Federal Communications Commission

From The IT Law Wiki

Contents 1 Overview 2 FCC Structure 3 FCC Strategic Plan 3.1 Broadband 3.2 Competition 3.3 Spectrum 3.4 Media 3.5 Public Safety and Homeland Security 3.6 FCC Modernization 4 Convergence 5 Government Accountability Office Study

[edit] Overview

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent federal agency directly responsible to Congress. It was established by the Communications Act of 1934 ("1934 Act") and is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. The mission of the FCC is to ensure that the American people have available — at reasonable cost and without discrimination — rapid, efficient, nation- and world-wide communication services, whether by radio, television, wire, satellite, or cable.

Although the FCC has restructured over the past few years to better reflect the industry, it is still required to adhere to the statutory requirements of its governing legislation, the 1934 Act. The Act requires the FCC to regulate the various industry sectors differently. Some policymakers have been critical of the FCC and the manner in which it regulates various sectors of the telecommunications industry — telephone, cable television, radio and television broadcasting, and some aspects of the Internet. These policymakers, including some in Congress, have long called for varying degrees and types of reform to the FCC.

Most proposals fall into two categories: (1) procedural changes made within the FCC or through congressional action that would affect the agency’s operations or (2) substantive policy changes requiring congressional action that would affect how the agency regulates different services and industry sectors.

[edit] FCC Structure

The FCC is directed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for five-year terms (except when filling an unexpired term). The President designates one of the Commissioners to serve as Chairperson. Only three Commissioners may be members of the same political party. None of them can have a financial interest in any Commission-related business.

The day-to-day functions of the FCC are carried out by six bureaus and 10 offices. The current structure of the FCC was established in 2002 as part of the agency’s effort to better reflect the industries it regulates. The bureaus process applications for licenses and other filings, analyze complaints, conduct investigations, develop and implement regulatory programs, and participate in hearings, among other things. The offices provide support services. Bureaus and offices often collaborate when addressing FCC issues. The following are the current FCC Bureaus:

• Wireline Competition Bureau
• Enforcement Bureau
• Wireless Telecommunications Bureau
• Media Bureau
• Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
• International Bureau
• Public Safety & Homeland Security Bureau

The only FCC office that conducts regulatory proceedings is the Office of Engineering and Technology, which advises the FCC on engineering matters. However, the Office of Administrative Law Judges also conducts hearings and issues initial decisions.

Other offices are the Office of Communication Business Opportunities, Office of the General Counsel, Office of the Inspector General, Office of Legislative Affairs, Office of the Managing Director, Office of Media Relations, Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis, and Office of Workplace Diversity.

[edit] FCC Strategic Plan

In 2003, the FCC adopted a five-year strategic plan promoting six goals relating to broadband, competition, spectrum, media, homeland security, and FCC modernization. In September 2005, the FCC updated this plan with new descriptions of each goal and incorporating “public safety” into its homeland security goal.^[1] The latest status report on the strategic plan was presented at an FCC open meeting on January 17, 2008.^[2]

[edit] Broadband

All Americans should have affordable access to robust and reliable broadband products and services. Regulatory policies must promote technological neutrality, competition, investment, and innovation to ensure that broadband service providers have sufficient incentive to develop and offer such products and services.^[3]

[edit] Competition

Competition in the provision of communications services, both domestically and overseas, supports the Nation’s economy. The competitive framework for communications services should foster innovation and offer consumers reliable, meaningful choice in affordable services.^[4]

[edit] Spectrum

Efficient and effective use of non-federal spectrum domestically and internationally promotes the growth and rapid deployment of innovative and efficient communications technologies and services.^[5]

[edit] Media

The Nation’s media regulations must promote competition and diversity and facilitate the transition to digital modes of delivery.^[6]

[edit] Public Safety and Homeland Security

Communications during emergencies and crises must be available for public safety, health, defense, and emergency personnel, as well as all consumers in need. The Nation’s critical communications infrastructure must be reliable, interoperable, redundant, and rapidly restorable.^[7]

[edit] FCC Modernization

The FCC shall strive to be a highly productive, adaptive, and innovative organization that maximizes the benefit to stakeholders, staff, and management from effective systems, processes, resources, and organizational culture.

[edit] Convergence

One of the most significant issues facing the FCC is the evolution of the communications industry towards an all-digital, broadband world that has blurred the distinctions between services, also called “convergence.”

The FCC has restructured over the past few years to better reflect the realities of convergence, but the agency is still required to adhere to the statutory requirements of its governing legislation, the Telecommunications Act of 1996[1]. Thus, while convergence has made distinguishing among types of data increasingly difficult, the FCC must continue to differentiate among services based on the distinctions drawn in the 1996 Act. Unfortunately, when all data looks the same and functionally similar services are provided by companies governed by different titles of the 1996 Act, questions of fairness and competitive advantage may arise. As newer technologies and services are developed and deployed, applying legacy regulations to them may begin to appear more strained.

The FCC has addressed two issues directly related to convergence during the 109th Congress: the proper regulatory classification of services via the Internet protocol (e.g., Voice over Internet Protocol VoIP) as well as law enforcement’s ability to conduct wiretaps effectively (i.e., using the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA). These issues are — and will continue to be — extremely important in reshaping the regulatory environment for telecommunications and information services.

The FCC also remains focused on broadband deployment. The agency continues to monitor its policies to encourage new providers to roll out new services (e.g., power companies will be deploying broadband over power line (BPL)) systems) as well as continue to promote deployment to underserved areas and populations, i.e., rural and low-income communities, through universal service and other programs (e.g., the E-Rate).

One of the difficulties in addressing the issues facing the FCC is that so many of them now intersect. So many of the broadband issues are inter-related that it is often difficult to sort out where one issue ends and another begins. For example, VoIP, CALEA, and BPL are all tied to the concept of broadband convergence and reliance on the Internet for information and it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to discuss one without touching on the others. Effectively addressing these types of issues may well be the greatest challenge facing both the FCC and Congress in the near future.

[edit] Government Accountability Office Study

In September 2007, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a study, conducted in response to a congressional request, on the FCC’s rulemaking process. Specifically, the GAO studied four rulemakings as case studies to determine the extent to which the FCC followed the steps for rulemakings required by law, including those related to public participation.^[8]

The GAO found that while the FCC generally followed the rulemaking process in the four case studies and most ex parte filings complied with FCC rules, several stakeholders had access to nonpublic information. For example, in discussions with some stakeholders that regularly participate in FCC rulemakings, multiple stakeholders generally knew when the Commission scheduled votes on proposed rules well before FCC notified the public, even though FCC rules prohibit disclosing this information outside of FCC. Other stakeholders said that they could not learn when rules were scheduled for a vote until FCC released the public meeting agenda, at which time FCC rules prohibit stakeholders from lobbying FCC. As a result, stakeholders with advance information about which rules are scheduled for a vote would know when it would be most effective to lobby FCC, while stakeholders without this information would not.

The GAO recommended that, to ensure a fair and transparent rulemaking process, the chairman of the FCC take steps to ensure equal access to information, particularly in regard to the disclosure of information about proposed rules that are scheduled to be considered by the Commission, by developing and maintaining (1) procedures to ensure that nonpublic information will not be disclosed and (2) a series of actions that will occur if the information is disclosed, such as referral to the Inspector General and providing the information to all stakeholders.

Cite error: <ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found