Tag Archives: conduit

Caltrans backs off requiring extra conduit in highway projects, but broadband cooperation door still open

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Caltrans updated its “user guide” for installing broadband infrastructure into highway projects. The big change is the elimination of a shadow conduit requirement – telecoms companies that take advantage of opportunities to install facilities in highway projects are no longer obligated to install extra conduit and fiber for Caltrans, at their own expense.

On the whole, it’s not a killer change. The more independent broadband infrastructure in the ground – Caltrans is nothing if not independent – the better. But Caltrans still has the option to pay for any conduit and fiber it might want to add. Since it doesn’t typically make its telecoms facilities available to private companies, the impact on competition is nil. Except where municipal broadband is concerned. Caltrans will cooperate with local agencies, in its own way, and in theory the less inventory it has, the less there is that might be shared. As a practical matter, though, the impact isn’t significant.

The important thing this is that independent Internet service providers and local agencies still have a clearly defined onramp to Caltrans projects. It takes some initiative, though. Caltrans publishes an interactive map showing where it’s planning to do some work – there’s a link to the current version on Caltrans’ wired broadband page – but it’s up to ISPs and agencies to keep track of what’s going on in their areas. Once a likely project is identified, Caltrans says that “companies or organisations working on broadband deployment may collaborate with Caltrans to install a broadband conduit as part of a project”. The next step is to email the Caltrans single point of contact for the district that’s involved. A link to the current list of those contacts is also on the wired broadband page.

This is all the result of assembly bill 1549, passed in 2016. It didn’t put Caltrans in the broadband business as we originally hoped, but it did open a plainly marked door for cooperation. It’s up to ISPs and local agencies to walk through it.

I served on Caltrans’ conduit task force and I’ve advocated for and helped to draft AB 1549. I’m involved and proud of it. Take it for what it’s worth.

Actually, there is broadband money in the big federal budget bill

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Update: Trump signed it. Done deal.

Update: the U.S. senate approved the bill this morning, now it’s up to president Donald Trump to sign or veto it.

An extra $600 million was added to federal broadband subsidies for rural areas, in the mammoth, all-in-one spending bill passed by the house of representatives yesterday, and up for a vote in the U.S. senate today. I missed it Wednesday night as I was skimming through its two thousand-plus pages, but the sharp eyed journos at Politico’s Morning Tech newsletter caught it.

The money is tagged for “a new broadband loan and grant pilot program” run by the federal agriculture department’s Rural Utilities Service (RUS). It doesn’t define what exactly the program is supposed to be piloting, though. Aside from language barring overlapping loans or grants, the only direct instructions in the bill set out specs for determining whether or not a rural community is eligible…

At least 90 percent of the households to be served by a project receiving a loan or grant under the pilot program shall be in a rural area without sufficient access to broadband, defined for this pilot program as 10 Mbps downstream, and 1 Mbps upstream, which shall be re-evaluated and redetermined, as necessary, on an annual basis by the Secretary of Agriculture.

RUS already uses a 10 Mbps down/1 Mbps up eligibility criterion for its other rural broadband programs, but any infrastructure it subsidises has to be capable of supporting service at the Federal Communications Commission’s advanced services standard of 25 Mbps down/3 Mbps up.

That’s significantly better than the slow, 1990s DSL speed levels demanded by telco and cable lobbyists and approved by California’s lawmakers last year. Assembly bill 1665 lowered California’s minimum acceptable broadband speed to 6 Mbps down/1 Mbps up, and allowed California Advanced Services Fund subsidies to be spent on infrastructure as slow as 10 Mbps down/1 Mbps up.

Questions still to be answered about the new federal program include what sort of broadband service providers are eligible – RUS rules and traditions favor the small rural cooperatives and telephone companies prevalent in the midwest and south, but not so common in California – and how the money will be split between grants and loans.

Dig once, broadband spectrum added to federal budget bill

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Broadband is getting a boost in the mammoth spending bill under consideration today in the U.S. house of representatives. But not cash.

Instead, the deal negotiated by republican and democratic congressional leaders rolls in a telecoms bill unanimously approved earlier this month by the house of representatives. It includes some useful, if mild, dig once requirements for federally funded highway projects – state transportation agencies will have to share construction plans, but not necessarily trenches, with Internet service providers and local agencies – and it frees up 255 MHz of spectrum for broadband use.

The bill – formerly house resolution 4986, now called the Ray Baum act – also consolidates several broadband-related reports that the Federal Communications Commission is supposed to periodically issue into one “communications marketplace report”. That’s not a popular idea among consumer advocacy organisations. In a blog post, Phillip Berenroick with D.C.-based Public Knowledge argues that…

By substituting a one-stop-shop report covering the entire communications ecosystem in place of the current reporting regime that takes a detailed, focused look at competition among individual services, the FCC will ultimately receive less accurate, granular, and relevant data across all of the services included in the Communications Market Report. As a result, both policymakers and the public will have less detailed information to understand each individual market.

That’s not necessarily true. The FCC isn’t required to diminish the quality of its work, although it’s not crazy to think it might. I have some misgivings about that provision too, but I also think it’s long past time to start dismantling the artificial regulatory distinctions between broadband companies, based on their corporate ancestry. AT&T and Comcast, for example, offer the same kinds of services in the same markets. There’s no reason for them to have to play by two different sets of rules. In that regard, consolidated market evaluations are a step in the right direction.

The bill has to be approved by both houses of congress before Saturday, otherwise the federal government grinds to a half. Again.

Text of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018, 21 March 2018

Unanimous dig once vote puts broadband conduit in federal highway plans

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Broadband infrastructure, and service providers, will have to be included in planning done for federally funded highway projects if, as expected, the U.S. senate goes along with a bill – house resolution 4986, aka the Ray Baum act – passed by the house of representatives last week. State transportation departments wouldn’t be required to include conduit and other telecoms facilities in projects, but they would have to share their construction plans with broadband companies and other state and local agencies, and do a minimal amount of coordination. The goal is “to facilitate the installation of broadband infrastructure” and “minimise repeated excavations” in roadways.

It’s a weak dig once program, but it’s a step in the right direction. It won’t have much impact in California because pretty much all of what’s required in the federal bill is already done here. Caltrans has a broadband notification and coordination program in place, the result of assembly bill 1549, which passed two years ago. At most, the program might need some minor tweaks if the federal bill passes.

HR 4986 covers a wide array of other broadband issues. It funds the Federal Communication Commission’s budget for the next two years and fiddles around with some job descriptions, programs and tasks. It also bundles in some of the Mobile Now act which, besides the dig once requirements, includes a plan to free up 255 megahertz of spectrum for broadband service – on both a licensed and unlicensed basis – and points the FCC toward allocating even more spectrum in the 3 GHz to 4 GHz and millimeter wave ranges for broadband uses.

Odds are HR 4986 will be approved by the senate. Broadband development is one of the few issues that republicans and democrats can agree on. The house vote to approve it was unanimous. It might be bundled into a massive federal budget bill that’s expected – or at least hoped for – later this month.

Caltrans opens the road for broadband projects

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

California highway projects are now broadband projects too. Or can be. Caltrans wrapped up development of standard rules and procedures for adding third party conduit to highway construction projects, and published a guide for “Wired Broadband Stakeholders”. It covers “partnering”, which is adding a separate, third party trench to a road project, and “co-location”, which involves Caltrans and a third party both installing conduit in a Caltrans trench.

There are limits on who can participate. Local government are eligible. So are non-profits, cable companies and certified telephone companies. The policy doesn’t exactly rule out small Internet service providers that haven’t gone to the trouble of getting a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the California Public Utilities Commission, but those that haven’t will have an uphill battle that they may not win.

Anyone adding a trench or conduit to a Caltrans project will have to bear the full cost, including design and construction, encroachment permits (which are required) and reimbursement of any extra state money spent by Caltrans as a result.

What Caltrans isn’t doing is getting into the broadband infrastructure business itself, unless a local agency is involved…

Caltrans will not share Caltrans-owned conduit, duct, or fiber optic cable strands with broadband providers. Caltrans may choose to share conduit or fibers with local government agencies for exchanging transportation data and services as part of a regional communications network infrastructure.

Broadband projects will be managed at a district level – Caltrans has 12 districts that cover the state – with a designated, single point of contact to respond to enquiries. A list of eligible projects has been posted, and will be periodically updated.

Caltrans was spurred into action by assembly bill 1549, which was passed in 2016, and by subsequent follow up negotiations last year. The final document is the result of a series of meetings with representatives from broadband companies and regional broadband consortia, including myself.

Downloads

Caltrans Wired Broadband Facility User Guide, 1 January 2018

Caltrans template broadband construction contract, 1 January 2018

Caltrans template broadband design contract, 1 January 2018

Links

General Caltrans information for wired broadband projects.

Includes links to a map of Caltrans highway projects and district contacts.

I served on Caltrans’ conduit task force and I’ve advocated for and helped to draft AB 1549. I’m involved and proud of it. Take it for what it’s worth.

Caltrans agrees to add conduit to highway projects

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Slow is a lot better than Stop.

More broadband conduit might be going into California highway projects over the next few years. A deal was struck between a north coast assemblyman – Jim Wood (D – Healdsburg) – and Caltrans: Wood drops his current effort to write conduit obligations into law, and Caltrans promises to rewrite its policies to be more accomodating to broadband infrastructure. According to a press release from Wood’s office…

“Caltrans has been a willing participant in discussions during the past two years as we have tried to move the needle on expanding Californian’s access to broadband,” said Wood. “Adopting a ‘dig once’ policy for these priority areas is an important advancement and we could not have done it without recognition by Caltrans that they play a meaningful role in facilitating expanded access to broadband.”

“In addition to improving mobility, we realize many benefits to communities and businesses can be realized through collaboration,” said Caltrans Director Malcolm Dougherty. “While performing our primary duty of maintaining California’s transportation infrastructure, it makes sense to achieve economies of scale where we can in order to maximize the benefits to Californians.”

By Caltrans installing conduit during planned road work, the cost of installing cable at a future date can be mitigated – often reducing costs to pennies on the dollar because trenches would only be opened once, rather than multiple times…

Last year, progress was made when AB 1549 established the “Broadband Task Force,” a process by which Caltrans brings together stakeholders to identify opportunities where companies can collaborate to install broadband conduit as part of future Caltrans projects. The first and very productive meeting was held with more than a dozen stakeholders earlier this month and regularly scheduled meetings will continue.

I participated in that meeting with Caltrans a couple of weeks ago. There was a genuine desire to cooperate with broadband infrastructure development efforts. But it’s a big organisation that moves slowly and doesn’t always implement policy on a statewide basis – Caltrans’ regional districts have a lot of autonomy.

This agreement is progress. If it means that Caltrans is moving – in its slow but inexorable way – toward being a broadband development player, it’s a win for everyone.

Monterey Bay broadband expert group offers conduit design advice

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

It’s one thing to say that empty telecoms conduit – shadow conduit – should be installed anytime a street is repaved or a utility trench is dug, but that begs a question: what kind of conduit, and how should it be designed?

To answer that question, the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership and the Central Coast Broadband Consortium convened a technical expert group that included senior public works engineers, Internet service providers, underground construction contractors and manufacturers. An intense discussion at an afternoon meeting at U.C. Santa Cruz produced a draft set of shadow conduit specifications and guidance, which then circulated through several rounds of revisions.

Consensus was reached on a number of key items, including appropriate conduit size…

  1. 2-inch conduit is sufficient for multiple high capacity fiber cables using current technology (432 strands or more), and can be subdivided using inner-duct that would allow multiple service providers to share a single conduit.
  2. 4-inch conduit has even more capacity but, due to its larger size, can present design problems, for example when connecting to vaults. This size of conduit was standard when telecommunications systems depended on thick bundles of copper cables, but is not necessary for most modern fiber applications. However, 4-inch conduit should be considered for installation on bridges, railroad crossings and in other circumstances where future changes would be particularly difficult or impossible.
  3. Smaller conduit, e.g. 1.25-inch, is useful when it is not possible to install 2-inch conduit or when many, separate conduits are installed. It may be preferred when conduits are expected to be used by a single service provider, rather than shared among many over time, or when it meets the needs of an anticipated project or service provider.

Other specs included vault and hand hole placement, conduit system design considerations and preferred installation locations.

The document is intended to guide shadow conduit design decisions, not dictate them. It represents the broad consensus of the expert group members, but actual designs will ultimately depend on the specific circumstances of any given project or jurisdiction.

The next subject that the MBEP/CCBC expert group plans to tackle is microtrenching. It’s a fiber installation technique that, on the one hand, reduces project costs, but on the other hand can impact street service life and maintenance costs.

MBEP/CCBC Shadow Conduit Specifications version 1.0

Salinas promotes broadband development with new dig once rule

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Underground utility construction and other projects that involve work on city streets in Salinas will include dig once requirements, thanks to an ordinance approved by the Salinas city council. The new rule requires notification of telephone, cable and other telecoms companies whenever such work is done, and gives them an opportunity to include their own conduit in the project. Once completed, there will be a five year moratorium on any excavations in that particular location.

The key language reads

All construction, reconstruction, repaving of a City right of way shall include a provision for the installation of a public utility infrastructure, such as conduit, tube, duct, or other device designed for enclosing telecommunications wires, fibers, or cables, wherever practical and feasible…

To the extent feasible, the Director of Public Works or his/her designee shall notify (or require an applicant for such work to notify) all known telecommunications service providers of an impending excavation and afford all such service providers the opportunity to utilize the excavation to install, upgrade, co-locate, repair or improve their telecommunications facilities during such an excavation project. Any such notice shall be provided at least 30 days prior to the commencement of excavation. All service providers utilizing the same excavation shall be responsible for their proportionate share of the excavation costs, including but not limited to the costs of permitting. Such excavation shall not take place more than once on a particular City street within a 5-year period.

The ordinance reinforces the City of Salinas’ current practice of installing city-owned telecoms conduit in public works projects. In the relatively short time this shadow conduit policy has been in place, the city has built up an inventory of three miles of conduit that’s available to support broadband projects, and has plans to build 20 miles more in the next few years. And that’s not including new development that’s also on the books.

City of Salina resolution, communications infrastructure in underground projects
Staff report

CPUC takes on “last remaining natural monopoly” of pole, conduit ownership

FacebookTwitterGoogle+PinterestLinkedInRedditEmail

Energy.

The California Public Utilities Commission will focus on a particular kind of utility in the coming year. President Michael Picker delivered what amounts to a state-of-the-CPUC address at yesterday’s meeting, the first of the year and the first with the two newest commissioners – Martha Guzman Aceves and Clifford Rechtschaffen – on board and voting.

Picker spoke at length about new energy and environmental initiatives and, particularly, about “an emerging role in building the infrastructure to drive greenhouse gas emissions down in the California economy”. That’s clearly his passion, and introductory comments by Rechtschaffen and Guzman Aceves indicate they share it.

Still, Picker is promising something very important for broadband development in the year ahead: taking an inventory of the state’s stock of utility poles and conduit, and looking at expanding the CPUC’s role in regulating this “natural monopoly”…

For both electricity and communications, we may find that the wooden pole or the underground conduit is the last remaining natural monopoly in many parts of the state. And that’s what we do. We regulate monopolies, we insure fair rates, safe infrastructure and universal access to service.

This year we will consider a statewide census of the poles and underground conduits, and what kind of database we need in order to consider how to provide oversight to this natural monopoly…That’s a big challenge. It may be the key to true, universal access to broadband.

Picker also discussed organisational changes and, particularly, safety initiatives, including a new top level staffer in charge of safety and the establishment of a safety advocate’s office – a requirement imposed by last year’s legislation. He said the commission will add 300 new employees in the coming year, with the new safety responsibilities and the legislature’s mandate to establish a greater presence elsewhere in California, outside of its San Francisco headquarters, accounting for most of the increase.