With the May 14 deadline for compliance of broadband networks with the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, little more than one month away, most rural operators already have plans in place. But as they are learning, CALEA compliance is an evolving process.

That's one reason why John McHugh, technical director for the Organization for the Protection and Advancement of Small Telephone Companies (OPASTCO), was still fielding a dozen or so calls per week on the issue, even after a February deadline for filing compliance plans with the FCC had passed. Some companies had delayed making compliance plans in hopes of getting an extension-something experts say is unlikely.

“The FCC made it so strong in their second report and order, it's clear they will not accept anything [in the way of an extension] unless the companies have consulted with or are working with a trusted third party instead of installing it themselves,” he said.

CALEA compliance is an expensive proposition for rural companies that install and manage their own technology, costing as much as $150,000 at the start, McHugh said. Some rural companies thought they could use the expense as a way to get a delay or extension of the rules, but the FCC has made it clear that isn't going to happen.

“The idea was that if compliance costs far exceed benefits, you would be excused for a period of time,” said Al Gidari, a partner with Perkins Coie LLP. “But the way the FCC has defined the term, the only reason something isn't reasonably achievable is because there is not a technology available in the marketplace.”

The good news is that the FCC's agreement to let rural service providers use trusted third parties to implement their CALEA solutions has created a new competitive market, causing prices for those solutions to drop.

“It is getting very competitive,” said Marty Schell, general manager of Intelleq Communications, an affiliate of Dobson and McLoud Telephone companies-two rural service providers in Oklahoma. Intelleq, working with SS8 Networks, developed a trusted third-party solution for Dobson and McLoud and is now leveraging those capabilities to sell to other rural telcos.

The challenge now for the rural telco is to find the right solution.

“Not all trusted third-party solutions are created equal,” said Steve Gleave, vice president of marketing for SS8 Networks. “There's not a qualification you have to go through-no certification process.”

That puts the onus on rural telcos, which are looking at $10,000 per day in fines if they get a warrant for a lawful intercept but can't execute it.

“Every situation is unique; every company has unique requirements they have to satisfy,” McHugh said.

That's why most solutions start with a network assessment. This determines how much of a rural carrier's existing equipment is capable of actively identifying and replicating network traffic in response to a request from a mediation device. For this equipment, a trusted third party can provide the mediation from a centralized location and exchange information through secure virtual private network tunnels.

Where the network equipment is older and not CALEA-compliant, a probe must be installed in the network to feed information back to a centralized location.

“Most rural telephone companies actually require a combination of both solutions because of the particular designs of their networks,” said Peter Rasmusson, president of telecommunications consulting and engineering for Martin Group, which also developed a trusted third-party solution. “Some of them require both types of intercepts. … In other cases, clients have groomed their networks so they have just a few points at which we can do monitoring.”

Some typical rural network configurations can pose specific CALEA problems, such as digital loop carrier equipment that can “hairpin” calls or keep local calls with that local segment of the network and not route them back through a central office, Rasmusson said. That's an advantage for call traffic but a disadvantage for CALEA compliance.

The FCC has also seemingly agreed, however, that rural telcos with little likelihood of ever getting lawful intercept requests can utilize third-party solutions that use line taps where probes would be installed, but don't actually install the probes until a request comes in.

“This is somewhat new turf,” said Anthony Rutkowski, vice president of regulatory affairs and standards for VeriSign, another third-party solution provider. “The legal authorities are getting increasingly concerned about child predators, and you only have to watch TV to see there is a lot of this going on.”

It's also critical, solution providers say, that rural telcos take CALEA into account with any changes in their networks because they could quickly find themselves non-compliant again. Many rural carriers are already viewing their FCC implementation plans as living documents that will change with time, Schell said.

And, McHugh said, even companies that outsource services, such as reselling a voice-over-IP offering from a larger provider, don't get a pass. “They have to make sure that [the larger provider] is compliant because if they get a court order, they can't just hand it off,” he said. “If you have the relationship with the customer, it's your responsibility.”

Whatever the cost of implementing CALEA, it is unlikely rural telcos will be able to pass it along to consumers. Their broadband services are not part of any rate base, and the competitive pricing of broadband access makes rate increases hard to swallow, McHugh said.

That has some in the industry concerned how CALEA compliance will affect broadband availability.

“We think this has had an effect on availability of services in rural areas which are marginally profitable and on innovation of services, contrary to the FCC's objective to enhance competition,” Gidari said.

THE COST OF CALEA