Proposed National Security Rules Face Lots of Industry Pushback
CTIA said the FCC is in no position to determine if any telecom companies are a threat to U.S. security, and it should work with the Department of Homeland Security, which has more expertise in the area. Other commenters also urged caution. The Rural Wireless Association said the FCC has already chilled investment in rural networks. Reply comments were posted this week in docket 18-89 on the NPRM approved 5-0 by commissioners in April (see 1804170038).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
Chinese equipment maker Huawei said rules wouldn't be supported by the law or the facts. “Those parties encouraging the Commission to blacklist a handful of companies from supplying equipment or services to USF support recipients are largely those companies’ competitors, who would directly benefit from such a rule,” Huawei said. “The U.S. cannot afford to become the only country in the world that lacks access to the best communication technologies.” Huawei also questioned the legality of blocking USF payments to some carriers: “Most commenters agree that the FCC’s authority” over the USF “does not encompass national-security concerns, and interjecting such concerns into the funding process would violate the statutory universal service principles.”
“While policymakers are right to consider ways to secure the U.S. communications sector’s supply chain against bad actors, any action in this particular proceeding should be thoroughly coordinated among federal government agencies with appropriate jurisdiction and expertise -- including the multiple relevant supply chain security processes that are presently underway -- as well as with the communications sector stakeholders who know this market best,” CTIA said. CTIA said there's little consensus in the record on the relative costs and benefits of new rules. “This simply reinforces the need for the Commission to work with other expert agencies to conduct a thorough quantitative and qualitative analysis … before taking action that will likely have significant effects throughout the communications and IT sectors,” the group said.
Many rural carriers rely on “less costly Chinese-manufactured network infrastructure equipment” in their networks, said RWA. “If the proposed rule is adopted, small rural carriers which rely on Huawei or ZTE equipment will eventually need to replace such equipment, with grave consequences for their customers and people who live, work, and travel through the areas they serve,” RWA said. Small carriers would have to remove and replace equipment already in their networks “at tremendous expense,” the group said.
The FCC should focus on best practices, not rules, said the Rural Wireless Broadband Coalition. “The objective of this approach is to avoid any need to invest ‘trust’ in particular vendors, and instead rely on a collaborative process that produces best practices tailored to the telecommunications sector,” the group said. Commenters agree the FCC has caused confusion and uncertainty by “attempting to propose a rule that distills a complex issue down to a clear-cut prohibition.”
The Competitive Carriers Association, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, ITTA and NTCA jointly raised concerns. Rules proposed in the NPRM aren’t the answer, they said. “As many commenters, including those who generally support the FCC’s actions in this area, have explained, this problem can only be solved through a whole-government approach that addresses the overall telecommunications network,” the groups warned.