House Republicans Blast NTIA on 'Ignoring' BEAD Rate Regulation Ban
House Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, Communications Subcommittee Chairman Bob Latta of Ohio and 14 other panel Republicans are charging NTIA with ignoring Congress’ intent in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act by allowing states to regulate broadband rates via rules for participation in the broadband equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program. Rodgers and Latta were among GOP leaders who criticized the FCC Friday for giving Congress “deeply misleading” information about its implementation of IIJA’s affordable connectivity program (see Ref:2312150068]).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
IIJA “explicitly prohibits” NTIA “from ‘regulat[ing] the rates charged for broadband service,’” Rodgers, Latta and the other Republican lawmakers said in a letter to Administrator Alan Davidson released Monday. “During Senate floor debate on this legislation, members of Congress agreed that this language meant that ‘no rate regulation of broadband services would be authorized or permitted by NTIA or the Assistant Secretary who leads NTIA as part of the state broadband grant program.’” BEAD rate regulation concerns also arose during Davidson’s 2021 Senate confirmation process (see 2112140074).
Davidson’s December testimony to House Communications and NTIA’s approval last week of Louisiana’s initial plan for implementing its $1.35 billion BEAD allocation (see 2312150047), which proposes rate regulation for certain broadband plans, indicate “you are planning to ignore” Congress’ IIJA mandate, the Republicans said. “You did not foreclose approval of state plans that regulated rates of broadband service” during the House Communications hearing and “when directly asked, ‘Will NTIA permit a state to rate regulate, yes or no,’ you did not provide a yes or no answer and instead stated that NTIA would give states flexibility on how to approach this issue. This ‘flexibility’ to pursue rate regulation is not only concerning, but is strictly prohibited.”
Other states “have submitted initial proposals to NTIA that include some form of rate regulation,” the GOP lawmakers said in the letter. “For example, California will award points [to] applicants that make ‘a clear and unambiguous commitment to offer a symmetrical 1 Gbps service at $50 per month to BEAD-funded locations through Priority Broadband Projects, or 100/20 Mbps at $30 per month’ for other projects.” As “we have said before, NTIA’s approval of state plans that include rate regulation is NTIA regulating rates in violation of the IIJA,” lawmakers said. “Because there appears to be confusion about the definition of rate regulation, we define rate regulation as regulating the rate of broadband services in any way, including setting a rate, freezing rates, or placing a cap on rates.”
The Republican lawmakers pressed Davidson to confirm by Jan. 12 “whether NTIA will approve state plans that include rate regulation” and, if so, “an explanation of why you and the Biden Administration are ignoring the IIJA.” NTIA didn’t immediately comment.