FCC TOLD ADVANCED SERVICES BEING DEPLOYED IN TIMELY WAY

Supported by ILECs, the USTA urged the FCC to foster “competition under market-based rules.” It said much broadband growth had been “led, in fact dominated” by the cable industry, which wasn’t regulated the way incumbent wireline telephone companies for broadband services. “The Commission must level the playing field to provide regulatory parity for advanced services,” the USTA said.

SBC said it was important that the FCC create “a stable regulatory environment for all broadband providers.” For that, it said the Commission should “expeditiously” complete its 3 wireline proceedings -- the Wireline Broadband NPRM, the Non-Dominance NPRM and the Triennial Review NPRM -- identified more than 2 years ago in the Commission’s Third 706 Report. “The inequities and regulatory uncertainty created by these incomplete proceedings are inhibiting efficient investment in broadband networks and services and skewing competition in the broadband marketplace,” SBC said. It complained that “burdened by an asymmetrical regulatory landscape and continuing uncertainty, telephone companies simply cannot afford to make the substantial investment necessary to fully deploy these networks and services.”

Verizon said for the Triennial Review Order to have “the desired pro-investment effects,” the Commission should: (1) “Forbear from applying any unbundling requirements for broadband network elements that section 271 might be construed to impose.” (2) “Clarify the cutoff between mass market and enterprise market for purposes of rules governing unbundling of fiber loops.” (3) “Clarify that fiber to a multi-unit premises counts as fiber to the home for purposes of the Commission’s unbundling rules, regardless of whether the fiber extends all the way to each unit in the premises.”

But Sprint said because the market was “making significant progress,” there was “no basis for adopting any extraordinary measure to ensure that additional broadband facilities are provided.” It said regulation was “warranted in markets which are not behaving in a competitive manner,” which wasn’t the case.

In particular, Sprint said the Commission should “not engage in any actions to relieve large [ILECs] from obligations that would otherwise be warranted under the Act on the theory that they will thereby invest more in broadband access.” It said the ILECs should be required to make their networks available on a wholesale basis to competitors that will “respond with new products and services and drive down the market price.” Sprint said the Commission “should not be concerned about ILECs failing to respond to the vigorous competition to provide advanced services.” To ensure the continued progress, it said the Commission should enforce regulations that maintain the availability of ILEC services to competitors.

AT&T strongly disputed ILEC claims that additional regulatory relief was needed to encourage their deployment of broadband services. It said such arguments “confuse and conflate the availability of broadband services with the demand for those services… Any lack of subscribership claimed by the RBOCs is a result not of the lack of availability, but of the less than robust demand for their service offerings.” AT&T urged the FCC to “avoid the adverse consequences of an entrenched duopoly” of cable modem service and ILEC-provided DSL service by spurring the growth of broadband applications such as VoIP and encouraging deployment of alternative high-speed data technologies, such as broadband over power line and Wi-Fi.

Sprint also opposed use of universal service funds for deployment of advanced services. The current contribution factor for the fund is 8.7%, and it’s expected to increase unless funding levels decline, it said. It said USF costs already are high and “extending the support to advanced services, which are already generally available to the public through USF-supported schools and libraries, is unwarranted and unnecessary.”

Groups representing rural telecom carriers told the FCC that, despite numerous obstacles, the deployment of advanced services was happening in “a reasonable and timely” manner in the areas served by their members. OPASTCO said its members providing broadband could reach an average 88% of their customers, with 99% of the telcos offering speeds faster than 200 kbps in both directions, and 75% offering different tiers of service. NECA said despite “vast loop lengths and technical hurdles,” its member companies continued to roll out DSL at an “impressive rate.” It said 78.95% of its member companies’ access lines now were equipped to provide DSL.

NECA said “a key factor” underlying rural deployment of DSL was the ability of rate-of-return companies to tariff DSL services. “It is likely that a number of NECA traffic sensitive pool members would not be able to offer broadband DSL without the regulatory and economic assurance provided by the tariff and pooling process.” it said: “Tariff participants are spared the task of developing, filing and defending their own tariffs, thus saving time and money. In addition, revenue pools offer stable monthly cash flows and reduce the risks incurred when a carrier deploys new technologies.”

To encourage investment in broadband, OPASTCO urged the Commission to reject the recommendation by the Universal Service Joint Board to limit support to primary lines. OPASTCO also urged the Commission to ensure that the pooling option continue to be available. It said “without pooling, many rural ILECs would be forced to significantly raise their rates for these services in order to recover their costs. This may cause many current DSL subscribers to cancel the service. In addition, without pooling, rural ILECs would find it far more difficult to expand their DSL-based services to the most remote customers.”

OPASTCO said the FCC should also “take steps to make the video market more accessible to rural ILECs, since building video with advanced services makes broadband more economically viable to deploy. Also, accelerated depreciation rates would further encourage investment in network infrastructure.”

NCTA said advanced broadband services were being deployed on “a reasonable and timely basis” and consumers are rapidly adopting those services. The FCC’s “vigilant restraint” in regulation has resulted in tremendous consumer benefits and should be maintained, NCTA said. NCTA predicted that by year-end, cable modem service would be available to nearly 100 million subscribers, or 91% of all homes passed by cable systems. NCTA said the Commission should continue to use 200 kbps as the appropriate measure of what’s advanced telecom.

Comcast -- with more than 5.6 million cable modem subscriber households the leading provider -- said the market is also competitive, with services provided by wireline carriers, wireless, satellites and unlicensed operators. Comcast noted that recent quarterly reports from the 4 largest telephone companies showed large increases in orders. Another potential competitor is broadband over power line, Comcast said.

Comcast backed competitively and technologically neutral proposals for financial assistance to broadband providers that expand into unserved areas, and efforts to ease access to public rights-of-way. Specifically, Comcast said the federal govt. could do more to prevent states and localities from “using their right-of-way management authority as a basis for imposing excessive fees or taxes or as a justification for seeking to regulate the technical characteristics (e.g. transmission speeds, service quality), pricing, provisioning, or billing for broadband services.”

While satellite broadband could create competition and close the broadband gap, EchoStar said satellite operators need adequate spectrum to deploy those services. Besides a proceeding the Commission has said it would open concerning multiple uses of the cable TV relay service (CARS) spectrum, EchoStar said the following proposals before the FCC would allow more efficient use of spectrum for broadband: (1) EchoStar’s petition to allow coprimary use of the 28.6-29.1 GHz and 18.8-19.3 GHz bands by geostationary satellite orbit (GSO) and non-GSO fixed satellite service (FSS) systems. (2) Proposals from EchoStar and SES Americom to deploy DBS satellites 4.5 degrees between existing DBS birds. (3) Proposals to use foreign slots for additional services. Separately, SES Americom said grant of the reduced orbital spacing applications is the fastest way to increase orbital and spectrum resources. “The Commission should not attempt to overlay on top of the existing regulatory framework additional rules that could constrain creative spectrum- sharing solutions, and hinder (or discourage altogether) services that are a critical component of broadband service offerings.”