Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554



Similar documents
Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before The Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Digital Surveillance: The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act

(202) FCC ADOPTS ORDER TO ENABLE LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ACCESS CERTAIN BROADBAND AND VoIP PROVIDERS

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

CALEA Monitoring Report for Broadband Access and VOIP Services

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C INTRODUCTION

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION. Washington, DC 20006

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC 20554

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) SECOND REPORT AND ORDER AND MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF SOUTHERNLINC WIRELESS

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF CTIA THE WIRELESS ASSOCIATION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

October 27, Docket No. CFPB , RIN 3170-AA10 Home Mortgage Disclosure (Regulation C)

January 8, Re: OMB Control Number: 3060-xxxx; WC Docket No

RE: HIPAA Privacy Rule Accounting for Disclosures, RIN 0991-AB62

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF CTIA THE WIRELESS ASSOCIATION

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE NEW JERSEY DIVISION OF THE RATEPAYER ADVOCATE

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

AGENCY: National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of

How To Use A Phone Line With A Broadband Internet Connection (Voip)

Benefits of STEM OPT Program

F FCC Proposed Digital Telephone Number Registry and Its Impact on NPRM

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) )

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C AMENDMENT

Promoting Competition in the Provision of Cable Television Service A Discussion Paper Submitted on behalf of FairPoint Communications May 2009

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

Statute interpreted: Section (2), Stats. Statutory authority: Sections (5) (b) and (2), Stats. Explanation of agency authority:

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C REPLY TO OPPOSITIONS TO PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C In the Matter of ) ) Rural Call Completion ) WC Docket No.

Ex Parte Notice Request For Updated Information And Comment on Wireless Hearing Aid Compatibility Regulations, WT Docket Nos.

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER. Adopted: October 22, 2013 Released: October 22, 2013

Mortgages and Forced Programming in the MVPD Market

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Comments of WTA Advocates for Rural Broadband

Case3:14-cv Document1 Filed03/03/14 Page1 of 14

MEMORANDUM THE FCC S 2015 OPEN INTERNET ORDER AND IMPLICATIONS FOR BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS SERVICE PROVIDERS SAMPLE

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF VONAGE HOLDINGS CORPORATION

U.S. Department of Justice. Federal Bureau of Investigation VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

PUBLIC NOTICE Federal Communications Commission th St., S.W. Washington, D.C

November 6, The Honorable Richard Cordray Director Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 1700 G Street NW Washington, DC

Before the Federal Communications Commission

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Privacy Year in Review: Privacy and VoIP Technology

152 FERC 61,200 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. 18 CFR Part 40. [Docket No. RM ]

How To Write A Reply To The High Tech Broadband Coalition'S Comments To The Fcc.Com Website

Before The FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

46 CFR Parts 2, 5, 11, 107, 113, 114, 117, 125, 159, 162, 175, and 180. Shipping; Technical, Organizational, and Conforming Amendments

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C COMMENTS OF VONAGE HOLDINGS CORPORATION

Before the Office of Management and Budget ) ) ) ) )

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK

SUMMARY OF THE CFPB NOTICE

How To Write A Letter To The Fcc On Net Neutrality

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT COMMENTS OF THE

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C Comments of CTIA The Wireless Association

GUIDANCE ON OPEN INTERNET TRANSPARENCY RULE REQUIREMENTS. GN Docket No

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) ) PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS

Legal Alert: FCC Imposes Additional USF Contribution Obligations on Interconnected VoIP Providers, Increases Wireless Safe Harbor

Petition for Declaratory Ruling filed by Communication Innovators (CG Docket No )

April 7, 2010 MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES, AND INDEPENDENT REGULATORY AGENCIES

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES TELECOM ASSOCIATION

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) ) ) REPLY COMMENTS OF LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC

STATE OF WISCONSIN PSYCHOLOGY EXAMINING BOARD

May 20,2008 VIA

FCC Dives Headfirst Into Privacy

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C ) ) ) ) COMMENTS OF COMCAST CORPORATION

Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C

How To Ensure E911 Compliance

Before the OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Washington, D.C. ) ) ) COMMENTS OF DISH NETWORK L.L.C.

Equity Options With Flexible Terms; Special Rules and Definitions. SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations providing

Review Of The Commission Workplace (O1) And Its Role In SIP Interconnection Services

TRANSMITTAL IN FINAL DRAFT FORM OF ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REPORT

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C

BEFORE THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C

RE: Formal Proposed Rule, Motor Vehicle Brake Friction Material. May 23, 2016

June 27, Ms. Marlene H. Dortch Secretary Federal Communications Commission th Street, SW Washington, DC 20554

I. Network Management Practices

PUBLIC NOTICE FCC ENFORCEMENT ADVISORY

Addendum StartPage: 0

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Transcription:

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Communications Assistance for Law ) ET Docket No. 04-295 Enforcement Act and Broadband Access and ) Services ) RM-10865 REPLY COMMENTS OF University of Wisconsin-Madison Introduction and Summary The University of Wisconsin-Madison respectfully submits these reply comments in response to the Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking adopted in the above-captioned docket. 1 The University of Wisconsin-Madison supports the comments filed by the Higher Education Coalition and submits this reply to amplify several points based on its own experience and circumstances. The University of Wisconsin-Madison has the following issues and concerns regarding this legislation. First, current University of Wisconsin-Madison processes for responding to law enforcement surveillance requests are adequate for both the institution and for the law enforcement agencies. Second, the FCC should clarify that the private networks operated by colleges, universities, and research institutions are exempt from CALEA. And third, if CALEA applies to the University of Wisconsin-Madison s broadband network, potential significant costs may be 1 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act and Broadband Access and Services, First Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket No. 04-295, FCC 05-153 (rel. Sept. 23, 2005) ( Order ). DC\812218.1

incurred by the institution, thereby impeding its ability to deliver on our academic mission of teaching, service and research. Discussion 1. Current University of Wisconsin-Madison processes for responding to law enforcement surveillance requests are adequate for both the institution and for the law enforcement agencies. The University of Wisconsin-Madison s experience with law enforcement requests demonstrates that existing processes are more than adequate to ensure compliance with lawful surveillance requests. This is especially true when examined in light of both the infrequency of such requests and our history of full cooperation. Imposing burdensome new assistance-capability requirements under CALEA is simply not necessary to serve the interests of law enforcement. The University of Wisconsin-Madison regularly receives and complies with requests from law enforcement agencies. Typically, the university processes about ten official requests annually and we maintain ongoing weekly communications with local law enforcement personnel. In the last ten years, the university is not aware of receiving any requests for surveillance access to our network by law enforcement. Further, in discussions with local law enforcement and telephone services, we are not aware of any surveillance requests for our phone system. Recently we hosted a meeting of IT security specialists from peer institutions and queried them regarding past surveillance requests. All the universities agreed that they have never received a surveillance request. They have received subpoenas, national security letters, and other documents from law enforcement agencies

requesting log information about communications. As with UW-Madison, these universities have processed these requests with the assistance of their legal departments. 2. The FCC should clarify that the private networks operated by colleges, universities, and research institutions are exempt from CALEA. The University of Wisconsin-Madison s internal broadband network provides networking services to faculty, staff, students, and university guests. It should not be subject to CALEA as the legislation exempts private networks. 47 U.S.C. 1002(b)(2)(B). The Commission acknowledged in the Order that private educational networks are exempt from CALEA but it also stated that private networks that are interconnected with a public network or the Internet are subject to CALEA. Order at 36, n.100. The University of Wisconsin-Madison is connected to the public Internet via a combination of leased circuits and dark fiber networks to provide redundancy and diversity. These connections are also used for access to research networks, such as Internet 2, ESNet, and National Lambda Rail, and to enable peering relationships. The connections are shared by other higher education entities in the University of Wisconsin System. Clarification by the Commission that only commercial entities are covered by the language in footnote 100 would be helpful or as an alternative, the Commission should invoke its discretionary authority under Section 102(8)(C)(ii) of CALEA to exempt higher education and research institutions from compliance with the forthcoming assistance-capability requirements. This exemption would eliminate

unnecessary costs to colleges and universities and would align with congressional intent. Developing the exemption criteria soon is critical as the 18-month compliance deadline has already begun. The University of Wisconsin-Madison must begin its planning now to reallocate funds from teaching, service and research areas for possible CALEA compliance efforts. The Higher Education Coalition has defined a narrow class of private network operators that should be exempt from CALEA. Using these definitions, the Commission is urged to establish the exemption for higher education and research institutions now. 3. If CALEA applies to the University of Wisconsin-Madison s broadband network, potential significant costs may be incurred by the institution, thereby impeding its ability to deliver on our academic mission of teaching and research. As noted above, the University of Wisconsin-Madison believes that CALEA does not apply to it and adds no value to our work with law enforcement agencies. If the Commission were to apply the language in footnote 100 of the Order broadly and conclude that higher education networks such as the University of Wisconsin- Madison s must comply with some or all assistance capability requirements, potential significant costs may be incurred. If the DOJ or the FCC requires interception of communications by particular users at points within the University of Wisconsin-Madison s network, it is likely that many of our campus network equipment would need to be replaced or upgraded and that significant staff costs would be incurred.

The financial burden and cost in staff time for the University of Wisconsin- Madison may be significant if the FCC were to apply CALEA broadly to higher education networks. Given our current adequate processes for law enforcement surveillance, these costs are an unnecessary burden and the costs exceed the benefits. The Commission should exempt higher education institutions and research networks from CALEA. If the FCC applies CALEA to our network, it should apply to the Internet connection facilities at the edge of the network, for the reasons stated by the Higher Education Coalition.

Conclusion The University of Wisconsin-Madison respectfully requests that the Commission clarify that private networks operated by higher education and research institutions are not subject to CALEA, or alternatively grant an exemption under Section 102(8)(C)(ii) of CALEA. Respectfully submitted, Ann E. Stunden Chief Information Officer University of Wisconsin-Madison 1210 W. Dayton St. Madison WI 53706 December 21, 2005