AT&T seeks FCC reconsideration of MDU broadband ruling

AT&T has asked the FCC to reverse its recent ruling that incumbent carriers do not have to unbundle fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) connections to multiple dwelling units (MDUs), because the long-distance giant contends the decision would leave some businesses with little or no broadband choices.

In the triennial review order approved last year, the FCC removed unbundling obligations for ILECs investing in fiber to the home (FTTH). This summer, the commission clarified that ILECs also are not required to unbundle fiber to "primarily residential" MDUs, such as apartment complexes.

The FCC declined to include unbundling obligations for FTTH projects because it represented a "greenfield" investment that could be made just as easily by competitive carriers as it could by incumbents. But that’s not the case for MDUs, where fiber deployments already exist, according to AT&T’s filing. "Most fundamentally, there is simply no valid evidence in the record that the conditions that led the commission to limit unbundling for FTTH deployed to individual residences apply to fiber deployed to MDUs, which concentrate numerous households in one area," the filing states.

While competitive fiber builds are commonplace to high-revenue enterprise customers, that is not the case for primarily residential MDUs, according to AT&T spokeswoman Claudia Jones. Even in downtown areas where CLECs have invested in fiber to an office building, there may not be a link to a nearby apartment complex, she said.

"There’s not a whole lot of that going on," she said. "I don’t think that’s how most [fiber] buildouts are done."

As a result, businesses operating within a "primarily residential" MDU--the vague definition of which also is a source of concern for AT&T--could leave some companies with little or no broadband alternatives under the FCC’s ruling, according to AT&T.

"The arbitrary regime endorsed by the commission means that a dry cleaner on the ground floor of an apartment building will have no choice of providers, but a competing dry cleaner operating on the ground floor of an office building will," the filing states. "And the best that people who live in MDUs can hope for is the competitive "choice" provided by a cable/DSL duopoly.

"Moreover, because the commission provided no guidance as to the meaning of "predominantly residential," the incumbents, in anticompetitive fashion, will rely on this newly-broadened exception as a means to stifle competition in virtually all MDUs in which they can find any residences."