On November 18, the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology will convene to markup a couple of dozen bills aimed at addressing delays in broadband infrastructure deployment projects winning permits. Subcommittee Chairman Richard Hudson (R-NC-09) said back in September. "Unless we streamline the permitting process, all of the money we have dedicated to deployment will be tied up in burdensome reviews resulting in more unnecessary delays, forcing millions of Americans to continue to wait for connectivity." 

Here we offer a brief look at the bills under consideration at the markup. 

1. Federal Broadband Deployment Tracking Act (H.R. 1343)

This bill—sponsored by Reps. August Pfluger (R-TX) and Darren Soto (D-FL)—would require the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to submit a comprehensive plan to Congress within 180 days detailing how the agency will track the acceptance, processing, and disposal of broadband permitting applications on federal lands. These applications are essential for accessing easements and rights-of-way to build or maintain telecommunications infrastructure. Through this legislation, the NTIA will also be responsible for detailing how they will quickly implement their plan and any potential barriers they could face. Rep. Pfluger said, "By enhancing government accountability and accelerating broadband deployment, we're not just improving a process—we're investing in the future of our nation. The Federal Broadband Deployment Tracking Act will help ensure that investments in broadband expansion reach Americans more quickly and effectively.”

2. Facilitating DIGITAL Applications Act (H.R.1588)

The Facilitating DIGITAL Applications Act would require NTIA to periodically report on the development of online portals for the acceptance, processing, and disposal of applications for communications use authorizations. This bill was sponsored by Reps. Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA) and Debbie Dingell (D-MI).

Communications use authorizations are requests for easements, rights-of-way, leases, licenses, or other authorizations to locate or modify a transmitting device, support structure, or other communications facility on public lands or National Forest System land.

Under this bill, NTIA would be required to report to Congress about:

1. Whether the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service have each established a portal, and

2. Any barriers to establishing the portals.

The NTIA would have to submit the first report within 90 days of the enactment of the bill and additional reports every 60 days thereafter until the portals are established. Additionally, Interior and the Forest Service would have to notify the NTIA within three business days of establishing their respective portals.

Rep. Dingell said:

In addition to the Commerce Committee, this bill was referred to the House Committees on Agriculture and Natural Resources.

3. DIGITAL Applications Act (H.R.1665)

The Deploying Infrastructure with Greater Internet Transactions and Legacy (DIGITAL) Applications Act was introduced by Reps. Kat Cammack (R-FL) and Doris Matsui (D-CA). This bill would require the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to each establish an online portal for accepting, processing, and disposal of applications for communications use authorizations.

Communications use authorizations include requests for easements, rights-of-way, leases, licenses, or other authorizations to locate or modify a transmitting device, support structure, or other communications facility on public lands or National Forest System land.

The Department of the Interior and the Forest Service must also notify NTIA within three business days of establishing their respective portals, and once the portals are established, the NTIA must link to them from its website.

Rep. Matsui said

This legislation was also referred to the House Committees on Agriculture and Natural Resources. The Committee on Natural Resources approved the bill by unanimous consent on April 9.

4. Expediting Federal Broadband Deployment Act (H.R. 1681)

The Expediting Federal Broadband Deployment Act, sponsored by Reps. Marcus Evans (D-PA) and Angie Craig (D-MN), would direct NTIA to lead an interagency strike force to help prioritize reviews for requests to deploy broadband on federal land. 

The strike force would (1) conduct periodic calls with strike force members to ensure that each agency prioritizes the review of requests for communications use authorizations, (2) establish goals for the review of the requests, and (3) monitor and facilitate agency accountability for meeting the established goals.

The bill specifies that the strike force must include the head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the head of each federal land management agency, and other members designated by the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior. The bill also requires the strike force to report to Congress regarding its effectiveness.

On April 9, 2025, the House Committee on Natural Resources approved H.R. 1681 by unanimous consent.

5. Standard FEES Act (H.R.1731)

The Standard Fees to Expedite Evaluation and Streamlining (Standard FEES) Act was introduced by Reps. Gary Palmer (R-AL) and Patrick Ryan (D-NY). This bill would require the General Services Administration (GSA) to establish, and federal agencies to adopt, a uniform schedule of fees for applications to place, modify, or maintain communications facilities in, over, or on federally owned buildings and property.  

Under the proposed legislation, the fees established by the GSA must be competitively neutral with respect to other application fees for similar uses and based on the direct and actual costs of processing such applications. The GSA may establish exceptions to the fee schedule to be granted by agencies on a case-by-case basis, provided the exceptions are competitively neutral with respect to the categories of individuals or entities granted exceptions and meet certain other requirements. 

Agencies may only use fees collected to cover the costs of processing applications, and only to the extent that the funds are provided in advance in appropriations acts.

Rep. Ryan said, “The Standard FEES Act will enable federal dollars for broadband deployment to flow faster and will make the deployment process more efficient. The digital divide in America leaves too many behind—I’ll always fight for practical solutions that bring high speed internet to every household.”

The bill was also referred to the House Transportation Committee's Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.

6. Broadband and Telecommunications RAIL Act (not yet introduced)

Rep. John Joyce (R-PA) recently shared with his colleagues a bill aimed at streamlining the deployment of telecommunications and broadband service facilities in public rights-of-way and the rights-of-way of railroad carriers. The Broadband and Telecommunications RAIL Act (still unnumbered) would require the FCC to write rules to govern the intersection of public rights-of-way, railroad rights-of-way, and broadband deployment.

7. Proportional Reviews for Broadband Deployment Act (H.R.2289)

Sponsored by Rep. Earl “Buddy” Carter (R-GA), the Proportional Reviews for Broadband Deployment Act aims to remove “burdensome” permitting requirements for upgrading existing wireless towers. This bill excludes certain requests to modify an existing wireless tower or base station from specified environmental and historic preservation review requirements. Specifically, the bill applies to certain requests to modify an existing wireless tower or base station by collocating, removing, or replacing transmission equipment. In particular, the bill specifies that such projects are not considered major federal actions under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or undertakings under the National Historic Preservation Act. This excludes the projects from relevant reviews required under those acts.

Rep. Carter said, “Unnecessary permitting requirements for basic wireless tower upgrades are preventing high-speed internet access to those who need it most. This commonsense bill will ensure that minor, essential upgrades to our wireless infrastructure are not held up by bureaucratic delays.”

The bill was also referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

8. BROADBAND Leadership Act (H.R.278)

The Barriers and Regulatory Obstacles Avoids Deployment of Broadband Access and Needs Deregulatory (BROADBAND) Leadership Act, sponsored by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA), would streamline permitting processes for telecommunications service providers.

The bill would do so by limiting the authority of a state or locality to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of telecommunications service facilities. States and localities may not discriminate in such regulations among providers of telecommunications services, including based on the technology used to provide services. In addition, states and localities may not regulate in a manner that effectively prohibits the provision or improvement of interstate or intrastate telecommunications services. However, states and localities may charge reasonable, cost-based fees (1) to review requests to place, construct, or modify telecommunications service facilities; or (2) for the use of property owned or managed by the state or locality for the placement, construction, or modification of those facilities.

Rep. Griffith has introduced this bill in multiple previous Congressional terms. In 2023, Griffith said:

9. Broadband Resiliency and Flexible Investment Act (H.R.339)

The Broadband Resiliency and Flexible Investment Act, introduced by Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), would amend the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 to streamline the consideration by state and local governments of requests for modification of certain existing wireless facilities and telecommunications service facilities.

Specifically, this bill would amend the language to say that a state or local government must approve any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower, base station, or eligible support structure––that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such wireless tower, base station, or eligible support structure––and any eligible telecommunications facilities request for a modification of an existing telecommunications service facility in or on eligible support infrastructure (also within the current structural dimensions). State and local government entities must approve requests within 60 days or give written notice of denial within 60 days. States and local governments can require the submission of information from telecommunications entities only to the extent that such information is reasonably related to the request.

10. Wireless Broadband Competition and Efficient Deployment Act (H.R.1541)

The Wireless Broadband Competition and Efficient Deployment Act, sponsored by Rep. Michael Rulli (R-OH), would exempt infrastructure projects that involve the installation or modification of certain wireless communications facilities from specified federal environmental and historic preservation review requirements. This includes projects that involve:

1. The mounting or installation of an eligible personal wireless service facility with an eligible personal wireless service facility that exists when an authorization request for the mounting or installation is filed with a state or local government or an Indian tribe; or
2. The modification of an eligible personal wireless service facility.

“This bill would eliminate burdensome reviews that are often repetitive and slow down broadband expansion,” Rep Rulli said.

The legislation was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.

11. Wireless Resiliency and Flexible Investment Act of 2025 (H.R.1617)

Sponsored by Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY), the Wireless Resiliency and Flexible Investment Act means to speed up wireless broadband deployment by changing the broadband permitting process. Under this bill, a state and local government must approve any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower, base station, or eligible support structure that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of that structure.

Rep. Langworthy said:

12. Wildfire Communications Resiliency Act (H.R.1655)

The Wildfire Communications Resiliency Act, sponsored by Rep. Cliff Bentz (R-OR), would exempt certain post-wildfire communications infrastructure projects from specified federal environmental and historic preservation review requirements. The bill would exempt from review projects that:

1. Are to be carried out within five years of the declaration of a wildfire-related major disaster or emergency in a given area; 
2. Are to be carried out entirely within the area for which the major disaster or emergency was declared; and
3. Will replace a communications facility damaged by the major disaster or emergency, or make improvements to a communications facility that are necessary for recovery or to prevent or mitigate a future major disaster or emergency.

To qualify under the bill, a major disaster or emergency must have been declared by the President, a state governor, or a tribal chief executive. 

Rep. Bentz said:

House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands held a hearing that considered this legislation back in June. 

13. GRANTED Act of 2025 (H.R.1836)

Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-CA) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) introduced the Liquid Cooling for AI Act. The proposed legislation directs a comprehensive technology assessment exploring the use of liquid cooling technologies in U.S. data centers and how they can advance AI computing abilities. Additionally, it calls for the development of government-wide best practices that will not only guide federal use of liquid cooling technologies and methods to enhance the security and reliability of data centers but also establish standards that accelerate adoption of liquid cooling systems across both public and private AI facilities. 

Rep. Gottheimer said:

14. BEAD FEE Act of 2025 (H.R.1975)

Introduced by Rep. Rick Allen (R-GA), the BEAD FEE Act of 2025 would limit the nature of fees that states and territories receiving Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program funding may impose on applicants seeking authorization to construct or deploy broadband infrastructure. 

Under the bill, BEAD funds may not be provided to an eligible entity if the entity or a political subdivision of the entity charges fees:

1. To consider a request to place, construct, or modify broadband infrastructure; or
2. For the use of a right-of-way owned or managed by the entity or a political subdivision, or for the use of infrastructure within such a right-of-way, to place, construct, or modify broadband infrastructure.

However, this restriction does not apply to fees that are competitively neutral, technology neutral, nondiscriminatory, publicly disclosed, and based on actual, direct, and objectively reasonable costs.

Any such fee must be described to applicants in a manner that distinguishes between (1) recurring and nonrecurring fees, and (2) the use of infrastructure on which there is no existing broadband infrastructure and the use of infrastructure on which there is existing broadband infrastructure as of the date of the application. 

Rep. Allen said:

15. Reducing Barriers for Broadband on Federal Lands Act of 2025 (H.R.2298)

The Reducing Barriers for Broadband on Federal Lands Act of 2025, introduced by Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-ID), would ensure that certain broadband projects are not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews. 

There are no cosponsors. The bill also sits in the Committee on Natural Resources.

16. Coastal Broadband Deployment Act (H.R.2817)

The Coastal Broadband Deployment Act was introduced by Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R-FL). The bill aims to speed coastal broadband deployment by ensuring that the deployment or modification of a communications facility entirely within a floodplain is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews. 

Rep. Bilirakis said, “Several parts of my district lie within flood zones. I want to be sure that all of my constituents have access to 21st Century Technologies, enabling them to harness the potential power that these capabilities offer. Being left behind is not an option.” 

There are no cosponsors. The bill also sits in the Committee on Natural Resources.

17. Connecting Communities Post Disasters Act of 2025 (H.R.3960)

The Connecting Communities Post Disasters Act of 2025 was introduced by Rep Neal Dunn (R-FL). The Act would ensure that projects to replace or improve communications systems damaged by disasters are not subject to environmental or historical preservation reviews. The Act would ensure that systems damaged by a disaster or emergency declared by the President would not be classified in a way that would require NEPA or National Historic Preservation Act review.

There are no cosponsors. The bill also sits in the Committee on Natural Resources.

18. Brownfields Broadband Deployment Act (H.R.4211)

The Brownfields Broadband Deployment Act was introduced by Rep Tim Walberg (R-MI-5). The Act would ensure that projects for the deployment or modification of a communications facility built entirely in a brownfield would not be subject to environmental or historic preservation reviews. A brownfield is a previously developed property that is currently abandoned or underused. 

Rep Walberg said,

The bill was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources. There are no cosponsors.

19. CABLE Competition Act (H.R.4927)

The Consumer Access to Broadband for Local Economies and Competition Act, or CABLE Competition Act, was introduced by Reps. Erin Houchin (R-IN) and Craig Goldman (R-TX). The CABLE Competition Act would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit franchising authorities from requiring approval for the sale of cable systems.

20. Winning the International Race for Economic Leadership and Expanding Service to Support Leadership Act” or “WIRELESS Leadership Act (H.R.5147)

The WIRELESS Leadership Act, introduced by Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH), would streamline permitting processes for wireless providers by preserving state and local zoning authority subject to reasonable limitations, like shot clocks and cost-based fees, to ensure providers receive an answer on their applications in a timely manner.

Rep. Latta said:

21. Cable Access for Broadband and Local Economic Leadership Act or CABLE Leadership Act (H.R.5170)

The CABLE Leadership Act, sponsored by Rep. Troy Balderson (R-OH) would place shot clocks on a cable franchising authority to act on a request for a new franchise to speed up deployment.

In 2023, Rep. Balderson said, "Too many Americans remain unable to access high-speed internet because the buildouts of new networks are held in limbo due to lengthy application processes for franchising approval. This legislation establishes a common sense ‘shot clock’ to help ensure projects are not bogged down by countless delays.”

The bill has no cosponsors.

22. Streamlining Permitting to Enable Efficient Deployment for Broadband Infrastructure or the SPEED for Broadband Infrastructure Act (H.R.5264)

Rep. Craig Goldman (R-TX) introduced the Streamlining Permitting to Enable Efficient Deployment for Broadband Infrastructure or the SPEED for Broadband Infrastructure Act (H.R. 5264) on September 10, 2025. The legislation aims to exempt some communications facilities installations from environmental or historical preservation reviews. Rep. Greg Pence (R-IN) introduced similar legislation in the last Congress.

The bill has no cosponsors; it was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.

23. 5G Using Previously Granted Rulings that Accelerate Deployment Everywhere Act or the 5G UPGRADE Act (H.R.5266)

Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R-TN) introduced the 5G Using Previously Granted Rulings that Accelerate Deployment Everywhere Act or the 5G UPGRADE Act (H.R.5266) on September 10. The bill would amend existing law to provide a timeframe for the consideration by State and local governments of requests for modification of certain existing wireless facilities.

The bill has no cosponsors. 

24. Broadband Competition and Efficient Deployment Act (H.R.5273)

On September 10, Rep. John Joyce (R-PA) introduced the Broadband Competition and Efficient Deployment Act, aiming to exempt telecommunications service facility collocation projects from certain environmental and historical preservation reviews.

The bill was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources; there are no cosponsors.

25. Cable Transparency Act (H.R.5290)

Rep. Randy Walker (R-TX) introduced the Cable Transparency Act on September 10. A similar bill was introduced by Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-AZ) in the last Congress. The legislation would modify the requirements governing decisions about the placement, construction, or modification of equipment and related facilities that are used in or attached to cable communications systems. Specifically, state or local governments, their instrumentalities, or franchise authorities (state or local entities that regulate certain aspects of cable operators) would not be able to regulate the placement, construction, or modification of cable equipment or facilities in a manner that effectively prohibits a cable operator from providing or enhancing its service under a franchise granted by one of those entities.

Additionally, the bill would require those entities to approve or deny a complete request to place, construct, or modify cable equipment or facilities within specified time frames. Failure to respond to the request within the specified time frame deems it automatically approved. Further, the bill would require that any denial of a request must be in writing, supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record, and publicly released at the same time as the decision is made.

The bill would permit an entity to charge fees for considering requests provided that the fees are (1) nondiscriminatory, (2) publicly disclosed in advance, and (3) based on actual and direct costs.

The modifications concerning the time frames for decisions and the fees apply retroactively to requests that are submitted prior to the enactment of the bill but have not been approved or denied.

The legislation has no cosponsors. 

26. Connecting and Building Lines for Expedited Expansion Act or the CABLE Expansion Act (H.R.5311)

Rep. Julie Fedorchak (R-ND) introduced the CABLE Expansion Act, legislation to expedite broadband deployment by streamlining the permitting process for cable operators while protecting the role of local governments. The bill would:

• Streamline applications for cable operators that apply to a franchise authority to deploy or upgrade facilities. 
• Preserve local authority while requiring timely, written responses from franchise authorities. 
• Establish clear timelines for decisions, with applications automatically granted if no response is issued in time. 
• Require transparency in fees and ensures they are based only on actual, direct costs. 
• Require any denial to be written, publicly released, and backed by clear evidence at the time of the decision. 
• Apply the new timelines and fee requirements retroactively to pending requests that have not yet been approved or denied.

Rep. Fedorchak said, “This commonsense legislation will help providers deploy and upgrade networks more quickly, reduce the regulatory burden, and lower costs, all while preserving local control over permitting decisions.”

The bill has no cosponsors.

27. Reducing Antiquated Permitting for Infrastructure Deployment Act or the RAPID Act (H.R.5318)

On September 11, Subcommittee Chairman Richard Hudson (R-NC) introduced the Reducing Antiquated Permitting for Infrastructure Deployment Act (H.R. 5318). Chairman Hudson introduced similar legislation, also known as the RAPID Act, in 2023. The legislation would 1) clarify that small cell deployments are subject to neither environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) nor historical review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and 2) establish a court's presumption that a wireless provider has completed a request for review if a Tribal nation or Native Hawaiian Organization has received certain completed FCC forms relating to deployment of new or collocated wireless facilities.

In 2023, Rep Hudson said:

The bill was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources; there are no cosponsors.

28. TRUSTED Broadband Networks Act (H.R. 5358)

A version of the TRUSTED Broadband Networks Act was introduced in the last Congress by Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY), now the chair of the House Commerce Committee. In 2023, Rep. Guthrie said, "With the reintroduction of the TRUSTED Broadband Networks Act, I’m doubling down on my efforts to help small and rural providers secure their networks by streamlining the permitting process to get rid of suspect equipment.”

Rep. Russell Fry (R-SC) is now championing this legislation that would provide that a project to remove and replace communications equipment or services listed under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews.

Specifically, the TRUSTED Broadband Networks Act:

• Exempts replacement projects from unnecessary reviews
  • Removal and replacement of insecure communications equipment (e.g., Huawei or ZTE hardware) will not be treated as a “major federal action” under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
  • These projects will also not be considered “undertakings” under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA).
• Clearly defines “covered projects”
  • Permanent removal of communications equipment/services deemed insecure under the 2019 Act.
  • Replacement with secure, trusted communications equipment/services.
• Covers all federal authorizations
  • Streamlines permits, certifications, approvals, and other federal authorizations needed for covered projects.
• Cuts red tape for small providers
  • Ensures rural and small telecom providers can secure their networks without delays caused by duplicative federal review processes.

“Securing our broadband infrastructure is essential to protecting not only national security, but also the everyday lives of Americans who rely on fast, safe, and reliable internet,” said Congressman Fry. “The TRUSTED Broadband Networks Act puts our small and rural providers in a position to act quickly and ensures adversaries cannot exploit vulnerabilities in U.S. networks.” 

There are no cosponsors for the bill. The legislation was also referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.

---

Grace Tepper and Zoë Walker contributed to this article.

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society is a non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring that all people in the U.S. have access to competitive, High-Performance Broadband regardless of where they live or who they are. We believe communication policy - rooted in the values of access, equity, and diversity - has the power to deliver new opportunities and strengthen communities.

---

© Benton Institute for Broadband & Society 2025. Redistribution of this email publication - both internally and externally - is encouraged if it includes this copyright statement.

---

For subscribe/unsubscribe info, please email headlinesATbentonDOTorg