|Wireless News Aggregation|
Wishing a safe and happy weekend for all readers of The Wireless Messaging News.
A Problem Continues
I was very surprised that I did not receive a single reply last week for this request for help or advice on the following issue with “Matched Pairs” of Nucleus Paging Transmitter modules—so I am repeating it this week's issue in hopes that someone will be able to help. I am not asking if there is an existing lab that can perform these adjustments. Just having details of the procedure would be a big help. Even in my modest lab here, I have equipment with higher frequency accuracy than what was available “back in the day.” Surely someone knows how to do this.
A Big Problem
The Motorola Nucleus II Paging Base Station is a great paging transmitter. The Nucleus I, however, had some problems.
One of the best features of this product was its modular construction. Most of the Nucleus' component parts were in plug-in modules that were field replaceable making maintenance much easier.
One issue was (and still is) that two of the modules had to always be kept together. They are called the “matched pair.”
Motorola used some tricks to keep people in the field from trying to match unmatched pairs, and force them to send SCM and Exciter modules back to the factory for calibrating them with precision laboratory equipment.
The serial numbers have to match in the Nucleus programing software or you can't transmit. Specifically the 4-level alignment ID parameter contained in the SCM has to match the Exciter ID parameter.
Even if someone could modify the programing software to “fudge” these parameters, that would not let them use unmatched modules effectively without recalibrating them to exact factory specifications.
So now that there is no longer a Motorola factory laboratory to send them to, what do we do?
I hope someone can help us resolve this serious problem for users of the Nucleus paging transmitter.
Please let me know if you can help. [ click here ]
Can You Help?
Looking for a source of the following parts:
If you can, please let me know where these can be obtained. [ click here ]
Now on to more news and views.
Wayne County, Illinois
A new issue of the Wireless Messaging Newsletter is posted on the web each week. A notification goes out by e-mail to subscribers on most Fridays around noon central US time. The notification message has a link to the actual newsletter on the web. That way it doesn’t fill up your incoming e-mail account.
There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. Readers are a very select group of wireless industry professionals, and include the senior managers of many of the world’s major Paging and Wireless Messaging companies. There is an even mix of operations managers, marketing people, and engineers — so I try to include items of interest to all three groups. It’s all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology.
I regularly get readers’ comments, so this newsletter has become a community forum for the Paging, and Wireless Messaging communities. You are welcome to contribute your ideas and opinions. Unless otherwise requested, all correspondence addressed to me is subject to publication in the newsletter and on my web site. I am very careful to protect the anonymity of those who request it.
I spend the whole week searching the Internet for news that I think may be of interest to you — so you won’t have to. This newsletter is an aggregator — a service that aggregates news from other news sources. You can help our community by sharing any interesting news that you find.
Editorial Opinion pieces present only the opinions of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the views of any of advertisers or supporters. This newsletter is independent of any trade association.
* required field
If you would like to subscribe to the newsletter just fill in the blanks in the form above, and then click on the “Subscribe” button.
There is no charge for subscription and there are no membership restrictions. It’s all about staying up-to-date with business trends and technology.
Back To Paging
Can You Help The Newsletter?
You can help support The Wireless Messaging News by clicking on the PayPal Donate button above. It is not necessary to be a member of PayPal to use this service.
Newspapers generally cost
A donation of $50.00 would certainly help cover a one-year period. If you are wiling and able, please click on the PayPal Donate button above.
If you are reading this, your potential customers are reading it as well. Please click here to find out about our advertising options.
The Wireless Messaging News
The Board of Advisor members are people with whom I have developed a special rapport, and have met personally. They are not obligated to support the newsletter in any way, except with advice, and maybe an occasional letter to the editor.
Windows Phone and BlackBerry head for extinction, leaving the smartphone market to Android and iOS
The mobile operating system market is a two-horse race now, and it's likely to stay that way for the foreseeable future.
By Adrian Kingsley-Hughes for Hardware 2.0
It was once hoped that the mobile ecosystem would be big and buoyant enough to support a whole number of different operating systems, but the data suggests that, just as with the PC ecosystem, there really is only room for two major players.
According to the latest Gartner report , the bottom has fallen completely out of Windows Phone and BlackBerry device shipments over the past year. A year ago things weren't great, with Windows Phone and BlackBerry having a market share during Q2 2015 of 2.5 and 0.3 percent respectively, but for Q2 2016 these had fallen to 0.6 and 0.1 percent respectively.
In real terms, shipments of Windows Phone devices stood at 1.97 million for the quarter, with BlackBerry at 400,000. Compare this to the 44.4 million iOS devices or 296.9 million Android smartphones shipped during the same period, and you see just how bad it is.
Essentially both Windows Phone and BlackBerry are headed for extinction. It's not a matter of if this is going to happen, but when.
This has some serious repercussions for the mobile arena:
One interesting question to ponder is this — with only two major players in the game, where will the needle come to rest? Right now the quarterly shipments are divided roughly 85 to 13 between Android and iOS respectively. But over the past year, Android has climbed four percentage points, while iOS dropped almost two points. I predict that in a year or so shipments will be nine to one in favor of Android.
From there, it's difficult to predict where things will go, but we might see a period of stability.
Here's another question worth pondering — is there now room for another operating system?
Given the dominance of the incumbent players (remember that while Apple has well under 20 percent of the shipments, it manages to scoop up more than 80 percent of the smartphone profits), and how impossible Microsoft found it to break into the market despite throwing masses of cash at the attempt, it seems unlikely.
It's unclear what Microsoft might do from here on in when it comes to smartphones — make a switch to Microsoft would be my guess — but trying to break into the market again just seems like throwing good money after bad.
OMNI Messaging Server
MARS (Mobile Alert Response System)
STG (SIP to TAP Gateway)
IDF unveils missile alert system for homes
The IDF system, developed with Beeper Communications, warns to within a square kilometer where the missile will hit.
Two years after Operation Protective Edge, a decade after the Second Lebanon War, with several in between rounds of fighting on Israel's southern border, the Home Front Command is revealing a new development likely to significantly improve warning for the public about missile and artillery fire against the home front.
This development, led by the Home Front Command, together with Beeper Communications Israel, features a private home siren that will provide real time warnings and call on tenants to quickly take cover or enter their protected area. According to Home Front Command Planning Department Commander Col. Itzik Gai, the home warning kit will be offered for sale to the general public within a few months, although he had difficulty in predicting the price.
In the rounds of fighting over the past decade in the north and the Gaza Strip, which were accompanied by heavy barrages of missiles and rockets fired against the home front, the defense establishment has learned that not everyone hears the sirens spread around the outskirts of cities. 3,000 such sirens are distributed all over Israel, and the Home Front Command says that they are regularly maintained and work well.
During summer and winter, however, the windows in many homes are closed. Air conditioning systems operate during many hours, and when combined with other home electrical appliances, it is difficult, and sometimes, impossible, to hear the siren.
In recent years, the Home Front Command has already led plans to develop apps for real time warning about missiles and rockets using mobile telephones or home computers, in addition to a personal warning delivered by means of cellphones in the territory against which the threat is directed. The personal warning system is being presented as a supplementary means of ensuring that none of us misses a warning: "The national siren system will continue to be the bulldozer for delivering warnings to the public, but the personal systems will be supplementary components," Gai stated.
Like the apps that have already been developed, some of which were also used during Operation Protective Edge two years ago, the home warning system will operate only if the missile or rocket threatens that particular space, thereby avoiding disrupting the daily routine in other areas.
The Home Front Command currently divides Israel into 264 polygons siren areas in which an alarm is activated according to identification of the missile or rocket's flight path and a calculation of where it will land. In the polygon in which the missile will hit, the alarm system will be immediately activated, and the public there will be asked to quickly enter the protected area or to take cover, depending on the instructions issued by the Home Front Command, independently of the attempt to intercept the threat in flight with Iron Dome, David's Sling, or Arrow missiles.
According to the IDF, this trend will be developed in the coming years, and the ability to provide rapid and accurate warnings to civilians will improve. "We're already thinking about delivering an earlier warning focused on a single square kilometer. We're also thinking about a personal warning to be delivered to a civilian wearing a personal ring, special buzzer, or even directly to a smart watch. It won't happen tomorrow morning, but it can be assumed that it will happen in the next decade, so that warnings will become much more personalized. Someone who gets such a warning, for example on their morning run, can understand that if he got it, then he is on or near the place where the rocket will hit, and should therefore hurry to take cover. Anyone who did not get the warning can continue doing whatever they were doing. This facilitates command continuity needed in the economy," Gai commented.
|Source:||Published by Globes [online], Israel business news — www.globes-online.com — on August 18, 2016|
|Voluntary Newsletter Supporters By Donation|
Premium Newsletter Supporter
Premium Newsletter Supporter
Canyon Ridge Communications
Premium Newsletter Supporter
e*Message Wireless Information Services Europe
Incyte Capital Holdings LLC
SFU part of emergency communications backup
posted Aug 10, 2016 at 7:00 AM
A natural disaster along B.C.’s West Coast could put Simon Fraser University’s Surrey campus into the thick of the region’s emergency communications response.
A high-speed, wireless link that connects the campus to the nearby Surrey-based Provincial Regional Emergency Operations Centre (PREOC) supports ongoing SFU research at the centre– and would also serve as a vital backup communications lifeline for the region.
“Beyond facilitating our research, this link serves as a critical backup communications link for Emergency BC (EMBC), and all of the supporting emergency agencies and utilities that may be called upon to assist at the PREOC in support of a large scale emergency in Southwestern B.C.,” said Peter Anderson, director of SFU’s Telematics Research Lab (TRL) in the School of Communication.
Anderson and colleague Stephen Braham played a backup role in the recent Cascadia Rising emergency exercise, which simulated the consequences of and responses to a 9.0 magnitude earthquake on the West Coast. In the event of a real emergency the Surrey PREOC would be the region’s hub, coordinating communications and emergency response and recovery operations with communities from Vancouver to Pemberton and Boston Bar.
The SFU Surrey link was originally established by the TRL, in conjunction with SFU Network Services, to support the University’s participation in emergency arrangements for the 2010 Olympics.
Since then Anderson and Braham have continued to refine SFU’s backup capabilities, including systems embedded in the University’s Advanced Mobile Emergency Communications (AMECom) vehicle. The unit was conceived and outfitted by Anderson and Braham at SFU’s Burnaby campus and is now housed permanently at the PREOC.
The vehicle also provides a test-bed to develop new generations of mobile communication support systems, and currently serves as an active emergency response capability for B.C. and local authorities.
Since initially created more than a decade ago, the vehicle has been dispatched to myriad provincial emergencies, including floods and wildfires, and was on standby during the recent Fort McMurray and northern B.C. fires.
A mobile satellite trailer is also stationed at the PREOC.
“There are wide-ranging challenges to emergency communications and disaster planning throughout the province,” says Anderson. “A 900 km flight up B.C.’s coast translates into over 26,000 km of intricately winding coastline. Given its remote channels and physical ruggedness this is one of the toughest places in the world in which to communicate.” Anderson’s ongoing work is also helping to inform plans to refine B.C.’s tsunami warning system.
“Through our work at SFU, the University has become a national leader in emergency communications,” says Anderson. “After years of research and remote testing we can now deploy our systems virtually anywhere.
“Our latest system connects to networks through a variety of different means including satellite systems, as well as existing Internet services,” he says.
“We’ve been testing the technology in Metro Vancouver, the Central Interior and in the Yukon, and have become the national lead for developing a rapid, deployable public safety broadband LTE cellular system.”
Anderson, who continues to fine-tune and test systems, also draws from the experiences responses to international disasters and has visited the sites of many of the world's most devastating events.
|Source:||North Delta Reporter|
|Product Support Services, Inc.|
Repair and Refurbishment Services
Product Support Services, Inc.
PSSI is the industry leader in reverse logistics, our services include depot repair, product returns management, RMA and RTV management, product audit, test, refurbishment, re-kitting and value recovery.
Disaster-Proven Paging for Public Safety
Paging system designs in the United States typically use a voice radio-style infrastructure. These systems are primarily designed for outdoor mobile coverage with modest indoor coverage. Before Narrowbanding, coverage wasn’t good, but what they have now is not acceptable! The high power, high tower approach also makes the system vulnerable. If one base station fails, a large area loses their paging service immediately!
Almost every technology went from analog to digital except fire paging. So it’s time to think about digital paging! The Disaster-Proven Paging Solution (DiCal) from Swissphone offers improved coverage, higher reliability and flexibility beyond anything that traditional analog or digital paging systems can provide.
Swissphone is the No. 1 supplier for digital paging solutions worldwide. The Swiss company has built paging networks for public safety organizations all over the world. Swissphone has more than 1 million pagers in the field running for years and years due to their renowned high quality.
DiCal is the digital paging system developed and manufactured by Swissphone. It is designed to meet the specific needs of public safety organizations. Fire and EMS rely on these types of networks to improve incident response time. DiCal systems are designed and engineered to provide maximum indoor paging coverage across an entire county. In a disaster situation, when one or several connections in a simulcast solution are disrupted or interrupted, the radio network automatically switches to fall back operating mode. Full functionality is preserved at all times. This new system is the next level of what we know as “Simulcast Paging” here in the U.S.
Swissphone offers high-quality pagers, very robust and waterproof. Swissphone offers the best sensitivity in the industry, and battery autonomy of up to three months. First responder may choose between a smart s.QUAD pager, which is able to connect with a smartphone and the Hurricane DUO pager, the only digital pager who offers text-to-voice functionality.
Bluetooth technology makes it possible to connect the s.QUAD with a compatible smartphone, and ultimately with various s.ONE software solutions from Swissphone. Thanks to Bluetooth pairing, the s.QUAD combines the reliability of an independent paging system with the benefits of commercial cellular network. Dispatched team members can respond back to the call, directly from the pager. The alert message is sent to the pager via paging and cellular at the same time. This hybrid solution makes the alert faster and more secure. Paging ensures alerting even if the commercial network fails or is overloaded.
Swissphone sets new standards in paging:
Swissphone provides a proven solution at an affordable cost. Do you want to learn more?
NIST’s ‘Nerdcart’ Could Improve Emergency Communication
BY: Jessie Bur
The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) is working to improve first-responder communications in an emergency through the Rapidly Deployable Public Safety Research Platform, or Nerdcart, as social media has dubbed it.
“The portable system was built to enable research in diverse environments,” said Tracy McElvaney, an engineering supervisor in NIST’s Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) Division. “But it is modeled after FirstNet’s image of a vehicle-borne network system and the public safety community’s vision of a rapidly deployable system to be used when the nationwide network is not available.”
The Nerdcart operates by providing voice, text, instant messaging, video, and data communications to more than 200 emergency users over the span of about 2.5 miles. The cart, which is about the size of a large filing cabinet, makes a difference due to its quick deployment time and ability to connect with both Long Term Evolution (LTE) phones and Land Mobile Radio (LMR) systems.
“Typically, it takes on the order of hours to deploy a ‘cell on wheels’ system to provide coverage at an event, and multiple deployable systems are needed to enable both LTE and LMR,” McElvaney said. “Our system provides LTE, LMR, video, and data. We rolled the system from the vehicle into the building, and once connected to an AC power outlet, we were making calls in less than five minutes.”
The work was partially funded by the Department of Homeland Security ‘s First Responder Group, and integrates commercially available technologies from a variety of private sector partners into a single platform.
“Our role at NIST is not to develop the technology itself, but to integrate the state-of-the-art pieces into a conceptual platform that will help drive the industry to meet public safety needs—that is, to make portable systems smaller, more robust, and with more capabilities,” McElvaney said.
Currently, PSCR staff are working to integrate sensor data and analytics into the cart’s systems, as well as enabling the system to connect to already established and temporary emergency networks in the area in which it is set up.
FCC ANNOUNCES ROLL-OUT SCHEDULE DETAILS FOR PARALLEL OPERATION
On July 22, 2016, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC or Commission) Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (Bureau) announced the roll-out schedule for the new version of the Network Outage Reporting System (NORS) platform, including a July 25, 2016 scheduled date for a portion of that roll-out. 1 In response to user input additional details are provided to define continuing filing requirements using the legacy system, while resetting the new system, test operations and cutover date in order to ensure a seamless transition to the new system platform. The Commission issues this Public Notice which supersedes the July 22, 2016 Public Notice and clarifies the July 25, 2016 date for partial system roll-out in favor of establishing a full system rollout date of August 31, 2016. It is expected that this path will ensure that technical and other user concerns will be addressed comprehensively in time to allow for effective system cutover and transition by providers to production system use.
Accordingly, on August 31, 2016 at 3 PM EDT, all users will need to file outage reports using the new platform. After this time, the old version of the NORS system will no longer be available for filing outage reports. Until that date and time, users should continue to make all required filings under Part 4 in the old version of the NORS system. 2 However, as of August 1, 2016, users may validate user credentials and company information. In addition, users can upload test filings in the test environment to confirm interoperability of the new platform.
The new NORS production system will be accessible directly at https://fcc.appiancloud.com/suite/ . The Commission will transfer existing User IDs from the old NORS system to the new NORS production system. If a user needs a new User ID, they can obtain one at https://www.fcc.gov/eform/submit/Network-Outage-Reporting-System-Registration .
The new NORS test system is currently available, and will remain open for testing purposes until September 15, 2016. The platform supports Web-based manual input from small providers as well as fully automated API interface for providers with machine-to-machine filing capabilities. Anyone wanting access to the new NORS test system should contact John Healy at 202-418-2448.
Companies required to file outage reports in NORS should note the following dates:
Any questions regarding the new NORS system and any reporting requirements can be directed to John Healy, CCR/PSHSB, at 202-418-2448, email@example.com or to David Ahn, CCR/PSHSB, at 202-418- 0853, firstname.lastname@example.org .
1 FCC Announces The Roll-Out Schedule For The New Version Of The Network Outage Reporting
Wireless Communication Solutions
USB Paging Encoder
Paging Data Receiver (PDR)
Please see our web site for other products including Internet Messaging Gateways, Unified Messaging Servers, test equipment, and Paging Terminals.
SEE WEB FOR COMPLETE LIST:
Selected portions of the BloostonLaw Telecom Update, and/or the BloostonLaw Private Users Update — newsletters from the Law Offices of Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy & Prendergast, LLP — are reproduced in this section with the firm’s permission.
ACAM 10-YEAR SUPPORT OFFERS AND BUILD-OUT OBLIGATIONS ISSUED
On Wednesday, August 3, the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau issued a Public Notice and four reports setting forth its offers of Alternative Connect American Cost Model (ACAM) support to rural local exchange carriers (RLECs) for the next ten years and the associated broadband build-out requirements. Interested RLECs will have until Tuesday, November 1, 2016, to submit to the Wireline Bureau (at ConnectAmerica@fcc.gov ) a “final election letter” signed by an officer (NOTE: the letter must be signed by an officer, and not by a manager) confirming their choice to accept the offered model-based support and committing to satisfy the associated broadband build-out obligations. RLECs that are not eligible for ACAM support and/or that elect to remain on Rate-of-Return support do not have to make a November 1, 2016, filing. In fact, all RLECs that do not file a “final election letter” on or before November 1 will be deemed to have elected to remain on the Rate-of-Return Path.
Clients having more than one study area in a state must make a statewide election to choose the Model-Based Path or the Rate-of-Return Path for all of their study areas within that state. If a company has study areas in two or more states, it should file a separate “final election letter” for each state and can elect different paths in different states. Also, RLECs that have recently acquired an RLEC in the same state (and where the companies are not yet listed in the ACAM reports as part of the same holding company) should make the same election for both their existing study area and the newly acquired company.
The ACAM reports are at https://transition.fcc.gov/wcb/ACAM_23_Offer_Rprt_7_0.xlsx .
Report 7.1 presents the state-level offer of annual ACAM support for each eligible “holding company” that will be provided for ten years (2017 through 2026) Where a company has only one study area in the state, the RLEC is the “holding company.” Where a company has multiple study areas in the state, they are combined into a single “holding company” entity. (Again, where a company has recently acquired an RLEC in the same state, they will both be listed as “holding companies” but must make the same election and can do so in the same “final election letter.” To the best of our information and belief, the ACAM offers and build-out obligations for such newly affiliated companies will be added together.)
Report 7.1 also lists each holding company’s: (a) total locations; and (b) locations in Census Blocks receiving ACAM support. The difference between these figures is the number of locations within Census Blocks where the company was deemed to have an “unsubsidized competitor” and where it is not eligible to receive ACAM support. Deployment of 25/3. 10/1 or 4/1 broadband in these ineligible Census Blocks will not count toward satisfaction of build-out obligations.
Report 7.2 lists each “holding company’s” build-out obligations with respect to the initial offer of ACAM support. It lists the total number of locations in the Census Blocks for which the company will receive ACAM support. It then divides these locations between: (a) the specific numbers of fully funded locations to which the company will be required to provide 25/3 broadband service or 10/1 broadband service by the end of the 10-year period (subject to interim completion standards); and (b) the specific numbers of capped locations to which the company must provide 4/1 broadband service or broadband service upon reasonable request.
Report 7.3 lists: (a) the “holding companies” that are eligible to elect the ACAM Model; and (b) the “holding companies that are not eligible either because they provide 10/1 broadband service to 90% or more of their eligible locations (“No”) or because they are ineligible for some other reason (“NA”).
Report 7.4 lists all RLEC study areas by state, and shows what “holding company” includes them.
The Wireline Bureau makes it very clear that the November 1 “final election letter” is likely to be irrevocable, and should be considered as such by the electing RLECs. When the elections are complete as of the close of business on November 1, the Wireline Bureau will determine whether the total ACAM support and transition payments (for “glide path” participants) for those electing the Model-Based Path is less than the overall $1.5 billion 10-year ACAM budget set by the Commission. If “yes,” the elections will be irrevocable and the Wireline Bureau will move to implement the Model-Based Path, probably as of January 1, 2017 or as soon as possible thereafter. If “no,” the Wireline Bureau and Commission will consider various measures to remain within a budget, including: (a) allocating an additional $50 million annually to ACAM support; (b) reducing further the number of “holding companies” eligible to elect the ACAM (e.g., by reducing the 90% 10/1 implementation threshold to a lower percentage); or (3) reducing the initial $200 per location funding cap to a lower amount and reducing the offered support amounts and associated build-out obligations. Only in the third instance will companies that submitted the November 1, 2016 letter be allowed to change their election.
The Wireline Bureau reminded carriers electing ACAM support that they must exit the NECA common line pool before they can receive Model-Based support.
The ACAM model is believed by many observers to be inaccurate, and appears to create significant numbers of “winners” and “losers” without any perceptible rhyme or reason. Nonetheless, the FCC’s implementation of it is very likely to be upheld in any judicial appeal because it is “voluntary” and no RLEC is required to elect it. The FCC has already tinkered with the “voluntary” nature of the Model Path somewhat by precluding some RLECs from electing it because they already provide 10/1 broadband service to 90% or more of their eligible locations or because their study areas are served by unsubsidized competitors. As noted above, if the ACAM is “over-subscribed” as of the November 1 filings, one of the FCC’s potential responses is to reduce further the number of carriers that may elect ACAM support.
While the Rural Associations were discussing the High Cost Fund changes with the FCC, one of their primary requests and goals was that the Model-Based Path and Rate-of-Return Path be completed prior to initial implementation, so that RLECs would be able to make fully informed elections. The FCC did not do this completely. Whereas many features of the Rate-of-Return Path have been specified in Rules, others remain uncertain. A prime example is that the Census Blocks in which Rate-of-Return Path carriers will not receive high-cost support due to the presence of “qualifying unsubsidized competitors” are unlikely to be determined by November 1.
For those considering election of ACAM support, the primary attraction is a specific and certain amount of support for the next ten years. Whereas future FCCs could change the rules of the game, including ACAM support amounts, the contractual arguments on appeal would be strong.
The predominant consideration at present would appear to be whether the ACAM support offered will be sufficient to meet the associated 10/1 and 25/3 build-out requirements. For some RLECs, even if the offered ACAM support is greater than their existing HCLS and ICLS, the ACAM amount may not be sufficient to extend the required 25/3 and 10/1 services into their unserved and underserved areas. Moreover, with the FCC requiring price cap carriers and RLECs to deploy broadband throughout the nation during significantly overlapping periods, there are likely to be significant shortages and price increases for fiber optic cable and qualified construction contractors. Whereas this issue has been brought to its attention, the FCC does not appear inclined to address the problem until it occurs or to indicate what it might do in that event. The bottom line here is that RLECs considering election of ACAM support need to consider not only the amount of ACAM offered but also the nature and cost of the associated build-out obligations.
Another significant question is the likely change in broadband capacity needs during the 10-year life of the ACAM. The FCC’s ACAM offers, and associated 25/3 and 10/1 build-out obligations, are primarily a budgetary determination. At this time, it is not clear whether 25/3 and 10/1 broadband service will remain viable speeds during the 2017-2026 period. To some extent, this may not matter: once a fiber network has reached the home or curb, it may be able to be upgraded to higher and higher speeds without substantial additional construction or cost. However, to the extent that a RLEC cannot readily upgrade its network beyond 25/3 or 10/1 levels, it may not be advantageous for it to be locked into ACAM support and service levels if consumer demands for broadband speeds increase significantly during the decade.
Finally, it is not clear what will happen to RLECs electing ACAM support after the 10-year period ends. Whereas the FCC is scheduled to initiate a proceeding in Year 8 to determine what will follow, past experience with the FCC indicates that 10 years can morph into 13 years, or 15 years or more. Some industry observers believe that the FCC will eventually require all RLECs to go onto ACAM. However, this will be resisted by all those that believe that ACAM is inaccurate. The one thing that is relatively certain is that the FCC is unlikely to allow those electing ACAM support in 2016 to go back onto Rate-of-Return regulation and support in the future.
SEPTEMBER 1: FCC FORM 477, LOCAL COMPETITION AND BROADBAND REPORTING FORM. Three types of entities must file this form. (1) Facilities-based Providers of Broadband Connections to End User Locations: Entities that are facilities-based providers of broadband connections — which are wired “lines” or wireless “channels” that enable the end user to receive information from and/or send information to the Internet at information transfer rates exceeding 200 kbps in at least one direction — must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which the entity provides one or more such connections to end user locations. For the purposes of Form 477, an entity is a “facilities-based” provider of broadband connections to end user locations if it owns the portion of the physical facility that terminates at the end user location, if it obtains unbundled network elements (UNEs), special access lines, or other leased facilities that terminate at the end user location and provisions/equips them as broadband, or if it provisions/equips a broadband wireless channel to the end user location over licensed or unlicensed spectrum. Such entities include incumbent and competitive local exchange carriers (LECs), cable system operators, fixed wireless service providers (including “wireless ISPs”), terrestrial and satellite mobile wireless service providers, MMDS providers, electric utilities, municipalities, and other entities. (Such entities do not include equipment suppliers unless the equipment supplier uses the equipment to provision a broadband connection that it offers to the public for sale. Such entities also do not include providers of fixed wireless services ( e.g., “Wi-Fi” and other wireless ethernet, or wireless local area network, applications) that only enable local distribution and sharing of a premises broadband facility.) (2) Providers of Wired or Fixed Wireless Local Telephone Services: Incumbent and competitive LECs must complete and file the applicable portions of the form for each state in which they provide local exchange service to one or more end user customers (which may include “dial-up” ISPs). (3) Providers of Interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) Service: Interconnected VoIP service is a service that enables real-time, two-way voice communications; requires a broadband connection from the user’s location; requires Internet-protocol compatible customer premises equipment; and permits users generally to receive calls that originate on the public switched telephone network and to terminate calls to the public switched telephone network. Interconnected VoIP providers must complete and file the applicable portions of the form for each state in which they provide interconnected VoIP service to one or more subscribers, with the state determined for reporting purposes by the location of the subscriber’s broadband connection or the subscriber’s “Registered Location” as of the data-collection date. “Registered Location” is the most recent information obtained by an interconnected VoIP service provider that identifies the physical location of an end user. (4) Providers of Mobile Telephony Services: Facilities-based providers of mobile telephony services must complete and file the applicable portions of this form for each state in which they serve one or more mobile telephony subscribers. A mobile telephony service is a real-time, two-way switched voice service that is interconnected with the public switched network using an in-network switching facility that enables the provider to reuse frequencies and accomplish seamless handoff of subscriber calls. A mobile telephony service provider is considered “facilities-based” if it serves a subscriber using spectrum for which the entity holds a license that it manages, or for which it has obtained the right to use via lease or other arrangement with a Band Manager.
SEPTEMBER 30: FCC FORM 396-C, MVPD EEO PROGRAM REPORTING FORM. Each year on September 30, multi-channel video program distributors (“MVPDs”) must file with the FCC an FCC Form 396-C, Multi-Channel Video Programming Distributor EEO Program Annual Report, for employment units with six or more full-time employees. Users must access the FCC’s electronic filing system via the Internet in order to submit the form; it will not be accepted if filed on paper unless accompanied by an appropriate request for waiver of the electronic filing requirement. Certain MVPDs also will be required to complete portions of the Supplemental Investigation Sheet (“SIS”) located at the end of the Form. These MVPDs are specifically identified in a Public Notice each year by the FCC.
|This newsletter is not intended to provide legal advice. Those interested in more information should contact the firm. For additional information, please contact Hal Mordkofsky at 202-828-5520 or email@example.com .|
|Friends & Colleagues|
Wireless Network Planners
|LETTERS TO THE EDITOR|
Hi Brad, Randall
We will be shutting down our paging network in the coming weeks. If any of your readers are interested in purchasing any equipment they can contact me by e-mail @ firstname.lastname@example.org
I have the following for sale.
|UNTIL NEXT WEEK|
|THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK|
“The foundation stones for a balanced success are honesty, character, integrity, faith, love and loyalty.”
— Zig Ziglar
|PHOTO OF THE WEEK|
|Source:||The Atlantic||Noah Berger / AP|
|Home Page||Directory||Consulting||Newsletters||Free Subscription||Products||Reference||Glossary||Send e-mail|