SpaceX has expressed its dissatisfaction with Virginia’s final spending plan under the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BROAD) program. The company claims that the state’s allocation of funds favors expensive fiber over more cost-effective satellite technologies.
According to SpaceX, it submitted bids to serve nearly every eligible location in the state, but its applications were unfairly disregarded. The company argues that it meets the statutory definition of a priority broadband project and provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate its ability to easily scale speeds over time.
Virginia’s broadband office has determined that SpaceX and Amazon’s Kuiper Systems meet the definition for specific areas, but not elsewhere. The state plans to allocate 80% of its funding to fiber deployments, with satellite services covering about 10%.
The dispute hinges on the definition of “priority broadband projects,” which prioritizes applications based on cost-effectiveness and scalability. SpaceX claims that it was unfairly treated in only 5% of the locations it applied for.
Other stakeholders have expressed concerns over the plan’s allocation of remaining funds, with EducationSuperHighway urging the state to specify its intentions. Vernonberg Group suggested that Virginia should assert its plans for workforce development and precision agriculture efforts.
The issue highlights the ongoing debate between fiber proponents and satellite bidders in the BROAD program. SpaceX’s criticism is part of a broader public spat over the Biden administration’s rules, which aim to make alternative technologies more competitive with fiber.
Source: https://broadbandbreakfast.com/spacex-ntia-should-reject-virginias-bead-plan