The US Treasury Department has released the final version of important compliance guidance applicable to broadband projects funded through the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (SLFRF) or Capital Project Fund (CPF) awards. The “SLFRF and CPF Supplemental Broadband Guidance” addresses several crucial issues relating to the use of SLFRF and CPF funds for broadband projects, including the crucial distinction of internet service providers (ISP) acting as “contractors” vs. “sub-recipients,” the treatment of “program income,” the scope of the Federal interest in the grant-funded property, procurement requirements, and other issues. Key changes adopted in the final guidance are as follows:

• Broadened definition of “ISP”: The final Guidance still uses the term “ISP,” but includes the following key sentence: “For purposes of this guidance, the term ‘ISP’ includes sub-recipients and contractors installing broadband infrastructure using SLFRF and CPF funds, and is not limited to entities that provide retail Internet access service.”
• Revenue from fiber IRUs and leases is not “program income”: The final Guidance squarely addresses the issue: “Treasury clarifies that income from indefeasible rights of use (IRUs) and leases relating to broadband infrastructure will not be considered program income.”
• A “fixed amount sub-award” can include an award involving a cost-sharing or match requirement, or where the recipient requires the ISP to submit evidence of costs: In the final Guidance, Treasury adopts a broad interpretation of “fixed amount sub-award,” so that it may include sub-awards that include a cost-based component or a match requirement. 
• Prior incurred costs may be reimbursable: The final Guidance clarifies that costs incurred by an ISP prior to receiving an award “are reimbursable to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the federal award or sub-award (for example, if an ISP purchased fiber or other broadband equipment in advance of being awarded a sub-award or contract).”
• Retroactive application: The final Guidance clarifies that it applies retroactively. It applies “to broadband infrastructure contracts and sub-awards funded by SLFRF and CPF for states, territories, freely associated states, and local governments, including those entered into [before] the release of this guidance.”

The clock is ticking on the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). Current estimates show the program may run out of funding as soon as the end of the first quarter in 2024. The only solution for keeping ACP operating is for Congress to refill the ACP funding bucket somehow. Angela Siefer of the National Digital Inclusion Alliance said that reauthorizing ACP was one of the biggest broadband issues on the plate for Congress. She talked about the many gains that have been made in getting broadband to low-income homes. The ACP was not created through a normal budget appropriations bill but was funded by $14.2 billion from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). There was also rollover funding of $2.2 billion added from the previous Emergency Broadband Benefit (EBB) program that had been funded by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021. That was a one-time funding event, and that means specific legislation is needed to keep the program running. There has been talk of moving the responsibility of the ACP to the Federal Communications Commission's Universal Service Fund (USF). But that would mean the agency would have to find a new way to pay for it. The current fees levied on long distance telecommunications are not nearly large enough to absorb the ACP obligations. Congress has already been considering ways to eliminate the FCC’s Lifeline fund, so the USF might not be a politically viable solution.

The state of Tennessee is expected by some estimates to receive as much as $896 million through the federal government's $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. But some customers in the rural southwest region of the state are on target to get fiber broadband service before those funds roll out, thanks to a buildout from Southwest Tennessee Electric Membership Corporation (STEMC) and Aeneas, which is nearly a year ahead of schedule. STEMC, like other electric co-ops in the US, decided several years ago that it wanted to build out fiber for its membership. In the process of determining whether to start or acquire their own broadband provider, STEMC discovered that local Internet and telephone company Aeneas was looking for a buyer following the death of the company's owner. Together, through a combination of grants from the Federal Communications Commission's Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) and state grants funded through Tennessee's share of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, STEMC and Aeneas are working with a total of $35.6 million in federal and state funds for this buildout. 

Our broadband internet connection at home must be as rock-solid and dependable as any other utility. So many devices depend on this connection: computers, phones, tablets, smart speakers, TVs, security systems, gaming consoles, smart home devices, and more. That’s why we asked readers to rate their satisfaction with their home internet service providers. Four of our Readers’ Choice Award winners for broadband home internet also won in 2022: Astound Broadband, AT&T Fiber, Starlink, and Verizon 5G Home Internet continue to receive some of the best satisfaction ratings from our respondents. But this year’s standout is a local provider: NextLight serves the approximately 100,000 people in the town of Longmont, Colorado. It's a municipal broadband service, meaning that it is owned by the town. This fiber-based broadband service receives the highest satisfaction scores on every question that we asked. NextLight's near-perfect scores, including an astronomic 9.9 for overall satisfaction, are unprecedented in the history of PCMag's surveys of broadband providers.

President Joe Biden will nominate the following individuals to serve as key leaders in the Federal Communications Commission:

• Anna M. Gomez, Nominee for Commissioner of the FCC: A telecommunications attorney with extensive experience in domestic and international communications law and policy. Gomez serves as a Senior Advisor for International Information and Communications Policy in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy. Gomez served as the National Telecommunications and Information Administration Deputy Administrator from 2009 to 2013.
• Geoffrey Adam Starks, Nominee for Commissioner of the FCC: Currently serves as a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission since 2017. Throughout his career, Starks has focused on creating access to high-quality broadband for every American including rural America. While serving at the FCC he has worked to make networks more secure.  Starks previously served as Assistant Bureau Chief of the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau.
• Brendan Carr, Nominee for Commissioner of the FCC: Currently serves as a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission, having first joined the agency as a staffer in 2012. In his time on the Commission, Carr has focused on expanding affordable, high-speed Internet service to all Americans. Carr also leads a groundbreaking telehealth initiative at the FCC, the Connected Care Pilot Program, which supports the delivery of high-quality care to low-income Americans and veterans.