The Scofflaw BEAD NOFO

Scofflaw speeders often say that traffic signs are merely suggestions. “Go as fast as you want, just don’t get caught.”

Sure, they’re a hassle sometimes. But most all of us obey the signals because the alternative would render our byways unusable and cause needless consternation and harm.

When Congress passed the IIJA, it created those same traffic signs, so-to-speak. After considerable back and forth over the speed requirements for the BEAD program, Congress rejected requests for mandates that would have clearly preferred fiber networks over all other broadband networks. This was a direct message to the NTIA that the best path to get broadband to all Americans is through a technologically-neutral approach – one which would invite more solutions to the table, thereby boosting the chances of success in arriving at Congress’ important IIJA goals.

Sadly, it appears the NTIA didn’t read the road manual and has failed its driver’s test with its BEAD NOFO.?

Instead of following Congress’ directions, it chose one technology above all – fiber optic networks – to implement the IIJA, limiting other reliable technologies – such as unlicensed fixed wireless – from meaningfully participating in BEAD, too.

As could be expected, this hasn’t gone over well with some members of Congress. In late November 2022, Senator Steve Daines (R-MT) sent a letter co-signed by six others (including Senators Ted Cruz and Marsha Blackburn) to the NTIA expressing deep concern over the road the agency has taken.

“NTIA excluded broadband service using entirely unlicensed spectrum from its definition of reliable broadband, a stark contrast to Congress’s tech-neutral intent and previous determinations reached by the Federal Communications Commission,” they noted. “Removing options off the table will result in communities being left behind…[Consequently it] is important that NTIA allow all broadband providers and technology to compete in order to ensure that we finally close the digital divide.”

You’d think getting caught by Congress might merit a respectful yet meticulous rebuttal by NTIA, assuring Capitol Hill that that the agency is indeed following its deliberate, tech-neutral traffic signs.

It did not.?

NTIA’s response a month later ignored altogether the question of tech-neutrality.

This traffic pattern is not new.?Repeated queries by the press on the matter have resulted in “no comment” from the NTIA. The same has been true of our WISP advocacy efforts, too. Though we have had numerous, courteous meetings with the agency, urging it to turn away from its unlawful approach, the NTIA has remained steadfastly silent, continuing on its heedless course. As of this writing – ten months after issuing its BEAD NOFO – the agency remains committed only to fiber.

WISPs preach "the right tool for the job." Fiber is an important technology in their open toolbox. But the BEAD NOFO purposely excludes other reliable alternatives which plainly work. As a result, it is a road to perdition and will leave too many Americans in the rear-view mirror as the urban-connected speed away, down the information superhighway. Fiber cannot timely or cost-effectively reach all Americans. Other technologies must be employed to get the job done.?????

Eventually all traffic scofflaws get caught. As the NTIA apparently has. But will the agency obey the stop light?

Answer: Only if the WISP industry stands strong; gets loud and active; and works aggressively with its partners in Washington, the states and other industry stakeholders to police BEAD’s direction.

Tech-neutrality is not merely a suggestion.?It’s the very heart of the law.

Want to lend a hand? We could use a few good traffic cops.