- NTIA published draft guidance that would allow unlicensed fixed wireless and LEO satellite providers to participate in BEAD
- Satellite could help reach “really off grid locations” that even fixed wireless access (FWA) can’t get to
- An alternative tech provider applying for BEAD must prove it has “technical and operational capacity” to deliver service in a project area
It’s here! NTIA just released long-awaited draft guidance on the use of non-fiber technologies for the BEAD program, with unlicensed wireless spectrum and satellite broadband entering the funding fray.
As NTIA Chief Alan Davidson hinted at this year’s Fiber Connect show, unlicensed fixed wireless spectrum can be used for BEAD projects if it would be too expensive to deploy end-to-end fiber or other “reliable” broadband service (i.e., hybrid fiber coaxial (HFC) tech, licensed fixed wireless access).
Low-earth orbit (LEO) satellite broadband is now officially eligible for BEAD funding, which is good news for providers like SpaceX’s Starlink that have expressed interest in participating in the program. Keep in mind the guidance isn’t finalized yet, as NTIA is seeking public comment through September 10.
Satellite broadband being in the BEAD mix isn’t too much of a surprise, according to Steve Schwerbel, state advocacy manager at WISPA.
“We’ve said all technologies need to be at the table. All technologies are going to need to play a role,” he told Fierce, adding most states probably realize there will be “a certain number of locations that really just can’t even be reached by fixed wireless.”
Such locations could be in “really rural and mountainous Vermont” or “somebody’s hunting cabin or ranch” in the middle of Montana, for example. There may not necessarily be a large amount of those “really off grid locations,” Schwerbel said, “but there’s always going to need to be some mix” of funding to reach the most remote parts of the country.
According to Vernonburg Group’s broadband funding optimization tool (commissioned by WISPA), roughly 2% of BEAD-eligible locations (~142,000) could be served with satellite, and that would cost about $315.8 million.
Whereas fixed wireless could cover 29% (2.1 million) of eligible locations and cost around $13.7 billion to deploy.
If satellite broadband and unlicensed FWA are now fair game for BEAD, it means an area with an existing alternative technology provider won’t be considered eligible for BEAD, the guidance noted.
“NTIA’s recognition that areas where uFWA and LEOs are already providing service and areas funded by government programs should be off the table for BEAD is a welcome instruction that states cannot afford wasteful overbuilding,” Schwerbel said in a statement provided to Fierce.
How can states determine if satellite or unlicensed FWA providers are up to the task for BEAD? NTIA said states should ensure a provider “has the technical and operational capacity” to deliver service to all locations in the project area.
Specifically, an alternative technology provider must prove it can provide a capacity of at least 5 Mbps or a usage allowance of 2 terabytes per month for each broadband-serviceable location within a four-year period. Network capacity includes last-mile facilities (like towers) as well as shared facilities like satellite ground stations or middle mile capacity.
Cautious optimism
All told, WISPA thinks the proposed guidance is a step in the right direction and is “cautiously optimistic” about figuring out ways to effectively use alternative technologies, Schwerbel said.
“NTIA seems to be indicating that states should not be overbuilding areas that are served by unlicensed spectrum…we’re still getting our heads around the language of how they’ve structured that and what it really means,” he said.
“But there’s some direction there that says, look instead of throwing something up across an unlicensed network that’s already serving a population, maybe we can find some ways to allow that network to continue to serve the population,” Schwerbel added. “So you don’t have to duplicate BEAD funds across that.”
