The decision by some price-cap carriers like CenturyLink and Windstream...
The decision by some price-cap carriers like CenturyLink and Windstream to turn down FCC Connect America Fund Phase I support shows the limits of wireline installations versus wireless, the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association said. “The elections made by some…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
price cap carriers suggest that only wireline technology can provide broadband service to rural areas,” WISPA said in an ex parte filing (http://xrl.us/bniprf). “They raise unsupported claims about their purported inability to provide subsidized broadband service with Phase I funds. Apparently, these carriers are unwilling to consider other, more efficient technologies to satisfy Phase I requirements.” WISPA said “economical ways already exist for Phase I-funded deployments: fixed wireless broadband technologies, like those used every day by unsubsidized WISPs. The Commission’s rules do not require CenturyLink or Windstream to provide wired service, so it is misleading for them to suggest that they cannot provide subsidized broadband service in an efficient and economic way.” “We believe that deploying fiber deeper into the network is the most efficient technology for bringing broadband to these remote customers,” a Windstream spokesman said in response. “In any case, it is noteworthy that the areas that Windstream is seeking to serve with CAF-1 funds are not served by any competitors, including WISPs.” CenturyLink didn’t have any comment, a spokeswoman said.