Tag: "ftth council"

Posted February 6, 2014 by lgonzalez

We reported last month on a decision from the FCC to make Connect America funds available to expand broadband. At the time we did not have much detail on the measure, but on January 30th, the FCC released its official statement. The agency reached a unanimous decision to open up Connect America Fund dollars for experimental projects.

The FCC restructured the Universal Services Fund (USF) in 2010 to create the Connect America Fund. Until now, those funds were only available to large incumbents. Because some incumbents did not want to be bound terms associated with the funds, they did not take the money and so a portion of it has not been distributed.

In the January 30th announcement, the FCC stated that it will open up funding to entities other than large incumbents in experimental processes, including nonprofits, cooperatives, municipal and tribal governments, and private businesses. The FTTH Council reported:

Specifically, the Commission’s order outlines a call for multiple pilot projects to examine how best to make the technology transition while preserving consumer welfare and promoting the widespread deployment and use of broadband networks. As part of those projects, the Commission, informed by recommendations of the FTTH Council, will be using “test beds” to experiment with different models of bringing next-generation high-speed broadband to rural areas. 

Interested parties must first file an expression of interest, describing how they would invest the funds. In keeping with the original goal of the Connect America fund, the FCC hopes to hear from organizations with rural broadband project plans. According to a Daily Yonder article on the process:

[Jonathan Chambers, the chief of the FCC’s Office of Strategic Planning and Policy Analysis] said the initial “expression of interest” isn’t a complex document. The FCC wants to hear who is interested in applying for support, what homes or institutions they want to serve and an estimate of the cost to get the job done.

Once they have that information, the commissioners will consider the next steps in creating the funding stream, Chambers said. A background report on the...

Read more
Posted October 14, 2013 by dcollado

This is Part 2 in a two-part series discussing comments submitted to the FCC in response to a petition filed by Fiber-To-The-Home Council proposing a new Gigabit Community Race to the Top program.

In Part 1 of this post, I focused mainly on the complaints filed by the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) against FTTHC’s Race to the Top proposal. While there was nothing new in those arguments (we see them all the time from industry spokespeople), I wanted to highlight their errors in light of this promising proposal to promote community networks. This post will focus on some of the more technical arguments which further demonstrate the industry’s false assertions.

NCTA attacks the FCC’s authority to implement Race to the Top, claiming that neither Section 254 (addressing universal service) nor Section 706 (addressing “advanced telecommunications capability”) of the Telecom Act authorize such a program.

The cable lobby’s argument against Section 254 authority hinges on the statute’s requirement that universal service funds only support services in small and rural markets that are “reasonably comparable” to those available in the rest of the country. Therefore, NCTA argues, Race to the Top would “enable a small number of communities to receive faster broadband speeds than the vast majority of Americans in urban areas have chosen to purchase.”

NCTA essentially believes its members get to dictate American broadband policy. If the majority of Americans “choose to purchase” only single-digit Mbps (megabits-per-second) broadband because that’s the only affordable option in their area, then the FCC cannot subsidize faster networks, anywhere. Or so argues the NCTA.

Even more tortured is the NCTA’s argument against the FCC’s Section 706 authority to implement Race to the Top. Section 706 instructs the FCC to regularly assess the deployment of “advanced telecommunications services,” and when it finds that such services are not rolling out fast enough, the FCC must make efforts to accelerate deployment.

NCTA thinks it’s clever to point out that the FCC “has never defined ‘advanced telecommunications capability’ for purposes of Section 706 to mean gigabit services” and it “has rightly made no finding that the deployment of gigabit services is not reasonable and...

Read more
Posted September 30, 2013 by dcollado

This is Part 1 in a two-part series discussing comments submitted to the FCC in response to a petition filed by Fiber-To-The-Home Council proposing a new Gigabit Community Race to the Top program.

The Fiber-To-The-Home Council (FTTHC) recently submitted a proposal to the FCC to create a Gigabit Communities "Race to the Top" program. The proposal suggests granting unclaimed portions of universal service funds (USF) to qualifying entities in small and rural markets willing to build gigabit networks. While the proposal may need some adjustments, the idea holds potential for encouraging community owned networks and we hope the FCC takes the next step by opening an official rulemaking proceeding.

What makes this proposal so promising for community networks is that it may not require grantees to qualify as “eligible telecommunications carriers” (ETCs), a technical requirement placed by the FCC on USF recipients. This requirement virtually assures that USF funds go to already established telcos and not to upstart community networks.

Instead, Race to the Top lays out its own qualifying criteria which opens the door for a broader variety of recipients, including co-ops, nonprofits and municipalities, taking a similar approach as the federal stimulus BTOP program. Furthermore, Race to the Top has the potential to improve on BTOP in one major aspect by focusing on last-mile networks, which BTOP grants largely shied away from.

The FCC comment period for this initial proposal has closed and the majority of submitted comments are supportive. But I want to highlight some of the misleading comments submitted by a few industry lobby groups - National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), Rural Broadband Association (NTCA) and USTelecom. This post will focus on the NCTA, the main lobbying apparatus of the massive cable corporations. A future post, Part 2, will discuss the others.

NCTA opposes the petition on multiple grounds which jump out in bold headings like “Funding Gigabit Networks is a Poor Use of Federal Subsidies” and “Overbuilding of Existing Networks Is Wasteful.” These comments rely on the illusion that cable service is already adequate in rural areas, and where it is not, cable...

Read more
Posted September 27, 2012 by christopher

The LUS Fiber network owned by the city of Lafayette, Louisiana, was profiled in this nine minute video from the FTTH Council Conference. LUS Fiber has been an inspiring network - overcoming tremendous opposition from Cox cable and AT&T (formerly BellSouth). It has long offered what I consider to be the best deal in broadband in the nation - $28/month for 10Mbps symmetrical.

And it has been incredibly innovative -- offering 100Mbps to all in-network transfers. So if my buddy and I are on opposite sides of town and only pay for the most basic connection, we can transfer files between each other as though we were on the same local network in our houses. This idea is being copied by other communities as well.

Finally, this LUS Fiber network was one of the three we profiled in our Broadband at the Speed of Light report on gigabit municipal networks.

Enjoy!

Posted May 21, 2012 by lgonzalez

We want to let you know about an upcoming one-day workshop that looks to be a good opportunity to learn more about FTTH networks. "Lighting Up New England" will be June 13 in Westford, Massachusetts, at the Westford Regency. The workshop will be hosted by the Fiber-to-the-Home Council and is part of the 2012 NEFC FiberFest.

Here are specifics from the announcement:

Fiber, Fiber Everywhere - a discussion panel covering the latest technologies that require more fiber to operate effectively - including fiber for wind farms, solar energy and for greater wireless reach using fiber to the antennae and to the cell tower.

Monica Webb, Executive Committee Chair, from WiredWest will be speaking about working with state and local organizations in Massachusetts as they build their own fiber optic networks. We have been seeing impressive results from the work of WiredWest and their group of 40 communities. Also speaking will be leaders from the FTTH Council, the American Cable Association, and analysts with expertise in FTTH and the fiber optic broadband industry. From the 2012 NEFC FiberFest website:

There will be a special focus on the trends in FTTH technology and equipment, as well as a focus on what network operators are doing to leverage fiber to the home into their strategies for success in the telecommunications market. This workshop is an outstanding learning opportunity for anyone who is interested in next-generation broadband -telecom service providers, consulting network engineers, manufacturers of optical access equipment, or anyone else who wants to get the inside scoop from the front lines of the all-fiber revolution.

You can register for the workshop here and visiting the exhibit area free.

Posted March 1, 2011 by christopher

A coalition of private companies, including Alcatel-Lucent, American Public Power Association, Atlantic-Engineering, the Fiber to the Home Council, Google, Intel, OnTrac, Telecommunications Industry Association, and Utilities Telecom Council, have released a letter opposing HB129/S87 in North Carolina. The bill would create considerable barriers to community broadband networks and public-private partnerships, effectively outlawing both given the restrictive language. We examined this bill here>. This the text of the letter they released:

February 25, 2011
via email

Representative Thom Tillis
Speaker of the House
Room 2304
16 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27601-1096

Senator Phil Berger
Senate President Pro Tempore
Room 2008
16 W. Jones Street Raleigh, NC 27601-2808

Dear Representative Tillis and Senator Berger:

We, the undersigned private-sector companies and trade associations, urge you to oppose H129/S87 (Level Playing Field/Local Competition bill) because it will harm both the public and private sectors, stifle economic growth, prevent the creation or retention of thousands of jobs, hamper work force development and diminish the quality of life in North Carolina. In particular, this bill will hurt the private sector in several ways: by curtailing public-private partnerships, stifling private companies that sell equipment and services to public broadband providers, and impairing educational and occupational opportunities that contribute to a skilled workforce from which businesses across the state will benefit.

The United States continues to suffer through one of the most serious economic crises in decades. The private sector alone cannot lift the United States out of this crisis. As a result, federal and state efforts are taking place across the Nation to deploy both private and public broadband infrastructure to stimulate and support economic development and jobs, especially in economically distressed areas. North Carolina has been the beneficiary of these efforts, as MCNC, with its $148 million award, is now building a state-of-the-art fiber optic network that will cross 106 counties and make available low-cost, internet connections to numerous high-cost, low-density, communities that the state’s private providers have...

Read more
Posted May 14, 2009 by christopher

This report is basically a snapshot of how Community FTTH systems were doing as of early 2008. Deployments by municipalities were among the first FTTH systems operating in the United States. Though, in aggregate, they do not approach the number of FTTH subscribers of a Verizon – which currently accounts for two-thirds of all FTTH deployments in the U.S. – municipal systems do have a significant percentage of all non-Verizon subscribers. Further, they represent an important aspect of national FTTH deployment, namely, the option and opportunity for local elected officials and civic leaders to upgrade local connectivity - when private enterprise will not take on the job.

In the case of muni systems, which are not-for-profit enterprises, one measure of “success” is defined as the level of their “take rate” – that is, the percentage of potential subscribers who are offered the service that actually do subscribe. Nationwide, the take rates for retail municipal systems after one to four years of operation averages 54 percent. This is much higher than larger incumbent service provider take rates, and is also well above the typical FTTH business plan usually requiring a 30-40 percent take rate to “break even” with payback periods.

Pages

Subscribe to ftth council