The FCC's April open meeting will see commissioners voting on a draft NPRM about georouting calls to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline, Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel wrote Wednesday. Also on the agenda is reinstatement of net neutrality rules (see 2404030043). More than 80% of calls to 988 come from wireless numbers, and network design makes it "challenging to receive help from close by," she wrote. The NPRM, which circulated on the 10th floor last month (see 2403210033), proposes routing calls to the crisis call center closest to where the call is made.

Don't expand space operations in the 2110-2120 MHz portion of the AWS-1 band, wireless interests urged the FCC this week in docket 13-115 reply comments. The agency in September adopted a Further NPRM proposing changes to the Table of Frequency Allocations addressing the use of spectrum by manned and unmanned spacecraft during missions, and seeking comment on new spectrum allocations in certain bands for communications with cargo and crew capsules. Wireless providers have relied on the 2110-2120 MHz band for their networks, and the proposed expansion of satellite uplinks in the band ignores that it was auctioned and licensed to commercial wireless operators subject only to interference from one federal user at one location in California, CTIA said. Expanded use outside of NASA's Deep Space Network research facility would undermine wireless licensees' "investment-backed expectations in acquiring [licenses] and foundational network deployment," it said. CTIA said minus the protections that come with exclusive use licenses, consumers could face service-quality disruptions and there would be less confidence in the auction and regulatory process. AT&T said its use of the 2110-2120 MHz spectrum is constrained only by the need to accept interference from those high-power NASA transmitters. It said additional restrictions on AWS-1 A-Block licensees’ use of the 2110-2120 MHz portion of the band would undermine the auction process and put new terms on licensees post auction. Such a move would also put AWS-1 A-Block licensees at a competitive disadvantage to other AWS-1 licensees, it said. More nonfederal spectrum allocations for launch activities will help relieve lower S-band congestion, SpaceX said. It urged streamlined coordination in the upper S band as a way of supporting launch and space operations while protecting incumbent flight-testing services. It pushed for looking beyond the S and L bands for spectrum for launch and space operations, including for commercial crewed and uncrewed spacecraft. In a separate filing, SpaceX and fellow crewed launch capability companies Vast Space, Sierra Space, Voyager Space Holdings and Starlab Space urged the FCC to make an allocation for future crewed space stations and operations not connected to the International Space Station, which is to be retired in 2030. They said additional bands should be considered for space-to-space communications. The Aerospace and Flight Test Radio Coordinating Council said that before there are any changes to the L and upper S bands, the FCC, NTIA, DOD and the space launch industry should get more experience with the lower S bands being available for nationwide licensing on a secondary basis. It said the FCC also should monitor commercial launch operators' use of the L and upper S bands under the existing framework.

The FCC’s net neutrality order will likely circulate this week (see 2403290057), with a 3-2 vote in favor on April 25, New Street’s Blair Levin said Tuesday. The order will largely restore 2015 rules, he said in a note to investors. “Like its predecessors, this policy debate will generate significant headlines and commentary, [but] is unlikely to generate significant changes in how the ISPs operate, nor material changes in their revenues, margins, or opportunities,” Levin said. “Traditional issues of non-discrimination, as well as the key investor concerns about price regulation and unbundling, will largely be treated as they were in 2015,” he added. Whether the FCC will preempt state action remains a question, though that matters less than in the past, he said. The new issue of how 5G network slicing is treated “puts the wireless companies on one side against the cable industry and certain public interest groups on the other,” Levin said: Another concern, the application of Section 214 of the Communications Act to ISPs, “can create some administrative headaches but is unlikely to be material to investors.” Barbara van Schewick, director of Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society, meanwhile, submitted a paper on throttling rules. “The new Open Internet Order needs to clearly prohibit ISPs from speeding up and slowing down applications and classes of applications,” the paper sent to the FCC says: “Neither the 2015 no-throttling rule nor the proposed no-throttling explicitly prohibited ISPs from speeding up an application or class of applications. … Clarifying this in the Order is critically important.” The paper was posted Tuesday in docket 23-320.

The Computer & Communications Industry Association and Incompas told the FCC they support allowing broadband internet access to “monetize networks in new ways through the use of non-BIAS services,” including network slicing. But the rules shouldn’t create a loophole that benefits only some companies, they said. The treatment of slicing has emerged as a large issue as the agency moves closer to an expected vote on new rules (see 2403290057). “How the Commission addresses non-BIAS data services in the Order is one of the most critical issues in this proceeding,” said a joint filing posted Monday in docket 23-320: “As currently proposed -- without expanded guidance and clarity-- the rule could create a large loophole that undercuts the FCC’s otherwise strong open internet rules.” Free Press raised concerns in meetings with an aide to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. “The forthcoming order would benefit by stating explicitly that supposed non-BIAS data services may not be used to evade the rules and the order’s conduct standards,” Free Press said. CTIA, meanwhile, explained to the FCC why network slicing is important and should be protected from regulation under proposed net neutrality rules. The filing adds detail to comments the group offered last week (see 403290042). “Network slicing is a technology that can provide innovative, virtualized wireless offerings targeted to users’ needs and is just emerging in the U.S.,” said a filing posted Monday in docket 23-320. “Network slicing will allow wireless providers to offer over a single physical network a series of virtual networks configured to satisfy different use cases -- including those that benefit from low latency, low jitter, high speeds, or heightened security, as well as those that can tolerate lower speeds, more jitter, or more delay than a typical [broadband internet access service] offering,” CTIA said. Use cases are still emerging and may include public-safety communications, robotic surgery, smart grids and other infrastructure, and communications at crowded events, the group said. Slicing also improves spectrum management, the group explained, allowing carriers to “manage finite spectrum resources more efficiently,” and can enhance network security and privacy “by isolating traffic in its own network slice, so that data and traffic cannot be intercepted or faked by entities of another network slice.”

The FCC announced the membership of the rechartered Communications Equity and Diversity Council ahead of the group’s first meeting Wednesday. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel announced in May that she would recharter the advisory committee, and the group’s new charter began in June (see 2305250058). “Currently, across the federal government, including here at the Commission, there is a focus on ensuring equity for all, including under-served communities,” Rosenworcel said in a news release Tuesday. “The CEDC exists to help level the playing field.” Wednesday’s meeting will open with an address from Rosenworcel, and otherwise involve introducing the advisory committee’s members, announcing working groups and receiving guidance on federal advisory committee best practices. Many members are returning from the previous charter, including the group’s chair and vice chairs (see 2403150059), Neptuno CEO Leticia Latino-van Splunteren, Multicultural Media Telecom and Internet Council President Robert Branson and former FCC Commissioner Henry Rivera. New members include University of Minnesota journalism professor Christopher Terry.

The FCC said Tuesday it has “more than doubled” the number of employees assigned to privacy and data protection since the launch last year of the Privacy and Data Protection Task Force (see 2306140075). The commission has “integrated technologists, software and hardware engineers, and other subject-matter experts into its enforcement matters, adding to the FCC’s deep technical expertise in rulemaking and licensing matters," and “convened technical experts” to focus on AI, machine learning and other emerging technologies through its Technological Advisory Council, it said in a news release. The announcement was part of a broader administration push (see 2403260029). “This ongoing work will allow us to maximize our efforts to address risks arising from the misuse or mishandling of sensitive data we entrust with service providers and the continued threats posed by cybercriminals and foreign adversaries,” said Enforcement Bureau Chief Loyaan Egal, chair of the task force.

President Joe Biden signed off Saturday on the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act FY 2024 minibus spending package (HR-2882), the White House said. The Senate voted 74-24 Saturday morning on the measure, which allocates $390.2 million to the FCC, $425.7 million to the FTC and $535 million in FY 2026 funds for CPB. Congressional leaders omitted stopgap funding for the FCC's affordable connectivity program and money for the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Reimbursement Program, despite repeated calls from the initiatives' backers (see 2403210067).

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied Essential Network Technologies and MetComm.net's Feb. 26 emergency motion to expedite consideration of their Feb. 14 E-rate program petition for review, said its order Monday (docket 24-1027). The petitioners haven’t demonstrated that delay “will cause irreparable injury and that the decision under review is subject to substantial challenge, or that the public interest otherwise warrants expedition,” said the order. Their 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). Their motion for expedited consideration argued that unless a briefing schedule is set that would allow for a D.C. Circuit decision on the appeal before the end of the court’s May sitting period, numerous elementary and secondary schools will be deprived of affordable IT infrastructure and broadband service for the new school year this fall (see 2403140002). But the FCC’s opposition said the petitioners have provided no compelling reasons for the D.C. Circuit to expedite review. “Under the circumstances, far from needing to expedite this case,” the D.C. Circuit “lacks jurisdiction to decide it,” because there is no final FCC action for the court to review, said the commission’s opposition.

The FCC proposed a total $1.2 million forfeiture for Nexstar and a $612,395 forfeiture for Mission Broadcasting (see 2403210078).

Policymakers shouldn’t forget the potential of very high frequency spectrum, the mmWave Coalition said last week in response to the National Science Foundation’s request for information (RFI) on the national spectrum research and development plan, which is part of the national spectrum strategy. The comments have yet to be posted by NSF. Most 5G and 6G discussions so far are focused on lower frequencies, the coalition said. “A key reason for this is that it is hard to justify a business case for sub-THZ mobile spectrum use at present as there are now basic technical questions, technological hurdles, and cost issues, yet these are fertile and active areas of research which may eventually lead to compelling opportunities for mobile use in this spectrum,” the group said. The coalition cited a growing need for wireless backhaul, “especially in rural, underserved areas often where fixed wireless access is vital for rural households, and often backhaul requirements cannot always be implemented in fiber technology, due to installation urgency requirements, local terrain features that delay or block installation, cost, or short term requirements that make fiber optic installation uneconomical.” The Dynamic Spectrum Alliance said the RFI is on target in the areas it suggests for research. “Efficiency, dynamic spectrum access and management, automated interference mitigation, and coexistence modeling are all areas in which the DSA and our members have keen interest and extensive experience,” the alliance said: “We also fully support efforts to study the economic-, market-, social-, and human-centric aspects of increasing spectrum access.” DSA called on the NSF to take into account innovative licensing frameworks that are already working, including the citizens broadband radio service band and 6 GHz. “Given the historical success of the variety of spectrum sharing techniques in different bands designed to protect different incumbents … there is no one size fits all solution to spectrum sharing,” DSA said. AT&T urged the administration to more clearly define the term dynamic spectrum sharing. The definition should include an “examination of full-power licensed use” and “development of a basis for predictable times and/or geographies in which dynamically shared spectrum can be used,” AT&T said. The carrier urged more work on interference mitigation techniques and not restricting research to “mere ‘on/off’ spectrum access controls.” The definition should seek “to define co-channel and adjacent channel interference environments to incorporate into network design and operation.”