Commissioner McDowell said that he would rather see a partnership approach between service providers and the government, rather than making significant changes that likely would end up in court, thereby slowing down broadband deployment and adoption.
"As a matter of good government, wouldn't creating such a new and untested regulatory regime without congressional authorization cause more uncertainty and not less, as advertised?" McDowell said. "And speaking of inevitable appellate litigation, how many years will it take to resolve these issues?"
During his speech, McDowell also stated that Net Neutrality supporters have yet to show a true need for new rules. He believes that cases of blockages where a customer or competition is harmed are few.
"Nonetheless, even in the absence of a clear showing of systemic market failure, the commission may still be headed toward enacting new regulations," McDowell said.
This is good and healthy dialog to be having in the public domain, and I encourage all of the FCC Commissioners to discuss the process of setting new rules, and to remember that the ultimate goal is more broadband to more people.
[ add comment ] ( 130 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 80 )The NTIA and RUS have quickly moved on to educating the market of the rules, schedules and intentions of NOFA #2. You can go to the BroadbandUSA.gov website for more details. And while we’re ready to work with service providers in support of their applications, I believe NOFA #1 was but a ‘trial’ program as RUS and NTIA worked through the definition, logistical and legal details required to establish a foundation for distributing funds aimed at expanding rural broadband.
I’ve been reviewing the official Federal Register documents filed on 1/22/10 by the RUS and NTIA and while much mystery remains as to how much funding will be awarded as part of NOFA #1, the guidance and rules for NOFA #2 are easier to follow.
Gone is the arduous definition of ‘remote rural’, the ‘2-step’ application process requiring applicants to submit with both RUS & NTIA and 50/50 grant/loan ratio employed by RUS. New to BIP, among other things, is the expanded qualifying service areas to include regions where <50% of a population base has access to >5Mbps (aggregate of upstream & downstream rates). As with anything in government, there are pros and cons to the changes.
Originally, RUS identified $2.325B in grants, loans and grant/loan combinations as available in NOFA #1. NTIA identified $1.6B as available with $2.75B remaining in NOFA #2. While both reserved the right to carry funds over to NOFA #2, the Federal Register clearly states that BIP will have $2.2B available in this round indicating much of the original amount will be carried over. NTIA will have ~$2.6B in this round indicating much is yet to be distributed as part of NOFA #1.
Anyway you look at it, NOFA #1 has produced a mixed bag of results. Clearly, winning applications were a result of methodical planning, strategic partnerships (in cases of middle mile projects) and long term vision for broadband (i.e. mostly FTTP last mile infrastructure). Those of you looking at NOFA #2 may glean some winning insights from these strategies. How many additional projects will be funded by NOFA #1 remains uncertain. And from what we hear from the service provider community, much is desired in the feedback loop between RUS/NTIA and applicants.
What do you think? Is the Broadband Stimulus Package clear as we move into NOFA #2? Clear as mud?
[ add comment ] ( 195 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 99 )I’m buying a TV at some point in the next two weeks--just in time for the Super Bowl and despite the fact that neither my team (go G-men!) nor my husband’s made it anywhere close to the big game this year. As is often the case when making a big purchase, this has made me hyper-sensitive to any news relating to televisions and especially so when it comes to the “next big thing”. So of course I’ve been paying attention to all the hype surrounding 3DTV.
Since the first 3D channel won’t launch until next year and because most are predicting that the adoption of 3DTV won’t really take hold until late in the decade, I feel safe moving forward with my TV purchase, but that doesn’t mean you should feel the same about your network. According to a Light Reading Cable Digital News report that I missed until last week, operators will need to dedicate 6MHz of bandwidth -- equal to a full analog channel -- in order to carry an upcoming, full-time 3D network from Discovery. Coupled with the uncountable other accounts about the growth in bandwidth, it seems like the need for a direct fiber feed to each home is coming faster every year and makes NOFA #2 even more enticing as a way to make FTTH happen more quickly.
As service providers, what do you think? Is it just hype? Will the bandwidth demands for 3DTV come down before you need to worry?
[ add comment ] ( 146 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 90 )One of the questions that I reflect upon as ubiquitous broadband service is discussed is how all households will be able to get online. In my reading, and discussions with industry people, the cost of an in-home PC is one of the biggest blockages to universal connectivity. Remember, universal POTS service came with the in-house device - a telephone.
Speaking a couple of weeks ago at the Consumer Electronics Show, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski offered a window into the thinking that is shaping our National Broadband Plan. The solution - treat televisions as the access device. Over 95% of US households have a TV, and if there was a simple and cheap (or free) way to attach them to the internet, now every household can be online. Genachowski said that the agency has been discouraged to see how few options Americans have for getting online videos on their TVs without buying new DVD players or other set-top boxes.
Perhaps the set-top box or the residential gateway will become the new telephone?
[ add comment ] ( 154 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 90 )A quick summary on NOFA #2 from Teresa Mastrangelo from Broadband Trends:
"RUS’s NOFA #2 allocates approximately $2.2 billion in this round for broadband infrastructure projects. This round focuses on last mile projects, which are anticipated to receive the vast majority of funding. RUS will also fund middle mile projects involving current RUS program participants.
The first NOFA had two funding options – grants up to 100 percent in remote rural areas, and 50/50 loan/grant combinations in non-remote rural areas. In the second NOFA, RUS has eliminated this distinction and adopted a base 75/25 grant/loan combination for all projects. The new approach provides RUS with flexibility to seek a waiver if additional grant resources are needed for areas that are difficult to serve, and priority for those who seek lower grant levels."
What do you think? Did the process and rules improve for you?
[ add comment ] ( 149 views ) | permalink |
( 3 / 90 )
Archives