States are poised to receive $42.5 billion in new Broadband, Equity, Access, And Deployment (BEAD) subsidies in the new year thanks to the 2021 infrastructure bill. But a growing number of ISPs in states like Minnesota say they may not participate in this latest round of federal grants, citing bureaucracy and burdensome restrictions.

While American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) grants came with significant leeway as to how grant money could be spent, BEAD grants, overseen by the National Telecommunications And Information Administration (NTIA), come with numerous requirements related to lien mandates, low-cost service obligations, and deployment technology.

Those restrictions serve a purpose in the wake of the boondoggle that was the FCC’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, which resulted in a massive number of defaulting bids and unfinished projects because companies bidding on projects lacked the competency or financing to finish their awarded projects. It’s a major reason the NTIA was put in charge of BEAD.

But many Minnesota ISPs are still bristling at BEAD’s requirements, according to Brent Christensen, president and CEO of the Minnesota Telecom Alliance, an organization that represents 70 ISPs across the North Star State.

Image

“My members are telling me they’re not going to participate,” Christensen recently told MinnPost when asked about the $42.45 billion broadband program. “The way that BEAD is structured. I don’t know how anybody’s going to participate.”

States wary about the restrictions and delays with looming federal broadband grants are poised to put significant taxpayer resources into Starlink and other low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations. The problem: such services often aren’t affordable, raise environmental questions, and may struggle to keep pace with consumer capacity demand.

Back in March, Maine unveiled a $5.4 million initiative to offer Starlink Low Earth Orbit (LEO) terminals to 9,000 state residents outside the reach of broadband from existing terrestrial providers.

An estimated 9,000 locations in the state (1.5 percent of residents) have no access to broadband, mostly peppered across rural Oxford, Penobscot, and Aroostook counties.

While well intentioned, the state’s initiative immediately sparked a debate about whether Starlink is the best use of taxpayer resources.

Starlink May Be Part of Solution

LEO satellite broadband has understandable allure for state broadband offices tasked with showing the federal government they have a solution for every premise – household and business – in the state. Depending on geography and state, some of these locations may require $100,000 for a terrestrial wireline connection.

Many of these unserved locations may be inhabited for a few weeks a year by the family of billionaires or 52 weeks a year by a family barely able to afford the fuel to live there. Spending $100,000 on that household may mean tens of other households see no improvement or have to settle for worse technology. And depending on who you ask, NTIA either demands that the state actually connect that household or simply have a feasible plan to achieve that connection.

Harrison County, Texas officials say they’re poised to use the county’s remaining Rescue Plan (ARPA) funds to strike a fiber expansion partnership with Etex Communications, a subsidiary of the locally-owned Etex Telephone Cooperative.

The Harrison County Commissioners Court says it’s putting the finishing touches on a $4.5 million public-public partnership with Etex that will help deliver fiber access to the Western end of the heavily underserved Texas county with the help of $1.5 million in federal ARPA funds.

Image

ARPA Funds To The Rescue

Etex Telephone Cooperative was originally formed in 1952 to meet the communication needs of people living in rural northeast Texas. Beginning with 743 members when the co-op was first created, the provider now services more than 12,600 members scattered across a service territory of 710 square miles of rural East Texas.

“Internet is a big issue. It’s almost as fundamental as water and electricity. You gotta have it,” Harrison County Judge Chad Sims tells The Marshall News Messenger. “It is an essential thing. So we’re happy to partner with ETEX.”

EMPOWER Broadband, a subsidiary of Mecklenburg Electric Cooperative (MEC), is asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to waive financing requirements attached to the provider’s takeover of thousands of subsidized broadband locations from RiverStreet Networks. It’s a move the cooperative says will save it millions of dollars in errant additional penalties.

It’s also highly representative of the ongoing challenges facing a program that has long been criticized for dysfunction and mismanagement.

The FCC program not only fell short of fulfilling its original promise, it now risks boxing numerous communities out from what could be a generational funding opportunity made possible by the 2021 infrastructure bill.  

During the 2018 Connect America Fund (CAF) Phase II auction, RiverStreet was awarded $32.1 million in financing to provide high-speed Internet to 13,518 locations in Virginia. RiverStreet is looking to divest 3,757 locations across three counties, poised to receive $8.1 million in annual CAF II broadband deployment support.

Image

According to a May RiverStreet filing with the FCC spotted by Broadband Breakfast, the divestment is necessary because the company “encountered certain obstacles that have prevented it from meeting its CAF II buildout milestones in the assigned CBGs.”

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) says it won’t be providing broader relief for broadband operators that have defaulted on grant awards via the agency’s messy and controversial Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) broadband subsidy program.

According to an FCC public notice, the FCC stated it found "no demonstrated need for broad relief" from provider penalties connected to either the RDOF or Connect America Fund II (CAF II) programs. It also shot down calls for a broader amnesty program for defaulters.

“Given the flexibility available under the existing default processes…we decline to provide a blanket amnesty,” the agency’s Wireline Competition Bureau said.

In a letter to the agency last February, a broad coalition of providers and consumer organizations suggested that either reduced penalties – or some sort of amnesty program – might speed up defaults, freeing areas for upcoming broadband infrastructure bill (Broadband Equity Access And Deployment, or BEAD) subsidies.

Image

The group was quick to point out that areas where RDOF and CAF II money has been committed are considered “served” for purposes of BEAD deployments, potentially boxing out many desperate U.S. communities from billions in potential funding.

“Many of the RDOF and CAF II awardees who cannot or will not deploy their networks are located in states with the greatest connectivity needs, like Missouri and Mississippi,” the authors wrote. “The Commission should not permit these unserved rural communities to face this type of double whammy and be left behind once again.”

But in its statement, the FCC insisted that changes to its approach aren’t necessary because, it claims, its existing processes are working.

As debate continues about the “collision course” between the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) and Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) programs, it is worth highlighting the unique leverage Tribal nations have to resolve these concerns on Tribal lands as well as the challenges they may face in navigating the process.

Existing state and federal grant/loan programs are considered “enforceable commitments” under BEAD rules, making locations funded through those programs, including RDOF, ineligible for BEAD grants (unless those awards are declared to be in default). This rule prevents “duplication” of federal or state funding for broadband infrastructure build-outs.

The debate has emerged because some communities are concerned that RDOF-funded building has not yet begun and, in some cases, may never be built-out. In the meantime those locations remain ineligible for BEAD because of these enforceable commitments.

However, the rules about enforceable commitments and duplication are different on Tribal lands. When issuing its BEAD guidance, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) determined that federal and state grant funding for buildout on Tribal lands – like RDOF – that do not carry Tribal Government Resolutions of consent are not considered to be enforceable commitments.

The Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) was supposed to drive affordable fiber into vast swaths of long-underserved parts of rural America. And while the FCC administered program accomplished some of that goal, a multitude of problems have plagued the program since its inception, putting both current and future broadband funding opportunities at risk.

The $20.4 billion RDOF program was created in 2019 by the Trump FCC as a way to shore up affordable broadband access in traditionally unserved rural U.S. markets.

The money was to be doled out via reverse auction in several phases, with winners chosen based on having the maximum impact for minimum projected cost.

During phase one of the program, the FCC stated that 180 bidders won $9.2 billion over 10 years to provide broadband to 5.2 million locations across 49 states and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.

But, according to ILSR data, roughly 34 percent of census blocks that won RDOF funding–more than $3 billion in awards – are now in default. All told, 287,322 census blocks were defaulted on by more than 121 providers as of December 2023.

Image

The defaults are only one part of a larger problem: namely that many communities bogged down in RDOF program dysfunction may risk losing out on the historic amount of federal funding to build modern broadband networks (BEAD) made possible by the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law.

One Big Giant Mess

The rocky rural hills of West Virginia are a formidable foe when it comes to building high-speed Internet infrastructure that offers affordable high-quality service.

Nobody knows that better than Hardy Telecommunications (OneNet), a small community-owned cooperative that delivers affordable fiber to frustrated locals deemed too costly and cumbersome to be served by the incumbent telecom giants.

The cooperative serves parts of four counties (Hardy, Pendelton, Grant, and Hampshire). It connected its first fiber customer in 2013, after receiving $31.6 million in federal BTOP funding. Since then, the cooperative tells ILSR they’ve spent $20 million of their own funds to bring fiber to rural corners of the aptly-named Mountain State.

Derek Barr, Assistant General Manager at Hardy Telecommunications, says the cooperative currently delivers broadband service to 5,050 rural subscribers – 4,736 of which are on fiber lines that simply wouldn’t exist without federal funding programs. Hardy Telecommunications also provides 68 customers with fixed wireless access (FWA) broadband service.

Image

“Our focus is fiber, and we're trying to build out fiber as much as we can,” Barr tells ILSR. “But it's very tough in our serving region. It's all mountains and a lot of trees, and a big chunk of our area is either state park or national forest land. It's also very hard to do fixed wireless because even if it might work in the winter, it's not going to work in the summer” when tree leaves block line of sight, he noted.

So the cooperative slowly and consistently expands fiber as it can, often in partnership with Pendleton County. As a result, locals have the option of a variety of double and triple play phone, cable, and fiber options, starting with a symmetrical 100 Mbps (megabit per second) downstream, 50 Mbps upstream fiber and phone bundle for $79 a month.