D.C. Circuit Court Upholds Most of 2017 Net Neutrality Order; Vacates State Preemption

/in , /by

On October 1, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its per curiam decision on the appeal of the FCC’s 2017 net neutrality order, also known as the Restoring Internet Freedom Order. Although the court upheld the Order in large part, it vacated part and remanded part back to the FCC to address three issues in which it found the Order inadequate: “(1) The Order failed to examine the implications of its decisions for public safety; (2) the Order does not sufficiently explain what reclassification will mean for regulation of pole attachments; and (3) the agency did not adequately address Petitioners’ concerns about the effects of broadband reclassification on the Lifeline Program.” The court vacated that part of the Order pre-empting any state or local requirement that “would effectively impose rules or requirements that [the FCC] repealed or decided to refrain from imposing in this order or that would impose more stringent requirements for any aspect of broadband service that [the FCC] address[ed] in this order.”

The court upheld the FCC’s decisions to restore the classification of broadband Internet access service as a less regulated “information service;” reinstate the private mobile service classification of mobile broadband Internet access service; eliminate the Internet Conduct Standard and the Bright Line Rules; and adopt enhanced transparency requirements that mandated ISPs to disclose information about their practices to consumers, entrepreneurs, and the FCC.

Chairman Pai, alongside Commissioners O’Rielly and Carr, were pleased with the court’s decision to uphold the majority of the Order. Chairman Pai said, “Today’s decision is a victory for consumers, broadband deployment, and the free and open Internet. The court affirmed the FCC’s decision to repeal 1930s utility-style regulation of the Internet imposed by the prior Administration.” Commissioner O’Rielly said, “It is heartening to see a court get most of the decision correct. … At the same time, vacating the preemption provisions seems to misread precedent and ignores the technology’s structure, which cannot be segmented into intrastate portions. Inevitably, this will lead to Commission case-by-case preemption efforts and more litigation.” Commissioner Carr said, “Today’s decision is a big win for a free and open Internet and for U.S. leadership in 5G.”

Commissioners Rosenworcel said, “Today’s court decision vacates the FCC’s unlawful effort to block states and localities from protecting an open internet for their citizens. From small towns to big cities, from state houses to governors’ executive actions, states and localities have been stepping in because the FCC shirked its duties. In addition, the court took the agency to task for disregarding its duty to consider how its decision threatens public safety, Lifeline service, and broadband infrastructure.”

Commissioner Starks said, “Above all else, today’s decision breathes new life into the fight for an open internet. It confirms that states can continue to step into the void left by this FCC. To that end, it is a validation of those states that have already sought to protect consumers, and a challenge to those that haven’t yet acted to think hard about how to protect their citizens.”

Net Neutrality Fight Heads to States, Capitol Hill

/in , /by

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals dropped a long-awaited ruling Tuesday on the FCC’s rollback of the Obama-era net neutrality rules, largely upholding the Republican-led repeal. But the court knocked down the FCC’s attempt to broadly override state efforts to craft their own net neutrality rules. An FCC senior official told reporters the ruling leaves open the possibility of the FCC challenging state laws on a case-by-case basis. Goldstein & Russell partner Kevin Russell, who argued against the FCC’s repeal, said that would be a “difficult task.”

— No one thinks this fight is over, but the next battleground may be in California. Remember: The state passed its own net neutrality rules in 2018 but agreed to hold off on enforcing them while the FCC’s rules faced a legal challenge. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra hailed the D.C. court for rebuffing “the FCC’s effort to preempt state net neutrality laws through regulation,” but his office said it was still evaluating its next steps in light of the federal ruling (which could still be reconsidered by the full complement of D.C. Circuit judges and/or the Supreme Court), according to a dispatch from POLITICO California reporters Jeremy B. White and Katy Murphy. Full Color Future Chair Mignon Clyburn, who as a Democratic FCC commissioner voted to approve the repealed rules, told POLITICO that the ruling will “allow each state to determine its own net neutrality future.” She added, “Any state wishing to protect entrepreneurs should follow the lead of California, Colorado, and Vermont in enacting laws protecting entrepreneurs and people of color with strong net neutrality requirements.”

— Over on the Hill, the ruling renewed calls for federal net neutrality legislation. Rep. Greg Walden, ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said Republicans in the chamber want to work on a “serious, bipartisan approach to creating a national standard.” Bipartisan legislation may prove as elusive as ever, though. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) marked Tuesday’s ruling by pushing his Save the Internet Act, urging Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to bring it to a vote. That House-passed measure (H.R. 1644) would restore the Obama-era rules and has proven deeply unpopular with Republicans; McConnell previously declared it “dead on arrival” in the Senate.

House E&C Plans Hearing On Huawei Gear Use in U.S. Networks

/in , /by

The House Energy and Commerce telecom subcommittee will hold a hearing next Tuesday (Sept. 24) on efforts to legislate on removing foreign telecommunications gear from U.S. networks.

“We look forward to pushing ahead with legislation to root-out suspect network equipment nationwide ,” E&C Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and subcommittee Chairman Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) said in a joint statement today.

The Sept. 24 session comes amid panel leaders’ talks on how to provide funds to help rural telecom companies ditch gear from Chinese providers like Huawei and ZTE, as POLITICO reported last week. Rural carriers, which chose this equipment for its low cost,fear Trump administration moves to block out Huawei will leave them with hefty bills. Senate Commerce lawmakers this summer approved a measure, S. 1625 (116), that would unleash $700 million to help these rural telecom companies.

“The smaller ones are probably the ones that need the help, and how you draw that line will be a challenge,” E&C ranking member Greg Walden (R-Ore.) told POLITICO recently. “There are models here that would work. For the improved communications networks and the increased security, it would be worth the federal investment.”

Democratic FCC Commissioner Geoffrey Starks said at a wireless conference today that “any funding should require recipients to observe good cybersecurity practices in the future.”

The panel didn’t announce witnesses for the session, which will also focus on ways to “improve coordination and management of spectrum resources to better serve the American people,” according to Pallone and Doyle.

Paradise Valley, AZ to Enforce Call Verification – June 1

/in , /by

The Town of Paradise Valley Alarm Ordinance has supported enhanced call verification for years but we were not enforcing it. We have recently put more of a focus on false alarm reduction and to support this will be requiring ECV prior to alarm companies notifying our dispatchers. We are hoping to have compliance as soon as possible with an expected enforcement date of June 1st, 2019. Our Police Officers take a tremendous amount of pride in the service they are able to provide to our community and we hope that this added level of verification will not only help them continue to provide a rapid response time to residents but also help residents avoid incurring false alarm fines.

 

For detailed information, email AlarmOpsTeam@paradisevalleyaz.gov or go to the Alarm Monitoring page on the Town of Paradise Valley website https://paradisevalleyaz.gov/421/Alarm-Monitoring.

BILL ACTION ALERT

/in , /by

The Texas Legislation is trying to pass a bill that will require populations under 5000 within the state to self-monitor or be monitored by a larger communications facility.  The False Alarm Reduction Association (FARA) is working in partnership with the Texas Burglary and Fire Alarm Association (TBFAA) to try and dissuade the mayor that is spearheading this bill.

To be successful, FARA and TBFAA seek to demonstrate that alarm systems do much more than report alarm signals. TMA had been asked to assist with this effort.

VIEW THE BILL – HB538

Data from alarm dealers and monitoring centers that clearly documents and quantifies the full scope of monitoring services provided to their customers is needed. Services beyond alarm signals may include, but are not limited to:

  • Troubles
  • Supervisory
  • Low Battery
  • Signals

Please send the requested data to:

Brad Shipp
Director
False Alarm Reduction Association (FARA)
Email: bradshipp@4yoursolution.com
Tel: +1.301.519.9237

Nationwide Monitoring Bill Survey

/in , /by

June 24, 2014

To: Central Station Owners

From:  CSAA Contract Monitoring Council

Re: Nationwide Monitoring Bill Survey

If your company provides alarm monitoring services to alarm dealers and/or end-users in multiple states, then you are aware of the challenges associated with obtaining proper licensing for your alarm monitoring company and your alarm dispatchers. Not only do the costs of repeatedly supplying fingerprint cards and background checks create a logistical challenge and financial burden, in many cases, the expensive and time-consuming training/testing requirements for monitoring personnel is not even relevant to the tasks that they perform on a daily basis.

To combat these and the other issues associated with individual state licenses for alarm monitoring companies, the CSAA Contract Monitoring Council represented by the Alarm Industry Communication Committee (AICC) has explored a bill, the “Alarm Monitoring Model Licensing Act.” The Council believes that a nationwide licensing bill would be very beneficial to central station monitoring companies; however, the passage of such legislation is a time-consuming and expensive endeavor, and funding is needed from the companies that will benefit from this legislation. At this time, funding for this effort has been exhausted, and the Council is not seeing sufficient interest in continuing the effort.

After several years of outreach, the Council would like to know of your interest in and support for pursuing this agenda. Please help us by completing the short survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/LZWLGN5  .

The survey questions are:

  1. Are you interested in CSAA pursuing this nationwide monitoring bill?
  2. Will you contact your Senator or Congressperson on behalf of this effort?
  3. Will you participate in communications and other activities to help promote this bill to Congress?
  4. Will your company contribute financially?
  5. Will you personally contribute to a PAC for this effort?
  6. Should CSAA stop pursuing this initiative?

Thank you for your participation. Your response will be kept confidential, though you will be asked for contact information. Questions? Contact Elizabeth Lasko at CSAA – ewlasko@csaaintl.org.