Telecom Industry Urges Inclusive Broadband Grant Program

“I don’t think Congress wanted to exclude anyone from serving in this rollout of infrastructure,” said Grant Seiffert, president of the Telecommunications Industry Association. He presented for several infrastructure associations, including the CEA, Fiber-To-The-Home Council, the Information Technology Industry Council and TechAmerica. He urged the agency to focus on the value of proposed projects, not the type of applicant. If a business or another party wants to provide broadband, the NTIA should permit their application, he said.

The NTIA should rule that giving direct grants to the private sector is in the public interest, agreed Curt Stamp, president of the Independent Telephone & Telecommunications Alliance. He also represented USTelecom, CTIA, NCTA, Satellite Industry Association and the Wireless Communications Association. Any entity licensed by federal or state government to provide telecom service should be automatically eligible, he said. For example, a company with a spectrum license or cable franchise shouldn’t need to enter any additional proceeding to prove eligibility, he said. Private sector applicants should be eligible to enter from the first round of grants, rather than “sidetracked” to later rounds, he added.

The NARUC believes industry entities should only be eligible if they're working with states, said Betty Ann Kane, chairwoman of the D.C. Public Service Commission. States have lengthy experience with universal service, and many have programs to spur broadband deployment and adoption, she said. Coordination between companies and states will better ensure speedy and effective deployment, she said.

Broadband providers oppose mandated public-private partnerships, Stamp said. The requirement may be too restrictive, running “the risk of driving away potential investors,” he said. The TIA’s Seiffert also appeared wary of the idea, urging the NTIA not to set the eligibility bar too high.

The Communications Workers of America supports permitting applications from industry, as long as a company shows it has the “financial, technical, managerial and operational qualifications” to complete the project quickly, said Debbie Goldman, telecom policy director. The NTIA should give strong consideration to the applicant’s past performance, she said. Spurring competition shouldn’t be a consideration, because the legislation didn’t state that as one of broadband grants’ goals, she said. The NTIA must focus instead on expanding broadband to unserved and underserved areas, facilitating adoption, building public computer capacity and helping public safety, she said.

Officials with the NARUC and the Western Telecommunications Alliance said during a second panel Tuesday on coordination between the NTIA and RUS that the two agencies should put forward a common application form to make applications easier for agencies and companies that are seeking funding. But panelists disagreed sharply on the role that state governments should play in the program.

Brad Ramsay, general counsel at the NARUC, said one of his “strongest suggestions” is a uniform application process. Ramsay noted that the NTIA is a small agency with only a few dozen employees assigned to broadband. “Have a single application and … have it online,” he said. “Submitting stacks of paper is not going to make it easier for the agencies to coordinate.”

“There’s a limited amount of resources that have been put on the table for this grant program and we believe that the coordination between the two agencies will help get that money out more efficiently and effectively,” said Derrick Owens, WTA director of government affairs. “We are also advocates of the need for uniform application procedure. … Many of our companies are RUS borrowers but none of them have been NTIA borrowers and we believe that process will allow for expedited fashion in processing applications.”

Mark DeFalco, with the Appalachian Regional Commission, said the two programs are different and will have to develop separate processes for awarding grants. “RUS has an existing process in place, and we expect the new stimulus dollars will flow through that process,” he said. “NTIA will need to develop their process and quite honestly with the time limits on this, it is a daunting task to get that process in place and get the money out the door.” But he said both agencies should use the same definitions for broadband, unserved and underserved areas, and have the same minimum speed requirements for rural areas.

Again panelists disagreed about the role the states, and various governors’ offices and PUCs should play in determining who gets funding.

Ramsay said a NARUC member called him to propose that state governments rank various proposals. That plan makes sense, he said. “If you don’t have the state involvement, then you are going to have probably a bunch of consultants in Washington who know very little about the state, calling my state commissions … and trying to get information from my state commissions to try to do the evaluation.” State officials “have the knowledge and expertise of the infrastructure” and “they are the ones that get complaints when there is no coverage … who take the political heat when it doesn’t work,” Ramsay said.

DeFalco said states must play a major role. “Many states have broadband task forces and different entities in place that have been looking at this,” he said. “The states have a real good idea where the absence of coverage is.”

But Mark Cooper, director of research at the Consumer Federation of America, said giving the states a major role would cause another set of problems. “Replacing consultants in Washington with consultants in Albany and Springfield, I'm not so sure we are making a lot of progress,” he said. “The point of my comments is try to diminish the magnitude of the scrum that takes place on the federal level, and there is going to be a scrum. If you just keep the decisions to the states, you end up with 50 scrums.” If the states play a larger role, the NTIA and RUS will have to put in place “very, very specific criteria” taking away most of the discretion from governors and state commissions.

A third panel Tuesday focused on “innovative” proposals to encourage sustainable adoption of broadband service and expand public computer center capacity. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly supports the allocation of $200 million to the public computing program by the stimulus law and asks NTIA to consider that amount a “floor” rather than a ceiling, said Jason Goldman, telecom and e-commerce counsel to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “Community colleges, libraries and other public computing centers serve a vital role, especially those who cannot afford computers or broadband access, because jobs, education, and information and the 21st century are all tied to access,” he said. A study found that library computers are the Internet connections for 70 percent of the users, he said.

Although 98 percent of schools are connected, “'connected’ means many things in education,” said Erin Duncan, federal lobbyist at the National Education Association. “It could mean high-speed wireless internet access throughout a building. Connected could also mean one computer in the office which collects absenteeism data for the central office.” Schools must have enough bandwidth “so students can have access to online materials that support a 21st century education,” she said. A study by America’s Digital Schools found that 67 percent of school districts prohibit teachers from using streaming video or similar tools, to conserve bandwidth, Duncan said.