Tag Archives: ACAM

Midco Says it Should Keep Unsubsidized Competitor Status

Posted on by
Reply

Last month, I wrote about the allegation that Midco’s ACAM misclassification cost other broadband providers in Minnesota subsidy support in MN. According to Broadband Breakfast, Midco says it should keep unsubsidized competitor status…

Midcontinent Communications says it does in fact provide voice service at some locations challenged by neighboring providers seeking subsidy awards to serve those areas.

Two other Minnesota providers, Arvig and Bevcomm, told the Federal Communications Commission this summer that they lost out on more than $2.8 million in annual support for 3,500 homes and businesses because Midco was incorrectly labeled as providing both broadband and voice service there, making the locations ineligible under program rules.

Seven other providers in the area subsequently told the agency they too should have their awards adjusted upward for the same reason. The trade association for rural ISPs supported them.

But Midco said in a filing, received Friday and posted with redactions Wednesday, that it does actually offer voice service at about 13 percent of the locations cited by Arvig and Bevcomm. It argued against subsidizing fiber overbuilds in its fixed wireless area.

Midco ACAM misclassification costs other ISPs subsidy support in MN

Posted on by
Reply

Broadband Breakfast reports…

Seven more broadband providers are telling regulators they received less subsidy money than they should have because one midwest provider was misclassified.

The Federal Communications Commission’s Enhanced ACAM program subsidizes the construction and maintenance of rural broadband through the agency’s Universal Service Fund, to the tune of $18 billion over the next 15 years. It offered participants less annual support for locations in their service area that are already served by an unsubsidized competitor.

The companies say fixed wireless provider Midcontinent Communications, or Midco, was classified as an “unsubsidized competitor” when it shouldn’t have been. They say they lost out on a total of more than $800,000 in annual support between them for 1,782 locations Midco serves.

In addition to not receiving subsidies, the classification hinges on providing both qualifying broadband and voice services, and the companies say Midco doesn’t provide voice service at some locations in their service areas.

“[A] sampling of quick address searches on Midco’s website confirms that Midco only offers broadband at such locations; no voice service is available,” the companies wrote. They submitted separate letters but used largely the same construction.

The companies asking for the reclassification include Wiktel, Manchester-Hartland, KMTelecom, Venture, HTC, Albany Fiber, and Alliance Communications. They operate in Minnesota and the Dakotas. …

The FCC can adjust the Enhanced ACAM awards until the end of 2025. Data on voice service was only available on a state level when the program was stood up in 2023, and the agency dealt with this by assuming providers that offered voice service in a state offered it everywhere in that state.

It’s not the first time the FCC has heard about misclassifying Midco. Two other Minnesota providers, Arvig and Bevcomm, asked the agency to reclassify the company in July, saying they lost out on more than $2.8 million annually.

Will providers in MN take E-ACAM funding, which requires 100/20 Mbps expansion?

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor does a nice job outlining a funding challenge that some providers are having right now…

Small rural carriers have a big decision to make by Sept. 29, now that the FCC has released new broadband funding offers. The new offers are based on a higher broadband speed, as mandated in the enhanced Alternative Connect America Model (E-ACAM) order adopted earlier this summer.

Carriers must advise the FCC by the September deadline, on a state-by-state basis, whether they want to participate in the E-ACAM program and accept the new offers.

The initial program, established several years ago, covers some of the costs of deploying broadband to unserved areas based on a cost model. Traditionally, providers were required to deploy speeds of 25 Mbps downstream and 3 Mbps upstream, and deployment cost estimates were based on deploying that speed.

The FCC E-ACAM program, established earlier this summer, raises the deployment speed required to 100/20 Mbps and gives carriers additional time to deploy service. The offers made this week are based on a new cost model considering the higher deployment speed requirement.

The new offers were made to small rural carriers that serve high-cost areas and receive support through the Universal Service high-cost program. This group includes those carriers that participate in the existing ACAM program, as well as those that receive funding based on embedded costs.

They have posted the offers made are on an FCC spreadsheet.

Here are the offers made in Minnesota…

State Holding company Current funding Total locations
MN Ace Telephone Association BLS              12,401
MN Albany Mutual Telephone Association ACAM                3,918
MN Alliance Communications Cooperative, Inc. ACAM                   722
MN Arvig Enterprises, Inc. ACAM              81,179
MN Benton Cooperative Telephone Company ACAM                5,837
MN Rural Communications Holding Corporation ACAM              23,388
MN Christensen Communications Company ACAM                1,700
MN City of Barnesville Municipal Telephone BLS                1,189
MN Consolidated Telephone Company BLS              13,684
MN Emily Cooperative Telephone Company BLS                2,559
MN Farmers Mutual Telephone Company (MN) ACAM                1,418
MN Garden Valley Telephone Company ACAM              18,021
MN Gardonville Cooperative Telephone Association ACAM                3,784
MN Halstad Telephone Company ACAM                1,635
MN Harmony Telephone Company ACAM                1,124
MN Interstate Telecommunications Cooperative, Inc. ACAM                1,816
MN Johnson Telephone Company ACAM                3,267
MN Kasson & Mantorville Telephone Company ACAM                5,349
MN Larson Utilities, Inc. ACAM                2,377
MN Lismore Cooperative Telephone Company ACAM                   487
MN Mabel Cooperative Telephone Company ACAM                   894
MN Manchester-Hartland Telephone Company BLS                   640
MN Nuvera Communications, Inc. ACAM              28,353
MN Nuvera Communications, Inc. BLS              23,499
MN Northern Telephone Company/Wilderness Valley Telephone Company ACAM                   177
MN KCL Enterprises, Inc. ACAM                   311
MN Park Region Mutual Telephone Company ACAM                7,434
MN Paul Bunyan Rural Telephone Cooperative ACAM              15,787
MN Polar Communication Mutual Aid Corporation ACAM                   239
MN Runestone Telephone Association ACAM                5,946
MN Spring Grove Communications ACAM                1,365
MN Telephone & Data Systems, incl. UScellular ACAM              40,810
MN Upsala Cooperative Telephone Association ACAM                1,217
MN West Central Telephone Assn. ACAM                5,532
MN Wikstrom Telephone Company, Inc. ACAM                9,671
MN Winnebago Cooperative Telecom Association ACAM                   848
MN Woodstock Telephone Company ACAM                1,822
MN Hanson Communications, Inc. ACAM                6,666
MN Tri-Co Technologies, LLC BLS                3,460
MN Federated Telephone Cooperative ACAM                3,478

The spreadsheet provides more info – but I know it would get lost in formatting on the blog. But for more info, check out the original versions.

TDS looking at broadband funding from ACAM over BEAD

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

At a time when some service providers are revving up to get funding in the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) rural broadband funding program, TDS Telecom President and CEO Jim Butman had a surprising take on it.

The company already has upgraded a large part of its traditional local service territory to fiber broadband but has about 500,000 locations that are served by DSL, including about 200,000 or fewer that do not have service at speeds of 25 Mbps available to them. Those locations would be considered unserved and eligible for BEAD funding.

But Butman is more excited about the possibility of getting funding through an extension to the FCC Universal Service Fund ACAM program to deploy fiber to those locations.

Going for ACAM funds make sense because, they would likely get funding long before BEAD money will hit the streets. Also, there’s the issue of non-competitive areas…

BEAD, he said, “is limited to the non-competitive areas and we just don’t see it.”

And although TDS has been aggressively deploying high-speed broadband outside its home turf, Butman was no more enthusiastic about applying for out-of-region BEAD funding than he was about in-region BEAD.

He did say something that I thought was worth noting for potential community partners…

TDS is quite selective in applying for government funding, however.

The company only applies for funding when it sees an opportunity to generate a minimum internal rate of return, and “if we don’t win, we don’t do it,” Butman said.

 

Arvig to Upgrade parts of Redwood, Otter Tail and Becker Counties (MN)

Posted on by
Reply

The Grand Forks Herald reports…

Arvig says it will invest $19.9 million in construction projects to improve internet access and upgrade networks in seven rural Minnesota areas in 2022.

The company is entering the sixth year of a 10-year commitment to use its share of funding from the FCC’s Alternative Connect America Cost Model (ACAM) to build and improve internet networks in rural areas. This year, crews will service the rural areas of Audubon, Morgan, Parkers Prairie, Perham, Red Del, Vesta and Walnut Grove.

When construction is complete later this fall, residents in the affected areas will have access to internet speeds up to 1 gigabit per second, as well as television and phone service.