House Subcommittee Approves Calling Card
Consumer Protection Act |
3/24. The House Commerce Committee's
(HCC) Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection amended and approved
HR 3993 [LOC |
WW], the
"Calling Card Consumer Protection Act". The Subcommittee approved a manager's
amendment by voice vote, and then approved the bill as amended by voice vote. The bill
next goes to the full Committee. This bill requires that prepaid calling cards disclose
certain information.
See,
bill as introduced [16 pages in PDF] on November 3, 2009,
manager's amendment [5 pages in PDF] approved on March 24, 2010, and
TLJ
edit of bill [HTML] showing changes made by the manager's amendment.
Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY) introduced this
bill on November 3, 2009. The Subcommittee held a hearing on December 3, 2009.
S 562 [LOC |
WW], titled the
"Prepaid Calling Card Consumer Protection Act of 2009", is a related bill in the
Senate. Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) introduced it
on March 10, 2009.
HR 3402 [LOC |
WW] was a related
bill in the 110th Congress that did not become law.
Rep. Engel (at right) stated in a
release that "Calling cards are an invaluable resource for people without
long distance telephone, or those who make frequent overseas calls. Students,
military, those with family abroad, and others who cannot afford long distance
service can save a great deal of money with the cards".
He added that "Calling card fraud harms those who are among the most vulnerable;
poor, minority, and immigrant populations as well as our military serving overseas"
The HCC's
Memorandum [PDF] of March 22, 2010 regarding this markup states that this bill "is
intended to prevent fraud and abuse in the prepaid calling card industry and to
provide consumers with accurate and understandable information about the rates,
fees, terms, and conditions associated with particular cards".
It continues that "many of the prepaid calling cards sold in the marketplace
today have numerous hidden costs such as connection fees, maintenance fees,
disconnect fees, and inconsistent rate-per-minute surcharges, and they fail to
deliver the full number of advertised calling minutes. One study found that
consumers could expect to receive only 60% of the minutes promised on the card.
In short, consumers often find that because of misleading information,
inconsistent claims, and hidden fees, they do not get the minutes they were
promised and essentially are left with a worthless piece of plastic, without any
recourse." (Footnotes omitted.)
Bill Summary. This bill, as amended, provides that "Any prepaid calling
card provider or prepaid calling card distributor shall accurately disclose" certain
information regarding "the terms and conditions of the prepaid calling card",
including the name and customer service telephone number of the card provider.
It also requires disclosure on the card of "The number of domestic interstate
minutes available from the prepaid calling card and the number of available minutes for
all international preferred destinations served by the prepaid calling card at the time
of purchase; or ... the dollar value of the prepaid calling card, the domestic interstate
rate per minute provided by such card, and the applicable per minute rates for all
international preferred destinations served by the prepaid calling card at the time of
purchase."
It also requires disclosure of "Any applicable fees", "A description
of any additional charges ... and the amount of such charges", "Any limitation
on the use or period of time for which the promoted or advertised minutes or rates will
be available", "A description of the applicable policies relating to refund,
recharge, and any predetermined decrease in value of such card over a period of time",
and "Any expiration date applicable to the prepaid calling card or the
minutes available with such calling card."
The bill also requires that for prepaid calling cards purchased via the internet, the
above described disclosures must also be displayed "in a clear and conspicuous manner
and location on the Internet website that the consumer must access prior to purchasing
such card".
The bill also contains a ban on "false, misleading, or deceptive representations
relating to the terms and conditions of the prepaid calling card".
This bill gives rulemaking and civil enforcement authority to the
Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and provides an exception
to common carriers' exemption from FTC regulation for the purposes of this bill.
The bill requires the FTC to write implementing regulations within one year
of enactment, and directs that the FTC follow the rulemaking procedure set forth
in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), rather than the Magnusson Moss Act
procedure
that governs many FTC proceedings. APA rulemaking procedure, which the Congress
periodically directs the FTC to follow in specific proceeding, provides for less
openness and procedural fairness to the public and affected parties.
The bill provides that the FTC can write rules regarding the format of the
disclosure, but rates, terms and conditions.
It states that the FTC "may prescribe requirements concerning the order, format,
presentation, and design of disclosures required by this Act and may establish and require
the use of uniform terms, symbols, or categories to describe or disclose fees and
additional charges, if the Commission finds that such requirements will assist consumers
in making purchasing decisions and effectuate the purposes of this Act. The Commission shall
not issue regulations that otherwise specify the rates, terms, and
conditions of prepaid calling cards."
What constitutes "rates, terms and conditions" is not always clear to
regulators and judges. Neither the bill's section on FTC authority, nor the
definitional section, provide any clarification.
In addition to FTC rulemaking and enforcement, the bill leaves numerous other
entities with authority to engage in potentially redundant activities.
First, the bill does not preclude the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
from conducting a redundant rulemaking proceeding under the Communications Act.
It merely requires that if the FCC does so, it "shall coordinate with the Federal
Trade Commission to ensure that any such requirements are not inconsistent
with the requirements of this Act and the regulations issued under" it.
Second, the bill gives states, including their public utility commissions and
consumer protection agencies, authority to enforce this Act. It provides that states "may
bring a civil action on behalf of the residents of that State in a district court of
the United States of appropriate jurisdiction, or any other court of competent
jurisdiction to --- (A) enjoin that practice; (B) enforce compliance with this Act;
(C) obtain damage, restitution, or other compensation on behalf of residents of
the State; ..."
It further provides that if a state brings an action under this Act, the FCC may
intervene, participate, and remove to federal court, but not block the action. However,
if the FCC is the first to file an action, then no state may initiate an action under
this Act during the pendency of the FCC action against the defendants named in the FCC
action.
This limitation language in the bill is weak. If the FCC initiated an action against
one company, a state could act against a parent or subsidiary company, or officers, for
the same underlying conduct. If the FCC proceeds against a card provider, a state could
proceed against a card distribution for the same underlying conduct. Also, states are
free to proceed before or after the pendency of a federal action.
The bill could have given the FCC authority, in its discretion, upon the
filing of its own action, to direct the
court to dismiss the state action. But, it did not.
Also, the bill does not preempt state laws. The bill merely precludes a state
from establishing or continuing a law "that contains requirements regarding
disclosures to be printed on prepaid calling cards or packaging unless such
requirements are identical to the requirements of section 3." States are free to
write laws that create state causes of action, and set state remedies.
The bill is silent on private rights of action for violation of the bill, or
state law.
Finally, the bill requires studies to be conducted by the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) and
FTC, in consultation with the FCC.
The manager's amendment made numerous changes to the bill. Among the more important
changes are the preemption language, and the addition of a ban on false, misleading, or
deceptive representations.
|
|
|
House Passes Federal Peer to
Peer Bill |
3/24. The House passed HR 4098
[LOC |
WW], the
"Secure Federal File Sharing Act", by a vote of 408-13. See,
Roll Call No. 183.
This bill provides that the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
"shall issue guidance on the use of peer-to-peer file sharing software ... to
prohibit the download, installation, or use by Government employees and contractors of
open-network peer-to-peer file sharing software on all Federal computers, computer
systems, and networks, including those operated by contractors on the Government's
behalf", unless approved by a process set by the OMB. See also, See,
House Report
No. 111-431.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), who
represents a Silicon Valley district, voted present. Her position is that the
idea of the bill is good, but that the bill is poorly crafted, and could be
overbroad.
Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-NY), the Chairman of the
House Oversight and Government Reform Committee
(HOGRC), introduced this bill on November 17, 2009. He stated during floor debate that
this bill "is intended to improve the cybersecurity of Federal systems in response
to a series of troubling breaches of confidential information". See also, Towns'
release.
Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), the ranking Republican
on the HOGRC emphasized security, and threats from spyware. He said that "those who
market this software to the public, usually for free, do so with backdoors deliberately
there that make it enticing to those who want access, and that's how their revenue comes."
Rep. Issa continued that "the very players who will provide you peer-to-peer for free so
that you can get thousands of videos, plenty of music, and exchange pictures often do so
specifically so that you unwittingly open up all of your information."
Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-NY) stated in the House
that "this bill reduces the risk to our government computer systems of downloading
malicious software that could infect other systems within the government. It is well
documented that peer-to-peer applications are regularly used by hackers to incorporate
spyware, viruses, Trojan horses, or worms onto the downloader's computer. Not only does
this expose a person's personal information to exploitation, but could put sensitive
information about our government resources into unfriendly hands."
Rep. Clarke (at right)
continued that "peer-to-peer software is frequently used to illegally download software
or documents that are otherwise protected by intellectual property laws. Allowing Federal
employees to use this software to download pirated materials not only puts them at risk
of prosecution, but puts the Federal government in a precarious position of having
passively supported illegal acts."
No one spoke against the bill. Rep. Paul Broun
(R-GA), who voted against the bill, demanded a roll call vote.
All of the 13 votes against the bill were cast by Republicans.
Rep. Ron Paul
(R-TX) voted no. He consistently, and often solitarily, votes against bills that
limit individual freedom, or increase federal government power.
The other votes against the bill were cast by members with strong libertarian,
anti-government, and/or conservative leanings, some of whom frequently vote against bills
passed by huge majorities. Some have been casting frequent no votes in the 111th
Congress.
A block of Georgia Republicans voted no: Rep. Broun,
Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA),
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA),
Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), and
Rep. Lynn Westmoreland
(R-GA). A block of Texas Republicans voted no; Rep. Paul,
Rep. Kenny Marchant (R-TX),
Rep. Ted Poe (R-TX). Two other Southern
Republicans voted no: Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) and
Rep. John Duncan (R-TN). Three others voted no:
Rep. Ed Royce (R-CA),
Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), and
Rep. Don Young (R-AK).
There are agendas other than cyber security. Copyright based industries, and
particularly, movies and recorded music, seek to limit revenues lost as a result of peer
to peer systems. Limiting government employee's access to free music and movies via peer
to peer systems is one of many ways to pursue this goal.
Perhaps it should be noted that that when federal employees spend time using peer to
peer applications at work for personal reasons, they are spending less time performing
their governmental functions. The same could be said for online shopping, poker, and porn.
Also, use of these peer to peer applications can lead to harm to federal computer systems.
All of these things can diminish agencies' ability to regulate the lives of individuals.
Limiting such regulation is a goal of anti-government libertarians. Thus, under this
perspective, the more that peer to peer systems clog up and bog down federal regulatory
efforts, the happier certain freedom loving people would be.
|
|
|
Senate Commerce Committee Amends
Cybersecurity Act |
3/24. The Senate Commerce Committee (SCC)
amended and approved S 773
[LOC |
WW], the
"Cybersecurity Act of 2009". See, SCC
release.
This is a huge bill that addresses the development of a skilled cyber security workforce,
cyber security of federal government systems, collaboration between the federal government
and the private sector in promoting cyber security, and federal authority and powers with
respect to cyber security. It does not criminalize any conduct, contain any criminal law
provisions, or provide any resources for law enforcement agencies. It does not mandate or
address authentication, except to require two reports on the subject.
Sen. John Rockefeller (D-WV),
Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and
Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL) introduced this bill
on April 1, 2009.
On March 17, 2010, Senators Rockefeller and Snowe released a
revised
draft [62 pages in PDF] of the bill. For a summary of that draft, see Senators'
summary
[6 pages in PDF], and story titled "Senate Commerce Committee to Mark Up Revised
Cyber Security Bill" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,060, March 20, 2010.
Summary of Amendments. The SCC approved numerous amendments at its executive
session of March 24, 2010. It then approved the bill as amended. These amendments are
presented below, alphabetically by sponsor, and numerically, rather in the order in which
they were considered.
Also, new language is shown in red. Deleted
language is shown in strikethrough. Readers whose e-mail
services or applications change certain HTML source code may receive an altered
and less comprehensible version of this article.
Cantwell
1 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) that amends the
definition of "information system" to also include
"industrial control systems".
Cantwell
7 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Cantwell pertaining
to Section 204 and "NIST Cybersecurity Guidance". It extends the deadline by which
federal departments and agencies must measure their risks.
Cantwell
8 [PDF]. The SCC approved another amendment offered by Sen. Cantwell pertaining to Section
204 regarding the deadline for compliance.
Cantwell
12 [2 pages in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Cantwell that relates
to her amendment 1. This amendment also creates a grant program to fund education in
"cybersecurity in modern industrial control systems". It
also authorizes
appropriations totaling $4 Million for this purpose.
Hutchison
1 [PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by
Sen. Kay Hutchison (R-TX) that amends Section
4. As amended, this section would require a rulemaking proceeding to "establish a procedure for
the designation of any information system the infiltration, incapacitation, or disruption of
which would threaten a strategic national interests have
a debilitating impact on national security, including national economic security and
national public health or safety as a critical infrastructure information system
under this Act". This amendment broadens the reach of this bill.
Hutchison 2 [PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison.
Hutchison
3 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison
that contains a minor technical amendment to the language in Section 102
creating a program that would give federal cyber security scholarships to
students going to work for the government, with the authorization of
appropriations of $300 Million over five years.
Hutchison
4 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved another amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison which
changes the Section 102 scholarship program. This amendment provides that for students to be
eligible for scholarship money, they must "have demonstrated
a level of proficiency in math or computer sciences".
So perhaps, this money is not meant to subsidize French Lit majors.
Hutchison
5 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison
that deletes language regarding the use of unspent funds for the prizes in cyber
security competitions in Section 103.
Hutchison
6 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison
that changes a key provision of the bill.
Section 201(b) of the bill, as amended by Hutchison 6, requires that the President,
"in collaboration with owners and operators of United States critical infrastructure
information systems, sector coordinating councils and relevant governmental agencies,
regulatory entities, and nongovernmental organizations, develop and rehearse detailed
response and restoration plans that clarify specific roles, responsibilities, and authorities
of government and private sector actors during cybersecurity emergencies;
emergencies, and that identify the types of events and incidents that
would constitute a cybersecurity emergency".
However, the SCC further modified this amendment, and TLJ does not have the
language of that further modification. Moreover, Klobuchar 1 further amends this
Section 201(b)(1). See, below.
Hutchison
7 [PDF]. The SCC modified and then approved an amendment offered by Sen. Hutchison
pertaining to Section 301 and cyber security education.
Hutchison
8 [PDF]. The SCC modified and then approved an amendment offered by Sen.
Hutchison regarding Section 402 and federal assistance to state and regional
cyber security centers. The amendment pertains to precluding federally assisted
centers from competing with private sector entities.
Klobuchar
1 [1 page in PDF]. The SCC modified and then approved an amendment offered by
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
which amends several sections of the bill to elaborate on the meaning of
"government agencies". Her amendment provides the term "government agencies",
here and elsewhere, includes "Federal, State, and local law enforcement
entities".
Klobuchar
2 [1 page in PDF] The SCC approved an amendment offered by Sen. Klobuchar regarding an
FCC study. The March 17 draft includes a brief requirement that the FCC do a "Broadband
Cybersecurity Review". The amendment replaces this language with the following: the
FCC "shall report to Congress on effective and efficient
means to ensure the cybersecurity of commercial broadband networks as related to
public safety, consumer welfare, healthcare, education, energy, government,
security and other national purposes. This report should also consider consumer
education and outreach programs to assist individuals in protecting their home
and personal computers and other devices."
Udall
1 [PDF]. The SCC approved an amendment offered by
Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) to provide that cyber security
research also examine "consumer education and digital literacy initiatives".
Warner
1 [PDF]. The SCC modified and then approved an amendment offered by
Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) regarding authentication. The
March 17 draft, at Section 210, requires a study "on the feasibility of an identity
management and authentication program".
Sen. Warner's amendment, as modified, adds a new Section 211, that provides
as follows:
SEC. 211. REPORT ON EVALUATION OF CERTAIN IDENTITY AUTHENTICATION
FUNCTIONALITIES.
(a) IN GENERAL. Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the National Institute of Standards and Technology shall issue a public
report evaluating identity authentication solutions to determine the necessary
level of functionality and privacy protection, based on risk, commensurate with
the level of data assurance and sensitivity, as defined by OMB e-Authentication
Guidance Memorandum 04-04 (OMB 04-04).
(b) CONTENTS. The report under this section shall
(1) assess strategies and best practices for mapping the 4 authentication
levels with authentication functionalities appropriate for each level; and
(2) address specifically authentication levels and appropriate functionalities
necessary and available for the protection of electronic medical records and
health information.
|
|
|
|
In This
Issue |
This issue contains the following items:
• House Subcommittee Approves Calling Card Consumer Protection Act
• House Passes Federal Peer to Peer Bill
• Senate Commerce Committee Amends Cybersecurity Act
|
|
|
Washington Tech
Calendar
New items are highlighted in
red. |
|
|
Thursday, March 25 |
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for
legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items. See, Rep. Hoyer's
schedule for week of March 22, and
schedule for March 25.
The Senate will meet at 9:45 AM. It will
resume consideration of HR 4872
[LOC |
WW], the
"Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act".
8:30 AM - 4:30 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the Department
of the Interior's (DOI) U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS)
National Geospatial Advisory Committee
(NGAC). See, notice
in the Federal Register, March 5, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 43, at Page 10309.
Location: One Washington Circle Hotel, 1 Washington Circle, NW.
10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary
Committee (SJC) will hold an executive business meeting. The agenda includes
consideration of S 3111
[LOC |
WW], the
"Faster FOIA Act of 2010", a bill to create a powerless commission
that would write a toothless report on why federal officials do not comply with the
federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which is codified at
5
U.S.C. § 552. The agenda also includes consideration judicial nominees: Sharon Coleman
(to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois), Gary
Feinerman (USDC/NDIll), and William Martinez (USDC/DColo). The SJC rarely follows its
published agendas. The SJC will webcast this event. See,
notice.
Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM. The House
Commerce Committee's (HCC) Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the
Internet (SCTI) will hold a hearing on the FCC
staff report
[376 pages in PDF] titled "A National Broadband Plan for Our Future".
See, HCC
notice, and story titled "FCC Releases National Broadband Plan" in TLJ
Daily E-Mail Alert No. 2,058, March 15, 2010. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.
11:00 AM - 1:00 PM. The
Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) will host an event
titled "What Can the U.S. Do to Spur Job Creation?". The speakers will include
Gary Locke (Secretary
of Commerce), Karen Mills (Administrator of the Small Business Administration),
Rep. Betsy Markey (D-CO), Xavier Williams
(AT&T), and Bruce Reed (DLC). For more information, contact Marc Dunkelman at mdunkelman
at dlc dot org or 202-608-1243 or Conor McKay at cmckay at dlc dot org or 202-608-1232.
Location: Newseum, Knight Conference Center, 8th floor, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
2:00 PM. The House
Appropriations Committee's (HAC) Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and Related
Agencies will hold a hearing titled "USPTO FY 2011 Budget Overview". The
witness will be David Kappos
(head of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office).
Location: Room H-309, Capitol Building.
6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host an event
titled "Happy Hour". For more information, contact Nguyen Vu at nguyen dot
vu at bingham dot com or Micah Caldwell at mcaldwell at fh-law dot com. Location:
Mackey's Public House, 1823 L St., NW.
|
|
|
Friday, March 26 |
The House will meet at 9:00 AM for legislative business. See, Rep. Hoyer's
schedule for week of March 22.
RESCHEDULED FOR MARCH 31. 9:00 AM. The Federal
Communications Commission's (FCC) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB)
will hold a meeting regarding the public safety and homeland security related portions
of the FCC's March 16, 2010,
staff
report [376 pages in PDF] titled "National Broadband Plan".
Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room.
9:30 AM - 12:00 NOON. The
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF)
and the Embassy of Sweden will host a event titled "Health IT Seminar". See,
notice.
Register with RSVP-hos at foreign dot ministry dot se. Location: Embassy of Sweden,
2900 K St., NW
10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of State's (DOS) International
Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) will meet by teleconference to prepare
for an April 19-30, 2010, meeting of International Telecommunication Union's (ITU)
Telecommunication Standardization Sector's (ITU-T) Study Group 13 (Future networks
including mobile and Next Generation Networks). See,
notice in the Federal
Register, March 9, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 45, at Page 10860.
12:00 NOON. The American Bar Association's (ABA) Antitrust Section will
host a brown bag lunch titled "60 Minutes with the Antitrust Division".
The speakers will include Christine Varney, William Cavanaugh, and Molly
Boast. Location: Wilmer Hale, 1875 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
10:00 PM. 5:00 PM.
Extended deadline to submit to the Department of Commerce's (DOC)
National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) applications for Comprehensive Community Infrastructure (CCI)
projects under the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP). See,
notice in the Federal
Register, March 8, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 44, at Page 10464, and
notice in the
Federal Register, March 24, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 56, at Page 14131.
|
|
|
Monday, March 29 |
Passover begins at sunset.
The House will not meet the week of March 29 - April 2, 2010, or the week
of April 5-9, 2010. See, 2010
House calendar.
The Senate will not meet the week of March 29 - April 2, 2010, or the week
of April 5-9, 2010. See,
2010 Senate calendar.
3:00 PM. Deadline to submit to the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) a "Letter of Intent" to
request grant money under the NIST Construction Grant Program for FY 2010. This $50
Million program subsidizes the construction of research science buildings of
colleges, universities, and non-profit science research organizations. See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 2, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 40, at Pages 9392-9397.
5:00 PM. Extended deadline to submit to the Rural
Utilities Service (RUS) applications under the second round Notice of
Funds Availability (NOFA) for the Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP).
See, notice in
the Federal Register, March 8, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 44, at Pages 10455-10456.
Deadline to submit comments to the Rural
Utilities Service (RUS) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
regarding changing the requirements for Emergency Restoration Plans (ERPs) to include
compliance with the requirements established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) for public assistance grant eligibility in the event of a declared disaster. See,
notice in the Federal
Register, January 26, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 16, at Pages 4006-4007.
|
|
|
Tuesday, March 30 |
8:45 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the
National Nanotechnology
Coordination Office (NNCO) and the Executive Office of the President's (EOP)
Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP)
National Science and Technology Council's (NSTC) Nanoscale Science, Engineering,
and Technology (NSET) Subcommittee. The meeting will address "science related
to environmental, health, and safety aspects of nanomaterials". See,
notice in the
Federal Register, February 26, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 38, at Pages 9007-9008. Location:
Holiday Inn Rosslyn-Key Bridge, 1900 N. Fort Myer Drive, Arlington, VA.
9:00 AM - 5:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of
Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science's
Advanced Scientific
Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). The agenda for March 30 includes
"Exascale Computing". See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 4, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 42, at Page 9887. Location:
American Geophysical Union, 2000 Florida Ave., NW.
2:00 - 3:30 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ)
Antitrust Division will host a seminar
presented by
James Roberts (Duke University) titled "Entry and Selection in
Auctions". For more information, contact Patrick Greenlee at 202-307-3745
or atr dot eag at usdoj dot gov. Location: DOJ, Liberty Square Building, 450 5th
St., NW.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) in response to its Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(2ndFNPRM) regarding the Emergency Alert System (EAS) The FCC adopted
this item on January 12, 2010, and released the
text [23 pages in PDF] on January 14. It is FCC 10-11 in EB Docket No.
04-296. See, notice
in the Federal Register, January 29, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 19, at Pages
4760-4768.
|
|
|
Wednesday, March 31 |
8:00 AM - 4:00 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of the
National Nanotechnology
Coordination Office (NNCO) and the Executive Office of the President's (EOP)
Office of Science and Technology Policy's (OSTP)
National Science and Technology Council's (NSTC) Nanoscale Science, Engineering,
and Technology (NSET) Subcommittee. The meeting will address "science related
to environmental, health, and safety aspects of nanomaterials". See,
notice in the
Federal Register, February 26, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 38, at Pages 9007-9008. Location:
Holiday Inn Rosslyn-Key Bridge, 1900 N. Fort Myer Drive, Arlington, VA.
9:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. Day one of a two day meeting of
Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science's
Advanced Scientific
Computing Advisory Committee (ASCAC). See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 4, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 42, at Page 9887. Location:
American Geophysical Union, 2000 Florida Ave., NW.
9:30 - 11:30 AM. The Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) will
hold a meeting regarding the public safety and homeland security related
portions of the FCC's March 16, 2010,
staff report [376 pages in PDF] titled "National Broadband Plan".
Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room.
1:00 - 5:00 PM. The Federal
Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Mass Media Committee will host an event
titled "Media Regulation and the First Amendment in the 21st Century".
The price to attend ranges from $50 to $350. This event qualifies for continuing legal
education credits. Location: Newseum, 555 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.
5:00 PM. Deadline to submit nominations to the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)
for National Medal of Technology and Innovation awards. See,
nomination
form [MS Word].
Deadline for the Office of the U.S.
Trade Representative (OUSTR) to issue its Section 1377 report regarding the
operation, effectiveness, and implementation of, and compliance with, the
telecommunications provisions of the World Trade Organization (WTO) General
Agreement on Trade in Services, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), free
trade agreements (FTAs) with Australia, Bahrain, Chile, Morocco, Oman, Peru, and
Singapore, and the Dominican Republic -- Central America -- U.S. Free Trade Agreement
(CAFTA-DR). See, notice
in the Federal Register, November 17, 2009, Vol. 74, No. 220, at Pages 59339-59340.
Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its
Public Notice (PN) requesting comments on the
Petition
for Rulemaking [18 pages in PDF] regarding 700 MHz band mobile
equipment design and procurement practices. This PN is DA 10-278 in RM No.
11592. The FCC released it on February 18, 2010. The Petition was filed on
September 29, 2009, by four lower 700 MHz Band A Block licensees. See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 1, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 39, at Pages 9210-9211.
Deadline for facilities based carriers that provide international
telecommunications services to file a Circuit Status Report with the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). See,
notice.
|
|
|
Thursday, April 1 |
9:00 AM - 6:00 PM. Day one of a two day meeting of the
National Science Foundation's (NSF) Advisory
Committee for Mathematical and Physical Sciences. See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 5, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 43, at Page 10328. Location:
NSF, RM 375, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.
10:00 AM - 12:00 NOON. The Department of Health and Human Services'
(DHHS) Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology's (ONCHIT)
HIT Standards Committee's Privacy & Security Workgroup will meet by webcast. See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 17, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 51, at Page 12753.
|
|
|
Friday, April 2 |
Good Friday.
9:00 AM - 3:00 PM. Day two of a two day meeting of
the National Science Foundation's (NSF)
Advisory Committee for Mathematical and Physical Sciences. See,
notice in the
Federal Register, March 5, 2010, Vol. 75, No. 43, at Page 10328. Location:
NSF, RM 375, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.
9:30 - 11:00 AM. The
New America Foundation (NAF) will
host a panel discussion titled "Can You Hear Me Now? Why Your Cell Phone is
So Terrible". This event is free and open to the public. See,
notice and
registration page. Location: NAF, 1899 L St., NW.
Deadline to submit comments to the
National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST)
Computer Security Division (CSD) regarding its draft
NIST IR-7628 [305 pages in PDF] titled "Smart Grid Cyber Security
Strategy and Requirements". |
|
|
About Tech Law
Journal |
Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and
a subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription
to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year for a single
recipient. There are discounts for subscribers with multiple
recipients.
Free one month trial subscriptions are available. Also,
free subscriptions are available for journalists, federal
elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and
executive branch. The TLJ web site is free access. However,
copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert are not published in the
web site until two months after writing.
For information about subscriptions, see
subscription information page.
Tech Law Journal now accepts credit card payments. See, TLJ
credit
card payments page.
TLJ is published by
David
Carney
Contact: 202-364-8882.
carney at techlawjournal dot com
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.
Privacy
Policy
Notices
& Disclaimers
Copyright 1998-2010 David Carney. All rights reserved.
|
|
|