Net Neutrality...

Fletcher Kittredge fkittred at gwi.net
Wed Jul 16 11:03:22 UTC 2014


Page 9-10 from the Connect America Fund (CAF) Report and Order on Rural
Broadband Experiments.  I don't think this needs translation, but please
read carefully.

*2.*
        We concluded in the Tech Transitions Order that we would encourage
participation in

the rural broadband experiments from a wide range of entities—including
competitive local exchange
carriers, electric utilities, fixed and mobile wireless providers, WISPs,
State and regional authorities,
Tribal governments, and partnerships among interested entities.49
 We were encouraged to see the
diversity in the expressions of interest submitted by interested parties.
Of the more than 1,000
expressions of interest filed, almost half were from entities that are not
currently ETCs, including electric
utilities, WISPS, and agencies of state, county or local governments.
*22.* We remind entities that they need not be ETCs at the time they
initially submit their
formal proposals for funding through the rural broadband experiments, but
that they must obtain ETC
designation after being identified as winning bidders for the funding award.
 As stated in the Tech
Transitions Order, we expect entities to confirm their ETC status within 90
days of the public notice
announcing the winning bidders selected to receive funding.51
 Any winning bidder that fails to notify the
Bureau that it has obtained ETC designation within the 90 day timeframe
will be considered in default
and will not be eligible to receive funding for its proposed rural
broadband experiment. Any funding that
is forfeited in such a manner will not be redistributed to other
applicants. We conclude this is necessary
so that we can move forward with the experiments in a timely manner.
However, a waiver of this
deadline may be appropriate if a winning bidder is able to demonstrate that
it has engaged in good faith to
obtain ETC designation, but has not received approval within the 90-day
timeframe.[52]
*23.* We sought comment in the Tech Transitions FNPRM on whether to adopt a
presumption
that if a state fails to act on an ETC application from a selected
participant within a specified period of
time, the state lacks jurisdiction over the applicant, and the Commission
will address the ETC
application.   Multiple commenters supported this proposal.54
 We now conclude that, for purposes of this experiment, if after 90 days a
state has failed to act on a pending ETC application, an entity may
request that the Commission designate it as an ETC, pursuant to section
214(e)(6).55
 Although we are
confident that states share our desire to work cooperatively to advance
broadband, and we expect states to
expeditiously designate qualified entities that have expressed an interest
in providing voice and
broadband to consumers in price cap areas within their states, we also
recognize the need to adopt
measures that will provide a pathway to obtaining ETC designation in
situations where there is a lack of
action by the state.
======
 52 See 47 C.F.R. § 1.3. We expect entities selected for funding to submit
their ETC applications to the relevant
jurisdiction as soon as possible after release of the public notice
announcing winning bids, and will presume an
entity to have shown good faith if it files its ETC application within 15
days of release of the public notice. A
waiver of the 90-day deadline would be appropriate if, for example, if an
entity has an ETC application pending with
a state, and the state’s next meeting at which it would consider the ETC
application will occur after the 90-day
window.



On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Brett Glass <nanog at brettglass.com> wrote:

> I'll just say that we've consulted legal counsel about what it would take
> to become an ETC, and it's simply too burdensome for us to consider. We'd
> need to become a telephone company, at the very time when old fashioned
> telephone service is becoming a thing of the past. (We enthusiastically
> support "over the top" VoIP so that we can help our customers get
> inexpensive
> telephone service without ourselves having to be a telephone company.)
>
> --Brett Glass
>
>
> At 07:53 PM 7/15/2014, Bob Evans wrote:
>
>  I think your point needs to be explained. Because anything gnment is
>> riddled will large carrier benefiting. Look at the school discounts for
>> internet services...pretty much just for LECs.
>> Thank You
>> Bob Evans
>> CTO
>>
>
>


-- 
Fletcher Kittredge
GWI
8 Pomerleau Street
Biddeford, ME 04005-9457
207-602-1134


More information about the NANOG mailing list