In the coming years, access to spectrum will be an increasingly important foundation of America’s leadership as mobile broadband becomes a major driver of our nation’s future economic growth, and faster and more capable mobile connections become essential in improving every facet of society. Expanding the amount of spectrum available for mobile broadband use is an important part of a broader strategy to improve the speed and accessibility of wireless service in America.

Capacity hindered by inefficiency

Recently there has been considerable discussion about a looming spectrum shortage. Yet the reality is that most of our spectrum is unused most of the time. This is because spectrum is managed by often assigning exclusive rights to a particular “licensee” to use a specific frequency in a specific location, and often only for a very specific purpose or service. This approach, which is analogous to building a private road for every different type of vehicle, leads to inefficient utilization of our nation’s spectrum resources, and impedes the introduction of new technologies.

A large percentage of these frequencies service the thousands of government systems that provide the essential functions for our national security. And, in most cases, even if it were possible to reallocate their spectrum for new commercial uses and technologies, the process of doing so is extremely expensive and incredibly slow, taking on the order of a decade or more – far too slow to keep up with our fast-paced digital economy.

For these reasons, the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) recently recommended a new approach to federal spectrum management. With a new approach, we can transform the availability of a precious national resource – spectrum – from scarcity to abundance, and do so rapidly. It is time to start building the first shared-use spectrum superhighways.

Automation of spectrum analysis

PCAST’s report calls for a new spectrum architecture that uses an automated “spectrum access system” that will enable new and inexpensive technologies to coexist with legacy federal systems. The combination of smaller radio cells and a spectrum access system could make underutilized spectrum, much of which is currently assigned to the federal government, available to commercial users in just a few years, rather than a decade or more.

As dynamic sharing evolves and spectrum is reused in smaller and smaller cells, capacity can be improved thousands of times. Likewise, capacity effectiveness can be improved thousands of times, thereby enabling less expensive mobile broadband access using technologies like LTE.  Just as we have seen with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, innovation in wide area mobile communications, sensor networks – even whole new industries and products that we cannot yet foresee – will emerge.

A pioneering first step

Last month the Federal Communications Commission voted unanimously to approve an important proposal to begin building the nation’s spectrum superhighways. These new rules would unlock 100 megahertz of spectrum in the 3.5 GHz band for commercial use. In response to a directive from President Obama, this spectrum was identified by the Commerce Department as ripe for sharing because it is only sporadically used by shipborne military radars, mostly located along the East and West Coasts.

This new spectrum management model builds upon the FCC’s pioneering experience allowing database-driven access to vacant channels (so-called “white spaces”) in the TV bands. Over time, this new model should be extended into other frequency bands as well. Building on the farsighted and ongoing work of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the Department of Defense, and other federal agencies, the PCAST report calls for the eventual sharing of up to 1,000 megahertz of federal spectrum with the commercial sector.

A key to our future competitiveness

It is great progress that the FCC’s proposal is moving forward, and both the FCC and NTIA deserve our praise. However, it is important to note that any real value to the economy and consumers will start to accrue only when the review process has concluded, new rules put in place, and infrastructure is deployed. Reaching that goal quickly should remain our focus.

The European Commission recently introduced the outline for a proposal for spectrum sharing in the European Union, reminding us that we are in a world-wide innovation race. By adopting a new approach to spectrum management first, the U.S. can lead in both the amount of spectrum available and in continuing to advance the technologies required for the future.

We applaud the FCC for proposing this crucial first step. Much like the creation of interstate highways, it will catalyze innovation, fuel our competitiveness and demonstrate global leadership.

Mark Gorenberg, PCAST and Managing Director, Hummer Winblad Venture Partners

Eric Lander, PCAST and President, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard

Craig Mundie, PCAST and Chief Research and Strategy Officer, Microsoft

William Press, PCAST and the University of Texas at Austin

Eric Schmidt, PCAST and Chairman, Google 

Photo courtesy of Andrey Titarenko/Shutterstock.com.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• 2012: Data, spectrum and the race to LTE
• The 2013 task management tools market

A federal agency may have just sounded the death knell for LightSquared’s plans to build a nationwide LTE network. The National Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Timing Executive Committee, otherwise known as PNT ExComm, has concluded that any LTE network LightSquared would build, no matter how much it scales back its transmission power, would interfere with GPS devices nationwide, IDG news reported.

Ultimately, the Federal Communications Commission has the final say on whether LightSquared can go forward, but with the full weight of the government organization overseeing GPS against the would-be operator, the chances that the FCC will green-light its launch are now slim to none. According to IDG, the nine federal agencies that make up ExComm came to a unanimous decision after it found that LightSquared’s network would cause interference on 75 percent of the general navigation GPS devices tested:

Based upon this testing and analysis, there appear to be no practical solutions or mitigations that would permit the LightSquared broadband service, as proposed, to operate in the next few months or years without significantly interfering with GPS. As a result, no additional testing is warranted at this time.

LightSquared immediately shot back with a letter (PDF) accusing PNT ExComm’s advisory board of extreme bias and even singled out the board’s representative from NASA, Bradford Parkinson, since he also sits on the board of Trimble Navigation, a GPS device maker. In the letter, LightSquared asked that the National Telecommunications and Information Agency — which originally asked ExComm to conduct the study — to take over the testing process:

This is yet another example of the structural bias that exists within [the ExComm advisory board] which is doing harm to LightSquared, its employees, customers and suppliers. As a result of this deeply flawed process, [the board] is prepared to recommend to PNT EXCOMM that it should block a new, competitive, and innovative broadband network that Sprint, Best Buy, Leap Wireless and almost 30 other companies have partnered with for the benefit of consumers and the economy in order to benefit a handful of discontinued, non-consumer, or niche devices, none of which were intended to be used, and will not be used, near LightSquared’s planned base stations.

LightSquared is running out of options, money and time. Even if it were to convince the FCC and NTIA to conduct new tests taking into account its latest concessions to build a lower-power and further-scaled-back network, it would still take months to structure and perform those tests. Meanwhile, LightSquared is hemorrhaging cash and flirting with bankruptcy. Its network construction plans with Sprint are on hold, and Sprint could call off its network hosting deal entirely at the end of the month, which would force LightSquared to shoulder the enormous cost of building its own network.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in Q1
• Confused about the wireless markets? Here’s a breakdown
• NewNet Winners and Losers of 2009

The information will also be available via an API and in a form folks can download. It will be updated every six months and has some nifty ways to rank broadband speeds and showcase how the nation’s broadband doesn’t quite serve what the FCC and NTIA calls “public anchor institutions” which includes libraries and schools. A related report released today by the NTIA noted two-thirds of surveyed schools subscribe to speeds lower than 25 Mbps despite needing connections between 50 Mbps and 100 Mbps. These anchor institutions could be thought of as gateway drugs for getting folks online, and thus, the FCC and the NTIA want to make sure they have the best access. When the map is released at www.broadbandmap.gov later this afternoon, I look forward to both exploring this type of data and adding some information about broadband connections in my area.

The five-year cost associated with building and maintaining the map is $200 million, according to Larry Strickling, assistant secretary for communications and information at the Department of Commerce and the administrator for the NTIA. Congress had budgeted $350 million in total, although some states contributed funding and information to this map as well.

A nationwide broadband map was first called for under the Broadband Data Improvement Act in 2008, but Congress never funded its creation, leaving it essentially stranded. In 2009, with the passage of the broadband stimulus program under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, the mapping project was finally funded. We’ve covered the challenges inherent in creating a broadband map, and some of our issues with the plans to create the map that was unveiled today, but even if this isn’t perfect, it’s in a form that has an opportunity to evolve.

Below are some more fun facts from the report released by the NTIA:

• In 2010, 68 percent of households had broadband access, as compared to 63.5 percent in 2009. (Broadband was defined as Internet access service that uses DSL, cable modem, fiber optics, mobile broadband, and other high-speed Internet access services.)
• The digital divide between urban and rural areas is still significant. In 2010, 70 percent of urban households and only 60 percent of rural households accessed broadband Internet service.
• Overall, the two most commonly cited main reasons for not having broadband Internet access at home are that it’s perceived as not needed (46 percent) or it’s considered too expensive (25 percent).
• However, in rural America, the lack of broadband availability is a bigger reason for non-adoption than in urban areas (9.4 percent vs. 1 percent). Americans also cite the lack of a computer as a factor.
• Despite the growing importance of the Internet in American life, 28.3 percent of all persons do not use the Internet in any location, down from 31.6 percent in 2009.

Related GigaOM Pro Content (sub req’d):

• Who Will Profit From Broadband Innovation?
• The New Net-Neutrality Debate: What’s the Best Way to Discriminate?
• When It Comes to Pain at the Pipe, Upstream Is the New Downstream

Today, we get information on the second round in which the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) will give out more than $4.6 billion in funds.

As part of the formal paperwork that lets people know there’s money to be had, I discovered what happened to missing funds I had written about a few weeks ago. The RUS was supposed to give out $2.6 billion in the first round but only wrote checks for $300 million. I wondered what that meant for the original applicants seeking the grant money and where the rest of the money was.

Today, my questions are answered, as the RUS says it has $2.3 billion to give out during this second round of funding, and that companies and towns that applied for money the first time around can either resubmit their original application or better tailor it to the new rules for this funding round. The majority of the RUS funding will be for last mile projects and middle-mile infrastructure. The RUS will only allocate money for satellite providers for areas that remain unserved after all other Recovery Act broadband funding is awarded.

The NTIA will hand out the remaining $2.35 billion. People can send in applications between Feb. 16 and March 15, 2010, and the agencies plan to announce all awards by Sept. 30, 2010, which is the deadline by which all funds have to be allocated under the original legislation. They’re cutting it close.

Image courtesy of Flickr user AMagill

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of Wi-Fi in the enterprise
• Netflix may suffer from limited mobility
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

Already in my original story on these grants I pointed out how there appears to be $2.1 billion missing from this first tranche of allocations. Back in July, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service set a plan to allocate $4.1 billion in the first tranche, but only $2 billion was talked about yesterday. When I asked the NTIA about the missing money, I was referred to the RUS, which sent me the following statement:

“We are making solid progress in evaluating proposals. Loan and grant announcements will be made on a rolling basis so not everything goes through the system at one time.”

But while I get that it’s difficult to allocate $7.2 billion worth of grants in less than two years, as the NTIA and RUS is charged with, I still want to know if the RUS only plans to make $400 million in grants available to this first class of applicants.

Under the terms of the stimulus bill the RUS is supposed to distribute $2.5 billion in total funds. In July they said all of that was supposed to be allocated in the first tranche. So if the RUS is only sending out $400 million as part of this first disbursement, then knowing when the rest will become available, and the rules that will govern who gets it, is important. Both agencies are seeking input as to how to adjust the rules for the second tranche, so what happens to those who applied under the older rules thinking the first tranche was the only chance they had at RUS funds?

Those are my questions related to the missing $2.1 billion, so let’s now talk about missing data. On a conference call held to discuss the disbursements, the heads of the NTIA and RUS admitted that they don’t have household-level data as to who has broadband. That’s because we’re spending this money without a nationwide broadband map, something I covered four months ago.

However, a key element of the overall legislation was getting broadband to places deemed unserved or underserved. So existing service providers were allowed to file reports with the NTIA and the RUS notifying the agencies that they already offered broadband in an area. Sources tell me some 50-85 percent of the original 2,200 applicants have such comments filed against them.

Mike Rodha, senior vice president at rural telecommunications provider Windstream, told me that his company filed “hundreds of them.” Other filers include Qwest, TDS Telecom, Time Warner Cable, AT&T and Charter Communications. Rhoda says that the NTIA didn’t really discuss any of the comments with his firm, but that he’s not going to kick up a fuss about the process by trying to block awards to projects where Windstream already provides service.

“At this point we diplomatically get the facts out,” Rhoda said. “As we were afraid of, some of this money is ultimately going to areas that already have service. It’s like building a new interstate highway near where one that has adequate capacity already exists.”

TDS Telecom, another provider, said that rather than objecting to other projects, it was going to focus instead on the $8.6 million grant it won in Michigan. Still, I wonder to what degree those objections slowed down the overall application review process. Comcast spokesperson Sena Fitzmaurice told me that the agencies had followed up with the cable provider on some of its comments, and had sent agents to certain rural areas to see if consumers and businesses had service.  That’s a slow process without a national broadband map, so it takes a while to prove if carriers serve a project area or not.

So as the government keeps churning out grant announcements over the next two-and-a-half months, hopefully it will also spend time answering these questions, and maybe even tinkering  with the rules ahead of the second call for applications that’s due to occur “early next year.” Which leads to another question: When early next year, exactly?

Sign image courtesy of Flickr user Orin Zebest; question image courtesy of Flickr user  Marco Belluci

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Takeaways from connected consumer’s second quarter
• A near-term outlook for big data
• Q4 Wrap-up: SOPA and the future of digital content

This is the first allocation for the first tranche of grant applicants. Back in July the USDA and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration announced that they would allocate $4.1 billion in grant funds between them in the first of three allocation processes. The process has since been whittled down to two tranches of funding with the initial call for applicants receiving 2,200 applications asking for $28 billion.

In a conference call last night, reporters pressed the heads of both the NTIA program and the USDA’s program about the delays so far, but both evaded the questions. Larry Strickling, assistant secretary for communications and information at the Department of Commerce and the administrator for the NTIA, assured folks that it would be able to allocate the NTIA’s $1.6 billion portion of the first tranche by the end of February as planned.

Based on the original July commitments, the USDA’s Rural Utilities Service (RUS) needs to allocate $2.5 billion in grant money. However, a release out today disclosing the upcoming stimulus spending by both the NTIA and the RUS only mentions $2 billion in total grants to be allocated over the next 75 days, not the original $4.1 billion. This has me wondering if the RUS allocations are running behind schedule. If the NTIA expects to allocate all of its $1.6 billion before the end of February, then that leaves the RUS allocating $400 million — or $2.1 billion less than it originally planned under its July commitments.

Despite the questions, the relative lateness of these grants and the scarcity of project announcements so far, here’s the breakdown of the $182 million getting doled out: The RUS has allocated $53.8 million to eight projects and has found matching funds of a little more than $12 million, for a total of $66 million. The NTIA has approved $129 million in projects matched by $34 million in other funds for 10 projects, with four of them focused on the middle-mile infrastructure.

We’ll update the story with a list of the projects getting funded later this morning after a press conference. If you’re looking for more details, check out the report issued along with the initial announcement.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of Wi-Fi in the enterprise
• Netflix may suffer from limited mobility
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

That’s a lot of demand for rural broadband, especially when we recall that the larger vendors have shied away from asking for funds. The NTIA and the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service expects to make the first cuts in this pile of applications by Sept. 15. According to the release, so far the breakdown of applications looks like this:

• More than 260 applications were filed solely with NTIA’s Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP), requesting over $5.4 billion in grants to fund broadband infrastructure projects in unserved and underserved areas.
• More than 400 applications were filed solely with RUS’s Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP), requesting nearly $5 billion in grants and loans for broadband infrastructure projects in rural areas.
• More than 830 applications were filed with both NTIA’s BTOP and RUS’s BIP, requesting nearly $12.8 billion in infrastructure funding. Applicants for infrastructure projects in rural areas had to apply to the RUS program but were given the opportunity to jointly apply to the NTIA program in case RUS didn’t fund their application.
• More than 320 applications were filed with NTIA requesting nearly $2.5 billion in grants for projects that promote sustainable demand for broadband services. The Recovery Act directs NTIA to make at least $250 million available for programs that encourage sustainable adoption of broadband services, of which up to $150 million is allocated in this first round of grants.
• More than 360 applications were filed with NTIA requesting more than $1.9 billion in grants from BTOP for public computer center projects to expand access to broadband service and enhance broadband capacity at public libraries, community colleges, and other institutions that provide the benefits of broadband to the general public or specific vulnerable populations. The Recovery Act directs NTIA to make at least $200 million available for expanding public computer center capacity, of which up to $50 million is allocated in this first round of grants.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of Wi-Fi in the enterprise
• Netflix may suffer from limited mobility
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

The deadline, originally scheduled at 5 p.m. ET tomorrow, has been extended to Aug. 20 for folks trying to submit their applications electronically. Those sending in paper don’t get such a reprieve. From the notice on BroadbandUSA.gov:

Over the last several days, the online application system (Easygrants® System) has experienced service delays due to the volume of activity from potential applicants. The agencies have added additional servers to address these capacity issues. Nevertheless, in an effort to give applicants that have already started the electronic application submission process prior to the application closing deadline an opportunity to complete the submission of those applications, RUS and NTIA announce that an applicant with an application pending in the Easygrants® System as of 5 p.m. ET on August 14, 2009, will be given until 5 p.m. ET on August 20, 2009, to complete the electronic submission of its application.

You can look at this as an example of how ill-prepared the agencies are for the duty of dispensing $7.2 billion for broadband over an 18-month-period, or you can note how flexible they are being in the wake of  (presumably) high demand for the money. Readers, I leave it up to you.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The future of Wi-Fi in the enterprise
• Netflix may suffer from limited mobility
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012

There’s an entire 100-plus-page document noting the rules around who can apply for grants and how those grant applications will be judged. The grant recipients will be judged primarily on whether or not they plan to provide broadband to people who don’t have any. There’s even $350 million set aside to help the government determine who those people are, but there’s no way it will figure that out by Friday – which is when the first round of broadband grant applications are due.

Knowing that, the government has decided to back off from its demands for quality data about current broadband access and speeds from a third party and instead rely on the telecommunications industry’s information. On Friday, the Department of Commerce, which is running the National Telecommunications Information Agency, declared that the broadband maps only needs to contain block-level data, not the address-level data for which consumers groups had hoped. And it said the maps don’t need to contain information about the actual speeds offered because the large telcos view such information as competitive and wouldn’t give it up. I told you so.

So all the broadband maps will contain is general data about who has broadband (remember, that’s 768 kbps downlink speeds) on any given block — specifically what speeds are advertised, not what’s actually delivered. That difference could be significant for the telcos, whose DSL lines provide service to 25 percent of the U.S. (according to Leichtman Research Group) and whose speeds vary depending on how far a resident lives from the remote terminal. It’s less significant for the cable companies, which provide a shared network where speeds can vary depending on what a neighbor is doing on his or her connection, mostly because the cable company would be unlikely to see its network speeds dip below 768 kbps. For a nice analysis of why carriers can’t guarantee speeds, check out this post.

There are legitimate competitive concerns about releasing such detailed data in the public sphere, but if the government wants to spend money bringing broadband — however slow — to the masses tomorrow, it needs to know exactly where those masses live and whether or not they are receiving broadband today. It’s easy to find pockets without broadband in ostensibly covered neighborhoods, especially in areas where cable doesn’t reach and DSL is the only option.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• GigaOM Research highs and lows from CES 2013
• How HR can make the case for workforce analytics
• The 2013 task management tools market

“I think it is a new era, and I think that carriers will eventually get the message and come along,” Broadband Census quoted Strickling, who will also play a role in the NTIA’s distribution of $4.7 billion in broadband stimulus money, as saying. “We don’t really see this as being a huge problem longer term. But to get this thing started off, we need to protect that confidentiality, or at least give carriers the [option] of retaining that.”

While I agree that if the carriers provided better data, it would make the mapping process easier, I’m not inclined to believe that public pressure will gently mold carriers into benevolent, data-gifting entities, any more than I believed Verizon when it said that public pressure would be enough to ensure that carriers keep people’s web data private. We need laws. Carriers don’t want to share the data because then wed know exactly how uncompetitive the market for broadband is in most areas of the country — and armed with that knowledge, the government may have to figure out what to do about it.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• GigaOM Research highs and lows from CES 2013
• How HR can make the case for workforce analytics
• The 2013 task management tools market