Satellite broadband providers said in joint comments filed in docket...

EchoStar, and EchoStar subsidiary Hughes. The FCC recently asked for comment on separate proposals from the state members of the Federal-State Universal Service Joint Board, ILECs and rural LECs. The ILEC plan is known as the America’s Broadband Connectivity (ABC) plan. Each of the proposals places “the interests of incumbent wireline carriers above those of consumers and the objectives of universal service,” said the satellite broadband companies. “Tellingly,” the proposals don’t make a case that wireline carriers “are in the best position to extend high quality-broadband service to unserved consumers quickly and at a minimal cost,” they said. The proposal “virtually guarantees funding to incumbents” even where another technology could offer a better solution and run “contrary to the principles of competitive and technological neutrality,” said the satellite companies. Subsidizing wireline incumbents gives them an insurmountable price advantage, effectively deterring competitors from entering subsidized markets, said the satellite companies. The proposals also wouldn’t require incumbents to meet evolving broadband speed requirements, thus perpetuating the rural/urban digital divide and entrenching the “already outdated DSL technology that cannot be upgraded easily,” said the satellite providers. If the FCC decides to preclude non-wireline providers from competing, it should do so only for fiber services and only when such services can be “deployed more cost-effectively than other services,” said the satellite companies. Meanwhile, some state and wireless comments were dismissive of the future role of satellite broadband. Any funding for satellite broadband shouldn’t be part of a mobility fund, as proposed in the ILECs plan, said the Rural Telecommunications Group (http://xrl.us/bmbhvk). “Although it is unlikely that satellite service will be able to deliver speeds that are close to the broadband threshold proposed by the ABC Plan, any support for satellite providers should not come out of a funding mechanism that is designated for mobile broadband,” RTG said. “Satellite carriers provide a fixed Internet access service, and should not receive support from a fund purposed for ensuring that consumers enjoy the benefits of mobility.” Satellite will most likely be used where it’s too expensive for ILECs to build out, and the funds should therefore come from funding reserved for incumbent carriers, RTG said. Satellite broadband wouldn’t fit the needs of Vermont and Maine, said the Maine Public Utilities Commission and Vermont Department of Public Service in a joint filing (http://xrl.us/bmbhvz). “The ABC Plan relies upon satellite service to meet the goal of universal broadband, notwithstanding technical, geographic, and capacity limitations that indicate that satellite may not reliably meet the 4/768 threshold in the ABC Plan, nor be comparable to the much higher speeds available in urban and suburban areas,” the states said. “Satellite service is not suited for interactive voice communications, and does not meet the comparability test in the context of a plan that replaces support for rural telephone service with support for satellite service.” Satellite service can be hurt by “atmospheric conditions,” capacity constraints, and topography, said the states.