An FCC report on rural broadband prescribes government intervention to spur availability and demand. The report, released publicly on Wednesday, was required by Congress in the 2008 Farm Bill and did not require sign off by all commissioners.

An FCC report on rural broadband prescribes government intervention to spur availability and demand. The report, released publicly on Wednesday, was required by Congress in the 2008 Farm Bill and did not require sign off by all commissioners. Instead, writing in the first-person, acting Chairman Michael Copps highlighted common problems affecting rural broadband, including technological challenges, lack of data and high network costs. Copps also urged a revamp of the Universal Service Fund, new rules on network openness and an audit of all spectrum that the FCC has licensed, with an eye on where it is being used effectively or could see more use on a secondary basis.

There appeared to be little new in the more than 100 comments that flooded into the FCC this week about how to develop a comprehensive broadband strategy for rural parts of the U.S. The recommendations of the commission are expected to be given weight at NTIA and RUS as the agencies develop their respective broadband stimulus programs.

Consensus is building on universal service legislation that would expand the fund to cover broadband, House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Rick Boucher, D-Va., told the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association Tuesday. Boucher asked the group, which held its annual legislative conference this week, to urge members of Congress to support legislation he hopes to introduce “in the near term.” He declined to say when the legislation would be ready.

The Alarm Industry Communications Committee said that if the FCC makes their members pay into the Universal Service Fund, the effect would be “devastating.” The group filed in a FCC docket seeking comment on various proposals for USF reform, which include proposals to base USF contributions on individual phone numbers. “The imposition of either an $.85/number or $l/number charge could have devastating effects on a rapidly growing sector of the alarm industry,” the group said. It noted that its service, connecting alarms to a central office, does not touch the PSTN and customers would not be able to make or receive calls. “The transmission between the customer’s premise and the alarm monitoring center is specified by the alarm company, and not the customer,” the filing said. “The panel dials a predetermined number which serves the alarm company and … the panels may not be used to dial the PSTN except with extreme difficulty, if at all.”

Universal Service Fund subsidies should be automatically available to rural carriers using satellite broadband, Hughes, Inmarsat and the National Rural Telecommunications Cooperative said. In comments on the FCC’s three plans to revamp USF (see separate report in this issue), the groups condemned a proposed rule that would require a commission waiver for USF recipients before they could use satellite broadband to fulfill new deployment requirements. “The economic challenges of deploying terrestrial-based communications infrastructure will mean that it could take many years for customers in hard-to-serve areas to have access to terrestrially provided broadband services, and in some cases terrestrially provided services will never be available,” Hughes and Inmarsat said in joint comments. “These customers deserve the option of being able to choose satellite-delivered broadband, even if it is available at slower speeds than the speeds that may be available using terrestrial-based services.” The satellite companies supported the FCC’s proposed USF contribution proposal, which would base payments to USF on the carrier’s quantity of residential phone numbers. However, the companies “are very concerned that the proposed contribution rate of $35 per assessable business connection over 64 kbps would have a punitive effect on satellite broadband providers who have lower user to connection ratios than terrestrial broadband providers,” they said.

Largely reiterating past arguments, telecom interests fought over when and how to revamp the Universal Service Fund and intercarrier compensation. In comments last week, carriers, states and others dissected three FCC overhaul plans, known as Appendices A, B and C. Appendix A is FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s Oct. 14 revamp plan, B is a proposal addressing USF only, and C a revised Martin plan incorporating changes sought by the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies and other groups. Earlier this month, Martin said a revamp this year is unlikely (CD Nov 19 p2). But other commissioners have said they want to vote on an order at the December meeting. (See separate story on the FCC agenda in this issue.)

With the proper revisions, major cable and wireless associations said, they would back FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s plan to overhaul the Universal Service Fund and intercarrier compensation. Meanwhile, Qwest, congressmen and consumer advocates took sides. The FCC plans to vote Nov. 4 on the Martin plan. Sunshine was to have gone into effect Tuesday (CD Oct 28 p2).

The FCC seems to be setting up intercarrier compensation and Universal Service Fund overhaul proposals for its Nov. 4 meeting. Whether Chairman Kevin Martin will propose a complete overhaul there was still fluid, sources said. A court order gave the commission until Nov. 5 to explain the statutory basis for its ISP-bound traffic compensation regime. Industry officials said the Wireline Bureau is soliciting comments on several comprehensive proposals.

The FCC should use phone numbers for Universal Service Fund contribution, said the USF by the Numbers Coalition. Members from AT&T, Verizon, CTIA, USTelecom and IDT met last week with Amy Bender, aide to Chairman Kevin Martin. Group members not represented at the meeting are NCTA, GCI, Megapath and the VON Coalition. The FCC assesses USF contributions based on a carrier’s interstate revenue. The coalition wants contributions based on how many phone numbers a carrier owns. That would be easier, provide certainty to consumers and stabilize USF funding, said the coalition.