I get asked a lot what I think of the Federal Communication Commission's Broadband Map and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) allocation of the $42.5 billion in broadband funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). Here’s what I think: this has been a fair process and a fair outcome. As far as I’m aware, no state has cause to be very upset. I highly doubt we’ll see lawsuits and angry senators yelling at Federal Communications Commission and National Telecommunications and Information Administration officials. After a lot of work (with a lot more to do) the FCC and NTIA deserve a lot of credit for getting us to this point. In particular, I want to highlight Michigan. The day after the “new map” was published, I highlighted that things looked unfair in Michigan. Their allocation dropped $416 million from my previous estimates, due largely to two fixed wireless providers significantly increasing their coverage area. I don’t know exact details of what transpired. I suspect many phone calls were made. Many conversations were had. And their allocation is up $141 million to $1.56 billion. That’s more equitable. I’ve updated my spreadsheet with the official allocation, and shortly I’ll update it with distribution of Unserved and Underserved locations by state and county, according to the update of the FCC map posted this morning, with data as of June 15, 2023.

Word has been circulating that the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) recently informed State Broadband Offices that they must submit a final Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) plan to the NTIA one year after receiving approval of the Initial Proposal of grant rules. The ugly twist is that the NTIA is expecting the Final Proposal to include a final list of all BEAD grant winners. Everybody has always assumed that the Final Proposal would be just that – a proposal that describes and fine-tunes the rules being used to award grants. Most State Grant Offices have assumed that they would have multiple years to pick BEAD grant winners. The BEAD grants are complex, and reviewing and resolving grants that ask to serve overlapping areas is going to add a lot of complication to the process. If the NTIA really insists on a speedy timeline, it will be creating a Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF)-type disaster. The only way to get this process done in a year (or even 18 months) would be through a single round of grants – done hastily. With a tight time frame, the grants won’t be reviewed closely and grants that include errors will be pushed through. broadband providers that aren’t really qualified will sneak through. I’m hoping that this is just a trial balloon being circulated by the NTIA to get feedback, and if so, every State Broadband Office needs to push back hard.

Think about internet access in a community like a plate of crumbly cookies: Even if an internet service provider (ISP) takes a big bite out of each of the treats by servicing most addresses, the plate will still have broken pieces left behind. Such is the logic for statewide line extension programs around the US. The purpose of these programs is connecting homes and businesses just out of reach of existing last-mile infrastructure. However, delivering service to even the closest outlier isn’t so straightforward. From 2020 to 2022, the state of Vermont initiated a pandemic-era Line Extension Customer Assistance Program (LECAP) using an initial round of funding from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, with an additional boost from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). A go-to image to describe the need for line extensions in Vermont is a dirt road with a dead end. The entire road may have five houses on it, but only four have internet access. The house at the dead end may be left with DSL, dial-up, laggy satellite or no internet access at all. Even fixed wireless solutions have trouble reaching them because of the density of trees and mountains. Due to that fact, small towns across the state were historically left to fend for themselves, which led to the creation of Vermont’s Communications Union Districts (CUD). Each CUD contains bands of towns that work together as a municipality to negotiate with ISPs and find community-driven broadband solutions. As for whether Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program projects will go after the remaining line extensions necessary across the state, Rob Fish, director of the Vermont Community Broadband Board doesn’t believe that the previous program’s framework lends itself to BEAD very well.