Comments on the FCC NPRM to restructure Lifeline and cover broadband are due Aug. 17, replies Sept. 15, after the Federal Register published the item on Friday. The FCC set the deadlines for 30 days and 60 days after FR publication when it adopted the notice and related orders 3-2 June 18 (see 1506180029). The Democratic majority said the proposals and actions would reboot Lifeline support for the 21st century by helping low-income consumers gain broadband access and by undertaking further administrative restructuring to ensure program efficiency and integrity. The Republican minority said the FCC refusal to impose or even propose a Lifeline budgetary cap was fiscally irresponsible and invited further waste, fraud and abuse. The NPRM seeks comment on proposals, including to maintain the current $9.25/month subsidy for Lifeline recipients and adopt minimum service standards for voice and broadband service. It also asked whether Lifeline providers should be required to offer broadband, how to spur more competition to improve price and service, and how to encourage more state participation. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said the proposals would start to address the "homework gap" affecting low-income students who have no broadband access and sometimes go to fast food restaurants and other places with free Wi-Fi service to do assignments. The NPRM also proposed to overhaul the process of verifying consumer eligibility by lifting administrative responsibility from Lifeline service providers, and asked about possible alternatives, including establishing a third-party "national verifier," coordinating with other federal needs-based programs, and using vouchers to directly subsidize consumers.

The FCC Enforcement Bureau dismissed a complaint by Global Franchise Development, which does business as Exotic Sportz, against AT&T and Charter Communications after the parties settled their number-porting dispute (see 1507140030). The dismissal came in an order posted Thursday in docket 15-32. The order noted the parties had asked the FCC to dismiss Exotic's complaint that Charter unlawfully ported Exotic's toll-free number away from AT&T, and also noted that both companies had denied any wrongdoing. AT&T and Charter had opposed the complaint.

AT&T, Charter and Global Franchise Development Corp., which does business as Exotic Sportz, have settled a number-porting dispute, Exotic said in a filing posted Tuesday in FCC docket 15-32. Exotic asked the commission to dismiss its June 8 complaint alleging that Charter had unlawfully ported Exotic's toll-free number away from AT&T, and that both companies had improperly denied any wrongdoing. Both Charter and AT&T had urged the FCC to deny the complaint, in lengthy responses (see here and here).

“I believe it is best for me to step aside and allow new leadership to step in, enabling the agency to move beyond the current challenges and allowing the employees at OPM to continue their important work,” former Office of Personnel Management Director Katherine Archuleta wrote in a blog post Saturday regarding her resignation Friday (see 1507100037). “While my team and I have accomplished much together, in particular, I’m proud of the work we have done to develop the REDI (Recruitment, Engagement, Diversity and Inclusion) initiative and our IT Strategic Plan,” Archuleta said. “These efforts have transformed our ability to serve our customer agencies and ensure that the Federal Government is able to attract, hire, engage, and develop a talented and diverse Federal workforce.”

Public Knowledge cited religion in lobbying the FCC on the IP tech transition, said an ex parte filing posted Thursday in docket 14-174. Public Knowledge asked the FCC to clarify that in event of natural disasters or other unforeseen circumstances, carriers are obligated to restore service or file applications for discontinuance under Section 214 of the Communications Act if they don't plan to repair their networks or restore service. It said some parties argue they shouldn't have to file such discontinuance applications in those situations. "This is apparently an application of the theory that where an Act of God has struck down a network in His terrible wrath, no mere mortal shall presume to repair it," Public Knowledge said, with a footnote citing Ecclesiastes 7:13 ("Marvel at the work of God, for who may straighten that which He has made crooked?"). "Such a religious-based theory finds no sanctuary in the statute, however. Under the plain language of the statute, a carrier is obligated to continue to provide service until it has actually obtained a certificate from the Commission finding that the discontinuance serves the public interest." Citing Section 214(c), Public Knowledge said, "In other words, regardless of whether or not the physical facility is destroyed or damaged, and regardless of whether this network damage, degradation or destruction comes from the Act of God or the hand of man, whether by sin of commission or sin of omission and casual neglect, the carrier is required to offer its preexisting service to the community at sufficient quality as to not constitute an impairment."

The D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals vacated a National Labor Relations Board ruling that the Southern New England Telephone Company, owned by AT&T at the time, committed an unfair labor practice by prohibiting employees who interacted with customers from wearing a union shirt with the words "inmate" and "prisoner of AT&T." The court said in its decision Friday that "it was reasonable for AT&T to believe that the 'inmate/prisoner' shirts may harm AT&T's relationship with its customers or its public image" and the company "lawfully prohibited its employees from wearing the shirt." The decision was written by Judge Brett Kavanaugh. The ruling follows a Southern New England Telephone Company appeal of a 2-1 NLRB decision that AT&T was wrong to prohibit its workers from wearing the pro-union shirts during contract negotiations between the company and the Communications Workers of America. According to CWA, AT&T infringed on the rights of employees under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, but the telecom company responded by saying it had invoked the act's "special circumstances" provision, which allows companies to ban union messages on publicly visible apparel on the job when the messages might harm customer relations or the company's public image, the court decision said. "Common sense sometimes matters in resolving legal disputes," said the decision. "This case is a good example." In addition to overturning the NLRB's decision concerning the shirts, the ruling also denies the NLRB's cross-application for enforcement of its initial 2-1 vote. "We’re pleased with [the] Court’s common sense approval of our apparel policies," an AT&T spokesman said Friday. "While we respect our employees' right to express their opinions, it is our policy to require appropriate dress for employees in customer-facing positions." The NLRB and CWA didn't comment Friday.

FCC Enforcement Bureau letters notifying Icon Telecom and Oscar Enrique Perez-Zumaeta of their suspension from participating in the Lifeline USF program are to be published Thursday in the Federal Register, said two FR notices including the letters (here and here) posted Wednesday. The letters, which also give notice of the commencement of debarment proceedings against Icon and Perez-Zumaeta, were dated May 26 and June 8, respectively, and released at the time by the FCC (see 1505260027 and 1506080067), but the parties have 30 days to contest the suspensions upon receipt of the letter or publication of the suspension in the Federal Register, whichever comes first. Icon, a Lifeline participant, pleaded guilty "to knowingly making a false statement to the Universal Service Administrative Company through its submission of 58 fabricated customer recertification forms," the bureau said in its letter notifying Icon. In April, Wes Yui Chew, president and owner of Icon, was ordered to serve four years in federal prison and pay a fine of $117,166 after pleading guilty to money laundering for transferring $20.5 million from an Icon bank account to his own, "despite knowing that Icon had thousands fewer customers than it reported to the Commission," said the bureau in a separate letter notifying Chew of his own suspension (which was not part of Wednesday's FR notices). Chew also agreed to forfeit $27 million seized during a Department of Justice investigation. Perez-Zumaeta owned and managed PSPS Sales, which recruited low-income people to apply for Lifeline-supported phone services through Icon. He pleaded guilty to money laundering for depositing a $52,390 check from Icon into a PSPS bank account "despite knowing that more than $10,000.00 of those funds was the result of criminal fraud against the Commission," the bureau said in its letter to Perez-Zumaeta.

“Technology makes it easy for scammers to fake or ‘spoof’ caller ID information” and can make it look like they’re calling from a different place or number, including the receiver's’ own number, said a blog post Tuesday from FTC Do Not Call Program Coordinator Bikram Bandy. “Scammers use this trick as a way to get around call-blocking and hide from law enforcement,” Bandy said. Don’t pick up, press buttons to be taken off the call list or talk to a live person as it’s an illegal robocall, he said. Ignore them and move on with your day, Bandy said.

The Supreme Court may be moving in a direction of giving less deference to the Chevron doctrine and that could be bad news for the FCC as an appeal of the February net neutrality order moves forward, Free State Foundation President Randolph May said Tuesday in The Hill. In recent decisions, King v. Burwell, an Affordable Care Act (ACA) case, and Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, the court raised new questions about Chevron deference, the doctrine that if a reviewing court deems a statutory provision “ambiguous” and the agency's interpretation “reasonable,” an agency's interpretation is to be given “controlling weight,” May said. In rejecting the latest challenge to the ACA, Chief Justice John Roberts “refrained, at least explicitly, from relying on Chevron deference, despite acknowledging the statute's ambiguity,” May wrote. “While observing that Chevron's approach ‘is premised on the theory that a statute's ambiguity constitutes an implicit delegation from Congress to the agency to fill in the statutory gaps,’ he nevertheless declared that this was one of the ‘extraordinary cases’ in which the Chevron doctrine doesn't apply. Why not? Because, according to Roberts, it involves a question of such deep 'economic and political significance' that ‘had Congress wished to assign that question to an agency, it surely would have done so expressly.’" In the Michigan case, writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said the EPA may regulate power plants only if it concludes "regulation is appropriate and necessary," May said. “Scalia, while not questioning Chevron's applicability, determined that, ‘even under this deferential standard,’ the EPA's interpretation of the statute was unreasonable. Thus, Chevron did not carry the day.”

Next-generation 911 was a major theme when more than 2,000 met in Denver last week for the National Emergency Number Association's annual meeting, NENA said in a news release. “NG9-1-1 not only provides the capability to accept 9-1-1 text and multimedia messaging, but also enhances call routing and handling,” the group said. “In addition, NG9-1-1 allows for communications and data transfers across county, state, and international borders, and provides for interconnection and seamless information sharing between 9-1-1 centers, first responders, poison control centers, trauma centers, and other emergency response entities.”