Laserfiche WebLink
Some commenters advocated for unserved and underserved areas to be prioritized while <br />providing flexibility for recipients to serve areas beyond those designated as unserved or <br />underserved. Reflecting the perceived restrictiveness of the interim final rule approach, some <br />commenters asked for assurance that projects conducted under other categories of SLFRF <br />eligible uses, specifically to respond to the public health and negative economic impacts of the <br />pandemic under sections 602(c)(1)(A)-(C) and 603(c)(1)(A)-(C), were not barred by the presence <br />of 25/3 Mbps service, including "gap networks," which are networks designed to offer low-cost <br />or no -cost internet access for lower -income households with low broadband adoption rates. <br />Commenters suggested additional factors to be incorporated in the consideration of <br />locations that are eligible to be served. Many commenters suggested that affordability should be <br />considered a key factor when determining whether a community has access to broadband, as the <br />presence of 25/3 Mbps service does not necessarily mean the service is financially accessible to <br />the area's residents. Commenters noted that surveys indicate that affordability, not lack of <br />coverage, is the most significant barrier for most Americans who do not have robust broadband <br />service in their households. Some advocated that the final rule allow for investments in areas <br />with existing reliable wireline access at or above 25/3 Mbps as long as existing broadband <br />service has been unaffordable for a certain segment of the population; others advocated that <br />Treasury presume eligibility when investments are made in certain areas, such as Qualified <br />Census Tracts or neighborhoods with persistent poverty, or are made by Tribal governments. <br />Separately, some commenters noted that Treasury should provide more clarification on what <br />constitutes a "reliabl[e]" connection, including providing details as to latency, jitter, and other <br />technical specifications that would meet that standard, and what it means for certain <br />301 <br />