dslreports logo
 story category
U.S. Finally Passes 'Dig Once' Rules for Fiber Deployment

For years we've noted how the government has repeatedly considered "dig once" laws to improve broadband connectivity nationwide. Basically, these proposals usually include requirements that new fiber conduit banks be installed automatically as part of any Federal highway projects moving forward, gutting much of the cumbersome regulatory barriers in the process. It's something that gets proposed every few years, but never seems to move forward despite bipartisan support.

Click for full size
Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increase highway build costs and reduces the budget for overall projects, even if the long-term benefits and savings (from not having to dig again) are notable.

Other times, the idea has seen opposition from entrenched telecom incumbents, who don't really appreciate competitors suddenly having access to inexpensive fiber conduit, increasing the overall competitive threat.

This year, somehow, the proposal appears finally poised to succeed. Dig Once language has been included in a broader reauthorization of the Federal Communications Commission that's expected to pass in the next few weeks. The reauthorization contains several broadband industry related efforts, including one that open the door to new spectrum auctions for mid-band and millimeter wave spectrum.

Democratic Representative Anna Eshoo, who has proposed dig once legislation numerous times at this point, was quick to applaud the effort in a statement.

“Dig Once will make it easier for states and broadband providers to enter new and underserved markets by laying the broadband conduit during construction of roads," Eshoo said. "This will reduce costs drastically and increase access for communities across the country."

The dig once provision "mandates the inclusion of broadband conduit--plastic pipes which house fiber-optic communications cable--during the construction of any road receiving federal funding," her announcement stated.
view:
topics flat nest 

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 edit

-1 recommendation

tshirt

Premium Member

Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

and sometimes you end up with rooms full of overpriced routers and billion$ in dark fiber in a series of tubes wandering endlessly underground never to be used.
But pumping up bubbles is best left to wall st

It's an excellent IDEA, if only common sense could be applied. perhaps if it said "A cost estimate for this ADDITIONAL item shall be provided, and Shall be considered as part of the project approval process"
Unfortunately, each time we get a bridge to nowhere, this will REQUIRE a matching "tube to nobody" perhaps at a price that Nobody doesn't want to pay.

there needs to be an exemption process explored EACH time (ie is there already massive parallel capacity available?) will the ROW today be forced to move before phase 2-3-4 -5 is complete? will the current conduit be functional useful in the time frame it is likely to be needed? is it really cheaper to 'throw it in the hole' today or should it just receive RoW today because install cost exceeds PRACTICAL current or foreseeable need.
sims
join:2013-04-06

5 recommendations

sims

Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

IIUC this only requires that conduit be placed so that if at some undetermined time in the future someone decides they want to run fiber they can without having to dig up miles of road.

When they replaced the bridge near my house they had the POTS line strung along side the bridge because the county forgot to place conduit in the bridge for the line.

It stayed like that for over a year until AT&T got a contractor to bore a hole and place a conduit under the river(stream?) to replace it.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 recommendation

tshirt

Premium Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

said by sims:

When they replaced the bridge near my house they had the POTS line strung along side the bridge because the county forgot to place conduit in the bridge for the line.

So a case where if reviewed it likely would have made sense to add conduit...unless several other close by bridges already had more than enough capacity to cross the river and feed everything on this side.
The assumption that all the highway project are paved shoulder to shoulder with a narrow ROW bedded in complex concrete abutments (a good case for pre placed conduit) vs many large projects in the west where the row allotted may be well off (30'-50') the side in a gravel shoulder or frontage road that could easily be "plowed" in later on.
some federal hwys across the southwest (blm, native lands, sw deserts, nw forests ) go for 10's to 100's of miles as gravel road with NO gas, electric, water, or telephone...yet an ABSOLUTE "MUST HAVE" rule would force conduit? in a situation where it is more likely to get washed out than get used?

If we were made of money maybe, but right now when bridges are failing (and falling) due to low funding, should EVERY project be forced to add another 1-2% and thus out of the thousands of impending life saving repair/replacements, dozens or 100's don't get funded?
sims
join:2013-04-06

1 recommendation

sims

Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

In my case the bridge they tore down had conduit in place for AT&T that AT&T was using they neglected to replace it when they built the new one.
They had to bore a line under the stream as it is not practical to add conduit to a bridge once already built.

For how much roads cost I have a hard time believing having to buy and place a empty plastic pipe in the road ahead of time would even end up being 1% of the road cost but maybe they are using much more expensive pipe than i'm thinking of.

Having to run around the road or dig up and replace will for sure cost several times the cost of having it done in the first place.

long runs in the desert could be useful for backhaul but I can see where that would be undesirable.

As for funding yes we really hate spending money on basic infrastructure but thinking we should put it off till later so it costs 10x more is likely part of why we have funding problems today.

Anon00700
@att.net

Anon00700

Anon

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

You can add conduit to a bridge. You can attach it to the side of the bridge and it’s done everywhere. I’ve seen it done L3 owns thousands of miles of fiber like that in Ohio.
sims
join:2013-04-06

sims

Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

I wonder why AT&T didn't do that here.

tshirt
Premium Member
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA

1 edit

tshirt

Premium Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

said by sims:

I wonder why AT&T didn't do that here

bridge clearance or aesthics. or if the entitiy that ignore an existing RoW likely had to pay the additional cost and AT&T ends up with a better bigger bore pipe NOT dependent on the bridge.
a road project here vacated the frontier RoW across the street and replaced it with a second/extra space on the new poles on this side the new tier is rapidly being filled with new third part duct on the way to an existing cell tower...now a total of 10 new 3/4" ducts from 2-3 directions (everyone wants independent routes but all share common poles the last quarter/-1/10 mile.
BTW there are several large contractors who specialize in building, managing, and leasing bridge RoW so someone needing a single fiber can avoid the sometimes years long attachment approval process. those that want to add a duct of their own need to work through a huge process such as this thread »[NEWS] Comcast services now available in the Rainier, OR area (after researching a bit several bridge crossing ads via google became quite persistent for a week.
»bridgemastersinc.com/

Anon9cdc0
@charter.com

1 recommendation

Anon9cdc0 to tshirt

Anon

to tshirt
Yes because digging up a road a few years later to lay conduit is so much cheaper and convenient.

NorcalTech
join:2015-07-14

NorcalTech

Member

Re: Sometimes that's because such a rule would modestly increases highway build

I think you missed the part where he stated that it might not be needed in the future.

there needs to be an exemption process explored EACH time (ie is there already massive parallel capacity available?) will the ROW today be forced to move before phase 2-3-4 -5 is complete? will the current conduit be functional useful in the time frame it is likely to be needed? is it really cheaper to 'throw it in the hole' today or should it just receive RoW today because install cost exceeds PRACTICAL current or foreseeable need.

Anon4da3d
@2600:1005.x

-1 recommendation

Anon4da3d

Anon

Could be a good idea.

Incumbents wouldn't play nice with one touch make ready, maybe government can level the playing ground a little. Incumbents will be able to keep the poles and maybe consumers will get ftth. Win win situation right?

tito79
join:2010-03-14
Port Saint Lucie, FL

1 recommendation

tito79

Member

Re: Could be a good idea.

lots of small cities already have these rules.

Anon79cac
@att.net

Anon79cac to Anon4da3d

Anon

to Anon4da3d
Only “provider” that had issues was Google. No other overbuilder has had issues. Hmmmm. What does that say for you. Google should play by the rules already established and hey wouldn’t have issues. Or maybe if they wanted their case to work, maybe in Nashville they should have deployed on 80% of the power company owned poles instead of bitching and crying for over a year how things weren’t treated fairly with them. They’re case is done and over with. One touch is BS designed and written by Google’s lobbying arm- well the whole damn company since they don’t really do anything nor make $$$$.

LightSpan
Premium Member
join:2004-02-18
Lexington, KY

LightSpan

Premium Member

been doing it for decades

We have always placed multiple duct runs in the ground in a large city or along a federal and state roadways . Now there is a rule you can no longer do and aerial crossing of and interstate roadway . So now it takes for ever to get a permit to bore under the intestate . We are still waiting for permits going on six months !!!!!!!

pende_tim
Premium Member
join:2004-01-04
Selbyville, DE

pende_tim

Premium Member

Who Owns The Conduit?

Great Idea! A lot less torn up roads and one lane traffic.

Ok there is this nice empty conduit along the road. Someone decides to run fiber through it. Who owns the conduit to give permission? What happens when the next someone competing with the first user needs to run along the same route? Will the first user try to block the second user over fear of "damages" to his fiber?
Slyster
join:2015-01-08
Sugar Grove, VA

Slyster

Member

Re: Who Owns The Conduit?

I would think the lines would be openly shared

LightSpan
Premium Member
join:2004-02-18
Lexington, KY

LightSpan

Premium Member

Re: Who Owns The Conduit?

We paid for them and the easement .We own the conduit runs .

pende_tim
Premium Member
join:2004-01-04
Selbyville, DE

pende_tim

Premium Member

Re: Who Owns The Conduit?

said by LightSpan:

We paid for them and the easement .We own the conduit runs .

I was asking about the empty conduit run(s) that are installed as part of a federally funded road project. Understand that if a private company pays to do a run they own it and can rent space to others.

Anonf2a9a
@att.net

Anonf2a9a

Anon

Re: Who Owns The Conduit?

Yes. Unless the state or feds higher a company to manage the conduit like NYC does with VZ.
Anonf2a9a

Anonf2a9a to pende_tim

Anon

to pende_tim
A private company such as VZ would be hired to manage them like in NYC

LightSpan
Premium Member
join:2004-02-18
Lexington, KY

2 recommendations

LightSpan to pende_tim

Premium Member

to pende_tim
We get easement rites to place conduit , we paid for said easement . We place duct runs for fiber and pull fiber through them . Some will put there equipment in our central offices in the CLEC room and lease dark fiber from us . Other companies will buy spare in our duct run and pull there own fiber . If a company gets easement to place fiber next to ours . Its get located so they don't hit it when buying their fiber . I have had to go out and repair cut fibers from contractors hitting our fiber runs . The duct run has to be repaired . Sometimes if there is a spare duct run we can pull new fiber through that and repair damaged conduit run.

GTAXL
join:2013-09-11
Mount Vernon, OH

GTAXL

Member

How easy to repair?

This is good, but how easy would it be to repair damaged fiber optic then? Say from a dig or from an earthquake. Also is there gonna be a mandate on how thick the conduit will be, how many fiber optic cables and different carriers will it support up to?
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080

Member

years ago,

they actually did trench conduit when they built the US highway system originally, that's how we ended up with some of the first cross country backbone links now enjoyed by some of the biggest tier-1 companies.