The Federal Communications Commission's Office of Economics and Analytics, in consultation with the Wireline Competition Bureau, launched the urban rate survey for 2020. The information collected in this survey will be used to develop voice and broadband reasonable comparability benchmarks that will be in place in 2020. The FCC will be collecting the rates offered by a random sample of providers of fixed services identified using December 2018 FCC Form 477 data. The FCC will collect separate samples for fixed voice and fixed broadband services with up to 500 urban Census tracts in each. Because some providers serve many urban Census tracts, these providers may receive surveys for multiple Census tracts. Notifications that a provider is required to complete a survey will be sent via email to each selected provider’s FCC Form 477 contact person and certifying official on Thursday, July 25, 2019. The survey consists of an online reporting form which will be accessible only to the selected providers. The email notification will provide detailed information on how to access and complete the survey online report form and how to obtain technical assistance. Completed surveys will be due on Monday, August 26, 2019.

Corporate choices made by AT&T and Verizon, and Frontier Communications’ dire financial condition created the growing divide between relatively modern telecommunications infrastructure in affluent urban and suburban communities and the decaying infrastructure in poor and rural ones. The result is “deteriorating service quality”, “persistent disinvestment”, an “investment focus on higher-income communities” and an “increased focus on areas most heavily impacted by competition.” When addressing service quality going forward, the California Public Utilities Commission should:

1. Expand the financial penalties for carriers that fail to meet the minimum GO 133-C/D service quality standards.
2. In an effectively competitive market, persistently poor service quality would drive customers to take their business elsewhere. Where competition is not present, fines imposed due to an ILEC’s failure to meet service quality standards should be high enough so as to have the same financial consequences as poor service quality under competitive market conditions.
3. The GO 133-C/D maximum Customer Trouble Report Rates of 6%, 8% or 10% (depending upon wire center size) of switched access lines per month are far too generous, and failure rates as high as these can hardly constitute acceptable service quality. The carriers have had little difficulty in meeting these standards, and they should be revised downward.
4. Unless carriers can offer technically valid explanations as to how and why smaller wire centers experience the poorest service quality, the minimum GO 133-C/D standards should be applied uniformly for all wire centers.
5. The GO 133-D fines should vary based upon the extent of a carrier's failure to meet any service quality standard, rising in magnitude as the extent of the shortfall increases.
6. Retain its requirement that Uniform Regulatory Framework carriers maintain their Part 32 Uniform System of Accounts ("USOA") regulatory accounting records and submit annual ARMIS-type financial reports. The requirement should be expanded to also include wire center level accounting data. Carriers should be required to submit these to the Communications Division on a semi-annual basis. 
7. Establish a process to proactively examine the alternatives that would be available to maintain adequate service to Frontier California customers in the event that the parent company no longer has the financial resources to provide safe and reliable services in California.

Apparently, the Justice Department is pushing state officials to support a planned settlement that would allow T-Mobile US and Sprint to merge by selling assets to Dish Network. The discussions come in response to some of the state attorneys general who have already filed a federal antitrust suit seeking to block the more than $26 billion merger. The talks include attorneys general from states that refrained from joining the lawsuit. A spokesman for New York’s attorney general said the Justice Department hadn’t contacted his office nor shared any details of a potential merger settlement.

Apple and Intel have signed an agreement for Apple to acquire the majority of Intel’s smartphone modem business. Approximately 2,200 Intel employees will join Apple, along with intellectual property, equipment and leases. The transaction, valued at $1 billion, is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2019, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary conditions, including works council and other relevant consultations in certain jurisdictions. Combining the acquired patents for current and future wireless technology with Apple’s existing portfolio, Apple will hold over 17,000 wireless technology patents, ranging from protocols for cellular standards to modem architecture and modem operation. Intel will retain the ability to develop modems for non-smartphone applications, such as PCs, internet-of-things devices and autonomous vehicles.

A group of state attorneys general met with US Attorney General William Barr  to discuss antitrust concerns related to major tech companies, as the Justice Department launches a review of whether online platforms are reducing competition. New York, Texas, Arizona, and Louisiana, sent representatives to the Justice Department for the meeting with senior officials. 

"Our bipartisan coalition of eight state attorneys general was pleased with the opportunity to meet with US Attorney General Barr to talk about the real concerns consumers across the country have with big tech companies stifling competition on the internet," participating states said in a joint statement. "It was a productive meeting and we're considering a range of possible antitrust actions against such companies." New York Attorney General Tish James said of the state AGs, “We have concerns about the size of these tech companies and will hold them accountable for anticompetitive practices that endanger privacy and consumer data.”