 253 AND 332 IF IT MATERIALLY LIMITS OR INHIBITS THE ABILITY OF ANY COMPETITOR OR POTENTIAL COMPETITOR TO COMPETE IN A FAIR AND BALANCED LEGAL AND REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT. THE DECLARATORY RULING WOULD CLARIFY THE STATE AND LOCAL FEE AND OTHER CHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH DEPLOYMENT OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE ARE CONSISTENT WITH SECTIONS 253 AND 332 ONLY IF THEY ARE A REASONABLE APPROXIMATION OF THE STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT COST AND COST FACTORED INTO THE FEES ARE OBJECTIVELY REASONABLE AND FEES ARE NO HIGHER THAN THE FEES CHARGED SIMILAR SITUATED COMPETITORS IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS. THE DECLARATORY RULING WOULD PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON THE APPLICATIONS OF THIS STANDARD IT OTHER STATE AND LOCAL RESTRICTIONS INCLUDING UNDERGROUND REQUIREMENTS MENT MENT IT WITH ESTABLISH 332 SHOT CLOCKS FOR STATE AND LOCAL REVIEW OF SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES APPLICATIONS. SPECIFICALLY IT WOULD ESTABLISH A SHOT CLOCK FOR SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES. DUE TO THE SHORTENED SHOT CLOCK TIME FRAMES LOCAL AUTHORITIES WOULD BE ABLE TO RESTART THE SHOT CLOCKS IF THEY NOTIFY THE APPLICANT OF MATERIAL DEFICIENCY IN THE APPLICATION WITHIN 10 DAYS. THE REPORTING ORDER WITH CODIFY THE EXISTING SHOT CLOCKS THAT THE COMMISSION ESTABLISHED IN 2009 AND ESTABLISHED A NEW REMEDY AVAILABLE IT APPLICANTS WHEN AUTHORITIES FAIL IT ACT IN THE NEW 332 SHOT CLOCKS. THE THIRD POINT WITH CONCLUDE THE SHOT CLOCKS APPLY TO ALL AUTHORIZATIONS NECESSARY FOR THE DEPHREULTLOYMENT OF SERVICES AND FOR APPLICATIONS IS THE SAME AS IF THE APPLICATIONS WILL BEEN SUBMITTED INDIVIDUALLY. COLLECTIVELY THE MEASURES IN THERE RULING AND ORDER WOULD ELIMINATE REGULATORY BARRIERS THIS UNLAWFULLY INHIBIT THE DEPLOYMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO SUPPORT ADVANCED WIRELESS SERVICES AND WOULD ESTABLISH PROCEDURES THAT WITH EXPEDITE THE DEPLOYMENT OF WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE ACROSS THE NATION. WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUREAU RECOMMENDS ADOPTION AND REQUESTS EDITORIAL PRIVILEGES TO MAKE TECHNICAL OR CONFORMING EDITS.

CHAIRMAN PAI: THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. IS THIS YOUR FIRST TIME PRESENT PRESENTING?

>> SECOND.

CHAIRMAN PAI: WELL DONE. COMMENTS FROM THE BENCH.

Continue reading “FCC Vote WT-17-79 Transcript”

Adapted from an article by Tom Wheeler September 25, 2018; Original article here

September 28 will see a White House rally to promote U.S. leadership in fifth generation (5G) wireless technology. I was part of a similar event at the Clinton White House in 1993 that promoted the importance of making more spectrum available through auctions that were then being considered by Congress. This time around, it looks like the messaging will be around the “5G race” between the United States and China

Wireless Industry groups warn that the U.S. is in third place behind China and South Korea when it comes to 5G. The so-called “5G gap” has become the go-to rationale for all kinds of industry-sought policy changes. Judging by how the issue is framed, the U.S. is on the verge of losing the “5G race” to China.

• T-Mobile and Sprint warn that the U.S. will lose the 5G race if the companies are not allowed to merge (while announcing their own non-merged 5G deployment plans).

• The Trump Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has used the race to justify extending Washington’s regulatory reach down to telling local governments how to do zoning for antenna siting (this from the “deregulatory” administration).

• Satellite operators such as Intelsat, whose C-Band transmission business has atrophied, have discovered they can recast their licenses as “5G spectrum”. The satellite companies are asking the Trump FCC for permission to conduct a private auction that would allow them to reap a potential monetary windfall instead of U.S. taxpayers.

It is time to take a deep breath and let logic temper emotional battle cries and political gamesmanship. We need to spend less time worrying about China and more time asking how we can race to make broadband work for all Americans.

Continue reading “The Real Race is to Serve All Americans”

By Bruce Kushnick. Sept 25, 2018; Original article here

Legend

• WT Docket 15-180: Revising the Historic Preservation Review Process for Wireless Facility Deployments
• WT Docket 17-79: Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment
• WC Docket 17-84: Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment
• WTB = Wireline Telecommunications Bureau
• WCB = Wireline Competition Bureau

FCC Actions for Proceeding WT Docket 17-79

Num	Division	Item	Date	Form
1	WTB: opens WT Docket 17-79	Docs	3/30/17	PUB NOTICE
2	Chairman Pai: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry – WT Docket 17-79 and 15-180	Docs	3/30/17	OTHER
3	WTB: Press release for WT Docket 17-79	Docs	4/20/17	OTHER
4	WTB: FCC-17-38 – Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry for WT Docket 17-79 (Streamlining State and Local Review; Reexamining National Historic Preservation Act and National Environmental Policy Act)	Docs	4/21/17	NPRM
5	WTB announce webinars to examine regulatory impediments to wireless network infrastructure investment and deployment; re: WT Docket 17-79	Docs	5/11/17	PUB NOTICE
6	WTB announces webinars that will examine the regulatory impediments to wireless network infrastructure, including impediments associated with the Commission’s National Historic Preservation Act	Docs	5/11/17	PUB NOTICE
7	WTB: DA 17-525 – deadlines for filing comments in response to the NPRM and NOI in WT Docket 17-79 are extended to 6/15/17 and 7/7/17, respectively.	Docs	5/26/17	ORDER
8	WTB: DA 17-669 – Request for Extension of Time to File Reply Comments for WT Dockets 17-79 and 17-84 is DENIED.	Docs	7/13/17	ORDER
9	WTB: FCC 17-153 – Press release for Order that eliminates historic preservation review when a pole is replaced with a substantially identical pole; for WT Docket 17-79	Docs	11/16/17	OTHER
10	WTB: FCC 17-153 – exclusion for Pole Replacements that won’t affect historic properties; Amendments and reorganization of historic preservation rules.	Docs	11/17/17	R&O
11	WTB: FCC 17-165 – Press release for order that allows collocations on Twilight Towers without historic preservation review; re: WT Docket 17-79	Docs	12/14/17	OTHER
12	WTB: FCC 17-165 – Call for Comment on a solution for so-called “Twilight Towers,” which, if adopted, would create a new exclusion from routine historic preservation review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).	Docs	12/14/17	PUB NOTICE
13	WTB: FCC 18-30 – Press release for order that excludes small wireless facilities deployed on non-Tribal lands from National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review; re: WT Docket 17-79	Doc	3/22/18	OTHER
14	WTB: FCC 18-30 – order that Excludes Small Wireless Facilities From NHPA and NEPA Review; Streamlines NHPA and NEPA Review for Large Wireless Facilities; re: WT Docket 17-79	Docs	3/30/18	R&O
15	Communications Business Opportunities: FCC 17-153/DA 18-458 – Small Business Compliance Guide re: WT Docket 17-79. The Report and Order created an exemption from historic preservation review, for the replacement of utility poles that will support communications antennas.	Doc	5/3/18	OTHER
16	WTB: DA 18-675 – changes that are being made to implement the Commission’s 2018 Infrastructure Second Report and Order, which was released on 3/30/18; re: WT Docket No. 17-79	Doc	7/2/18	PUB NOTICE
17	Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau: Eight Petitions for Reconsideration have been filed by 6/11/17 in matter of WT Docket 17-79	Doc	7/24/18	PUB NOTICE
18	WTB & WCB: FCC 18-111 – Press release for one-touch, make-ready rules for utility poles re: WT Docket 17-79; WC Docket 17-84	Docs	8/2/18	OTHER
19	WTB & WCB: FCC 18-111 – Third Report and Order and Declaratory Ruling for new one-touch, make-ready pole attachment process	Docs	8/3/18	R&O
20	Office of General Counsel: FCC 18-111 – the FCC received many comments from the public; like the listed comments, they will be associated with, but not made part of, the record re: WT Docket 17-79; WC Docket 17-84.	Doc	8/17/18	PUB NOTICE

Continue reading “30+ FCC Actions in 2017-2018 Eliminate States Rights and Consumer Protections”

Rep. McNerney Leads Letter Urging FCC to Delay Vote Undermining Communities’ Ability to Meet Needs of Residents

By Jerry McNerney Sep 25, 2018 Press Release here

Washington, DC – Today, Congressman Jerry McNerney (CA-09), along with eight Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, sent a letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai, requesting the proposed Streamlining Deployment of Next Generation Wireless Infrastructure Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order be removed from tomorrow’s Open Meeting agenda.

The letter was also signed by

1. Congressman Mike Doyle (PA-14)
2. Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06)
3. Congressman Eliot Engle (NY-16)
4. Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (MI-12)
5. Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (NY-09)
6. Congressman Peter Welch (VT-At-Large)
7. Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (CA-18)
8. Congressman John Sarbanes (MD-03)

The letter reads:

"Dear Chairman Pai:

We support swift deployment of 5G and are concerned that the proposed Streamlining Deployment of Next Generation Wireless Infrastructure Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order (“Declaratory Ruling and Order”) will set us on a path that will ultimately delay 5G efforts. Many cities and counties of varying sizes across the country have spoken out against this proposal and urged the Commission to cooperatively address key concerns so as to avoid harm to consumers and localities. Given the reasons outlined below, we ask that you remove the item from the Open Meeting agenda and take the time needed to resolve these issues. Thoughtful consideration now will benefit consumers and avoid unnecessary delays that may result from future litigation.

We are excited about the opportunities that 5G will bring—including its potential to increase broadband connectivity, transform health care and transportation, and make our power grids more efficient — and we are eager to see 5G deployed. However, in order to achieve the best outcome for consumers, it is crucial that 5G be deployed in a way that carefully balances the interests of both communities and the wireless carriers. The Declaratory Ruling and Order clearly falls short of striking such a balance.

Continue reading “Nine US House Members Oppose FCC Action That Harms Consumers”

By Bruce Kushnick, Sept 23, 2018; Original article here.

Cross Subsidies from Your State’s Wired, State-Based Telecom Utility to Separate Private Wireless Companies Have Been Floating this Wireless Expansion For a Long Time — this must end,

On September, 26, 2018, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr will present a plan for deploying 5G, which claims that rural areas will benefit and that federal actions are needed to help create billions in investments.

“And yet still too many communities, especially in rural America, feel that they may be left behind. Their elected leaders have called on the FCC to act because they are concerned that, without federal action, they may not see 4G, let alone 5G service. They worry that the billions of dollars of investment needed to deploy next-gen networks will be consumed by high fees and long delays in big, ‘must serve’ cities.”

Continue reading “5G Wireless Is Not Profitable When the Cross-Subsidies Stop”

By Leslie Stimson, Sept 21, 2018, | Original Inside Towers article here

Two municipal representatives on the FCC’s Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee say localities’ concerns were brushed aside as the FCC prepared the small cells siting streamlining item, to be voted on next week.

Debbi Goldman, the representative for Communications Workers of America on the BDAC’s Model Code for Municipalities Working Group, in a filing this week, calls the draft order

• Is “inconsistent” with the working group’s recommendations
• Is an "overreach of federal authority”

The proposal sets “presumptively reasonable” siting costs at $270 per year per site, according to Goldman, who adds the working group didn’t reach a conclusion about fees because “of a lack of agreement.”

Goldman writes:

“The draft order ignores our work, choosing instead to further the interests of the wireless industry over that of the public,”

Continue reading “BDAC Reps Report that Municipal Input Was Brushed Aside by the FCC”

by Mike Dano, Sept 21, 2018 | Original Fierce Wireless article here.

A large number of U.S. cities, both big and small, voiced concerted and coordinated opposition to the FCC’s proposal to streamline the deployment of small cells across the country.

At the center of the issue is the federal government’s attempts to override local government control over the installation of wireless equipment like small cells in neighborhoods around the country. The FCC essentially argues that some state and city rules are unnecessarily impeding the deployment of wireless infrastructure, including 5G. But a large number of U.S. cities are fighting back against that argument — contending that they should remain in charge of the costs and timelines associated with small cell deployments.

Cities speaking up on the issue range from Philadelphia to San Francisco to Chicago to Lakewood, California, and Yuma, Arizona. The filings by the cities generally follow the same format and present the same basic arguments:

• The FCC’s proposed new collocation shot clock category “is too extreme.”
• The FCC’s proposed definition of “effective prohibition” is overly broad.
• The FCC’s proposed recurring fee structure is an “unreasonable overreach that will harm local policy innovation,” and the fees are not “fair and reasonable” compensation.

Continue reading “Major US Cities Revolt Against FCC Small Cell Deployment Rules”