The next deadline is September 1, keep in mind.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Patrick Leary <ple...@apertonet.com>wrote:

>  I agree Brian that this is potentially a huge positive for WISPs. People,
> if you have not declared yourself officially, you are shooting yourself in
> the foot (maybe the head). File your Form 477.
>
> Patrick Leary
> Aperto Networks
> 813.426.4230 mobile
>
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Brian Webster
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 28, 2010 9:37 AM
>
> *To:* memb...@wispa.org; 'WISPA General List'; motor...@afmug.com
> *Subject:* [WISPA] USF Reform Bill Introduced - The most compelling reason
> todocument and map your network coverage ever
> *Importance:* High
>
>  Steve Coran just posted the message below to the WISPA FCC committee
> list. I took particular note to the following statement:
>
>
>
> *- would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> provider that does not receive support***
>
>
>
> Now the way I read the above statement is that if a WISP covers 75% of a
> current USF recipients service area, there will no longer be eligibility to
> receive USF funds. Remember if they have broadband they also have access to
> many VOIP providers even if you do not provide VOIP services. Vonage and
> Skype come to mind, not to mention cellular coverage. *This would be a
> huge factor in leveling the playing field for WISP’s in rural markets!* I
> cannot see a more compelling reason to document and map your networks than
> this. Not only will it prevent yet another subsidized competitor from coming
> in to your service area, but it will also erode funding  for any Telco who
> currently receives USF in your markets. This would bring wireless as a
> delivery method to the forefront because there are then no artificial
> revenue streams subsidizing the cost to deliver last mile service. We all
> know that wireless has the least cost per household passed in low density
> markets.
>
>
>
> There are many ways to document and map your coverage areas. First and
> foremost though is that you should file *the Form 477* as required. Next
> one should map their network with an accurate service area where you would
> confidently offer service. This can be done many ways (including paying me
> to do it). This also shows a very important reason to be participating in
> your state broadband mapping efforts. I would expect that those state maps
> will become one of the major verification sources to establish the 75%
> coverage. The FCC 477 database will probably become another verification
> source. If you are listed in both of them it would be very hard for someone
> to say you don’t exist and don’t offer coverage in their areas.
>
>
>
> One of the downsides to this bill is that all broadband providers will be
> required to contribute to the fund. My gut feeling though is that if WISP’s
> were accurately mapped and documented it would show so much less of the US
> is unserved by broadband and thus the required funding through USF to get it
> there will be much less.
>
>
>
> Brian
>
> ----------------------------------
>
>
>
> Last week, Reps. Boucher (D-VA) and Terry (R-NE) introduced legislation
> that would reform the Universal Service Fund.  The Press Release, Overview,
> Section by Section summary and text of the bill are available at this link:
>
>
> http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1579&Itemid=122
>
>
>
> I have not read these documents, but plan to do so soon.  A few highlights
> that the trade press has noted:
>
>     - would reduce or deny support to wireline incumbents in areas where at
> least 75% of households can receive voice and broadband from a competitive
> provider that does not receive support
>
>     - FCC would create cost model that includes broadband in figuring
> support models
>
>     - competitive bidding among wireless carriers for USF support
>
>     - no more than two wireless CETCs could get support in the same area
>
>     - carriers would have 5 years to provide broadband throughout their
> service areas, or would lose support
>
>     - all broadband providers would pay into USF to expand contribution
> base
>
>     - FCC to decide appropriate speed for broadband
>
>
>
> Rep. Boucher has said that the bill is on his "front burner" and that he
> wants to get the legislation passed this Fall.  Please feel free to comment
> on-list AFTER you've reviewed the documents so that you can promote
> education of the WISPA membership and help shape whatever position WISPA may
> wish to take as the bill works its way through Congress.  Thanks.
>
>
>
> Stephen E. Coran
>
> Rini Coran, PC
>
> 1140 19th Street, NW, Suite 600
>
> Washington, D.C. 20036
>
> 202.463.4310 - voice
>
> 202.669.3288 - cell
>
> 202.296.2014 - fax
>
> sco...@rinicoran.com - e-mail
>
> www.rinicoran.com
>
> www.telecommunicationslaw.com
>
>
> ****
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to