The FCC’s motion to dismiss the Feb. 14 petition for review of Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.net for lack of jurisdiction (see 2403140002) is based on the “faulty premise” that this case doesn’t seek review of an FCC order, said the petitioners’ opposition Friday (docket 24-1027) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The petition for review challenges the authority of the FCC and the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC) to stop processing the reimbursement of discounts for IT and broadband services that MetComm and Essential provided to schools under Section 254 of the Communications Act (see 2402200044). The petition “requests judicial review of the regulations and the final orders of the FCC promulgating those rules,” which purport to authorize the USAC “to stop statutorily mandated reimbursement of discounts provided to elementary and secondary schools,” said the opposition. USAC’s conformity to those FCC rules “is causing irreparable injury to schools, students, and petitioners cognizable by a court of equity,” it said. The FCC “incorrectly suggests” this case is an appeal of USAC’s investigations, “where an FCC order concluding those investigations has been unreasonably delayed for years,” contrary to the Administrative Procedure Act, said the opposition. “This is not an appeal seeking review of the merits, if any, of USAC’s investigations,” it said. Rather the petition for review in this case asks the D.C. Circuit “to determine the legality of the FCC’s regulations promulgated by FCC orders purporting to authorize USAC to stop for years, if not indefinitely, the discount reimbursement” mandated by Section 254, said the opposition. The FCC's position in its motion to dismiss “has no reasonable basis in the law,” it said. The D.C. Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court have determined that the D.C. Circuit “has jurisdiction under the Hobbs Act to review the application of FCC rules promulgated by final FCC orders exercising the FCC's rulemaking power,” it said.

FCC commissioners appeared to make limited changes to the supplemental coverage from space (SCS) framework, approved 5-0 Thursday (see 2403140050). Officials said there were “changes to the margins” but no major revisions. The FCC posted the final order and Further NPRM Friday. The order addresses concerns raised in recent ex parte filings. For example, an added paragraph dismisses concerns of T-Mobile and SpaceX that an aggregate out-of-band power flux density limit of -120 dBW/m²/MHz is too strict (see 2403060055). The companies asked the FCC to instead take additional comment. The proposed limit “strikes the appropriate balance and will provide clarity for stakeholders interested in enabling SCS while protecting adjacent terrestrial operations,” the order says. AT&T suggests that “[r]ather than drawing a bright line at this stage, the Commission should not prohibit SCS service from satisfying wireless buildout requirements, so long as the Commission evaluates SCS service performance on a case-by-case basis,” the order says, addressing another recent filing: “We reiterate that we do not believe that it is appropriate to allow a terrestrial licensee to rely on SCS provided by its satellite operator partners/lessees to satisfy the terrestrial licensee’s buildout or performance requirements at this time.” Among other tweaks, the final order says the FCC declines to add the 1.4 GHz band to the SCS bands “at this time,” leaving open the possibility for change. The further notice was largely the same as that proposed by Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. She and Commissioners Geoffrey Starks and Anna Gomez attached written statements.

The Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now nonprofits, which filed a petition for review challenging portions of the FCC’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order under the Administrative Procedure Act, seek to intervene on the FCC’s behalf against the 20 industry petitioners who want to set the entire order aside (see 2403140042), said their motion Friday (docket 24-1315) in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the industry petitioners are successful in having the FCC’s digital discrimination rules vacated, communities that nonprofits advocate for -- including disproportionately low-income communities and communities of color -- “will be left with inferior options with limited speeds and increasing prices,” said their motion. This would harm their interests “in advancing equitable broadband access for their members and constituents, who, because of their race, ethnicity, color, income level, religion, or national origin, lack access to quality, affordable broadband,” it said.

The FCC’s Communications Equity and Diversity Council will maintain the same leadership under its new charter as it had under the previous version, said a public notice Friday announcing the group’s March 27 meeting (see 2403080058). Heather Gate, Connected Nation vice president-digital inclusion, will continue as chair. Gate succeeded now-FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez in 2021. Also continuing in former roles as vice chairs are Brookings Institution Senior Fellow Nicol Turner Lee and Susan Au Allen, U.S. Pan Asian American Chamber of Commerce Education Foundation CEO, the PN said.

The FCC is investigating the extent to which U.S. mobile devices are still processing signals from China’s BeiDou, Russia’s GLONASS and other foreign adversaries’ global navigation satellite systems (GNSS), Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel told reporters Thursday. House China Committee Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., pressed the FCC on the item earlier this week (see 2403120073). The FCC’s investigation includes all major U.S. device suppliers, including Apple, Google, Motorola, Nokia and Samsung, a commission spokesperson said. FCC commissioners unanimously approved a voluntary cyber trust mark program based on National Institute of Standards and Technology criteria during their meeting Thursday (see 2403140034).

The Advisory Council for Historic Preservation (ACHP) Thursday released an update to its 2017 program comment, aimed at speeding the approval of 5G and other deployments under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The agreement wraps in changes including those in the FCC’s 2020 order addressing equipment compound expansions as part of collocation (see 2010270043), industry officials said, noting it's largely an extension of prior decisions. The program comment also now applies to every federal agency, a change from the 2017 document. “The purpose of the amendment is to assist federal agencies in efficiently permitting and approving the deployment of wired and wireless next generation technologies of communications infrastructure, including 5G, to connect all communities with reliable, high-speed Internet,” the revised program comment says: “The Program Comment provides an alternative way for federal agencies to comply with Section 106 to take into account the effects of undertakings under its scope on historic properties and afford the ACHP a reasonable opportunity to comment on them.” ACHP notes the document comes as companies start to deploy broadband using $65 billion provided under the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and was updated at the request of the NTIA. “All wireless deployments start with a permitting application, but too often our enhanced connectivity goals are quickly ensnared in red tape,” emailed Wireless Infrastructure Association President Patrick Halley. By amending the comment “to apply across the federal ecosystem, these agencies have taken a critical step today for increasing predictability in federal broadband permitting,” he said. The collaborative effort is “the kind of action we need to hasten broadband deployment by ensuring our permitting policies are more predictable, proportionate, and transparent across the board,” Halley said. “It’s crucial to speed up the permitting process and lower barriers to broadband buildout, especially as more federal deployment funding dollars start to flow,” said USTelecom President Jonathan Spalter.

Public interest groups and two academics urged the FCC to update its approach to net neutrality rules to address issues concerning new services like network slicing, which industry, particularly T-Mobile (see 2402260058), has raised. “Open Internet protections primarily focus on providers’ practices when providing broadband Internet access service [BIAS],” the filing said: “But ever since the FCC first adopted comprehensive open Internet protections in 2010, the agency has recognized that other services that are delivered over the same last-mile connection … may also undermine the open Internet, harming innovation, competition, investment, and user choice.” The FCC should consider how the service is defined “in the first sentence of the BIAS definition … or a functional equivalent of regular BIAS,” advocates said. The technology shouldn’t harm the open internet “by negatively affecting the capacity available for, and the performance of, BIAS, either dynamically or over time” or “have the purpose or effect of evading Open Internet protections,” the filing said. The filing was made by the Open Technology Institute at New America; Public Knowledge; Barbara van Schewick, director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society; and Scott Jordan, computer science professor at the University of California, Irvine.

Petitioner Insurance Marketing Coalition's brief is due April 15, with respondent FCC's due 30 days later, said a briefing notice Tuesday (docket 24-10277) in the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The coalition’s optional reply brief is due 21 days after the service of the commission’s brief, it said. The coalition’s petition for review asks the 11th Circuit to vacate the FCC’s Dec. 18 order implementing rules under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to target and eliminate illegal robotexts (see 2312220059). The coalition alleges the order exceeds the FCC’s statutory authority and was adopted “without observance of procedure required by law.” The order imposes several measures, including codifying that the national do not call registry’s protections apply to unlawful text messages.

Oral argument in Gray Television’s petition for review against the FCC is scheduled for May 15 in Birmingham, said an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals calendar Friday (docket 22-14274). Argument time is 15 minutes for each side, it said. Gray’s petition argues that the agency’s authority over broadcast license transfers doesn’t apply to the company’s 2020 purchase of another broadcaster’s CBS network affiliate in Anchorage because no licenses were transferred (see 2309140058).

The FCC has announced the membership of the rechartered Intergovernmental Advisory Committee in a public notice and news release Monday. Composed of elected officials from municipal, county, state and tribal governments, the IAC is focused on advising the FCC on telecom issues that affect those entities. “These local, county, state, and Tribal leaders offer the Commission valuable perspectives on how we can work together to connect the American people,” said Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel in the release. The IAC has 30 new and returning members, including Chair and Michigan Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist (D) and Vice Chair Marshall Pierite, who is chairman-CEO of the Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana. The group also includes the governors of North Carolina, Wisconsin and South Carolina, the mayors of Washington, D.C.; Pasadena, California; and North Miami, Florida, and numerous other public officials. The first IAC meeting will be held on April 18.