There's three options:
1) It's touch range, because it's like casting breath of life - this doesn't make sense because of the action required (you wouldn't be able to get to them) and because of the wording (it restores them as if you cast the spell, which means it's just referring to that spell's effects as shorthand)
2) It's channel-energy range - this makes the most sense, but has no support from the text. There's many other things that require you to expend uses of channel energy which then have effects which have no relation to the range of your channel energy ability.
3) There is no range (other than line of effect, which is inherient in almost everything) - this is the most RAW reading of it, but can be kindof absurd in practice. "I'm 400 feet away, and I can't heal from that range, so I'll just let him die and then revive him."
In other words, no one knows.
I think Bobson's option 1, is the most reasonable interpretation. The reference to the spell grants us something to go with, for those parts of the feat that isn't specificied in the text.
But there is no discussion, that it could have been written much clearer.
Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell (Core Rulebook 251).
Given the lack of any other qualifiers or specific descriptors, I'd say that, as written above, the feat basically allows you to spend three uses of channel energy to cast the Breath of Life spell, and follows all the guidelines of that spell - range of touch, 5D8+CL hit points cured if target creature died the previous round, incur one negative level for a day if raised etc.
Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell (Core Rulebook 251).Given the lack of any other qualifiers or specific descriptors, I'd say that, as written above, the feat basically allows you to spend three uses of channel energy to cast the Breath of Life spell, and follows all the guidelines of that spell - range of touch, 5D8+CL hit points cured if target creature died the previous round, incur one negative level for a day if raised etc.
Which makes it next to useless for the intended purpose of Breath of Life (and implied purpose of the feat), which is to save someone who just died. It would require them to have died while within 10" of you, where you could five foot step to them and use the ability.
If the intent were to just turn three channels into a big heal (which is a use of breath of life that doesn't even work here), I'd expect it to have been based on a different spell and have a different name.
While I think Bobson's second theory is reasonable, I think that RAW (and possibly RAI), the third idea has the best support.
The text of the Benefit requires three things: A full-round action that provokes, three uses of channel energy expended, and a dead creature. That dead creature is then restored to life as if you had cast breath of life on it. (Note: the ability simply compares the effect to Breath of Life, not the ability itself)
There are no restrictions beyond what I mentioned noted in the ability description, so why add extras to the ability without a very good reason to do so?
Well, the benefit of the feat is actually that Cleric (or other character capable of Channeling) doesn't have to commit all his 5th level spell slots to Breaths of Life, but can rather do the "oh s~%%" response as required (especially since Breath of Life doesn't qualify for spontaneous casting).
Considering Cleric has to be 11th level to qualify for this feat, it's reasonable to assume Cleric likely has -at least- 6 Channel Energy uses a day, possibly as many as 10+. This gives him 2-3+ bonus 5th level spell slots if needed. That, by itself, is a major benefit.
Regarding range: touch, do notice Breath of Life says f cast upon a creature that has died within 1 round - I'll admit that kind of wording drives me bonkers but I'd assume (liberally) that means if Cleric's ally dies, Cleric (hopefully one of last in the initiative order) gets to his ally the same round, and uses Breath of Life the following round. I -Will- grant you that goes into the realm of RAI / freestyle interpretation, and may not be supported by RAW.
Well, the benefit of the feat is actually that Cleric (or other character capable of Channeling) doesn't have to commit all his 5th level spell slots to Breaths of Life, but can rather do the "oh s#!+" response as required (especially since Breath of Life doesn't qualify for spontaneous casting).
Which if the ability in question takes longer than the normal spell (which is a standard action), and the range is touch... well, its not so much of a 'Oh snap!' button as a wasted feature, because most of the time people aren't dropping within arms reach of the cleric.
Considering Cleric has to be 11th level to qualify for this feat, it's reasonable to assume Cleric likely has -at least- 6 Channel Energy uses a day, possibly as many as 10+. This gives him 2-3+ bonus 5th level spell slots if needed. That, by itself, is a major benefit.
2-3 spell slots which may not (and indeed, should not) ever be needed is a terrible trade for a feat.
Regarding range: touch...
I'll note again, the ability in question does not mention range. It mentions the effect 'as if you had cast Breath of Life...', which is pretty explicitly telling you to skip all the things like Range, Spells Prepared, etc., and go strait to 'What does Breath of Life do?'
I agree that the range is not limited to Breath of Life and is the range of a channel.
If the intent was to follow all the casting rules for breath of life the power would read. "Spend three channels to cast the spell Breath of Life." but it really reads "Benefit: As a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity, you can expend three uses of your channel energy class feature to restore a dead creature to life as if you had cast the breath of life spell."
You are not casting breath of life... you are channeling to give the end effects of breath of life. At least that is how I read it.
Don't you hate it when the developers leave things so ambiguous?
To me, this merits a FAQ.
I think option 2...it says "as", since you're not actually casting the spell.
So expend 3 uses and then from within your channel range you affect a target 'as if' they had the spell cast on them is intrepretation.
I also, FAQ'd the OP's post.
Guess you were right, Cas!
A and A. See 2 posts above yours.