FCC Reschedules Monthly Meeting to Combine it with Field Hearing
The monthly FCC agenda meeting was rescheduled to Monday to coincide with a net neutrality hearing in Cambridge, Mass., said agency officials. The decision late Tuesday to cancel the Feb. 26 meeting in Washington and combine it with the Feb. 25 field hearing caps a week of confusion among commission staff, and last-minute changes in details of both events (CD Feb 15 p1). FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s plan for commissioners to vote on six media and wireless items at the meeting was scotched by the latest change in plans, commission sources said. No items will be voted on at the field hearing, they said, and commissioners once again were asked to vote on three of the six items before the meeting.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Commissioners and their advisors learned of the decision to clear the agenda late Tuesday, commission sources said. The action will let commissioners concentrate on listening to testimony on broadband network management practices at the meeting. The part of the commission’s Web site listing dates and times for coming monthly meetings was changed to reflect the new date Wednesday morning, an FCC official said.
The commission had said the broadband hearing will be at Harvard Law School. The FCC had planned to hold both the monthly meeting and net neutrality hearing in Cambridge Feb. 26. But the hearing was rescheduled because House Telecommunications Subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey, D- Mass., couldn’t make it.
Late Wednesday, the FCC released the agenda for the en banc hearing. Industry executives, representatives of public interest groups supporting network neutrality, academics and technologists all will testify. Sources said there were no surprises.
Of the four media items Martin said Feb. 8 he wanted action on by the meeting, only one will get a vote, commission officials said. Martin asked the other commissioners to adopt by Friday his order approving DirecTV’s transfer, the sources said. (See separate report in this issue.) They said the chairman didn’t set deadlines for votes on a rulemaking notice proposing a 2012 deadline for low-power TV stations to switch to digital, a proposed order requiring satellite-TV providers carry the signals of all digital stations in a market if they carry one, or a third DTV item. Martin told the other commissioners he wants those items adopted on circulation, the sources said.
The DirecTV order was the only one of the four media items that Martin wanted quick action on, probably because he doesn’t want to hold up the $11 billion deal, two FCC sources said. The chairman may have decided not to put the low-power notice on the meeting agenda because he fears he doesn’t have the votes for it, a commission official said. Some commissioners dislike the notice because it would pave the way for low-power stations to demand carriage on cable systems, officials said. With a focus on the 2009 digital transition for full-power stations, there’s less urgency for action on the low-power item, an official said. Commissioners probably will approve the DBS DTV order, but they're considering changing it to clarify what DirecTV and EchoStar must do to ensure that satellite subscribers in rural markets can get the signals of local broadcasters after Feb. 17, 2009, another official said.
Two wireless items were supposed to be on the meeting agenda, but neither is controversial and both are expected to be voted before the meeting. One deals with several matters involving the 2.5 GHz band used by broadband radio service and educational broadband service operators. The other is a proposed order requested by the Coast Guard that concerns use of VHF maritime channel 87B in inland areas as part of a national system to track ship movements. Commissioners probably will vote on the items electronically as soon as a few minor points are sorted out, commission officials said.
Industry executives, who asked not to be identified for fear of FCC retribution, expressed concerns about the rescheduling. “It’s frustrating for people who think that they need to be there and want to be there,” said an industry attorney who doesn’t plan to attend the hearing. “There was a period last week when there was a question mark about was it going to happen and when it would happen. It makes it really difficult for the advocates who care about these things.” The lawyer noted that the agency is now trying to schedule meetings well in advance and is circulating a list of items before commissioners with an eye toward working more openly.