We’re all well aware that the Rural Utility Services (RUS) and National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) first deadline for application submissions has come and gone. But, the overwhelming response from the provider community tells us those looking to help the unserved and underserved citizens in our nation are waiting quite impatiently for the distribution of funds. In August, the two agencies issued a press release sharing the status of the demand from the first round of applications. Combined, the two are offering approximately $4 billion in funds -- about $2.4 billion from RUS and $1.6 billion from NTIA.

Interestingly, almost 2,200 total applications were received from all 50 U.S. states, territories and the District of Columbia from a “diverse range of parties,” including state, local, and tribal governments, non-profits, industry and “anchor institutions,” described as libraries, universities, community colleges, and hospitals. Public safety organizations and other entities in rural, suburban, and urban areas were among the applicants as well. The applications are requesting almost $28 billion in funding or about 7 times the offered amount of this first round. Applicants committed to approximately $10.5 billion in matching funds, so that the total amount of broadband projects proposed is more than $38 billion.

The Network On Demand
Clearly, this demand speaks to the need for broadband across our country. One of the infrastructure strategies to accomplish this is Wireless Broadband Access (WBA). The question, of course, is whether the WBA can help meet the goals of the 2009 Stimulus Act?

We all know that the purpose of the 2009 Stimulus Act is to jumpstart the economy and create jobs through short-term funding of infrastructure projects. It is believed that investment in broadband will create jobs needed for build out and so stimulate short term growth but also long-term growth through multipliers resulting from expanded telecom infrastructure.

The Stimulus Act allocates funds for the establishment of the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) that will provide grants for broadband deployment in areas that are currently “unserved” and “underserved” and encourage sustainable Broadband adoption in low income communities.”(iv) The former are, of course, almost exclusively in low-density rural areas, hitherto neglected by ISPs because the ROI per network mile for wireline deployment is so low. Federal funds would compensate for this lack of profitability. Hence the rationale for placing part of the broadband stimulus funds under the aegis of the Rural Utilities Service of the USDA.

Discussion within the Obama team following the signing of the Stimulus act has opened up the possible dilemma of a cyber_bridge to nowhere. Wireline deployment, principally FTTH, is job-creation intensive but costly in relation to the number of subscribers reached. Investment must be balanced. As Blair Levin, White House tech team advisor has said, “if one proposal costs $100 million and creates 10,000 jobs, but only connects three people, and the other one costs $200 million, a few less jobs, but connects a million people, you probably want the latter.”(v)

When matched against wireline deployment costs, WBA, whether WiMAX or LTE (coming on strong in 2010), offers advantages of scalability, quicker ROI, lower installation costs, faster deployment and lower operation costs.

Wireless will likely create fewer jobs than wireline in the short term. But it can be deployed profitably in small- and low-density markets, and also save communities from depopulation and economic decline.

Providers opting to deploy Wireless broadband as an infrastructure strategy must enroll the help of 3 commercial suppliers to help them accomplish their objectives:

1. The manufacturer of antennas and base station equipment.
2. The company that will install and field test the hardware.
3. The company that will, on a market-by-market basis, delineate “unserved” and “underserved” market geography, derive optimal wireless network plans to reach unserved markets based on available/planned vertical real estate, and measure ROI based on numbers and income levels of predicted consumers cross-tabulated with signal strength forecasted through precise RF GIS modeling.

GIS-related companies can help providers accomplish the third of the above roles. And though it may seem overstated, we argue that GIS is the “third leg of the stool” (to coin a favorite Obama metaphor) and indispensible to any deployment project of BWA.

Going Above and Beyond the Map
Given the importance of this role in meeting the objectives of the Stimulus Act, providers should look for a GIS partner that can do the following:

1. Prepare a radio frequency RF network plan (incorporating point of presence and microwave backhaul by line of sight) that targets prequalified consumers based upon accurate modeling of RF strength as layered on top of mapped households, businesses, and public institutions whose purchasing habits and demographic attributes are linked via a relational data base.

This also means that the provider should be able to type in the name and address of a prequalified broadband customer and determine:
• whether acceptable service is available.
• whether that service will require indoor or outdoor service equipment.

2. Set up for the ISP client ‘back office’ customer service maintenance coupled with periodic upgrades of the RF network plan as demographics and ground clutter obstruction impacts on signal footprints change.

3. Graphically illustrate how to bring WBA to “unserved” and “underserved” areas of America by doing the following:

Step 1. Illustrate Frequency Valuation (See Figure 1.)

  Figure 1. 

Step 2. Show Current Infrastructure (See Figure 2.)

  Figure 2.

Step 3. Identify the Market (See Figure 3.)

  Figure 3.

Step 4. Select Network Design Criteria (See Figure 4.)

  Figure 4.

Step 5. Calculate Coverage Estimates (See Figure 5.)

  Figure 5.

Two Cases for Strong GIS Partners
Because of the huge CapEx of WBA deployment, telecommunications providers need access to the most accurate data and reliable methods possible of network planning now more than ever. The stakes are too high and investment in infrastructure has grown too costly to not get it right the first time. The top reason for using Afterimage's services for RF network planning is that huge cost savings are incurred over the strategy of physically trying out alternative deployments, climbing towers, hanging hardware and field testing till an optimal, or more likely a minimally satisfactory solution is found.

GIS integrated and advanced RF modeling software can help improve the process providers use to get funding in the following ways:
• Provides Overall cost savings derived from RF network planning.
• Accuracy of RF planning that assures ROI.
• Fast turnaround of R Fplanning delivering quick return on investment.
• Scalability of RF planning that is nimble and flexible to ISP needs.

Two past examples illustrate the importance of accurate data and network planning. In Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, a business plan by Wireless Philadelphia presented costs for building the wireless network that were grossly underestimated. The actual cost to the city for the project was more than double the original estimates.(vii)

Similarly, a wireless network pilot project in Seattle, Washington was shut down only five months after it was initiated because trees were interfering with the Wi-Fi signals.(viii) These failures arose from the inability to effectively predict where signal could be received and at what strength without the huge cost of, in the field, trial and error of different antenna configurations and test driving of the result. By utilizing the tools described here, it may have been possible to avoid what took place in Philadelphia.

Facilities ARE the Future
It is a given that ISP's engaged in wireless deployment range from small local providers that are under-capitalized and working with unlicensed frequency to the highly capitalized companies owning or leasing licensed frequencies operating nationwide. This, of course, dictates clients' needs for market feasibility assessment. A flexible GIS solution will be one that can vary from a "stripped down look see" to a full-blown RF planning product.

The new funding of broadband funding for the unserved or underserved citizens of our country demands service providers to think in a new way. Providers must be able to define a geographic area of interest and determine the number of towers required to cover the desired number of households and/or businesses. And most importantly, they need to create a generalized model or "first look" in order to determine if the rigors of submitting an application by the next deadline is worth their while so they can adequately deliver broadband services to their unserved or underserved customers.

Note: This article has been adapted from a white paper, “The Geographical Key to Broadband Stimulus Funding by Afterimage GIS”, by Dr. J. Andrew Slack, Afterimage GIS, March 2009.

Sources:
iv. S. Derek Turner, “Putting the Angels in the Details: A Roadmap for Broadband Stimulus Success”, freepress, February 2009.
v. John Eggerton, Multichannel News, February 26, 2009.
vii. Sonina Matteo, NETWORK WORLD, March 3, 2008.
viii. Tricia Duryee, The Seattle Times, October 13, 2005.

 About the Author
Dr. J Andrew Slack, Director of Research and Development for Afterimage, boasts an extensive background of 42 years spanning academe, government service, and consulting in the private sector. Dr. Slack has been involved in economic health of cities, developing specialist skills in transport network planning and GIS. Afterimage GIS is a geospatial information services consultancy. For more information, email info@afterimagegis.com or visit www.afterimagegis.com.

For more information about RUS, NTIA, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), visit www.rurdev.usda.gov, www.ntia.doc.gov/broadbandgrants, and visit www.broadbandusa.gov.

What’s your take on this subject? Leave a comment and get the conversation going.