Site Search

Entries in Valley Telephone Cooperative (4)

Monday
Apr302012

For the Smart Rural Community, Broadband is Just the Beginning

NTCA Paper Delivers Affirmations and Examples of RLEC-Enabled Smart Rural Communities  

“A robust broadband network is the foundation of a smart rural community,” according to an NTCA White Paper entitled The Smart Rural Community; but “It is important to note that the mere presence of a robust, next-generation broadband network does not create a smart rural community.” The NTCA paper explores the meaning of “smart rural community” by providing insightful examples from rural areas across the country. The paper also makes declarations about how smart rural communities benefit local consumers and businesses by going above and beyond simply providing a fast, fat pipe to the premises. Generally speaking, “A smart rural community relies on broadband networks to enable a series of applications that the community can leverage for innovative economic development and commerce, top-notch education, first-rate healthcare, cutting-edge government services, enhanced security and more efficient utilities use.”

By reading the smart rural community examples in the NTCA paper, you can visualize a smart rural community as a stack of interrelated applications and services from the individual household level all the way up to the government level, and everything in between. A smart rural community will likely mean different things to different communities, and building a smart rural community will be a collaborative and unique experience for each community. The payoffs for investing in a smart rural community, NTCA argues, are significant: these investments and projects “create opportunities for community growth and viability.” Rural telecom providers are leading the way, and “Broadband networks that are currently being built by rural telephone companies are economic engines for the entire community.”

The abundant examples in the paper include projects in education, health care, agriculture, public safety, government, utilities, and home networking. In each category, NTCA highlights at least one rural broadband provider who is undertaking a smart rural community project by leveraging its broadband infrastructure and collaborating with other local institutions. In each example, the rural broadband provider is helping local residents and business to operate more efficiently, be more involved in the community, promote economic growth, or improve the quality of life in remote areas. Some of the RLECs highlighted in the paper include:

  • Nex-Tech (KS) has developed a shared network for local schools, Interactive Television Networks Inc., which “enables students to learn from teachers located in a different location, and allows the schools to share curriculum and spread the overhead costs among participants.” Nex-Tech has also helped develop a mobile application with Fort Hays University, and “the app enables processors to post curriculum and allows students to review the campus map, enroll in courses, watch videos and interact with campus staff.”
  • Madison Telephone Company (IL) has entered into a public-private partnership with a local health care provider. In this example, “Community Memorial Hospital transfers digital images in order to receive remote diagnostics services from larger hospitals and clinics in St. Louis and Springfield, Illinois…Madison Telephone worked in conjunction with the hospital to install fiber optic cable. The new fiber network enables the local hospital to expedite the transfer of images and diagnostic information.”
  • Ayrshire Farmers Mutual Telephone (IA) provides high-speed broadband to area farmers, who use the network to make critical farming decisions. One local farmer uses broadband to decide when and where to sell commodities and purchase the lowest-cost inputs. The farmer also utilizes “real-time weather reports [which] provide important information about temperatures, wind patterns and precipitation levels, which dictate the best times to distribute herbicides and pesticides and perform other farm operations.”
  • Valley Telephone Cooperative (TX) connects a local farm with 10 Mbps fiber-based broadband, enabling the farmer to “access county and state government offices online…to renew his vehicle licenses, contact his local tax bureau and perform other remote transactions, thus saving both on travel costs and time.”
  • Dickey Rural Networks (ND) has collaborated with local water and electric utilities on smart grid projects. The company built a private broadband network for the water utility, where “The technology will be used to monitor and control 12 remote lift stations and reservoir sites, providing the utility with greater intelligence and insight into its operations.” Additionally, “Dickey Rural Networks has collaborated with its state network and several neighboring telecommunications companies to install a fiber-based virtual private network throughout the electric transmission network.”
  • Horry Telephone Cooperative (SC) has developed Total Connect Remote Service, a home security system that is accessible from a consumer’s smartphone. NTCA explains, “The communications provider views its security service as a method to differentiate itself from its national and regional competitors, and entice home owners and developers to adapt a bundled package of services.”

NTCA concludes the paper with some thoughts on what type of infrastructure enables a thriving smart rural community. Some parameters include supporting sustainable economic activity, enabling any application a citizen or business may need, being “future-proof” and ubiquitous, uniting wired and wireless technologies, and maintaining the most current cybersecurity protection. NTCA recommends that broadband providers in smart rural communities offer at least 20 Mbps to the end-user and 1 Gbps in institutions.

NTCA ceo Shirley Bloomfield commented, “This paper confirms that the infrastructure and tech knowledge necessary to support smart applications exists in rural settings as well as big cities. It also underlines just how important broadband-enabled technologies are to the millions of people who live in rural America. Policy makers should take note and work to ensure that rural Americans have access to the same smart applications and the many economic benefits that accompany them as their counterparts in urban areas.”

One key-takeaway from reading this paper is that a single advanced (or “future-proof”) rural broadband network can literally provide innumerable customizable opportunities for citizens and businesses in remote areas. The underlying network can enable communities to tailor “smart” applications and technologies to their specific needs, such that the residents and businesses are more connected to the entire world than ever before. With one robust network, the sky is the limit for rural communities. However, the NTCA paper shows that it takes more than an “if you build it, they will come” attitude. Rural broadband providers have to collaborate with education, health care, local government, public safety, utility providers, local businesses and individual consumers in order to develop a truly smart rural community.

Wednesday
Apr112012

In the “I Dare You” Game of USF Waivers, RLECs Will Win or Fold 

The Few Waivers Filed Show the Importance of Having a "Hook"

Out of all of the frustrating aspects of the USF/ICC Transformation Order and FNPRM, the waiver process ranks high on the list, yet it gets less attention than issues like regression analysis and bill-and-keep. Why is it so frustrating? Well, a waiver essentially costs small companies tens of thousands of dollars to prepare and file, and there is no guarantee that the FCC will grant the requested relief. It is a very expensive and cumbersome undertaking to tell the FCC that your company is facing financial insolvency because of the FCC’s actions.

Nevertheless, waiver momentum has picked up a bit over the last few weeks with new filings, letters of intent, and even support from friends in high places—Congress—for one waiver. FCC representatives have often said if a company doesn’t like the rules, it can file a waiver; but this is easier said than done. John Staurulakis, Inc. vice president John Kuykendall described the waiver process “as though the Wireline Bureau is taking an ‘I dare you’ approach to filing waivers. On one hand, the Bureau is saying that the USF/ICC Order must not be that bad since only a few carriers have sought waivers to be exempted from the reforms. On the other hand, the Bureau knows that once a company files a waiver, the petition will then be subjected to a ‘rigorous, thorough and searching review comparable to a total earnings review’ and that the bar which must be attained for the waiver to be granted is so high that few, if any, carriers can meet it.”

Understanding this complicated dynamic is important if you want to play the waiver game with the FCC, but is there a way to know with certainty if your costly and burdensome waiver will be granted? Not unless you have a crystal ball, but for now it appears as though waiver filers are predominantly companies with a specific “hook” that will at the very least get the FCC’s attention. I came across an article last week about the college admissions process which explained that there are countless highly qualified students applying to top colleges, but they are denied because they do not have some unusual or unique “hook.” These “unhooked” kids look great on paper—they got good grades, played sports, led student government and extracurricular groups—but they might not be internationally ranked gymnasts or National Merit scholars, which a school with high-bar admission standards is looking for (like the FCC in its waiver acceptance process). Back to the point—I couldn’t help but think about how the “unhooked” RLECs will fare if they go forward with filing waivers, especially in comparison to “hooked” companies like Big Bend Telephone Company (BBTC) and Windy City Cellular (WCC).

In February, West Texas-based BBTC filed a petition for a waiver of three USF rules including the $250 monthly cap and regression analysis. Since filing, BBTC’s waiver has attracted considerable attention due to the company’s hook: border security is at risk if BBTC loses its USF support. BBTC is the only service provider in a massive and geographically unrelenting area of West Texas, and the company provides service to dozens of local, state, and federal institutions including the Texas Rangers, the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the Texas Department of Transportation. BBTC’s hook turned heads in Congress at the state and federal level.

Texas State Representative Pete Gallego, who represents BBTC’s district, wrote to the FCC in support of BBTC’s waiver. Gallego explained, “BBTC has overcome and continues to manage high cost challenges through an innovative and cost-effective combination of wireline, wireless and satellite solutions that make BBTC a truly High Cost Provider in comparison to other rural communications companies both in the state and the nation.” Gallego added, “BBTC is the epitome of why universal service was created and is still needed today.” He is especially concerned about the impact on 911 emergency services, and he expresses that he “cannot imagine a scenario in which basic communications will be lost in such a wide, diverse, and vital segment of the country. We may reside in rural America, but we deserve the same voice and broadband service found in cities at reasonable rates. Indeed, universal service was designed and intended for the benefit of people in rural America—people like the consumers of BBTC.”

The Texas Border Sheriff’s Coalition also wrote to the FCC in support of BBTC’s waiver, arguing that “Unless the Commission waives its rules as applied to Big Bend, we are concerned that the primary communications network capable of serving a number of our members needs and the needs of other federal and state institutions tasked with protecting a majority of the Texas border will be shut off and, as a result, border security would be fundamentally undermined by this disruption in communications.” Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) also chimed in, commenting “We understand that the Commission must be judicious in its granting of waivers from the USF/ICC Transformation Order lest excessive waivers undermine the larger reforms set forth in the Order…In our estimation, Big Bend’s situation is unique, and we urge the Commission to carefully and seriously consider Big Bend’s waiver petition.”

Nearly 4000 miles across the continent from BBTC, Adak Alaska-based Windy City Cellular also appears to have a clear hook: it is the only service provider to completely cover a remote island prone to inhospitable weather conditions and home to very few permanent residents. On April 3, WCC filed a petition for a waiver of the $3,000 annual per-line cap on CETC support, which WCC claims slashed the company’s funding by 84% in the flicker of time since the Order was passed last fall. WCC’s opening statement in its waiver petition sets the stage for what follows: “Adak Island is located in an earthquake zone and in the vicinity of an active volcano. The area is mountainous, and is characterized by extreme weather conditions including cyclonic storms, wind gusts in excess of 100 knots, fog storms in the summer, and an average accumulation of more than eight feet of snow.”

WCC is the only telecommunications service provider that covers the entire Adak Island area, including a large wildlife refuge and the surrounding sea. Entities like the Marine Exchange, the Aleut Corporation, and the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Observatory rely on WCC’s service, as well as the Island’s 326 permanent residents and the many seasonal fishers, hunters, and tourists. Adak Island is a former Naval Complex and once was home to over 6k residents, but the population has dwindled over the decades. However, WCC explains that there are “a large number of contractors in Adak who provide various critical governmental services relating to maritime safety, ordinance disposal, environmental remediation, asset evaluation, wildlife preservation, and environmental monitoring.” Adak is only accessible by twice-weekly flights (weather permitting) and once-yearly barges, and “Adak is undoubtedly one of the most remote, isolated and climactically inhospitable communities in the United States.”

WCC’s wireline parent Adak Eagle Enterprises (AEE) is also in trouble as a result of the USF/ICC Order, and it is expected that AEE will file its own waiver soon. WCC explains that AEE rebuilt an outdated and decayed military telecommunications network on the island after several other providers declined. As a result of WCC and AEE’s efforts and funding from RUS and USF, the island now has modern telecommunications services. However, absent a waiver, it will not. WCC is therefore requesting a limited waiver only until the Mobility Fund Phase II mechanism is implemented, and only for half of its previous amount of support ($880.09, the “bare minimum” to keep the lights on). WCC pleas to the FCC, “If a waiver of the annual cap is not expeditiously granted, the results will be catastrophic for the Adak area: (1) WCC will be forced to cease operations, causing customers to lose service with no terrestrial alternative, and roaming ability throughout the Adak area will be lost; (2) critical services, government functions, and public safety will be jeopardized; and (3) WCC will become insolvent, causing the loss of a critical number of jobs for the Adak area.” Like BBTC, WCC’s waiver is supported by a number of local institutions, such as the City of Adak and the Aleut Corporation.

An April 9 ex parte meeting following up with the FCC after the waiver filing emphasizes how important it is for the FCC to expeditiously grant WCC's requested relief. WCC argues that it now has only 12 weeks until it must shut down operations, and the crunch has already been felt during a recent wind and snow storm that knocked out the only remaining satellite in use causing customers to lose service for a full day.

BBTC and WCC indeed may represent some of the most severe outliers in the entire rural telecommunications industry—a point that both parties bring up in their waivers—but what about the companies who do not have such an obvious hook yet still risk becoming financially insolvent as a result of the FCC’s rules? Will the FCC only grant waivers in cases that are literally a life or death situation for rural consumers? Some companies are likely still studying whether or not they have a hook that they can exploit in a waiver filing, and others are waiting for the FCC to release the final details on regression analysis. PBT Telecom and Valley Telephone Cooperativeboth filed letters of intent notifying the FCC that they will file waivers if the regression analysis methodology proposed in the FNPRM is adopted without change.

The bottom line is that if you take on the FCC’s dare to file a waiver, you might want to think of it like you are applying to Harvard. You have all of the standard qualifications to be accepted, but you need to play up your unique hook as much as possible in order to stand out from the crowd. If at least 40% of RLECs can indeed show that regression analysis and other USF/ICC cuts will push their companies into financial ruin and customers will lose service, it will be a challenge to earn an illustrious spot on the FCC’s highly-coveted waiver acceptance list.

Feel free to discuss your thoughts on the waiver process on JSICA’s LinkedIn USF Forum.

Monday
Apr022012

Valley Telephone Cooperative Alerts FCC of Waiver Intention

RLECs Anxiously Anticipate FCC’s Decision on Quantile Regression Analysis

In advance of an impending FCC final decision on the quantile regression analysis (QRA) methodology—which could come anytime in the next month or so—Texas RLEC Valley Telephone Cooperative (Valley) is already getting its affairs in order to file a waiver, going as far as notifying the FCC of its intentions. On March 29, 2012, Valley filed an ex parte letter stating “its intent to seek waiver of rules limiting reimbursable capital and operating costs if the Wireline Competition Bureau adopts the proposed quantile regression analysis methodology for High Cost Loop Support and Interstate Common Line Support.”

Valley CEO Dave Osborn writes that the cooperative has studied the impacts of QRA and found that its support will be clipped. Furthermore, “it appears that the only reason why the Cooperative has been clipped is due to the efforts that it has undertaken over the last several years to invest in its network to bring reliable telecom and high-speed broadband services to its members.” As a cooperative, Valley “has a mandate to provide the same quality of service to all of its members,” and its efforts to bring broadband it all of its members “have furthered the objectives of universal service set forth in the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and of the National Broadband Plan.”

As this letter was just a notification of Valley’s intentions to file a waiver, it did not go into great detail regarding the cooperative’s “good cause,” aside from noting that Valley indeed has good cause to be granted a waiver. Valley also said what most of the RLEC industry has been thinking (and saying) since November: “Waiving the rule would be in the public interest since all of the comments that have been received on this methodology have shown that it is fundamentally flawed and there are a myriad of technical problems associated with the methodology.”

Last month, several high-ranking government economists filed peer reviews of QRA which affirmed that the FCC’s proposed methodology needs some serious foundational work before it is ready to be implemented. Meanwhile, dozens of rural independent companies have been visiting with members of the FCC and filing ex parte notices and comments illustrating the potential negative impacts of QRA on their companies. It is likely that many of these companies are holding off on filing a waiver until after the FCC releases an Order detailing the precise methodology. However, QRA is set to take effect on July 1, and the clock is ticking. If the FCC changes the QRA methodology, RLECs will have to modify their impact studies and reassess whether or not they need to file a waiver—that’s a lot of work, but it is probably better than the alternative if QRA is not modified.

Do you plan on filing a waiver once the FCC releases the final QRA methodology?

Tuesday
Dec132011

Valley Telephone Selects Entone's FusionTV for Hybrid TV Services

Source: Entone Press Release

Entone, Inc., a provider of Hybrid TV and Connected Home solutions, announced that Valley Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (VTCI) has selected its FusionTV solution to power the delivery of hybrid TV services. The deployment creates momentum for the industry’s move to a fusion of linear TV and cloud services by broadband service operators.

Entone’s FusionTV solution will enable VTCI to offer its IPTV subscribers the best of live HDTV, DVR and cloud services via a single TV input, remote control and user interface. The 50+ content and cloud-based services that are available instantly include video on demand (VOD) content from VUDU, photo sharing from Flickr and Picasa, and popular social media apps like Facebook and Twitter.