- would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support
Ø Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISPs in rural markets! That is the way I see it too! Victoria Proffer www.ShowMeBroadband.com www.StLouisBroadband.com 314-974-5600 From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Brian Webster Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:37 AM To: memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'; motor...@afmug.com Subject: [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason to document and map your network coverage ever Importance: High Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee list. I took particular note to the following statement: - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. This would be a huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISPs in rural markets! I cannot see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than this. Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming in to your service area, but it will also erode funding for any Telco who currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density markets. There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and foremost though is that you should file the Form 477 as required. Next one should map their network with an accurate service area where you would confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75% coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for someone to say you dont exist and dont offer coverage in their areas. One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if WISPs were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the US is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to get it there will be much less. Brian ---------------------------------- Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation that would reform the Universal Service Fund. The Press Release, Overview, Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this link: http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content <http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579 &Itemid=122> &task=view&id=1579&Itemid=122 I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon. A few highlights that the trade press has noted: - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive provider that does not receive support - FCC would create cost model that includes broadband in figuring support models - competitive bidding among wireless carriers for USF support - no more than two wireless CETCs could get support in the same area - carriers would have 5 years to provide broadband throughout their service areas, or would lose support - all broadband providers would pay into USF to expand contribution base - FCC to decide appropriate speed for broadband Rep. Boucher has said that the bill is on his "front burner" and that he wants to get the legislation passed this Fall. Please feel free to comment on-list AFTER you've reviewed the documents so that you can promote education of the WISPA membership and help shape whatever position WISPA may wish to take as the bill works its way through Congress. Thanks. Stephen E. Coran Rini Coran, PC 1140 19th Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20036 202.463.4310 - voice 202.669.3288 - cell 202.296.2014 - fax <mailto:sco...@rinicoran.com> sco...@rinicoran.com - e-mail www.rinicoran.com <http://www.rinicoran.com/> www.telecommunicationslaw.com <http://www.telecommunicationslaw.com/> No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.851 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3031 - Release Date: 07/28/10 03:37:00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
