Re: LEC copper removal from commercial properties

["Shrikumar.H" <shri.nanog () enablery org>]

Does it refer to this?? Hmm....

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-10-72A1.pdf

                        ORDER
Adopted: April 28, 2010       Released: May 4, 2010 

[..snip..]

1. In this Order, we ask the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service
(Joint Board) to review the Commission~s eligibility, verification, and
outreach rules for the Lifeline and Link Up universal service programs,
which currently provide discounts on telephone service for low-income
customers. Specifically, we ask the Joint Board to recommend any changes
to these aspects of the

[..snip..snip..]

Dont see any mandate, let alone about copper.

-- //Shrikumar


---Original Message---
> From: Brandon Svec via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 18:20:43 -0800
> To: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () gmail com>
> Cc: nanog <nanog () nanog org>
> Subject: Re: LEC copper removal from commercial properties
> Reply-To: Brandon Svec <bsvec () teamonesolutions com>
>
> I found an alarmist email from a provider that I have not fact checked that
> states-
>
> The FCC has issued Order 10-72A1 that mandates that all POTS Lines in the USA
> be replaced with an alternative service by August 2, 2022.
>
> Brandon Svec 
>
>
>
>     On Feb 16, 2022, at 6:16 PM, Brandon Svec <bsvec () teamonesolutions com>
>     wrote:
>
>
>        Telcos have been trying/begging/warning of discontinuing copper for many
>     years. Maybe the political and regulatory environment is currently allowing
>     them to get on with it in some areas?
>
>     I don   t think there is an FCC rule requiring the fiber as much as
>     allowing the removal of copper. 
>
>     Brandon Svec 
>
>
>
>         On Feb 16, 2022, at 6:01 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan () gmail com>
>         wrote:
>
>
>            
>
>         NANOG'ers;
>
>         At least in Boston, commercial property owners are receiving notices
>         that 'copper  lines are being removed per FCC rules' and replaced with
>         fiber. The property owner, not the network operators (or users of
>         unbundled elements if that's even still a thing) are being presented
>         with an agreement that acknowledges the removal, authorizes the fiber
>         installation and provides for a minor oversight of the design. It
>         suggests that no costs are involved in terms of hosting equipment. No
>         power reimbursement. No rent for spaces used.
>
>         There is an ominous paragraph in the letter that says if the property
>         owner doesn't comply that tenants will lose all services including
>         elevator phones, alarms, voice, internet and any copper/ds0 originated
>         services. They didn't say 911, but that would go without saying.
>
>         Has anyone heard of this?
>         What FCC rule requires this?
>
>         Thanks for any insights.
>
>         Warm regards,
>
>         Martin