[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign welcome you to another episode of Closing the Digital Divide.
We also are excited to welcome a new sponsor, Bovardio.
Your broadband team just got smarter. Bovardio builds AI agents that work the way your best employee does. On task 247 and ready to scale from customer service to network ops. Bravadio delivers intelligence that works the way your team does.
Learn
[email protected] welcome to Closing the Digital Divide, the podcast dedicated to creating meaningful conversations and sharing valuable insights from industry leaders, policymakers, equipment manufacturers and others on Closing the Digital Divide. I'm your host, Charles Thomas, and together we'll explore policies, challenges, triumphs and innovative solutions that are reshaping the digital landscape.
Welcome everyone to Closing the Digital Divide. Today I'm excited to have my friend and the CEO President King.
I don't know what other accolades can I throw in there for you, David. Mr. David Zumwalt, who's CEO and President of WISPA. David, how are you today?
[00:01:21] Speaker B: I'm doing fine. Nobody's called me a king though. I'm not going to let it go to my head.
[00:01:28] Speaker A: Well, David, the last time I had you on was last October at Whisper Palooza and we were kind of getting ready for what we thought was going to be the launch of Bead at that time.
There's been a couple changes, one or two.
So today we want to talk about wireless role in Closing the Digital Divide as it pertains to the new rules and guidance that have come down from ntia. But David, before we get started in our podcast here, tell our audience a little bit about yourself and a little bit about wispa.
[00:02:15] Speaker B: So I have been with WISPA just a little over three years. My official start date was June 1, 2022. And for those who remember the calendar, I think May 13, 2022 is when the Bead NOFO dropped. So I was kind of working behind the scenes getting ready for the transition, but I actually started after the Bead NOFO had dropped. So we were spending a lot of time on BEAD from my very first day in the office.
WISPA as an organization is well over 20 years old.
The origins go back to probably 25 years ago when a collection of hometown ISPs who happened to be deploying wireless technologies to meet their customers needs came together because they realized they were going to need some advocacy, especially the policy work with the FCC as spectrum issues were beginning to arise.
Since that time, we've continued to follow the developments in the industry.
As you know, we're kind of a right tool for the right job organization, everyone can win.
We have a lot of fiber that is being deployed by our members, for example. But fundamentally the core of WISPA are those wireless routes. It's the hometown ISPs that have deployed wireless to meet their customers needs. Generally an area where. Areas where other service providers either could not or would not go.
[00:03:43] Speaker A: Awesome. Yes. And we have, we have personally experienced going where no one else would go. That sounds like a Star Trek thing or something.
[00:03:54] Speaker B: Where no one has been before.
[00:03:56] Speaker A: So, David, let's talk about the new guidance.
With NTIA's updated B guidance, how do you see the wireless industry position evolving within the broader landscape of the federally funded broadband expansion?
[00:04:15] Speaker B: Yeah, just remembering that I just stated that we are a right tool for the right job kind of an organization and our ISP members are as well.
That's really been what we've advocated all along in the context of bead. It's that close the digital divide. We would have done it by now if this had been easy. Right.
So you can't come at this problem with the expectation that you only have one tool in your toolbox. You've got to find a way to be able to meet the needs of broadband customers wherever they live. And some technologies fit certain areas better than others.
So our advocacy for bead, for example, has always been about that. It's like, you know, if we're going to focus on one technology, it's going to be too expensive. We're not going to be able to to close the digital divide with the funds that are available. The timeline is going to be too long and we're going to really lose a generation of prospective subscribers because we're waiting for the perfect technology, so to speak.
So advocacy has been all about that. And there have been obviously some questions. How does wireless continue to scale to be able to meet future broadband demands?
You know, legitimate questions that the federal government has been asking about how the money that it's providing from the taxpayers will be properly stewarded. You know, so I think everybody's kind of on the same page in trying to at least get to the same destination. But if we focus on the notion that we're going to get broadband service to everyone, and if that is truly the national priority and we want to do it as quickly and effectively as possible, then you have to have every technology at the table. So eventually, I think NTIA had come to see the value of that viewpoint.
They had their questions answered about the underlying core technologies.
They had a lot of work that they needed to do to kind of inform and educate the states because every state has different needs.
But the pivot that happened on June 6th of this year with a new policy update really was not a surprise to us because this is what we've been pushing for really since bead was first announced in 2022.
[00:06:39] Speaker A: Well, and speaking of that, how significant is that shift away from fiber being favored to fix wireless and also Leo?
[00:06:57] Speaker B: Well, I think, you know, this is not the way I look at it. I don't look at it as, you know, fiber won or fiber lost in any of these circumstances. I think it's ultimately the broadband serviceable locations. You know, how do you get service to them in the most cost effective and sustainable way? You know, having the federal government use taxpayer funds to provide the capital investment, necessarily build it necessary to build out any kind of a network doesn't create the footprint for being able to manage it, to continue to operate it. So those operating expenses kind of come into play as well. And there will be arguments or debates about, you know, what technologies cost more or less to be able to go and maintain. But the reality is, if you're going to spend a heck of a lot to put infrastructure in place, you're probably going to have to spend a heck of a lot to maintain it at some point in time. The last thing we want to do is see technologies deployed that then cannot be sustained or maintained because that does no favors in the digital divide.
It comes back to the whole question then of what are the candidate technologies that could appropriately serve a particular location.
What you need to have available to a major commercial enterprise or to a government office might be very different than what you'd have at a subscriber level at a residential community or in a place that really doesn't have as pronounced a need for broadband. So the ability to be able to lean into that with the technology that makes sense for the individual customer, very, very important in order to getting this done. Right?
[00:08:38] Speaker A: Yeah, and I'll just comment on that. I recently went to an event down in Kentucky and I'm here in Virginia, and I had to drive through the hills, Blue Ridge of Virginia, through West Virginia and then through Kentucky. And I'm looking around and I'm like, how in the world are we going to get Internet to these folks up in these hills? Man, it was crazy.
So, David, how is WISPA engaging with state broadband offices to ensure that wireless providers are fairly considered in bead implementation plans?
[00:09:21] Speaker B: It's a really great and timely question because every state is different.
Some states have been very clear that they are immediately open to participation by wireless providers. Others are either more skeptical or they're holding on to the prior guidance which treated fiber as the preferred technology to be able to reach a location. And so some states sort of seem to be almost actively looking for ways to disqualify technologies other than fiber, or at least deprioritize them in the way that they're evaluated so that fiber can come out on top of. And like I said earlier, every state's got a different set of priorities, different set of needs that they're trying to be able to address.
And so there's some sovereignty at the state broadband office level. So we see our job as primarily related to advocacy and education.
We want to make sure that state broadband offices are informed and not misinformed, that they are properly guided by what NTI has said, and they're not misinterpreting any of the guidance or any of the latest in the policy notice, because ultimately, that's how you get to the right solution for your community or for your state. Now, having said that, we are fierce advocates for fixed wireless in particular because of what's been going on for the last three years with Bead. Prior to the policy notice from ntia, it was pretty much only the fiber show. And I think a lot of people who might not completely appreciate the differences in technologies and their applications in certain circumstances may have just heard that enough that they believe that only fiber will do. And they may be highly principled about the way that they're looking at it, but they're misguided. When you look at how technologies can play, I know there are going to be some locations, for example, where low earth orbiting satellites is the only practical solution to be able to meet a need in a particular area. It's certainly something that people would be considering as backup or as redundant capabilities. And many of our users, in fact, have done this in response to local natural disasters or problems that have taken out network infrastructure elsewhere. So if you come at this with an open mind, and if you come at it with an appreciation that at the end of the day, the devices at the end of the broadband connection really don't care what's upstream of them. What they care about is can they connect? Can they do it with the right speed, with the right performance, low latency, can they connect to the rest of the world, the underlying technology that the endpoint devices do not care about at the end of the day? And so we think that, say, broadband offices should Sort of behave with that same sort of motivation.
[00:12:22] Speaker A: Well, and David, if the goal is to get everyone connected, are you seeing some of these state broadband offices being more open to.
[00:12:37] Speaker B: Yes.
[00:12:38] Speaker A: What I would say a hybrid model or are there pushback?
[00:12:42] Speaker B: Yeah, no, there are many that are open.
I think, you know, one of the challenges for the state broadband offices just to kind of throw some kudos their direction, many of these offices had to be stood up very, very quickly and so completely overwhelmed with priorities. The need to develop staffs, develop plans, work with local legislatures on any kind of, not just matching funds, but there are broadband funding programs in different states that can come alongside programs like BEAD at the national level, or they may be specifically targeted to state programs. And the point being is that state broadband offices are all different because they're different.
They're dealing with a fabric of funding and regulatory opportunities and challenges that are different state to state.
You know, so there's a lot that state broadband offices have to be, you know, handling. And I think we tend to take a look at this and say, well, you know, be. Because there's so much money involved and it's the national priority that that's the only thing that state broadband offices are caring about. And that's not true. They're caring about a lot more than that. And they're managing programs that go well beyond just, just bead.
So anyway, the states are different.
Many of them are very friendly to all technologies and I think many of them become friendlier to all technologies when they realize that non deployment related activities that are also provided for indeed can only be achieved if you haven't run out of BEAD money for deployment.
So keeping all of that in balance. But you said something else that I really want to come back to. This is critical and I think it tends to be glossed over.
If our priority is closing the digital divide, then why are we waiting any longer than we have to be waiting?
It's like I don't want to be waiting another decade because we waited for a particular technology that somebody decided was the only one that could go in. And we have folks that are stranded without broadband service for that period of time because we made a decision that was best for them. You see, we had to get you the same technology that existed in urban America. We had to get you something that was going to be able to handle your future generations, but didn't solve your need. Now we've got an opportunity, I believe, to close the digital divide in a matter of a couple of years, not in 10 and it's not just doing things in haste that I'm kind of advocating here. It's doing it in haste only because we have the technologies that can do it right now. So let's get going.
[00:15:29] Speaker A: Right. And you know, I've spent my entire career in, in rural America getting broadband too. And let me tell you, the, the joy that people have when they are finally connected and can finally have a, a better quality of life because they, they, they move to those areas because that's where in, in, in most cases, that's where they chose to be. Right?
[00:15:58] Speaker B: Yeah, yeah.
[00:15:59] Speaker A: But they should have the same access to connectivity as anyone in urban. And don't get me on my footstool for that man, because we'll be here all day. I wanted to talk about specific specifics here because we hear this all the time. And one common critique of wireless is whether it can consistently meet these performance requirements of 100 by 20 and also low latency. How does today's fixed wireless technology, especially those in licensed spectrum, and you can touch on unlicensed as well, address those concerns.
[00:16:38] Speaker B: Yeah, so, and I will get to wireless in particular, but I want to point out something that's important. No matter what technology you're deploying, how the network is designed and how it's implemented is critical because you can't solve for poor design just by throwing a technology at it. What you've got to do is you've got to have a great design. If you design and operate a network for low latency, then you can have low latency performance.
If you design it for capacity, then you can have capacity sufficient not just for today, but for tomorrow. So it comes down to what you're doing operationally to implement and then plan for the growth of the network, regardless of what technologies are incorporated. The other thing to keep in mind here is that when you look at networks, none of them are monolithic in terms of technology. Very few, I would say, are. So when we talk about, say, fixed wireless providers, we're not talking about the only network that's ever touched is a fixed wireless, you know, component. Fixed wireless generally refers to what does that last mile look like? What, what connecting technology is actually reaching the customer premise. And if that last connection is a fixed wireless connection, then the operator is generally called a wisp or wireless isp, or it could be a managed service provider that's deploying fixed wireless in a condo or resort or something like that. So.
But the design principles are all fundamentally the same. You've got to design for low latency and for performance.
And frankly, you have to implement based on the needs that your subscriber have.
For three years, I ran a 9000 subscriber WISP, and while we were working to obviously upsell capacity to customers, we found that because of the communities that we were serving, that many customers wanted to stay on the lowest cost model that they could.
And so they ended up purposefully choosing, say, 50 megabit per second packages which were sufficient for streaming for multiple devices in their homes, because we managed for latency and we had all sorts of cache servers from Netflix and things that were within the interior of our network to make that possible.
And they still weren't maxing out the amount of bandwidth that we were providing to them. And I point that out not to make an argument for 50 megabit service because the broadband standard is now 100 megabits down, 20 up. But it's simply to point out that when we talk about any technology, and especially fixed wireless, there are folks out there that will say, well, fixed wireless can never get to gigabit speeds. Well, that's BS because doing it all the time, you know.
Well, you know, fixed wireless can't get through trees.
Well, sorry, take a look again. Look at the technologies that are being deployed by vendors that are active in this space.
So it's really, it's not appropriate to put, say, all of fixed wireless in a bucket and say it can't when it's already doing.
And when we look at the progression in technologies just over the last 10 years or so and what's coming in the future, I've got no problem being absolutely confident that wireless is going to be able to meet the need. But importantly, the operators that are deploying it are deploying the right tool for the job. So even if they are a wisp and they see a need to be able to deploy fiber, they're going to deploy it because they're committed to meeting the needs of their customers.
[00:20:24] Speaker A: David, that is a capital point and I'm so glad you brought that up on, on the design side of that because it's very, very important and it does play a role in that. And, and quite frankly, every network has some fiber in it. Right. Whether it's somewhere, somewhere, whether that's middle mile or, you know, you know, at the tower, somewhere there's this fiber. Right. So every, essentially every fixed wireless network is a hybrid network.
But let's talk about the technology a little bit here and the design part of that. Sure.
When we look at innovations like CBRS, millimeter wave, private LTE 5G.
Those solutions that are fiber like standards, how do those standards make bead more eligible for fix wireless?
[00:21:31] Speaker B: So the picture has changed a little bit as a result of the policy notice.
So I'm going to sort of mix my metaphors here a little bit. But to provide some context, in the past, the broadband data collection efforts that are related to identifying services that are available at a broadband serviceable location looked at wireless technology in three fundamental ways. It could be licensed, it could be unlicensed, and they have a third category called licensed by rule.
License by rule refers to services that are treated as licensed for regulatory purposes, but they don't have the same FCC license that is given to, for example, point to point paths that are frequency coordinated so that you have protection from interference and things of that sort. And not to get too much in the weeds here, but CBRS has two elements to it that affect commercial operations.
CBRS is a very unique band because there's Department of Defense utilization in there already. These are radars that have priority use of the band. And so there's a spectrum sharing model that has been implemented over the last several years that works very, very well that deals with this priority user called dod. Because the radars are not on, they're not activated, I can't speak. They're not activated all the time.
So the second tier priority is called a priority access license. So this would be considered license spectrum, but in this CBRS band, which is 3.55 to 3.7 gigahertz. And then there is another use called GAA which is considered licensed by rule. But it has the third priority, if you will, behind DoD and PAL licenses. What's beautiful about the GAA spectrum is that if a PAL license did not get issued as a result of the auction a few years ago, then anyone can use that GAA spectrum to augment their network.
Because of the spectrum, the frequency band that it's in, it has in some ways some ideal propagation characteristics for certain rural applications.
But importantly, if you happen to be an operator that has a combination of PALS and gaa, then you can create a really healthy fabric of service and it would all be considered qualified for priority broadband service under the previous model. It's not fiber. But as long as the broadband standards were being met now that unlicensed is also considered eligible for priority broadband treatment under the policy notice. As long as the broadband standards are met, then the differentiation between licensed and unlicensed is really not totally moot. Because if you're in the unlicensed realm, then you have some heavier lifting to do to demonstrate that you know how to manage interference and that you've identified what's going on in your unique environment. Because the state Broadband office is going to be concerned about that. They're going to want to make sure that if they're going to deploy bead funding or protect you from bead funding, that you've got that under control.
So it's not total apples to apples. And I kind of took us a long way around the horn on that. But fundamentally now it doesn't matter what kind of wireless is in the room. If you're managing it well, if you've designed it well, if it's performing up to the standards that NTIA has established, then it's pretty much indistinguishable from any other technology you would put out there.
[00:25:24] Speaker A: Well, David, we are quickly running out of time, but I got a couple of questions I really want to get to. And one of them is around workforce. You know, all of the states were given a 90 day period and we're a little bit, I think we're about a little past halfway on that now to get in there new proposals to ntia.
So everyone's working in a really condensed schedule that includes workforce.
How do you see the workforce being able to be scaled up?
And we'll, we'll focus here on, on wireless to be able to meet the demands of this new condensed schedule.
[00:26:15] Speaker B: And.
[00:26:15] Speaker A: What challenges are we going to have?
[00:26:19] Speaker B: I so appreciate that question because it's unanswerable at some level. I mean, I can certainly give you an answer that's going to sound wonderful. But when we look at it, and I'll try to step through this pretty quickly, if you think about unlicensed fixed wireless operators that were previously pretty much disqualified or heavily discouraged from participating in beads, then to get the wake up call on June 6th that says, hey, you're welcome back in the room again. And by the way, you only have 90 days to figure this out and the state Broadband office might have a lot of questions for you about how you designed your network and how all this means and did you do drive tests for every location and can you prove this? And we need the spreadsheet tomorrow. You know, that's a workforce challenge to an operating ISP that went from 0 to 100 and a half a second.
Not expecting or anticipating, not anticipating that that big of a shift would have happened. So I would say certainly in the WSC community there's been a lot of long hours and long weekends and not a lot of Time off, you know, kind of working through the opportunity. And some are bidding for bead, some are working hard to make sure that their coverage areas are protected against taxpayer funded over building.
But I think the core of your question really goes more to workforce that's around ultimately the deployment of the network. Right now the stage we're in is we've got to update all the applications and kind of rethink what the bid strategy is and what areas we're in, you know, how we partner and all of that. And so that's really more of the province, I think, of the people who are helping guide the application process and advise the potential sub grantees on their strategies. But next comes the actual implementation and that's where whether it's, you know, outside plant, you know, fiber installers, splicers and people who can work on right of way and pull attachment issues. If you're using wired infrastructure, what you can do to, you know, climb towers, to perhaps bring fiber to the tower for deployment through fixed wireless, all of that is kind of in the room. And so it's creating, I think an opportunity for job surge. But you can't train people just overnight in this level of specialization.
So I think this is going to be a little ragged for a while.
But as some states discovered, I think coming into this, they were sort of trying to.
Hoard is not the right word, but they were trying to make sure that they could marshal the resources necessary so that they could get going as soon as the sub grantee awards were issued.
And so they had workforce ready to be able to go and do it. And the 90 day delay followed by then the 90 day shot clock. Because remember, NTIA delayed at the beginning of the year post the transition in administrations. So now you've got people who are on the bench for six months. It's hard to keep a workforce aligned on something like that. So it's been a bit gnarly. But as we get more clarity from NTIA and they begin to process these through to awards, then I think we'll see things settle down. But there's always room for more talent, especially skilled talent.
[00:29:37] Speaker A: Well, David, I want to thank you for coming on and sharing your knowledge and expertise.
One last question. What should listeners, particularly those in rural or unserved communities, understand about the potential of wireless broadband to close the digital dividend?
[00:29:59] Speaker B: The main thing is it's the fastest way there.
It really is. It's just wired infrastructure takes a long time to deploy.
In most cases, all technologies need to be at the table. But in order to meet the needs and especially unserved communities. If you want to get it served faster, you're going to see wireless in the room. But rest assured that wireless will get it done. It can deliver the speeds, it can deliver the latencies.
No matter what you may have thought you heard in the past, wireless is already deployed in many rural communities that are now past the digital divide. And if you're still in it, wireless is coming to your rescue too.
[00:30:45] Speaker A: Well said, my friend. Well said.
Before we wrap up today's episode, let's talk a little bit about our new sponsor.
Closing the digital vibe takes more than funding. It takes automation. Bovadio AI agents streamline workflows, cut ticket volume and supercharge your field team. Smarter Broadband starts here. Visit barbaudio.com to launch your 30 day no fee pilot.
Davis Tell tell our audience how they can get involved with Wispa or your website.
[00:31:26] Speaker B: So the best way to learn more about WISPA is to go to the website, which is wispa.org and you'll find everything that you need there to see what we're up to, what our advocacy is, the latest on our team, on initiatives that we have going.
You know, we are member led in the sense that members participate in our committees and our committee structures are specific to dealing with the sorts of things that hometown ISPs care about, what's going on in Capitol Hill, what's going on in the state houses, what's going on in the regulatory agencies. So there's lots of ways that you can get involved as a member to help shape priorities not only for wispa, but within your own community as well. So start with the website. That's probably the fastest way to do it.
And feel free to reach out because we'd love to talk to you.
[00:32:18] Speaker A: All right, David, thank you again, my friend.
And promise me that after some of these bills start to roll out and we start to get some feedback that we'll jump on again and kind of give us a little bit of an insight as to how things are going.
[00:32:36] Speaker B: Sure. Stay tuned. It's going to be a fun ride.
[00:32:39] Speaker A: All right, David, thanks again, Charles.
[00:32:41] Speaker B: We'll see you.
