[RTC List] Resolution T- 17288 Approval of Funding for the Redwood Telephone LLC Northern California Open Community Fiber Network Project, from the California Advanced Services Fund, Amounting to $2, 169, 815.
Scott Joachim
scott.joachim at gmail.com
Tue Sep 7 19:53:13 PDT 2010
Hi Folks,
I've received a number of emails asking about the status of the Northern
California Open Community Fiber Network middle mile project. Most recently
the CPUC approved Resolution T-17288 Approval of Funding for the Redwood
Telephone LLC Northern California Open Community Fiber Network Project, from
the California Advanced Services Fund, Amounting to $2,169,815.
A special thanks to all of the tribal partners, Humboldt and Del Norte
Counties, and all the organizations in the community that have gotten us
this far. We expect to hear from the Federal Government by the end of
September regarding the ARRA award. This project has been well received
inside the NTIA throughout the due diligence process. It is our deepest
hope they find us meritorious for award.
Financial Partner Tribes
5
Total Partner Tribes
9
Proposed Tribes to be Served
11
Total Project Cost
$21,698,080
Total Requested Assistance
$17,358,464
For more detailed information or questions about the project, please contact
the project manager Scott Joachim at scott.joachim at gmail.com or
it_director at bearrivertribe.com (cc:d).
Warmest regards,
Scott Joachim
Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria
27 Bear River Drive
Loleta, CA 95551
(707) 733-1976
*PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA*
*Communications Division*
*RESOLUTION T- 17288*
*Carrier Oversight and Programs Branch **
*September 2, 2010*
*R* *E* *S* *O* *L* *U* *T* *I* *O* *N*
*Resolution T- 17288 Approval of Funding for the Redwood Telephone LLC
Northern California Open Community Fiber Network* *Project, from the
California Advanced Services Fund, Amounting to $2,169,815.*
__________________________________________________________________
*Summary*
This Resolution adopts contingent funding for the Redwood Telephone LLC
Northern California Open Community Fiber Network* *(Redwood) project,
amounting to $2,169,815 from the California Advanced Services Fund (CASF).
This amount represents 10% of the project costs to provide broadband service
to unserved and underserved areas in accordance with Commission Resolution
T-17143 and Decision (D.) 09-07-020.*Background*
On December 20, 2007, the Commission approved D.07-12-054 which
established the two-year CASF program to provide matching funds of up to 40%
of the total project costs for the deployment of broadband infrastructure in
unserved and underserved areas in
California.1<http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_RESOLUTION/123081.htm#P38_1232>
Resolution
T-17143, approved on June 12, 2008, adopted application requirements,
scoring criteria for the award of funds, and a prescribed timeline for other
filings and notifications including a projected Commission Meeting date for
final approval of award(s).
D.07-12-054 limited the extension of CASF funding to:
· Entities with a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN)
that qualify as "telephone corporations" as defined in § 234 of the Public
Utilities Code (PU Code);
· Wireless carriers registered with the Commission that have been granted
a Wireless Identification Number (WIR);
· Entities who have pending applications for a CPCN; and
· A consortium with a member holding a CPCN or a WIR who will serve as
the fiscal agent of the consortium (D.07-12-054 at pgs. 33-35, mimeo).
On July 9, 2009, the Commission issued D.09-07-020 establishing new
schedules and plans for the filing, review and approval of an additional
round of broadband project requests. This decision also provides the
potential for the applicants to seek CASF program funding while pursuing
funding for broadband deployment grants issued under the Recovery
Act.2<http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_RESOLUTION/123081.htm#P47_2506>
Also,
because federal grants under Recovery Act can fund up to 80% of the project
cost, D.09-07-020 allowed applicants to seek an additional 10% funding
coverage from the CASF, leaving only 10% of the project cost for the
applicant to provide.
On July 29, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill (AB) 1555
(Chapter 24, Statutes of 2009), amending Section 281 of the PU Code to
expand CASF eligibility to any entity applying for CASF funding in
conjunction with their Recovery Act funding request, provided that entity
satisfies the eligibility requirement for CASF funding. AB 1555 also
provides that the Commission establish requirements and guidelines for
non-certificated applicants.
On October 29, 2009, the Commission approved Resolution T-17233
establishing application requirements and guidelines for non-CPUC
certificated applicants and broadband providers applying for CASF grant
money, in conjunction with an application for Recovery Act funding, to
develop and deploy broadband infrastructure.
*Notice/Protests*
The Census Block Group (CBG) list for the Redwood project appeared by
county on the Commission's CASF website page under "UNDERSERVED areas
proposed to be served as of April 1, 2010: Census Block Groups (CBGs*)*."
The Communications Division (CD) proceeded to review and analyze these
project areas to verify that they were not served as of the applicants'
filing date.
*Discussion*
This Resolution adopts funding of $2,169,815 contingent on receipt of a
Recovery Act award amounting to 80% of the total project cost for the
Redwood project in Humboldt County. Key project information is on pages A-1
to A-4 of Appendix A. A Shapefile of Redwood's proposed project can be found
on page A-5 of Appendix A.
On April 1, 2009, Redwood submitted its original application with a
project cost estimate of $21,698,146 of which 10% or $2,169,815 is being
requested from CASF as a match to a Round 2 Recovery Act fund request.
The proposed project provides middle mile and last mile facilities along
the upper Northern California coastline from Brookings, Oregon border in the
north to Benbow, California in the South. An additional segment will run
east from Blue Lake to Willow Creek and north to unserved areas including
Hoopa, Weitchpec, Orleans, and Somes Bar. The proposed project includes 11
Tribal Lands, 2 Counties, 8 incorporated and over 50 unincorporated cities.
The project will pass 53,075 households and 9,891 businesses including local
governmental agencies, health care providers, schools, and public safety
organizations. These remote areas suffer from rough terrain and inclement
weather. Many residents only have dialup available or are completely
unserved.
The proposed project would provide up to 1 Gbps secure private transport,
carrier-based Ethernet, and wholesale high-speed broadband internet access
to its subscribers. There are 163 interconnection points to facilitate
broadband adoption and demand aggregation including 28 Incumbent Local
Exchange Carrier (ILEC) Central Offices (COs), 73 Tower/Cell Sites, 3
Connections to Service Providers, 41 Last Mile Network Access Points, and a
Collocation Facility to the 23 proposed service areas: Arcata, Blue Lake,
Brookings, Crescent City, Eureka, Fernbridge, Fieldbrook, Fortuna, Hoopa,
Klamath, Korbel, Loleta, Mckinleyville, Orick, Orleans, Redway, Requa, Rio
Dell, Samoa/Manilla, Southern Humboldt, Trinidad, Weitchpec, Westhaven, and
Willow Creek. Distribution will be over a standard Gigbit Passive Optical
Network (GPON) architecture that will allow speeds to any location on the
network up to 2.4 Gbps by multiple fibers for additional throughput.
Subscribers will receive telephone and internet over a single fiber. This
network will use Fiber to the Home (FTTH) technology.
By building a regional middle mile, the Redwood Telephone plan will
interconnect anchor community facilities in served, un-served, under-served,
rural, and non-rural areas while delivering last mile for unserved and
underserved areas. The Redwood project proposes to construct middle mile
facilities connecting 544 community anchor facilities including 135 k-12
schools, 15 libraries, 11 community colleges campuses, 6 other institutions
of higher learning, 76 public safety agencies, 60 medical and health
providers, 32 community support organizations, and 209 other government
facilities.
Redwood will provide last mile service for seven unserved service areas
-- Hoopa, Klamath, Korbel, Orick, Orleans, Requa, and Weitchpec --
representing a population of 3,687 people and 676 businesses across 248
square miles. Underserved broadband services will be enhanced by providing
last mile to six communities -- Fieldbrook, Hoopa, Klamath, Kneeland,
Loleta, Southern Humboldt, and Westhaven -- representing 10,502 people and
3,541 businesses across 193 square miles.
Redwood will also improve communications for public safety by connecting
fire agencies to central communications, state agencies, and to one another.
Humboldt and Del Norte County Buildings will be directly connected on a
backbone infrastructure for public safety and disaster recovery. All of the
regions critical Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP) will be connected on
a high-speed, back-bone infrastructure with the State of California for Next
Generation 911 services, emergency management, public safety dispatch, and
disaster recovery. Secure wireless terminals will be located at 41 locations
across Humboldt and Del Norte County. Also, secure backhaul connections to
73 cell sites are available for emergency services on the proposed fiber
network.
This project will provide broadband to 728 square miles in 119 CBGs at
maximum speeds of 50 mbps download / 25 mbps upload retail, and average
speeds up to 1 Gbps wholesale.
To qualify under the CASF program, an unserved area is defined as an area
that is not served by any form of facilities-based broadband, or where
Internet connectivity is available only through dial-up service or
satellite. An underserved area is defined as an area in which broadband is
available but no facilities-based provider offers service at speeds of at
least 3 mbps download and 1 mbps upload. CD reviewed this project's
eligibility through analysis of the required submitted data. These data
include, but are not limited to: descriptions of current and proposed
broadband infrastructure; Geographic Information System (GIS) formatted
Shapefiles mapping the subject areas; assertion that the area is
underserved; potential subscriber size and household incomes; project
construction schedule; project budget; proposed pricing and commitment
period for new subscribers; and financial qualifications of the applicant.
In addition, CD reviewed the Shapefiles submitted which mapped the broadband
deployment proposed using United States 2000 Census data, the January 2008
California Broadband Task Force (CBTF) Report including its on-line maps,
and the revised August 10, 2009 CBTF maps, among others.
CD received no challenges to the project CBGs. However, upon review, CD
determined that portions of two of the proposed 119 CBGs, specifically the
areas around Loleta and Westhaven overlapped with areas shown as being
served with broadband at speeds greater than 3/1 mbps download/upload on the
CBTF maps. Redwood clarified that the portions on the map of their proposed
area that overlapped with areas shown as served on the CBTF maps were middle
mile. No proposed last mile areas overlap served areas. CD determined that
the CBGs covering the proposed area are qualified as unserved and
underserved as defined in Resolution T-17143. Accordingly, CD recommends
that the Commission approve a CASF funding award for the Redwood project.
This project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). No ground breaking activities may be conducted and the Commission
cannot disburse funding until the Commission has completed CEQA review. If
any special permits are required, Redwood has agreed to notify the
Commission, as appropriate.
Redwood is required to comply with all the guidelines, requirements, and
terms and conditions associated with the granting of CASF funds for
non-licensed broadband providers as specified in the ordering paragraphs of
Res. T-17233, including the requirements to 1) post a performance bond equal
to the total amount payable under this CASF award, or 10% of the project
costs, 2) submit the performance bond within five business days after the
completion of the CEQA review, if required and within five business days
after Commission approval, if CEQA review is not required; 3) submit the
information sheets in Appendices 1 and 2 of Res. T-17233 as part of
Redwood's application; 4) agree in writing to allow the Commission to
inspect the applicant's accounts, books, papers, and documents related to
the application and award of CASF funds; and 5) comply with all the
guidelines, requirements and conditions associated with the granting of CASF
funds as specified in Resolution T-17143, including, but not limited to, the
annual submission of Form 477 to the Federal Communications Commission as
discussed in Res. T-17143.
The receipt of the CASF grant is contingent on Redwood's 1) compliance
with the requirements in Resolution T-17233 and Resolution T-17143; and 2)
receipt of Recovery Act funding on this project. If the applicant is not
successful in its request for the Recovery Act grant or if the Recovery Act
grant is less than 80%, then Redwood may request additional CASF funds in
accordance with Ordering Paragraph No. 7 of D.09-07-020. The granting of
additional funds will be contingent on the availability of CASF funds.
If the applicant is not successful in its request for the Recovery Act
grant and, as a result will not build its project, Redwood should notify the
Director of the Communications Division within thirty (30) days of receiving
notification that their Recovery Act application has been rejected so that
the Commission may be reallocate CASF funds to other grants.
*Payments to CASF Recipients*
Submission of invoices from and payments to Redwood shall be made in
accordance with Section IX of Appendix A of Resolution T-17143 and according
to the guidelines and supporting documentation required in Resolution
T-17143.
Payment to Redwood shall essentially follow the process adopted for funds
created under Public Utilities Code §270. The following table describes the
timeline for processing CASF payments.
*Event*
*Payment Cycle 1*
*(Day/Month)*
*Payment Cycle 2*
*(Day/Month)*
Invoices due from Redwood to CD
5th of Month 1
20th of Month 1
Payment letters from CD to Information and Management Services Division
(IMSD) 3<http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_RESOLUTION/123081.htm#P104_13522>
On 19th of Month 1
On 4th of Month 2
Invoices submitted from IMSD to State Controller's Office (SCO) for payments
20th through 26th of Month 1
5th through 13th of Month 2
Redwood may submit its invoices under Payment Cycle 1 or 2.
If any date in this payment schedule falls on a weekend or holiday, that
date will be advanced to the next business day but the remaining dates in
the payment schedule will remain unchanged. The State Controller's Office
(SCO) requires 14 to 21 days to issue payment from the day that requests are
received by SCO. Approval and disbursement of the first 25% CASF payment is
contingent upon Redwood's (1) compliance with the requirements in
Resolutions T-17233 and T-17143; and (2) receiving Recovery Act funding
approval.
*Comments on Draft Resolution*
In compliance with PU Code § 311(g), a notice letter was emailed on July
13, 2010 informing a) all CASF applicants filing under D.09-07-020, and b)
parties on the service list of R.06-06-028 of the availability of the draft
of this Resolution for public comments at the Commission's website *
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/static/documents/index.htm*. This letter also
informed parties that the final conformed Resolution adopted by the
Commission will be posted and will be available at this same website.
On July 23, 2010, Travis Finch, President and CEO of Velocity
Communications, Inc. (Velocity) sent an email informing staff that Velocity
currently provides fixed wireless broadband service to two of the CBGs
listed as both unserved and underserved, specifically 060230101011
and 060230101012, both located within zip code 95546. Further, Velocity
asserts that current speeds provided in these two CBGs are up to 3 Mbps
download and 1 Mbps upload. Included in the email are coverage maps for both
CBGs and a parcel map showing usable parcels covered.
Velocity did not pose any challenges to the April 1, 2010 proposed
project CBGs posted on the CASF webpage as prescribed under Resolution
T-17143 and D.09-07-020. Although Velocity is not a party to R.06-06-028, CD
accepted their comments and shared them with Redwood on July 23, 2010.
On July 28, 2010, Redwood filed reply comments recommending that
Velocity's objection be dismissed because it is inaccurate, incorrect,
unverifiable, and did not comply with Commission procedures. Redwood argued
that:
· The Chief Financial Officer of the Hoopa Valley Tribe Housing Authority
informed Redwood that 70% of the reservation could not receive a signal from
Velocity, based on interviews of a former installer for Velocity.
· Velocity would not be able to consistently provide service due to
geographical concerns to 13 residents in the area.
· Velocity has inconsistent bandwidth availability and maximum download
and upload speeds of 736 kbps based on tests of 2 business customers and one
residential customer.
On August 05, 2010, Velocity sent staff an email rebutting Redwood's
reply comments. Velocity asserted that Redwood's comments were inaccurate,
as they were based on a former employee who was not familiar with Velocity's
current infrastructure and that he was biased, having been terminated for
impropriety. Velocity further stated that they do in fact have customers in
areas Redwood claims are unserved, and that the speed tests performed by
Redwood were for customers subscribed to speed tiers lower than 3/1.
On August 06, 2010, Redwood provided a more detailed map of their
proposed area in the Hoopa Valley along with additional speed tests from
customers confirmed to be subscribed at the 3/1 Tier from Velocity showing
their actual speed averaged less than half of what was advertised. CD made
Redwood's map available to Velocity and gave them the opportunity to provide
evidence that they do serve customers in Redwood's proposed area by August
11, 2010. Velocity informed CD that due to extenuating circumstances, they
would be unable to reply by the deadline set by CD, and that they would
stand by their original protest.
Based on further review, CD concludes that no change is warranted and
that the two CBGs- 060230101011 and 060230101012, in Redwood's proposed
coverage area are underserved, as indicted in Redwood's reply comments.
Accordingly, the Commission dismisses Velocity's comments and allows the
inclusion of these two CBGs in Redwood's proposed coverage area.
On July 27, 2010, the County of Humboldt and the Redwood Region Economic
Development Commission sent letters to the Commission and the Director of
the Communications Division, respectively, supporting Resolution T-17288.
*Findings*
1. The California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) was adopted in Decision
(D.) 07-12-054.
2. The CASF was established as a two-year program that will provide
matching funds of up to 40% of the total project costs for the deployment of
broadband infrastructure in underserved and underserved areas in California.
3. Resolution T-17143, approved on June 12, 2008, adopts the application
requirements and scoring criteria for the award of funds, a prescribed
timeline for other filings, and notifications including a projected
Commission Meeting date for final approval of award(s). T-17143 directed
interested applicants seeking funding for underserved projects to file their
project proposals and funding requests beginning July 24, 2008.
4. On July 29, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill (AB)
1555 (Chapter 24, Statutes of 2009), amending Section 281 of the PU Code to
expand CASF eligibility to any entity applying for CASF funding in
conjunction with their Recovery Act funding request
5. On July 9, 2009, the Commission issued D.09-07-020 approving a new
CASF schedule and plan for an additional round of broadband projects that
would complement broadband grants awarded under the federal government's
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act). While retaining the
40% matching grant process, the Commission in this Decision authorized
providers an option of seeking a 10% grant from the CASF concurrent with
efforts to seek an 80% grant from the Recovery Act fund.
6. A list of census block groups (CBGs) appeared by county on the
Commission's CASF website page under "UNDERSERVED areas proposed to be
served as of April 1, 2010: Census Block Groups (CBGs)." The Communications
Division (CD) proceeded with its independent review and analysis of this
project area to verify that it was not served as of the applicant's filing
date.
7. An unserved area is defined as an area that is not served by any form
of facilities-based broadband, or where Internet connectivity is available
only through dial-up service or satellite. An underserved area is defined as
an area in which broadband is available but no facilities-based provider
offers service at speeds of at least 3mbps download and 1 mbps upload.
8. Redwood filed its original CASF project application on April 1, 2010,
under D.09-07-020. CD reviewed the Redwood project eligibility through the
analysis of required data submitted. These data include, but are not limited
to: descriptions of current and proposed broadband infrastructure;
geographic information system (GIS) formatted Shapefiles mapping the subject
areas; assertion that the area is unserved and underserved; potential
subscriber size and household incomes; project construction schedule;
project budget; proposed pricing and commitment period for new subscribers;
and financial qualifications of the applicant.
9. Shapefiles, which mapped the broadband deployment, were reviewed by CD
using sources including, but not limited to, the United States 2000 Census
data, the January 2008 California Broadband Task Force (CBTF) Report, and
the revised August 10, 2009 CBTF map, among others. These maps helped to
verify the existence or non-existence of broadband service areas and
broadband speeds, where available.
10. CD verified this project and, when necessary, requested additional
information and/or meetings with the applicant to clarify its project
proposal.
11. None of the 119 CBGs in this proposed project were formally
challenged.
12. CD determined after its review that portions of 2 of the proposed 119
CBGs, specifically the areas around Loleta and Westhaven overlapped with
areas showed as being served with broadband at speeds greater than 3/1 mbps
download/upload on the CBTF maps. Redwood clarified that the portions on the
map of their proposed area that overlapped areas shown as served on the BBTF
were middle mile. No proposed last mile areas overlap served areas.
13. CD determined the Redwood project application for underserved areas
covering 119 CBGs as eligible to receive funding under CASF.
14. The Commission finds CD's recommendation for conditional CASF award
for Redwood's proposed project for unserved and underserved areas as
discussed and summarized in Appendix A, to be reasonable and consistent with
Commission orders and, therefore, adopts such award.
15. The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). No ground breaking activities may be conducted until the Commission
has completed CEQA review. If any special permits are required, Redwood has
agreed to notify the Commission, as appropriate.
16. Pursuant to the ordering paragraphs of Res. T-17233, Redwood is
required to 1) post a performance bond equal to the total amount payable
under this CASF award, or 10% of the project costs, 2) submit the
performance bond within five business days after the completion of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, if required and within
five business days after Commission approval, if the proposed facilities are
found to be exempt from CEQA review.
17. The proposed project may require CEQA review, but at this time, there
is not enough known information about the physical components of the project
to be able to conduct meaningful environmental review. If CEQA review is
required, Redwood may not conduct any ground breaking activities, and the
Commission may not disburse any funds until the Commission has completed
this review. If any special permits are required, Redwood has agreed to
notify the Commission as appropriate.
18. Redwood should comply with all guidelines, requirements, and
conditions associated with the granting of CASF funds as specified in
Resolution T-17233 and Resolution T-17143, including the submission of FCC
Form 477.
19. The receipt of the CASF grant should be contingent on Redwood
receiving the 80% Recovery Act grant on its underserved project. If the
applicant is not successful in its request for the Recovery Act grant or if
of the Recovery Act grant is less than 80%, then Redwood may request
additional CASF funds in accordance with Ordering Paragraph No. 7 of
D.09-07-020. The granting of additional funds will be contingent on the
availability of CASF funds.
20. If Redwood is unable to obtain Recovery Act funding and will not
construct the project, then Redwood must notify the Director of the
Communications Division within thirty (30) days of receiving notification
that their Recovery Act application has been rejected so that the Commission
may reallocate CASF funds to other grants.
21. A notice letter was emailed on July 13, 2010, informing a) all
applicants filing for underserved areas and, b) parties on the service list
of R.06-06-028 of the availability of the draft of this Resolution for
public comments at the Commission's website*
http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/static/documents/index.htm*. This letter also
informed parties that the final conformed Resolution adopted by the
Commission will be posted and available at this same website.
22. On July 23, 2010, Velocity Communications, Inc. (Velocity) sent an
email informing staff that Velocity currently provides fixed wireless
broadband service to two of the CBGs listed as both unserved and
underserved, specifically 060230101011 and 060230101012, both located within
zip code 95546.
23. Although Velocity is not a party to R.06-06-028, CD accepted their
comments and shared them with Redwood on July 23, 2010. It is pointed out,
however, that Velocity did not pose any challenges to the April 1, 2010
proposed project CBGs posted on the CASF webpage as prescribed under
Resolution T-17143 and D.09-07-020. On July 23, 2010, staff informed Redwood
of Velocity's comments.
24. On July 28, 2010, Redwood filed reply comments rebutting Velocity's
objection as inaccurate, incorrect and unverifiable and thus, should be
dismissed on its merits and for failure to comply with Commission
procedures. In their reply comments, Redwood submitted proof that the area
is underserved based on the # of households not receiving broadband service
and / or receiving maximum speeds of 1.9 Mbps.
25. On August 05, 2010, Velocity sent staff an email responding to the
Redwood's reply comments. Velocity denied Redwood's claims. When asked for
specific information regarding customer speeds and bandwidth purchased from
their supplier, Velocity informed CD that they would be unable to respond by
the deadline and would allow their original protest to stand on its own.
26. Based on further review, CD concludes that no change is warranted and
that the two CBGs- 060230101011 and 060230101012, in Redwood's proposed
coverage area are underserved, as indicted in Redwood's reply comments.
Accordingly, the Commission dismisses Velocity's comments and allows the
inclusion of these two CBGs in Redwood's proposed coverage area.
27. On July 27, 2010, the County of Humboldt and the Redwood Region
Economic Development Commission sent letters to the Commission and the
Director of the Communications Division, respectively, supporting Resolution
T-17288.
*THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that:*
1. The California Advanced Services Fund shall award contingent funding
of $2,169,815 from the California Advanced Services Fund to Redwood
Telephone LLC for its Northern California Open Community Fiber Network to
provide service in unserved and underserved areas as described in the
Discussion section and summarized in Appendix A of this Resolution.
2. Redwood shall 1) post a performance bond equal to the total amount
payable under this CASF award, or 10% of the project costs, 2) submit the
performance bond within five business days after the completion of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, if required and within
five business days after Commission approval, if the proposed facilities are
found to be exempt from CEQA review. Failure to post the performance bond
within the specified time frame may result in the CASF grant being
rescinded.
3. Redwood shall comply with all guidelines, requirements, and conditions
associated with the CASF funds award as specified in Resolution T-17143,
Resolution T-17233, and D.09-07-020.
4. The receipt of the CASF grant shall be contingent on Redwood receiving
the 80% Recovery Act grant on its underserved project. If the applicant is
not successful in its request for the Recovery Act grant or if of the
Recovery Act grant is less than requested, then Redwood may request
additional CASF funds in accordance with Ordering Paragraph No. 7 of
D.09-07-020. The granting of additional funds will be contingent on the
availability of CASF funds.
5. Redwood shall notify the Director of the Communications Division
within thirty (30) days of receiving notice that their Recovery Act
application has been rejected and as a result, will not construct the
underserved project, so that the Commission may reallocate CASF funds to
other applicants.
6. The program fund payment of $2,169,815 for this Commission-approved
project shall be paid out of the CASF fund in accordance with the guidelines
adopted in Resolution T-17143 and D.09-07-020.
7. Payments to Redwood shall be in accordance with Section IX of Appendix
A of Resolution T-17143 and in accordance with the process defined in the
"Payments to CASF Recipients" section of this Resolution.
This Resolution is effective today.
I hereby certify that this Resolution was adopted by the Public Utilities
Commission at its regular meeting on September 2, 2010. The following
Commissioners approved it:
/s/ Paul Clanon
PAUL CLANON
Executive Director
MICHAEL R.PEEVEY PEEVEY
President
DIAN M. GRUENEICH
JOHN A. BOHN
TIMOTHY ALAN SIMON
NANCY E. RYAN
Commissioners
*APPENDIX A*
*Resolution T- 17288*
*Redwood Project, Key Information*
*Redwood Telephone LLC*
* *
*1*
*Project Name*
*Northern California Open Community Fiber Network* *Project*
*2*
*Project Plan*
Fiber optic cables and wireless terminals will serve middle and last mile
customers.
*3*
*Project Size (in square miles)*
728
*4*
*Download speed (maximum)*
50 mbps
*5*
*Upload speed (maximum)*
25 mbps
*6*
*Location*
Humboldt, Del Norte
*a)*
*Community Names*
Arcata, Blue Lake, Crescent City, Eureka, Ferndale, Fieldbrook, Fortuna,
Hoopa, Klamath, Kneeland, Korbel, Loleta, Mckinleyville, Orick, Orleans,
Redway, Requa, Rio Dell, Samoa, Southern Humboldt, Trinidad, Witchpec,
Westhaven, Willow Creek
*b)*
*CBGs / Household Income*
*#*
*CBG*
*Income*
1
060150001011
$21,044
2
060150001012
$18,833
3
060150001021
$32,232
4
060150001022
$27,664
5
060150001031
$46,776
6
060150001032
$28,274
7
060150001033
$38,214
8
060150001034
$31,148
9
060150001035
$20,125
10
060150002011
$39,830
11
060150002012
$42,386
12
060150002013
$39,886
13
060150002021
$31,033
14
060150002022
$30,875
15
060150002024
$36,250
16
060150002031
$31,953
17
060150101022
18
060230001001
$16,667
19
060230001002
$21,429
20
060230001003
$24,167
21
060230001004
$19,435
22
060230002001
$31,316
23
060230002002
$29,188
24
060230002003
$29,414
25
060230002004
$20,323
26
060230002005
$17,155
27
060230002006
$21,150
28
060230002031
$26,696
29
060230003001
$22,344
30
060230003002
$30,263
31
060230003003
$25,625
32
060230003004
$36,583
33
060230003005
$32,500
34
060230004001
$48,900
35
060230004002
$32,000
36
060230004003
$23,678
37
060230005001
$17,882
38
060230005002
$25,333
39
060230005003
$22,298
40
060230005004
$22,432
41
060230006001
$32,370
42
060230006002
$34,293
43
060230006003
$40,272
44
060230006004
$26,037
45
060230006005
$37,419
46
060230007001
$36,949
47
060230007002
$34,063
48
060230007003
$40,438
49
060230007004
$40,833
50
060230008001
$31,061
51
060230008002
$39,799
52
060230008003
$35,402
53
060230009001
$48,036
54
060230009002
$49,028
55
060230009003
$46,742
56
060230010005
$14,620
57
060230011001
$29,405
58
060230011002
$16,995
59
060230011003
$26,974
60
060230011004
$32,780
61
060230011005
$26,852
62
060230012001
$25,313
63
060230012002
$48,077
64
060230012003
$18,648
65
060230101011
$22,132
66
060230101012
$26,429
67
060230101021
$22,984
68
060230101022
$10,000
69
060230101023
$26,023
70
060230101024
$42,813
71
060230102001
$27,760
72
060230102002
$34,844
73
060230102003
$36,500
74
060230103001
$50,417
75
060230103002
$37,321
76
060230103003
$32,443
77
060230103004
$29,583
78
060230103005
$44,375
79
060230104001
$39,472
80
060230104002
$43,929
81
060230105011
$40,855
82
060230105012
$27,734
83
060230105013
$36,406
84
060230105014
$33,500
85
060230105021
$43,107
86
060230105022
$31,186
87
060230105023
$47,955
88
060230106001
$42,946
89
060230106002
$47,850
90
060230107001
$36,719
91
060230107002
$44,141
92
060230107003
$37,125
93
060230107004
$23,438
94
060230107005
$26,836
95
060230108001
$28,833
96
060230108002
$34,537
97
060230108003
$35,625
98
060230108004
$26,731
99
060230109001
$22,500
100
060230109002
$22,043
101
060230109003
$40,227
102
060230109004
$40,714
103
060230110001
$45,806
104
060230110002
$27,279
105
060230110003
$34,659
106
060230111001
$26,571
107
060230111002
$29,336
108
060230111003
$31,765
109
060230111004
$36,736
110
060230112001
$33,571
111
060230112002
$43,365
112
060230112003
$35,231
113
060230113001
$35,102
114
060230113002
$25,720
115
060230113003
$30,167
116
060230113004
$22,027
117
060230113005
$27,188
118
060230113006
$27,500
119
060230113007
$41,528
*c)*
*ZIP Codes*
* *
95501
95503
95519
95521
95524
95525
95528
95531
95536
95540
95542
95546
95547
95548
95549
95550
95551
95554
95555
95556
95558
95560
95562
95563
95564
95565
95567
* *
95569
95570
* *
95573
* *
* *
*7*
*Estimated Potential Subscriber Size*
*a)*
*Households*
785 (Last Mile)
*b)*
*Businesses Passed*
9,891
*c)*
*Anchor Institutions*
544
*8*
*Deployment Schedule (from Commission approval date)*
24 Months
*9*
*Proposed Project Budget*
$21,698,146
*a)*
*CASF (10%)*
$2,169,815
*b)*
*CIAC*
$0
*c)*
*Amount of CASF Funds Requested*
*$2,169,815*
*APPENDIX A*
*Resolution T- 17288*
*Redwood Project Shapefiles*
*APPENDIX A*
*Resolution T- 17288*
*Redwood Statewide Map*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redwoodtech.org/pipermail/list_redwoodtech.org/attachments/20100907/4eeb8d9a/attachment.html>
More information about the List
mailing list