Doug Dawson

I’m starting to see situations where a shortage of construction labor is causing problems for some broadband providers. The supply chain issues for materials have largely been solved but the supply chain for construction contractors is a worsening situation for many providers. To give an example, I know a broadband provider with a long history of building networks that recently went to bid for two projects that are being funded by local American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) grant funding.

The Federal Communications Commission has a specific set of environmental rules that must be followed when building any telecommunications infrastructure. Broadband providers that haven’t built on park lands or were funded by certain federal broadband grants probably never heard of these rules. But the rules apply to all telecommunications construction. The reason providers probably haven’t heard about these specific rules is that the FCC has largely put providers on the honor system to meet these guidelines.

Ajit Pai recently wrote an article in the National Review where he talks about how his decision as head of the Federal Communications Commission to repeal net neutrality was the right one. He goes on to claim that repealing net neutrality was the driver behind the current boom in building fiber and upgrading other broadband technologies.

One of the hardest things that the Federal Communications Commission does is to decide spectrum policy. The agency has full authority to determine the details of how we use each slice of available spectrum. Most importantly, the agency can determine who can use spectrum – and that’s why the task is challenging. In the last decade, it’s hard to think of any spectrum deliberation and decision that didn’t have to weigh the interests of multiple spectrum users. There is almost always somebody using spectrum that must be considered.

Lumen has been the hardest large big telecommunications company to figure out. Verizon, AT&T, Frontier, Windstream, and others have clearly decided that building fiber is the future path to survival. Consequently, the other companies are far ahead of Lumen in terms of fiber passings. CEO Kate Johnson talked about Lumen’s upcoming fiber plans.

Over 81% of US households are now subscribed to a broadband speed of at least 200 Mbps. But broadband providers think that we are fixated too much on speed and that consumers don’t need faster speeds – they think that the marketing departments of the big providers have just convinced folks that faster speeds are important. But when talking about rural versus urban broadband speeds, the discussion can’t only be about what people need or don’t need.

Word has been circulating that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) recently informed State Broadband Offices that they must submit a final Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) plan to the NTIA one year after receiving approval of the Initial Proposal of grant rules. The ugly twist is that the NTIA is expecting the Final Proposal to include a final list of all BEAD grant winners. Everybody has always assumed that the Final Proposal would be just that – a proposal that describes and fine-tunes the rules being used to award grants.

There was an interesting political effort in the Washington State Legislature recently to expand the use of open-access networks. There was language included in Substitute House Bill 1147 that would require that any network funded from Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program grants must become open-access and available to other broadband providers.  Open-access has been a topic in Washington for many years.

The Federal Communications Commission originally budgeted $20.4 billion dollars for the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) subsidy program to be spent over ten years. The original RDOF reverse auction offered $16 billion in subsidies. But in a story that is now well known, some entities bid RDOF markets down to ridiculously low subsidy levels, and only $9.4 billion was claimed in the auction. $2.8 billion of this funding ended up in default, including some of the bidders who had driven the prices so low. That means that only $6.4 billion of the original $20.4 billion has been allocated.

Fiber manufacturers are always trying to make it easier to deploy fiber. One of the most interesting trends is the increasing migration from 250-micron fiber to 200-micron fiber. For those not familiar with the metric system, a micron is one-thousands of a millimeter. A 250-micron fiber has a diameter of 0.25 millimeters, while a 200-micron fiber has a diameter of 0.2 millimeters. That may not sound like a big difference, but when each fiber is thinner, the overall size of a fiber bundle is smaller.