Broadband officials in some western states indicated that many projects undertaken there with Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program funds will require technology other than fiber to connect their residents.

That shows why the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the federal agency in charge of BEAD deployment, must be flexible in the methods used to build the broadband infrastructure. Closing the digital divide requires an approach that utilizes many technologies.

At the recent Broadband Nation Expo in Washington, D.C., Utah Broadband Center Director
Rebecca Dilg said the state expect to deploy just 60% of BEAD projects with fiber. Fixed
wireless is expected to make up about 30% of projects, with other technologies rounding
out the remainder.

Dilg said that Utah would focus on fiber under NTIA’s guidelines, but would welcome
other providers because of the need to deploy quickly. Dilg said she realizes that some areas will just be too costly for fiber infrastructure.

“We’ve got mountains; we’ll be exploring hybrid options, and we’ll consider wireless,” she said. “We will score based on the cost and best use of the funds and reaching the most people.”

Dilg added that projects costing around $13,000 to $15,000 per household would likely see the usage of alternative technologies to fiber.

Sandip Bhowmick, Arizona’s state broadband director, expects a similar methodology in his state. Projects costing less than $10,000 per passing would likely be fiber; anything costing more than $15,000 would “definitely be satellite.”

Bhowmick said it would be illogical to deploy fiber in Arizona’s most sparsely populated areas
where it might require miles of fiber to serve a few households.

“No one would be managing that” in the future,” he said. “We’re seeing things more from a sustainability perspective.”

Fortunately, after pushback from lawmakers, NTIA softened its stance on fiber versus other
broadband deployment technologies as it prepared its notice of funding opportunity for the
$42.5 billion BEAD program last year. Having a multi-pronged approach could save taxpayers millions of dollars.

NTIA Director Alan Davidson told members of Congress in 2023 that while states will be
encouraged to prioritize fiber, NTIA has created a process for states to use other technologies where appropriate. Some members of Congress had argued that NTIA should be more technology-agnostic in its approach, given how terrain in some states makes fiber installation too costly in many locations.

“There will be some areas where you will be able to connect everybody with fiber with the
funding that’s given to states that choose to do that, other states will have a mix,” Davidson
said. “We’re going to see a range of choices made by states.”

As an example of how expensive fiber can be in certain locations, Fierce Telecom editor Linda Hardesty noted during a roundtable on Broadband Breakfast last year that an Alaskan company got a $33 million grant to install fiber to just 211 homes and five businesses.

That equates to a cost of more than $200,000 per connection, money that could never be recouped by a private provider without a government subsidy. A typical fiber deployment costs less than $3,000 per connection.

“That exorbitant cost is the reason why fiber has never been run to places like that before,
because private companies couldn’t make a business model out of that,” Hardesty said.

It is good to see open-minded approaches like those in Arizona and Utah to close the digital
divide with the best technology options for individual locations. Hopefully, other states will
follow suit so that taxpayer money can stretch further to provide service to the currently unserved.

Johnny Kampis is director of telecom policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.