Editor: Incomplete, inadequate telecom infrastructure requires state government to step into the gap

Broadband is essential as roads and like roads, it can't be left to the private sector alone, writes Charlotte Observer Associate Editor Mary C. Schulken.

Schulken cites a 2007 report by the North Carolina s e-NC Authority showing in four counties -- Jones, Greene, Warren and Gates -- less than 50 percent of the households can obtain access to high speed Internet services, while in 21 more than 30 percent are mired in broadband black holes.

"Access to high-speed Internet is as basic today as being connected by a good road -- and offers the same public benefit," Schulken writes. "Yet the private sector will not pay to put it within reach of every household and every community in North Carolina. The state needs to step up and invest in connecting the last mile."

Too bad this is AT&T territory. Up north in Massachusetts, a Verizon spokesman says the company is deploying its FiOS fiber optic plant without regard to population density and particular in areas where the old cable plant needs replacement.

Population density not determining factor in Verizon fiber deployment, spokesman says

More so than population density, the condition of the existing copper cable plant influences where Verizon plans to deploy its FiOS fiber optic infrastructure, a Verizon spokesman told the Worcester (Mass.) Business Journal.

"If you have to replace the copper in a particular area, there's no sense putting more copper in there," the spokesman told the newspaper.

Another factor driving fiber is the need to offer bundled services to attract residential customers who have abandoned POTS (Plain Old Telephone Service) over copper in favor of wireless phone service.

California PUC set to adopt guidelines for broadband subsidies

The California Public Utilities Commission is set to adopt guidelines June 12 for the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF). CASF was established by the CPUC in December 2007 to subsidize the deployment of broadband infrastructure in high cost unserved and underserved areas of the state. Funding will be prioritized for projects targeted to areas currently with only dial-up service or satellite and then to build out facilities in underserved areas if funds are still available.

$100 million in CASF funding is available, derived from a 25 percent surcharge on telephone bills that's estimated to be five cents a month for the average customer. The CASF surcharge will be offset by an equal reduction in the California High Cost Fund-B surcharge created to subsidize deployment of basic voice telephone service

Applications for CASF funding will be considered beginning July 3, 2008. CPUC will subsidize 40 percent of the project costs. Both wireline and wireless providers are eligible to apply. Benchmark throughput is 3Mbs for downloads and 1Mbs for uploads.

Project funding will be awarded by the fall of 2008 and successful applicants will have two years to complete their projects. That likely means for Californians currently located in broadband black holes -- there are some 2 million of them in about 2,000 towns according to a report by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force issued in January -- they'll have to wait at least until the fall of 2010 before they'll realize any benefit. The CASF funding was one of seven recommendations by the task force to increase broadband availability in California.

Higher than expected equipment, lost opportunity costs dog AT&T strategy to retain copper cable plant

AT&T continues to use its decades-old copper cable plant designed for carrying analog voice traffic to distribute Internet protocol traffic via Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) and more recently, its triple play voice/Internet/TV bundled service, U-Verse.

This strategy has allowed AT&T to avoid large expenditures to replace its last mile copper with fiber optic cable while continuing to depreciate the aging copper cable plant. But over time, it could prove to be a costlier strategy. The reason is that it takes a lot of field-based booster equipment — remote DSLAMs in the case of DSL and VRADs for U-Verse — to pump high bandwidth digital signals over old copper.

AT&T has all but abandoned putting in more remote DSLAMs to provide DSL, choosing to concentrate instead on fiber-fed VRADs to distribute U-Verse. However, if DSL Prime has got it right, Ma Bell will need a lot more VRADs than DSLAMS to reach customers. While DSLAMs can reliably propagate DSL service up to 12,000-14,000 feet, the VRADs used to distribute far more bandwidth intensive U-Verse are considerably less robust, not able to reliably serve premises more than 3,000 feet away. According to DSL Prime, AT&T erred in initially believing their reliable service range was 5,000 feet.

If true, that’s going to cost AT&T big time. Both in higher infrastructure costs because it will have to install more VRADs than anticipated and in lost opportunity costs since it will have to turn away droves of potential customers — including many who missed out on DSL and are still relegated to early 1990s era dialup because the telco failed to install enough remote DSLAMs.

FCC’s Martin doesn’t get it when it comes to U.S. broadband build out, fuels myth it’s largely a rural problem

FCC Chairman Kevin Martin continues to mischaracterize America’s poor broadband build out track record as a rural issue, telling last week’s D: All Things Digital Conference that the U.S. lags on broadband access “because it costs a lot more to build out in more rural areas and people who live further apart.”

Memo to Mr. Martin: It’s not a rural vs. non-rural issue. Rather, it’s one of incomplete telecommunications infrastructure that for all too many is an unfinished onramp to the information highway. Or a Balkanized “hodge podge” as the Communications Workers of America termed it.

There are plenty of folks residing in metro areas who can’t get wire line broadband connections from either telcos or cable companies. Oftentimes a neighbor will get service while another down the street cannot. In my own case, there’s both buried telco fiber and Comcast aerial cable 1.5 miles from my home that has existed for years. But neither the cableco or telco offer wireline broadband to me or my neighbors.

California's "surprisingly low" ranking for broadband connectivity speed

California may be widely considered the U.S. information technology leader as the home of the famed Silicon Valley. But when it comes to broadband Internet connectivity, it doesn't even make the top 10 among states, according to Internetnews.com's report on a recent study by mammoth Web server farmer Akamai.

David Belson, Akamai's director of market intelligence, told InternetNews.com that California ranks 17th, with just 21 percent of its connections coming in at 5 Mbps or higher over Akamai's network. "It was surprising that California didn't rank higher on the high broadband list," Belson said.

The top states are Delaware with 60 percent of its connections to Akamai measured at 5 Mbps, Rhode Island (42 percent) New York (36 percent), Nevada (34 percent), Oklahoma (33 percent), Connecticut (32 percent), New Hampshire (30 percent), Massachusetts (29 percent), Maryland (27 percent) and the District of Columbia (27 percent).

A possible contributing factor is the mediocre, incomplete state of the Golden State's broadband infrastructure. In January, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Broadband Task Force reported California's broadband infrastructure is unevenly deployed with nearly 2,000 towns and communities lacking broadband access -- many in Northern California -- while other parts of the state, mostly in metro areas of Southern California, enjoy state of the art connections.

What's truly surprising isn't so much Akamai's findings but AT&T's dubious assertion in a recent California Public Utilities filing that it provides broadband to its entire service area in the state.