Re: [WISPA] CALEA Costs-Shifting Relief

2007-04-26 Thread Mark Koskenmaki
I'm a bit confused, because I thougth the FCC specifically stated that there
is no longer any funds, nor are any applications under those sections
accepted anymore.

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-56A1.pdf

Relevant paragraph:

2. More generally, we herein specify mechanisms to ensure that
telecommunications

carriers comply with CALEA. Specifically, under the express terms of the
statute, all carriers subject to

CALEA are obliged to become CALEA-compliant. We find that sections 107(c)
and 109(b) of CALEA

provide only limited and temporary relief from compliance requirements, and
that they are

complementary provisions that serve different purposes, which are,
respectively: (1) extension of the

CALEA section 103 compliance deadline for equipment, facility, or service
deployed before October 25,

1998; and (2) recovery of CALEA-imposed costs.







- Original Message - 
From: Dawn DiPietro [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Costs-Shifting Relief


 Peter,

 Thank you for posting this information. Since there is a $5000
 application fee and that the provider has to prove that they have tried
 to comply I doubt the providers that scream the loudest will even take
 this information seriously and discount it like everything else we have
 heard about recently. I have heard on other lists that it is very
 difficult to get anything to come of this but as you know the
 misinformation flies rampantly these days. :-)

 Regards,
 Dawn DiPietro


 Peter R. wrote:
  *Section 109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief*
 
  CALEA section 109(b) permits a “telecommunications carrier,” as that
  term is defined by CALEA, to file a petition with the FCC and an
  application with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to request that DOJ
  pay the costs of the carrier’s CALEA compliance (cost-shifting relief)
  with respect to any equipment, facility or service installed or
  deployed after January 1, 1995. First, the carrier must file a section
  109(b)(1) petition with the FCC and prove that, based on one or more
  of the criteria set forth in section 109(b)(1)(A)-(K), implementation
  of at least one particular solution that would comply with a
  particular CALEA section 103 capability requirement is not “reasonably
  achievable.” Second, if the Commission grants a section 109(b)(1)
  petition, the carrier must then apply to DOJ, pursuant to section
  109(b)(2), to pay the reasonable costs of compliance for one of the
  solutions proposed in the section 109(b)(1) petition. DOJ may then
  either pay the reasonable costs of compliance or deny the application.
 
  If DOJ denies the section 109(b)(2) application, then the carrier is
  deemed to be CALEA compliant for the facilities, networks, and
  services (facilities) described in the section 109(b)(1) petition
  until those facilities are replaced, significantly upgraded or
  otherwise undergo a major modification. When those facilities are
  replaced, significantly upgraded or otherwise undergo a major
  modification, the carrier is obligated under the law to become CALEA
  compliant. The FCC may also specify in its CALEA section 109(b)(1)
  order granting a carrier’s petition the specific date when the
  replacement, upgrade or modification will occur and when CALEA
  compliance is required. Thus, a carrier’s obligation to comply with
  all CALEA requirements is only deferred when (1) the FCC grants a
  section 109(b)(1) petition, and (2) DOJ declines to pay the additional
  reasonable costs to comply with one or more of the CALEA requirements.
  No qualifying carrier is exempt from CALEA.
 
  Section 109(b)(1) petitions must be adequately supported, and the FCC
  decides whether to grant the petition strictly in reference to
  criteria set out in section 109(b)(1). Accordingly, carriers are
  encouraged to consult with competent legal and technical counsel
  before filing such a petition. Please note that a filing fee of
  $5,000.00 is required to accompany all CALEA section 109(b)(1)
  petitions filed with the FCC. See Appendix E entitled “Section
  109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief: Filing Instructions,”
  and paragraphs 38-57 of the CALEA Second Report and Order
  http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-56A1.pdf
  for detailed filing instructions and further explanation of the scope
  of relief, and its limitations, available under section 109(b).
 
  More at the bottom of this page: http://www.fcc.gov/calea/

 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] CALEA Costs-Shifting Relief

2007-04-26 Thread George Rogato
On one of the documents that I've rad that maybe is not that public, 
they have taken into consideration that some isp's can not afford to 
impliment calea and they have a solution for that.




Dawn DiPietro wrote:

Peter,

Thank you for posting this information. Since there is a $5000 
application fee and that the provider has to prove that they have tried 
to comply I doubt the providers that scream the loudest will even take 
this information seriously and discount it like everything else we have 
heard about recently. I have heard on other lists that it is very 
difficult to get anything to come of this but as you know the 
misinformation flies rampantly these days. :-)


Regards,
Dawn DiPietro


Peter R. wrote:

*Section 109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief*

CALEA section 109(b) permits a “telecommunications carrier,” as that 
term is defined by CALEA, to file a petition with the FCC and an 
application with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to request that DOJ 
pay the costs of the carrier’s CALEA compliance (cost-shifting relief) 
with respect to any equipment, facility or service installed or 
deployed after January 1, 1995. First, the carrier must file a section 
109(b)(1) petition with the FCC and prove that, based on one or more 
of the criteria set forth in section 109(b)(1)(A)-(K), implementation 
of at least one particular solution that would comply with a 
particular CALEA section 103 capability requirement is not “reasonably 
achievable.” Second, if the Commission grants a section 109(b)(1) 
petition, the carrier must then apply to DOJ, pursuant to section 
109(b)(2), to pay the reasonable costs of compliance for one of the 
solutions proposed in the section 109(b)(1) petition. DOJ may then 
either pay the reasonable costs of compliance or deny the application.


If DOJ denies the section 109(b)(2) application, then the carrier is 
deemed to be CALEA compliant for the facilities, networks, and 
services (facilities) described in the section 109(b)(1) petition 
until those facilities are replaced, significantly upgraded or 
otherwise undergo a major modification. When those facilities are 
replaced, significantly upgraded or otherwise undergo a major 
modification, the carrier is obligated under the law to become CALEA 
compliant. The FCC may also specify in its CALEA section 109(b)(1) 
order granting a carrier’s petition the specific date when the 
replacement, upgrade or modification will occur and when CALEA 
compliance is required. Thus, a carrier’s obligation to comply with 
all CALEA requirements is only deferred when (1) the FCC grants a 
section 109(b)(1) petition, and (2) DOJ declines to pay the additional 
reasonable costs to comply with one or more of the CALEA requirements. 
No qualifying carrier is exempt from CALEA.


Section 109(b)(1) petitions must be adequately supported, and the FCC 
decides whether to grant the petition strictly in reference to 
criteria set out in section 109(b)(1). Accordingly, carriers are 
encouraged to consult with competent legal and technical counsel 
before filing such a petition. Please note that a filing fee of 
$5,000.00 is required to accompany all CALEA section 109(b)(1) 
petitions filed with the FCC. See Appendix E entitled “Section 
109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief: Filing Instructions,” 
and paragraphs 38-57 of the CALEA Second Report and Order 
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-56A1.pdf 
for detailed filing instructions and further explanation of the scope 
of relief, and its limitations, available under section 109(b).


More at the bottom of this page: http://www.fcc.gov/calea/




--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/


Re: [WISPA] CALEA Costs-Shifting Relief

2007-04-26 Thread Mark Koskenmaki

- Original Message - 
From: George Rogato [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] CALEA Costs-Shifting Relief


 On one of the documents that I've rad that maybe is not that public,
 they have taken into consideration that some isp's can not afford to
 impliment calea and they have a solution for that.

Yes, you get to submit to them ALL of your financial data, including your
ability to borrow, and all state and federal money avaialble...

Ohhh...and the fee for filing that you can't afford to comply is $5200, and
they'll decide whether or not you can afford it...   but you still pay the
fee either way.








 Dawn DiPietro wrote:
  Peter,
 
  Thank you for posting this information. Since there is a $5000
  application fee and that the provider has to prove that they have tried
  to comply I doubt the providers that scream the loudest will even take
  this information seriously and discount it like everything else we have
  heard about recently. I have heard on other lists that it is very
  difficult to get anything to come of this but as you know the
  misinformation flies rampantly these days. :-)
 
  Regards,
  Dawn DiPietro
 
 
  Peter R. wrote:
  *Section 109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief*
 
  CALEA section 109(b) permits a “telecommunications carrier,” as that
  term is defined by CALEA, to file a petition with the FCC and an
  application with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to request that DOJ
  pay the costs of the carrier’s CALEA compliance (cost-shifting relief)
  with respect to any equipment, facility or service installed or
  deployed after January 1, 1995. First, the carrier must file a section
  109(b)(1) petition with the FCC and prove that, based on one or more
  of the criteria set forth in section 109(b)(1)(A)-(K), implementation
  of at least one particular solution that would comply with a
  particular CALEA section 103 capability requirement is not “reasonably
  achievable.” Second, if the Commission grants a section 109(b)(1)
  petition, the carrier must then apply to DOJ, pursuant to section
  109(b)(2), to pay the reasonable costs of compliance for one of the
  solutions proposed in the section 109(b)(1) petition. DOJ may then
  either pay the reasonable costs of compliance or deny the application.
 
  If DOJ denies the section 109(b)(2) application, then the carrier is
  deemed to be CALEA compliant for the facilities, networks, and
  services (facilities) described in the section 109(b)(1) petition
  until those facilities are replaced, significantly upgraded or
  otherwise undergo a major modification. When those facilities are
  replaced, significantly upgraded or otherwise undergo a major
  modification, the carrier is obligated under the law to become CALEA
  compliant. The FCC may also specify in its CALEA section 109(b)(1)
  order granting a carrier’s petition the specific date when the
  replacement, upgrade or modification will occur and when CALEA
  compliance is required. Thus, a carrier’s obligation to comply with
  all CALEA requirements is only deferred when (1) the FCC grants a
  section 109(b)(1) petition, and (2) DOJ declines to pay the additional
  reasonable costs to comply with one or more of the CALEA requirements.
  No qualifying carrier is exempt from CALEA.
 
  Section 109(b)(1) petitions must be adequately supported, and the FCC
  decides whether to grant the petition strictly in reference to
  criteria set out in section 109(b)(1). Accordingly, carriers are
  encouraged to consult with competent legal and technical counsel
  before filing such a petition. Please note that a filing fee of
  $5,000.00 is required to accompany all CALEA section 109(b)(1)
  petitions filed with the FCC. See Appendix E entitled “Section
  109(b)(1) Petitions for Cost-Shifting Relief: Filing Instructions,”
  and paragraphs 38-57 of the CALEA Second Report and Order
  http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-06-56A1.pdf
  for detailed filing instructions and further explanation of the scope
  of relief, and its limitations, available under section 109(b).
 
  More at the bottom of this page: http://www.fcc.gov/calea/
 

 -- 
 WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

 Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
 http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

 Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

-- 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/