Goulais (Buttermilk) Cell and Broadband Site

The Goulais (Buttermilk) site is now physically in location on the ski hill. Viewed from the parking lot, the tower is just to the left of the chairlift. I notice the cell and broadband antennae are in place but I could not detect any microwave antennae or see an equipment shelter. (The base of the tower was out of my line of vision.)

There was no cell signal coming from the tower on Sunday, 21 Nov 10 but I am hoping it will be activated as part of the Bellevue/Heyden project, if not before.

Once activated, the cellular and broadband coverage in the Goulais area will be improved markedly.

Residents in the Goulais area  may wish to contact the Tbaytel service desk at 1-800-264-9501 to register for the service or see http://www.tbaytel.net/residential/internet/connections/highspeed/regional_wireless.shtml for more details.

Bellevue and Heyden Sites Update 18 Nov 10

The Bellevue and Heyden broadband (high-speed Internet) sites  and the Heyden cellular site have been delayed once again. The unofficial new date is early December 2010.

In response to my queries, Tbaytel advised me on 18 Nov 10 that they are experiencing delays on the retrofit reinforcement work for the MTS Allstream owned Bellevue tower. The retrofit is necessary to allow the mounting of the microwave dishes needed to interconnect the Heyden tower into the Tbaytel backbone network proving access to the cellular mobile switching centre (MSC) and the broadband (high-speed Internet) point-of-presence (PoP).

The reinforcement project has two consecutive phases:

a. Work to meet the MTS Allstream requirements; and

b. Work to meet the Tbaytel requirements

The MTS Allstream work is scheduled for completion on 26 Nov 10 at which time the Tbaytel work will commence. Tbaytel did not provide an estimated completion date but I estimate the work may take up to two weeks.

Once the Bellevue tower is reinforced, microwave dishes will be mounted on the both the Bellevue and Heyden towers, tests conducted and the locations put into service.

Once one sees microwave dishes on the Heyden tower or receives strong cell phones signals from the tower, the work will be completed. While the work is being carried out, there may be disruptions with the cell signal from the Bellevue tower.

Tbaytel Website Layout Changes

Tbaytel has changed their website layout and modified their logo and name style to Tbaytel by dropping a couple of capital letters.

The revised site also provides details about the relationship with Rogers and the provisioning of 3G HSPA service in the Tbaytel service area.

CRTC Approves Bell Deferral Account Proposal

On Friday, 29 Oct 10 the CRTC issued Telecom Decision CRTC 2010-805 approving the use by Bell Canada of 3G HSAP+ cellular based technology to provide (high speed) Internet to the 112 designated unserved areas.

It now remains to be seen if the other carriers or public interest groups will launch further appeals’

The Deferral Account areas in the Algoma District are SSM-Airport (Pointes areas), Wawa, Goulais, Echo Bay and St. Joseph Island.

Rogers Responds to Bell Deferral Account Appeal

On 4 Oct 10, Rogers filed a Comments paper with the CRTC on the matter of Bell’s appeal of CRTC Telecom Decision 2010-637 concerning Bell’s use of Deferral Account funds. In particular, Rogers objected to allowing Bell to use HSPA cellular technology to provide broadband (high speed) Internet to unserved areas.

To support their objective, they claimed that Bell and Rogers either separately or together are already providing HSPA service in 93 of the identified Deferral Account 112 locations. They cited the current coverage maps available on the Bell and Rogers websites as the basis for this claim.

The following is information exacted from the published documents submitted by Rogers and applies to the Deferral Account areas in the Algoma District.

Location	Rogers HSPA	Bell HSPA
Goulais	TBayTel Exp*	No
St. Joseph Island	Yes	Yes
SSM - Airport	Yes	Yes
Wawa	TBayTel Exp*
Echo Bay	Yes	Yes

*- Refers to a TBayTel/Rogers agreement to provide a Rogers compatible HSPA overlay by 4Q 2011.

In my estimation, the Rogers claim that broadband (high speed) Internet is available by means of the supposed HSPA coverage in these locations is bogus. While there is partial service in some of the areas, it can hardly be considered as coverage. The images below are extracted from the Bell, Rogers and TBayTel coverage maps.

In all cases they show there is only partial coverage in the affected Deferral Account areas in spite of the fact coverage maps published by carriers are notoriously optimistic. This quote from the Rogers site indirectly confirms this:  “The map is a general representation of wireless coverage, current and future, where indicated. The areas shown are approximate. Actual coverage area may vary from map graphics. Reception may be affected by various factors, including system availability and capacity, customer's equipment, signal strength, topography and environmental conditions. Charges are based on the location of the site receiving and transmitting the signal, not the location of the subscriber.”

Another factor conveniently ignored by Rogers is that the coverage is not uniform even within the areas the maps designate as served. Trials by currently subscribers have shown that HSPA based broadband (high speed) Internet is not available within the areas even when a mast or tower mounted external Yagi antenna is used. Bell’s proposal calls for the construction of additional broadband (high speed) Internet sites (towers).

The Rogers submission only concerns the impact of Deferral Account funds on corporate finances and does not address the financial impact on users of defaulting to the in place HSPA service at the existing rates. The Bell Deferral Account proposal will provide robust service at a fraction of the cost that the existing HSPA would cost for the same amount of usage, provided it was even available.

Rogers proposes that the CRTC conduct an auction and allot the Deferral Account funds to the vendor that can prove the most efficient use of the funds to provide broadband (high speed) Internet. This proposal does have a certain amount of logic, especially if one is not currently eligible to receive any Deferral Account funds. Unfortunately, the regulatory and “red tape” that would need to be developed would likely take years to implement. It also glosses over the history of how and why the Deferral Accounts were created in the first place; it was a way to protect for alternate service providers like Rogers and others from unfair rate competition as they first entered the market place. In a manner of speaking, Rogers is proposing that it be allowed bid for a “double dip.”

Bell Coverage Goulais	Rogers Coverage SSM-Airport, Echo Bay,
Bell Coverage SSM-Airport, Echo Bay, St. Joseph Island	Rogers Coverage St. Joseph Island
Bell Coverage Wawa	Rogers Coverage Goulais
	TBayTel Goulais and Wawa

Broadband Canada Update Sep 2010

The September 2010 Industry Canada newsletter entitled “IC Monthly Headlines” had the following status update for the Broadband Canada  program:

“On May 9, 2010, Minister of Industry Tony Clement announced conditional funding approval for 52 projects that were either the only applications proposing service in a specific area or the clear leaders based on a combination of cost and coverage. A second round of 25 conditionally accepted projects in Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec was announced between July 6 and 15, 2010. These 77 projects will bring broadband to approximately 220 000 households, and represent a federal investment of approximately $110 million. More announcements are set for later this year.” [Emphasis added]

The total budget of the Broadband Canada is set at $225 million. 

Bell Appeals CRTC deferral Account Ruling

As expected by most observers and forewarned in my post of 31 Aug 10, on 13 Sep 10 Bell launched an appeal of the CRTC Deferral Account Decision 2010-637 .  The appeal has two main components: – it challenges the CRTC’s right to dictate which technology Bell can use to provide broadband service in the Deferral Account areas and the amount of money the CRTC identified as accrued interest on the Deferral Account funds held by the telcos. 
In addition the appeal addresses the issues raised by the Commission concerning the need to match existing Bell urban broadband services; Bell calls this the  Urban Service Comparability Requirement.
To meet these requirements Bell amended the original application (created a new application?) with significant increases in monthly data limits (Caps) and an usage insurance option of $5.00 per month for an additional 40 GB. This is the same feature available to current DSL subscribers. This means a consumer could get up to a 7 Mbps download with a 65 GB cap for $46.95 plus taxes and fees.
These changes address my major concerns with the original proposal. If the Bell ends up being allowed to implement this solution, I believe it will satisfy the majority of users in the Algoma District Deferral Account areas.

A COMPARISON THE ORIGINAL AND PROPOSED SPEED AND RATE  STRUCTURE

	Original HSPA Broadband Service Proposal	Proposed HSPA+ Retail Broadband Services
Province	Ontario	Ontario
Service Name	N/A	Home Zone Wireless	Home Zone Wireless Plus
Monthly Rate	$31.95	$31.95	$41.95
Download Speed	Up to 2 Mbps	Up to 2Mbps	Up to 7 Mbps
Upload Speed	Up to 800 Kbps	Up to 1 Mbps	Up to 3 Mbps
Monthly Usage Allowance	2 GB	2 GB	25 GB
Monthly Charge for Additional Usage	$2.50/GB	$2.50/GB, maximum of $30 per month
Usage Insurance	N/A	$5.00 per month for extra 40 GB
Activation Fee	$35.00	$29.95
Hardware	Turbo Stick provided at no charge	Turbo Hub: $3.95 monthly rental fee
Term	Monthly	Monthly

The Bell appeal submission proposes the following timeline: -  “Interested parties would have 30 days from the date of this Application (e.g., no later than 20 October 2010) to comment and the Company [Bell] would have 10 days thereafter (e.g., no later than 1 November 2010) to file its reply.”

Furthermore “ …Company requests that the Commission confirm in its forthcoming process that it will issue its decision in respect of this Application no later than 90 days from the date of Decision 2010-637, or by 29 November 2010 in order to preserve the Company's rights pursuant to petition the Governor in Council for the review, variation and rescission of the DSL Technology Directive pursuant to section 12 of the Act.”

I believe the CRTC is now on the horns of a dilemma: if they rule against Bell, then Bell will petition the Governor in Council (i.e. the Federal Cabinet); if they rule in favour of Bell, one or more of the other HSPA or vested interest parties will appeal or take legal action. 

It will be interesting to watch Bell explain how it can offer this level of service for Deferral Account areas at the  prices proposed compared to the prices it charges its regular HSPA data customers in other areas.