As we head into the final set of map challenges leading up to BEAD grants, State broadband offices are going to be wrestling with a host of sticky issues for the map challenges. One of the stickiest issues is how to recognize the service areas for ISPs that use licensed spectrum to deliver rural broadband.

The licensed wireless issue comes from a ruling from the NTIA that, for purposes of BEAD grants, fixed wireless networks using unlicensed spectrum are deemed to be unreliable. That means that WISPs that serve customers with unlicensed spectrum are assumed to be unserved – regardless of the speeds being delivered. This ruling set off a firestorm of comments for and against the NTIA decision, but the original ruling still stands for purposes of determining BEAD grant-eligible locations.

The corollary to that decision is that any area covered by wireless technology using licensed spectrum is considered to be served if the ISP can deliver speeds of at least 100/20 Mbps. There are two sets of ISPs using licensed spectrum to deliver broadband – cellular carriers and WISPs using licensed CBRS spectrum. The sticky question for a State broadband office is how to verify the service area of an existing wireless ISP using licensed spectrum. It’s not a straightforward answer.

Can a Customer Really Be Served? All ISPs are only supposed to claim locations in the FCC maps that the ISP can install in ten working days. It’s fairly easy to determine if a wireline ISP can serve a location just by looking at the presence of a physical wired network. It’s much harder to apply the 10-day test to define the coverage area of a wireless network. The starting assumption for BEAD grants is that claims of coverage made by ISPs in the latest FCC maps are considered to be accurate unless somebody challenges them.

There is a natural distance limitation set by physics for how far a given spectrum can deliver a strong wireless signal. All wireless transmissions get weaker as the distance from a tower increases, and there is some distance where a radio can’t deliver a guaranteed 100/20 Mbps signal. It doesn’t take much searching through the FCC mapping to find wireless ISPs that claim coverage across large expanses. A cellular carrier tends to only be on the tall towers in rural areas, but a WISP might be covering a large area by using secondary towers on grain elevators, monopoles, or other structures to increase coverage. A Broadband office needs to know the location of radios as a starting point to understand coverage.

The more challenging issue is to know if a specific customer can be covered. Physical impediments like hills can make it impossible to reach customers from a given tower site. While radios have gotten better at going through trees, heavy woods can still knock down the speeds below the 100/20 Mbps threshold required to be considered as served. WISPs that operate in challenging topographies will tell you that they often don’t know if they can serve a customer until they visit the customer and try to find a signal.

WISPs might point to wireless propagation studies to prove their claimed coverage area, but anywhere other than a flat, treeless plain, a propagation study is more theoretical than reality. If there is a map challenges, a State broadband office still ought to ask for any propagation studies. It would be a lot easier to believe claimed coverage areas (for all technologies) if the FCC had kept the rule that FCC map reporting must be certified by a licensed engineer – unfortunately, that requirement has been waived at a time when we’re striving to get the maps right for BEAD.

The Stickiest Issue. The biggest challenge for State broadband offices is how to apply the NTIA rules for licensed and unlicensed spectrum. Most WISPs using licensed 3.5 GHz CBRS are also using unlicensed 2.4 GHz, unlicensed 5.7 GHz, and unlicensed CBRS spectrum. WISPs are also anticipating the upcoming ability to use the unlicensed 6 GHz spectrum that brings gigantic channels and promises much faster speeds.

This raises a lot of questions about how to apply the NTIA ruling on unlicensed spectrum. I think all of the following questions can validly be asked, but since the NTIA hasn’t provided any specific guidance, I haven’t the slightest idea how to answer any of them:

• Does a WISP that claims to be licensed have to serve every customer using licensed spectrum? Does a WISP using licensed spectrum meet the NTIA rule if it also serves some customers with unlicensed spectrum?
• Is there some threshold percentage of licensed versus unlicensed customers that must be met to be considered as licensed? Is there a minimum threshold? What if a WISP serves only a few customers with licensed, or even just one – would it still be considered as using licensed spectrum? What if the WISP owns the spectrum license but serves all customers with unlicensed spectrum?
• In defining what is served today, can the WISP only claim customers as served with licensed spectrum that can also reach a speed of 100/20 Mbps?
• Another interesting issue to consider is when a tower using licensed spectrum delivers broadband to customers outside of the spectrum license footprint – are those customers considered to be served if the WISP is violating its license?

Why This Matters. BEAD has an obligation to bring broadband to every unserved location in each state. It’s incredibly difficult for a State broadband office to verify the claimed coverage footprint of an ISP that is using licensed spectrum. It’s hard to define the distance from a radio where speeds of 100/20 Mbps can’t be reached since that distance will vary according to obstacles in the signal path like trees. It’s hard to identify homes that don’t have a good enough line-of-sight be to served. And it feels overwhelming to know what to do about a WISP that mixes licensed and unlicensed spectrum. I don’t envy a State broadband office that gets challenges on this issue because it’s not an easy issue to understand or resolve.