Court appeals of the FCC net neutrality order by Alamo Broadband and USTelecom (see 1503230066) are premature, the agency wrote the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation Friday. The order doesn't take effect until it's published in the Federal Register, which hasn't happened, said the letter from Deputy Associate General Counsel Richard Welch. The FCC assumes the court that's randomly selected to consolidate both appeals will rule on whether they're premature, the letter said, and the agency plans to file a motion to dismiss both petitions as premature once the court is selected. The FCC’s attempt to justify the reclassification of broadband by pointing to industry investments in mobile voice under Communications Act Title II is “revisionist history” and “simply not borne out by the facts,” CTIA said in a blog post Friday. Wireless carriers’ investment has focused on the “heretofore unregulated market for mobile broadband networks” rather than the regulated voice market, the association said. In the past decade, carriers invested $260 billion in their networks, and another $90 billion purchasing spectrum at auctions, "primarily to handle mobile broadband traffic,” said the group. “Of course, the wireless industry will continue to invest, but the uncertainty generated by the FCC’s action means there will be less investment. And that’s no illusion.” Free Press disputed the argument, in a news release Friday. The group noted, among other things, that the annual growth rate in wireless capital spending between 1993 and 2002, before wireless was classified as a deregulated Title I service in 2007, was more than seven times higher than the annual rate in the following decade. The rate from that decade was seven times higher than the rate from 2003 to 2013, Free Press said.

Commissioner Mignon Clyburn’s Chief of Staff Adonis Hoffman is leaving the agency to start a think tank on business leadership, Chairman Tom Wheeler said at Thursday’s commission meeting. Hoffman is being temporarily replaced by Martha Heller, Clyburn’s acting aide on media issues and a former Enforcement Bureau assistant chief. Hoffman had no comment.

Correction: An FCC spokeswoman corrected information provided for a previous correction (see 1503250017), specifying now that the $190,000 the agency annually spends to maintain its Seattle field office doesn't include personnel expenses.

The FCC is seeking comment on the definition of “commencing operations” for new 600 MHz band wireless licensees after the incentive auction, said a public notice issued Thursday. Since some broadcast users of the band are allowed to continue operations until they receive notice that the wireless licensee is about to “commence operations” in that spectrum, a specific definition is needed, the PN said. It proposed defining commencement as when the wireless licensee begins “site commissioning tests,” which usually take place after the physical infrastructure of a cell site has been installed. For site commissioning testing, a licensee “will require access to its 600 MHz Band spectrum in the area in which it is commencing operations so all of its facilities can be tested under the real world conditions for which they were designed and in an environment that is free from potential interference from others,” the PN said. It seeks comment on whether some other stage of testing should be considered commencement, and the size of the area the wireless licensee must notify ahead of time. Comments are due May 1, replies May 18.

NTIA’s proposed exclusion zones for the 3.5 GHz band remain overly conservative, even after being dialed down considerably, Michael Calabrese, director of the New America Foundation’s Wireless Future Project, told us Thursday. NTIA recently filed at the FCC documents proposing much smaller “exclusion zones” along the coast than previously for the band, targeted by the FCC for sharing and small cells (see 1503250062). “Since the original exclusion zones assumed transmissions 1,000 times more powerful, shrinking them is simple common sense,” Calabrese said. But even these smaller zones make the 3.5 GHz band less commercially viable, he said. “The Navy told us their primary interference concern is a cumulative rise in the noise floor, within sight of the coastline, which can occur only from widespread and dense deployment of the very low-power, Wi-Fi like devices FCC is authorizing,” he said. “ Because this will take years, and because the geolocation database system governing minute-to-minute access to the band can limit the number of devices authorized to transmit within sight of Navy radar, it’s likely that passive sensing tied to the database will be deployed long before the noise floor endangers naval radar. In short, these exclusion zones are unnecessary and unduly restrictive.” Calabrese is a longtime member of the Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee.

The Association of Federal Communications Consulting Engineers (AFCCE) asked the FCC to seek comment on a proposed order, allegedly circulated by the FCC Enforcement Bureau, to close more than half the regional enforcement offices (see 1503110054). The group also asked the FCC to release a consultant report that recommended the office closures. The field offices are the FCC’s “eyes and ears,” the group said. “The ubiquitous presence of field offices and agents uniquely positions the Commission to resolve interference and unauthorized radio transmission cases,” it said. “Many of these cases involve safety-of-life services.” Increased spectrum sharing makes the field staff even more critical, AFCCE said.

Correction: The $190,000 the FCC spends annually to maintain its Seattle field office includes support costs such as rent and overhead in addition to its one staffer's salary (see 1503240045).

Bulk collection practices of communications metadata authorized by the USA Patriot Act, specifically under Section 215 authority, must end, said a letter to President Barack Obama, House and Senate leaders and intelligence officials Wednesday from the Reform Government Surveillance coalition, privacy and human rights groups, technology companies and associations. The signers acknowledged they have differing views on exactly what reforms must be included in any bill reauthorizing Section 215, which is the legal basis for NSA bulk collection program, and is set to expire on June 1. "Our broad, diverse, and bipartisan coalition believes that the status quo is untenable and that it is urgent that Congress move forward with reform,” the letter said. The groups agreed that bulk collection must end and for any collection that does occur, there should be “appropriate safeguards in place to protect privacy and users’ rights,” and collection should “contain transparency and accountability mechanisms for both government and company reporting, as well as an appropriate declassification regime for Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court decisions,” the letter said. Signers included the American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Democracy & Technology, Committee to Protect Journalists, Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), Google, Human Rights Watch, Internet Association, Microsoft, Mozilla, Public Knowledge, R Street, TechFreedom and the Wikimedia Foundation. “We understand that governments play a vital role in helping protect our communities, but we must do so in a way that protects the values we cherish,” wrote Microsoft Vice President-U.S. Government Affairs Fred Humphries in a blog post Wednesday. Two years ago, Americans learned the extent of NSA dragnet surveillance, and “the time has come for this program to end,” said CCIA President Ed Black. There's no better opportunity than the expiration of the Patriot Act’s bulk collection authorities to “institute the reforms necessary to restore the balance and limitations within which Congress and the public intended for our intelligence apparatus to operate,” Black said. “We have a responsibility to protect the privacy and security of our users’ data,” while helping governments keep people safe, wrote Google Chief Legal Officer David Drummond in a blog post Wednesday. “We have little doubt that Congress can protect both national security and privacy while taking a significant, concrete step toward restoring trust in the Internet.”

The idea pushed by Neustar and the New America Foundation for the FCC to create an independent manager to oversee a transition in local number portability administrators “adds duplicative review layers” and “would not be helpful,” Telcordia counsel John Nakahata of Harris, Wiltshire told Wireline Bureau officials Thursday, according to an ex parte filing posted Friday in docket 09-109. Nakahata also left a voice mail to an aide to Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, the filing said. Telcordia had envisioned a third-party program manager, if it wins the LNPA contract, to assist in the transition, the filing said. A transition overseer “extends far beyond facilitating the transition” and, under Neustar's and NAF’s proposals, would approve a voting trust to create separation between Telcordia and its parent, Ericsson, the filing said. The ability of Telcordia to operate neutrally, given parent company Ericsson’s business ties, has become a central issue at the commission before Thursday's scheduled vote on whether to authorize beginning LNPA contract negotiations with Telcordia. The idea of Ericsson creating a voting trust for some of its interests in Telcordia is one of the issues being considered (see 1503180033). Telcordia has no concern about being able to pass a review of a voting trust “but has substantial concern about the delay that such a review would inject into an already long-delayed implementation process,” the filing said. “Moreover, there will likely be provisions of the contract that are not appropriate for public -- or even limited security-cleared -- review, such as provisions regarding network and national security,” Telcordia’s filing said. Neustar had never been subject to such oversight, Telcordia noted. “Predictably, Ericsson is discounting the need for any analysis and oversight of this process, to the detriment of consumers, small carriers, law enforcement, public safety and other stakeholders," a Neustar spokeswoman said Friday. "The public interest demands more transparency, not less.” Nakahata in a conversation Tuesday with Daniel Alvarez, an aide to Chairman Tom Wheeler, criticized an NAF paper urging a delay in the commission vote, according to an ex parte filing posted Friday. “The paper adds nothing to the discussion and shows no sign of independent investigation or evaluation of the interests of consumers,” Telcordia said, saying the paper “merely cherry-picks the comments that most favor the arguments advanced by Neustar -- the entity that paid for their work." Meanwhile, in a letter posted Friday, Neustar said the Supreme Court in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association said unless a rule falls within the Administrative Procedure Act exemption for “interpretive rules,” a rulemaking is required. The selection of a new LNPA or altering neutrality requirements doesn't fall within the exemption and requires a notice and comment procedure, said the letter from Neustar counsel Aaron Panner of Kellogg Huber. Former Sen. John Breaux, now with Squire Patton, called Commissioner Mignon Clyburn Monday, on behalf of Neustar, also to urge a delay in vote, according to an ex parte filing posted Friday. Local number portability was one of the main provisions in the Telecommunications Act to promote local competition, Breaux told Clyburn. The vote should be delayed to give the commission more time to “review the ramifications of this selection,” Breaux said, according to the filing. In another letter posted Friday, Neustar said Telcordia’s response Wednesday to a Smith & Associates report didn't challenge S&A’s conclusion that Telcordia’s deployment schedule is “seriously understated even under the most optimistic assumptions.” Responding to Neustar’s argument about the Supreme Court decision, Nakahata emailed that “a law professor grading Neustar’s ex parte would give it an F. This decision adds no weight to Neustar’s meritless rulemaking arguments.” Quoting the late Democrat from New York, a Neustar spokeswoman responded: “As Senator [Daniel Patrick] Moynihan once said, ‘Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”

In a net neutrality-related development, the FCC Friday asked for applications from additional candidates to serve on its Consumer Advisory Committee. The net neutrality order directs the CAC to formulate and submit to the FCC a net neutrality enhanced transparency rule disclosure format, accessible to persons with disabilities, by Oct. 15, the FCC said. CAC is to determine whether the format should be the same for fixed and mobile broadband, the notice said. “The Commission expects the CAC to consider ‘whether and how a standard format for mobile broadband providers will allow providers to continue to differentiate their services competitively, as well as how mobile broadband providers can effectively disclose commercial terms to consumers regarding myriad plans in a manner that is not administratively burdensome.’” The second request for members reflects the CAC's additional responsibilities, the commission said. Applications are due at the FCC April 1.