Broadband Availability Recommendations

Connecting North Carolina: State Broadband Plan

 

About Broadband Availability

  • Broadband availability represents the ratio of the population with access to broadband at the speed data is transmitted or bandwidth capacity, measured in bits per second.
  • Also referred to as deployment, it measures the basic “supply” level of broadband or the capacity of the general population to utilize broadband communications.
  • The availability recommendations leverage existing infrastructure and resources to improve broadband availability in NC.

BROADBAND AVAILABILITY INDEX AT 25 MBPS DOWNLOAD SPEEDS

RECOMMENDATION 1: Lower barriers to Broadband deployment.

AV1.1 | Lower barriers to access local infrastructure.

  • The League of Municipalities and the Association of County Commissioners, in cooperation with BIO, should create a set of best practices and checklists for their members to ensure consistency, certainty and adherence to a process for the review and approval of permits or other required documents. This should include timelines and deadlines for both municipalities and ISPs for application review, processing and access.
  • The checklist should include which assets providers consider—vertical assets such as water towers, instructions on how to engage providers, and issues to consider for negotiating access agreements. These include exchanging access to assets and infrastructure in exchange for reduced service costs or increasing bandwidth.
  • These should simplify permitting applications and consider on-line portals and applications to increase efficiency and reduce paperwork
  • This initiative should create a time-limited task force or joint committee to explore whether permitting for rights-of-ways and easements should be further streamlined through legislation. This task force should explore how other states have streamlined permitting and access agreements, and it should look at amounts local governments are charging providers for permitting or access fees and taxes.

AV1.2 | The state and local governments should better leverage existing federal, state and philanthropic foundation grants to help fund deployment.

  • BIO should lead outreach to communities to educate and inform leaders about the federal and state funding sources available for broadband infrastructure and initiatives.
  • The state houses numerous private foundations that generously support programs that improve local communities and the state as a whole. Many of these foundations have charters to support specific initiatives like healthcare, economic development, and education. Each of these initiatives is, or can be, positively impacted by broadband access. BIO should collaborate with these entities to identify funding opportunities.
  • BIO should have a dedicated staff member to educate local communities through the League, NCACC, the COGs, the county commissioner and the NC Grantmakers Association about available and relevant grants. These groups should provide assistance to local communities or counties with identifying grant programs and with grant writing.

AV1.3 | Incent providers to lay dark fiber strands.

  • During deployments, providers and other entities relying on fiber-optic networks—NCDOT and municipalities—should maximize the number of stands deployed. The relative cost of the fiber is minimal compared to the cost of trenching, boring or attaching to poles. Thus, laying additional dark fiber strands while the ground is open would prevent decrease future expenses. Capacity will be a concern in the foreseeable future, and there will always be a need for backhaul for high-speed wireless networks.

AV1.4 | Revise county infrastructure ownership regulations.

  • Counties currently build and deploy various infrastructure, such as water and sewer, on which their citizens rely. These enterprise activities are specifically authorized by the General Statutes. Infrastructure supporting broadband deployment, like conduit, is not. The NCGA should amend the General Statutes to allow counties to invest in or directly fund deployment of infrastructure with the goal of partnering with private providers for Internet service. Specifically, the GA should:
    • Amend G.S. 153A-274 to define ‘broadband and digital infrastructure’ as an authorized “public enterprise.” It should authorize the county to lease or allow commercial use of that infrastructure. Additional language in the provision should specify which infrastructure qualifies and excludes the county from engaging in providing Internet services. This will also allow the counties to use the authority granted in § 160A-17.1—grants from other governments, to use grants for broadband infrastructure, as explained below.
    • Amend § 153A-349.60, authorization to provide grants, to provide consistency with the changes proposed above. Currently, this provision only allows counties to provide grants to providers using “unrestricted general fund revenue.” Most counties, particularly disadvantage counties, do not have the budget to use these funds for broadband incentive grants.

AV1.5 | Design and implement a Dig Once Policy.

  • Dig Once Policies at the federal and state level vary in process and form, but all aim to leverage the opportunity to lay conduit and/or cables during road building or expansion projects. In addition to lowering capital expenditures, it allows NCDOT better management of the ROWs by reducing the number of intrusions and by determining appropriate pathways. One policy will create uniformity across all regional divisions. The Federal Highway Administration encourages these policies and other states have adopted them with successful results. The Executive Branch should create a policy that provides ISPs with one of several options:
    • NCDOT installs multiple or segmented conduit during projects and enters into a “cost-basis lease” agreement for use by ISPs. NCDOT should consider bartering or exchange the use of the conduit for the installation or use of fiber-optic cables for their traffic signaling and Smart Transportation initiatives.
    • Notify providers of new road projects eligible for ISP facility installation when the project is announced and include standards, locations, and estimated costs. BIO could provide notifications to all ISPs quarterly. NCDOT should hold bi-annual meetings with ISPs to review new projects and work through anticipated issues.
  • BIO should work with the League of Municipalities (NCLM) and the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners (NCACC) to create unified standards and best practices for local governments to incent providers to lay dark fiber or conduit when expanding roads—a dig once policy should apply at the local level when relevant.
  • BIO, in cooperation with NCDOT, should create a database for use by ISPs and communities that include information on broadband-related projects occurring throughout the state, road projects, and major state infrastructure projects in locations where gaps in availability or access exist. This will help focus planning and capital where it is needed most.

 

AV1.6 | Railroad Crossing Policy.

  • Providers uniformly stated that deploying cables or fiber across railroad tracks is one of the biggest expenses they encounter and one of the most administratively exhausting. One anecdote ended with the provider deciding not to serve a particular neighborhood. BIO, NCDOT and the NCGA should engage railroads to develop standards and guidelines for access ROWs and for crossing railroads. These should contemplate reasonable costs for traversing areas owned by railroads. A uniform set of protocols should be agreed upon and followed when a provider makes a request. If a voluntary agreement cannot be reached, the NCGA should enact legislation similar to the statutory rights of providers to access privately owned utility poles.

AV1.7 | Design and implement a One Touch/Climb Once Policy for pole attachments.

  • Federal and state laws grant rights of access to poles. However, the negotiation process and expense continue to hinder deployment. The NCGA should lead a task force to explore the adoption, or codification if necessary, of a ‘one touch’ or a ‘climb once’ policy.
  • Like ‘dig once’ there are variations of the form and content currently used, but the objective is to reduce the make-ready work for each pole to one action. Typically, when a new provider accesses a pole it must wait until the other inhabitants of the pole move their lines first. This results in multiple companies accessing the pole.
  • A ‘one touch’ policy would allow prospective attachers to use independent, utility or owner approved certified contractors to perform all make-ready work under the joint direction and supervision of the pole owner. This promotes safety and limits disruptions to the ROW, typically a road. This policy should also address the need to develop an affordable, state-wide range for attachment fees and make-ready work costs.

RECOMMENDATION 2: Assistance to Communities, Counties and Regions to Support Public-Private Partnerships

AV2.1 | Expand the definition of those who get reimbursed for road move costs.

  • Utilities and ISPs bear the cost of moving their facilities during road construction. NCDOT does not charge these entities for access to the ROW. However, NCDOT and ISPs should explore with USDOT the use of federal funds to offset these costs, which will provide the ISPs with capital to expand or improve their facilities.

AV2.2 | Implement pilots like partnering with Army Reserve to lay fiber.

  • Local communities working with ISPs should leverage low-cost or voluntary resources to perform trenching or boring. The Army Reserve has partnered with communities in the Appalachian Region to dig trenches and perform other manual tasks associated with deployment.

AV2.3 | Design and implement a grant program for local governments.

  • The state provide and administer a grant program to help communities with path creation and infrastructure investments to offset or reduce CAPX costs. Past grant programs, such as the “Broadband Supply-side Grant,” offered by the state to incent deployment were part of the mix of programs that have positioned the state as one of the most connected in the nation.
  • A low-dollar grant could provide communities with resources they currently lack: grant writing, planning, or inventory assessments. These activities empower communities to develop equal partnerships with, and incent, ISPs that cannot justify a business case to deploy or upgrade network facilities. Any state grant or incentive program should be technology neutral, but should require the ISPs to have the capability to scale to a specific speed threshold.
  • Existing grant programs like the Community Development Block Grant program provided by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development and administered by the NC DOC and DEQ can serve as examples for designing this grant.

AV2.4 | Design and implement a loan program for local governments.

  • An alternative, or in addition to grant programs, the state should explore creating a dedicated fund to offer low-interest loan guarantees to communities looking for capital assistance using existing available state funds. The federal government and other state models, such as the NC DOC’s and DEQ’s “CDBG Revolving Loan Fund” could serve as an example when designing the fund and identifying its funding source.

AV2.5 | Update state building codes so buildings are broadband-capable.

  • The NCGA, through an existing committee or a joint committee, should study the building codes and determine best options for ensuring all new or renovated state-owned or state-funded properties allow for access points to facilitate fiber-optic and wireless equipment. The code should encourage building design and materials facilitate wireless penetration.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Leverage ongoing research and development of next-generation technologies to reach non-adopters and last-mile deployment.

AV3.1 | Create a small grant program

  • The grant program would have few restrictions and would allow the state to partner with next-generation technology companies to create pilots and test solutions. This could include partnerships with other state agencies and their offices, non-profits, grant-makers and for-profit companies such as (but not limited to) NC DOC, DPS, DPI and the NC DOC’s Office of Science, Technology and Innovation, GoldenLEAF, and NC-based companies.
  • The grant program would fund research to leverage technologies to expand access such as non-terrestrial technologies, small-cell technologies, and white space. It could also fund pilots for testing residential pointed (pointed directly at households) mobile access.

CONNECT WITH OUR
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TEAM


We'll do all we can to help your community reach its goals.

SIGN UP FOR MORE GREAT INFORMATION!

​​Join our mailing list to receive the latest broadband news, grant information, planning and strategy details and more from our team

GET IN TOUCH

Email: Broadband@NC.Gov

Broadband Infrastructure Office
301 N. Wilmington St., Raleigh, NC 27601