September 24, 2021

Volume XI, Number 267

Advertisement

September 24, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 23, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 22, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

TCPA Regulatory Update — Commission Considering Reduced STIR/SHAKEN Extension for Small Providers

The Commission plans to consider a proposal to speed up STIR/SHAKEN implementation for small providers that are most likely to originate illegal robocalls. Ahead of its May Open Meeting, the Commission circulated a public draft of a Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“FNPRM”) in the agency’s Call Authentication Trust Anchor Proceeding. The FNPRM seeks to address the problem of small voice service providers – i.e., those with fewer than 100,000 subscriber lines – who allegedly originate an increasingly large number of illegal robocalls by moving up the STIR/SHAKEN implementation deadline for those providers from June 30, 2023 to June 30, 2022. The FNPRM would also seek comment on how best to define and identify the problem subset of small voice service providers that should be subject to the reduced extension, and whether the Commission should adopt additional measures, including data submission, to facilitate oversight and ensure those small providers implement STIR/SHAKEN by their new deadline.

In her note announcing the agenda for the May meeting, Acting Chairwoman Rosenworcel noted that “[t]he FCC has set a deadline for most large voice providers to implement STIR/SHAKEN by June 2021, but we gave small voice providers a two-year extension to adopt this technology. Faced with new evidence that an increasing quantity of illegal robocalls are originating with a subset of small voice providers, I’ve circulated a proposal to shorten this extension for some companies who are likely to be the source of illegal robocalls.” If the Commission adopts the FNPRM, comments and reply comments will be due 30 and 60 days, respectively, after publication in the Federal Register.

©1994-2021 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume XI, Number 137
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Russell H. Fox, Communications Attorney, Mintz Levin, Regulatory Approvals
Member

With over 35 years in the wireless telecommunications industry, Russell is among the most experienced wireless communications attorneys in the country. Unique among his peers, Russell assists clients on federal legislative, regulatory, and transactional matters. He analyzes legislation on behalf of clients, participates in proceedings before the FCC and other federal agencies, negotiates spectrum agreements, and represents wireless providers in spectrum auctions. He is also frequently consulted on matters involving US spectrum use and policy.

Whether they are in the middle of a...

202-434-7483
Jonathan P. Garvin Communications & Media Attorney Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo Washington, DC
Associate

Jon focuses his practice on a wide range of legal challenges facing companies in the communications and media industries. He regularly advises clients on transactional, regulatory, and compliance issues before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) involving wireless, broadband, broadcast, and cable matters. In addition, Jon advises broadcast and print media clients on FTC and state-specific advertising rules and advises broadcast companies on Television Spectrum Repack and FCC license requirements. 

Jon brings FCC experience and insight to his engagements with the firm’s...

202-434-7357
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement