Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing 9 of 327 Publications in Telecommunications & Regulated Utilities
Written Testimonies & Filings DOT should be focusing its efforts on bringing the automotive industry’s new cellular vehicle-to-everything (“C-V2X”) technology to vehicles. Instead, we are concerned that DOT will attempt to use a study that is both procedurally and technically flawed to pressure the FCC to roll back its bipartisan decision on the 5.9 GHz band.
Dear Members of Congress,
Following years of careful study, in 2020 the FCC took bipartisan action to allow both unlicensed broadband and automotive use of the 5.9 GHz band, clearing the way for billions of dollars in economic value and innovation.
The Department of Transportation’s (“DOT”) recently announced study appears to be designed to undermine the FCC’s decision, spurred by interests’ intent on re-asserting a claim that the automotive industry should control the entire band. DOT is conducting this action without seeking public comment and appears to be relying on improper technical assumptions and methodologies.
Accordingly, the undersigned organizations urge you to stop this misguided effort. DOT should be focusing its efforts on bringing the automotive industry’s new cellular vehicle-to-everything (“C-V2X”) technology to vehicles. Instead, we are concerned that DOT will attempt to use a study that is both procedurally and technically flawed to pressure the FCC to roll back its bipartisan decision on the 5.9 GHz band. This would be another instance of government agency dysfunction run amok.
Congress designated the FCC as the nation’s arbiter of commercial spectrum. The FCC’s 5.9 GHz decision is based on sound science and engineering and will best serve both the broadband and automotive safety needs of the country. The FCC’s approach:
The FCC undertook a lengthy, full, and fair public rulemaking that expressly considered the views of all stakeholders, from consumer advocates and technology companies to the DOT, state transportation agencies and vehicle manufacturers. The result was a bipartisan and unanimous decision that adopted careful technical rules to protect neighboring automotive services.
The FCC’s decision is also critical for American jobs, as unlicensed technologies add hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy every year and economists calculate that enabling access to part of the 5.9 GHz band will add more than $28 billion by 2025. In fact, this spectrum has been used for the past two years to provide consumers with additional bandwidth to meet increased demand during the pandemic.
C-V2X advocates repeatedly told the FCC that 30 megahertz of spectrum would be sufficient for C-V2X to deliver time-critical safety messages and applications. Rather than relitigate the FCC’s bipartisan decision on a spectrum matter that is squarely in its jurisdiction, DOT should focus on helping the automotive industry deliver on those vehicle-safety promises.
Spectrum is a finite asset, and after a twenty-year grant of exclusive use of the band, the FCC was right to not allow these critical mid-band frequencies to lay fallow any longer. Given the importance of the 5.9 GHz band to the country, the federal government must speak with a unified voice on spectrum. Congress should direct the DOT to drop this post-Order testing immediately.
Respectfully submitted,
American Library Association Benton Institute for Broadband & Society Center for Rural Strategies Council for Citizens Against Government Waste Digital Progress Institute International Center for Law & Economics Next Century Cities Open Technology Institute at New America Public Knowledge R Street Institute Wireless Internet Service Providers Association (WISPA)
Presentations & Interviews ICLE Executive Director Ian Adams joined the Regulatory Transparency Project’s Fourth Branch Podcast to discuss proposed rules that would require mandatory switching on U.S. railroads. . . .
ICLE Executive Director Ian Adams joined the Regulatory Transparency Project’s Fourth Branch Podcast to discuss proposed rules that would require mandatory switching on U.S. railroads. The full episode is embedded below.
TOTM Though details remain scant (and thus, any final judgment would be premature), initial word on the new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework agreed to, in principle, by the . . .
Though details remain scant (and thus, any final judgment would be premature), initial word on the new Trans-Atlantic Data Privacy Framework agreed to, in principle, by the White House and the European Commission suggests that it could be a workable successor to the Privacy Shield agreement that was invalidated by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in 2020.
Read the full piece here.
Regulatory Comments Comments of the International Center for Law & Economics Before the Surface Transportation Board STB Ex Parte No. 711 (Sub-No. 1) Reciprocal Switching Submitted Feb. . . .
On behalf of the International Center for Law & Economics, a nonpartisan nonprofit that promotes the use of law & economics methodologies to inform public-policy debates, I offer the following comments to express concern about the potential finalization and promulgation of the Surface Transportation Board’s (STB) 2016 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the imposition of a reciprocal-switching requirement for U.S. freight-rail operations.
The STB’s renewed efforts on reciprocal switching have come as part of a push by the administration to spur competition in the U.S. economy.[1] This proceeding responds specifically to a call by President Joe Biden to: “strengthen regulations pertaining to reciprocal switching agreements.”[2] Unfortunately, like much of the administration’s broader effort, the regulatory solutions the STB offers are in search of competition problems, evidence of which remains conspicuously absent. Worse, the STB offers these new regulations on the basis of a docket that is now dated and that itself relied on even older data.[3] As a procedural and factual matter, the STB should use this proceeding to abandon consideration both of the 2016 NPRM, specifically, and of a reciprocal-switching mandate altogether.
Toward that end, these comments speak to the manifest infirmities of the proposal under consideration by examining how the STB has failed in its statutory duty to identify a problem suitable for regulatory redress; by identifying the proposed solution’s most likely outcomes and exploring how poorly they satisfy the Proposed Rule’s stated goal; and by detailing the inevitable costs associated with promulgating the Proposed Rule.
Competition within the freight-rail sector and the larger U.S. economy is vital to the nation’s economic health, and by the STB’s most recent assessment, is robust.[4] But the role of regulation is to make markets regular in a manner that fosters efficiency, not to reflect the whims or will of a regulator to the detriment of a disfavored party.
Read the full comments here.
[1] Executive Order 14036, 86 FR 36987-36999, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy.” July 9, 2021. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021-15069.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Docket No. EP 711, Docket No. EP 711 (Sub-No. 1), 81 FR 51149-51165,“Petition for Rulemaking To Adopt Revised Competitive Switching Rules; Reciprocal Switching.” Aug 3, 2016. (NPRM). https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2016-17980.
[4] Laurits Christensen Associates report to Surface Transportation Board, “A Study of Competition in the U.S. Freight Railroad Industry and Analysis of Proposals that might Enhance Competition.” November 2009. https://www.stb.gov/wpcontent/uploads/files/docs/competitionStudy/Executive%20Summary.pdf.
TOTM President Joe Biden’s nomination of Gigi Sohn to serve on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)—scheduled for a second hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee Feb. 9—has been . . .
President Joe Biden’s nomination of Gigi Sohn to serve on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)—scheduled for a second hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee Feb. 9—has been met with speculation that it presages renewed efforts at the FCC to enforce net neutrality. A veteran of tech policy battles, Sohn served as counselor to former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler at the time of the commission’s 2015 net-neutrality order.
Popular Media President Joe Biden’s July 2021 executive order offered a sneak preview of his administration’s priorities for the freight-rail sector, particularly where it calls on the Surface Transportation . . .
President Joe Biden’s July 2021 executive order offered a sneak preview of his administration’s priorities for the freight-rail sector, particularly where it calls on the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to “strengthen regulations pertaining to reciprocal switching agreements.”
Popular Media The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has released a list of 50 airports that it contends will need “buffer zones” for 5G cellular spectrum, the latest in a . . .
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has released a list of 50 airports that it contends will need “buffer zones” for 5G cellular spectrum, the latest in a months-long and escalating public fight between the agency and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Rather than a mere regulatory turf battle, the differences this internecine spectacle illustrates in how these two agencies think about risk and understand the purposes of regulation reflect basic divisions that run throughout our politics.
Popular Media In a turf war between federal agencies that could prove deeply disruptive to travelers, the Federal Aviation Administration is threatening to ground planes if the . . .
In a turf war between federal agencies that could prove deeply disruptive to travelers, the Federal Aviation Administration is threatening to ground planes if the Federal Communications Commission allows wireless carriers to begin operating in the C-band spectrum this week.
TL;DR Since taking office, the Biden administration has moved aggressively to use enforcement actions and rulemakings—many of them outlined in the administration’s July 2021 executive order—ostensibly as a means to promote market competition.
Since taking office, the Biden administration has moved aggressively to use enforcement actions and rulemakings—many of them outlined in the administration’s July 2021 executive order—ostensibly as a means to promote market competition. Among the targets of this approach has been the freight-rail sector. The administration advocates for mandated reciprocal switching, a form of compelled network interoperability, on grounds that it would improve the rail industry’s competitive environment.
The Biden EO called on the Surface Transportation Board (STB) to “strengthen regulations pertaining to reciprocal switching agreements,” which the board is expected to do in early 2022. The regulations would be based on a six-year-old notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), which was, in turn, based on far older data.
Concerns about competition in the freight-rail industry, and particularly about consolidation among Class I railroads, have been both overblown and misdirected, driving officials to seek counterproductive regulatory remedies. A reciprocal-switching mandate would render rail networks both less efficient and less resilient, as it would undermine firms’ ability to schedule their operations precisely.
Such a mandate would be particularly counterproductive in the midst of the ongoing supply-chain crisis. Over the longer term, a switching mandate would undermine the very incentives that have yielded enormous private investment in the development and ongoing maintenance of rail infrastructure.
Read the full explainer here.
