Oversight of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology U.S. House of Representatives
Follow its sittings
Doris Matsui
It's how our children can learn, how patients access telehealth, how small businesses compete, and how families stay connected. That is why Congress passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and invested 65 billion dollars to close the digital divide, including more than 42 billion dollars through the BEAD program. Congress made a promise to connect every community with affordable, reliable broadband. Instead of carrying out the promise, the Trump administration has spent the last 18 months gutting it. NTIA has repeatedly moved the goalposts, missed its own deadlines, and created uncertainty for states, providers, and the communities waiting to get connected.
Today, we see the consequences. Providers are walking away. States are being forced to revisit decisions they already made. Communities that thought help was finally on the way are once again left wondering when or if they'll ever get connected. California has worked in good faith to meet these shifting demands, but we're still stuck waiting on NTIA's final sign-off before we can get shovels in the ground.
From Sacramento to San Joaquin and the El Dorado Hills, families are now waiting well into next year while the Trump administration keeps changing the rules. Even more troubling, NTIA is still sitting on more than 20 billion dollars in BEAD non-deployment funding. Congress provided those funds because closing the digital divide requires more than laying fiber in the ground or launching satellites into space. It also requires making sure people can afford to get online and have the skills and support to use that connection. Yet, months after missing its own deadlines, NTIA still has not told states if or how they can use these funds, leaving states in limbo and families behind.
I'm equally concerned that in other areas, NTIA is also exceeding the authority that Congress gave it. Congress never directed NTIA to override state affordability policies, disregard their net neutrality laws, or discourage states from negotiating stronger contract provisions to protect consumers. And Congress certainly never authorized NTIA to override state AI laws. Yet, President Trump is threatening to withhold billions in broadband funding if states if he doesn't like their AI protection. The administration also illegally canceled nearly 3 billion dollars in digital equity funds, including 70 million dollars that was going to help California families.
That decision stopped their proposed project that would have helped more than 500,000 digitally disadvantaged California households gain affordable broadband access, digital skills training, and the devices they need to participate in today's economy. Across 50 California counties, including the Sacramento regions, seniors, veterans, students, people with disabilities, and low-income families are left behind because President Trump didn't like a program Congress specifically created to help them. Today, I'm concerned we'll hear NTIA continue to dodge accountability, offer vague answers, shift blame, and exceed the authority Congress gave it.
But the American people deserve clear answers. When will states receive certainty about funding? What legal authority does NTIA believe it has to impose requirements Congress never enacted? And when will states finally be allowed to finish the work Congress directed them to do? Congress passed a bipartisan law.
NTIA's job is to follow it, not rewrite it. Lastly, we must continue leading the world in spectrum policy, which powers the devices and services Americans depend on to work, learn, and stay safe. And that's why the US government must speak with one voice at next year's World Radiocommunications Conference. I urge and encourage NTIA to hold a spectrum summit to ensure that the US has a united front with our strategic allies. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Richard Hudson
Thank you. I now recognize the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Kentucky, for five minutes for his opening statement.
Brett Guthrie
Thanks, Chairman Hudson, thanks for hosting this important hearing today. And I thank Administrator Roth for being here. Welcome to the committee, back to the committee. The National Telecommunications Information Administration plays a critical role in ensuring every American has access to connectivity and that the United States continues to lead the world in technological information. I'm sure Chairman Hudson, I know he spoke a lot about BEAD, and I'm sure you mentioned that it took three years of the Biden administration to not get a penny out.
I'm sure you brought that up when we're talking about delays. But anyway, but I won't focus on that. I'm going to focus on the work you're doing on spectrum. My good friend, the ranking member of this subcommittee, and I have worked very closely together and very long hours on spectrum. So I appreciate being here together with her.
So one of the important roles NTIA plays is managing the use of federal spectrum. As demand for 5G, 6G, Wi-Fi, and AI continue to grow, we need to make sure spectrum is available for private use sector. The Working Families Tax Cut directed NTIA in coordination with the FCC to identify 500 megahertz of federal spectrum for reallocation for commercial use. I am pleased to hear that NTIA has already begun identifying bands for reallocation and studying other important mid-band spectrum bands. I hope NTIA can move quickly to get these bands to auction.
This is crucial to maintaining United States leadership in wireless innovation. NTIA also plays an essential role in representing the United States in the international telecommunications discussion, including this year's ITU-A meeting and next year's World Radiocommunications Conference. We have our work cut out for us. It's in China. I don't know who decided to locate that in China, but it is.
And I know we're going to have to have all hands on deck and working together. I look forward to hearing from Administrator Roth about our preparations for these two important events. American leadership globally is key. Otherwise, the next generation of technology will be dominated by adversaries who do not share our values and who cannot allow them to set standards to drive innovation and reap the economic benefits of our, that should be ours. As I say that, as I always say, we're not competing with Europe to regulate, we're competing with China to innovate.
We, as we did yesterday, protect our children from purveyors on the, through social media, but we also need to make sure that we have in place what's been really interesting to watch. And I've been, I've talked about Europe quite a bit and how that example of what not to do. As, as European teams are staying in, not just in our cities, which we have, I put our cities up against any city in the world, but particularly in our suburbs. I was just in Chattanooga at a wedding and the French, I mean, excuse me, the Spanish team is staying in the city of Chattanooga. And they're just seeing that American prosperity is throughout the country.
It's amazing how they look at the way everyday middle-class Americans live and they can't believe we have the standard of living that we have. I think that's been a great outcome from what we've seen of hosting the world in the United States, because people in the world can see they can live the same way we live if they have the right innovation and the right policies in place. So as I always say, we have twice the economy of Europe, where we had equivalent-sized economies in 2007. So it's important that we maintain our leadership so we continue to grow and raise the standard of living not just for the people running the companies, but the people who are working for the companies and benefiting from the efficiencies that come from these companies.
And we appreciate that, and I will yield back.
Richard Hudson
Thank you, Chairman. I now recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, the ranking member, for five minutes for his opening statement.
Frank Pallone
Thank you, Chairman Hudson. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, NTIA, plays a critical role in planning and coordinating US communications strategy at home and abroad, expanding internet access and connectivity, and improving public safety communications. And as the President's principal advisor for telecommunications policy, the NTIA administrator is responsible for leading an agency charged with ensuring Americans continue to have reliable access to communications capabilities. The BEAD program was established and funded as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 2021 to provide a generational investment in broadband infrastructure for unserved and underserved communities across the country. And for decades, we've heard countless stories about how pervasive the digital divide has become, especially in rural communities.
And that's why passing that law was a victory not just for red states or blue states, but for all communities lacking internet access. And this program was meant to address that inequity with state-of-the-art investments that would last for multiple decades. Unfortunately, the Trump NTIA has strayed far from that mission since January of 2025. Despite pushback from both Republicans and Democrats at all levels of government, the Trump NTIA is barreling ahead with its shady restructuring of the BEAD program while impounding billions of taxpayers' dollars in grant funds across a number of programs authorized and appropriated by Congress. Commerce Secretary Lutnick and NTIA Administrator Roth have repeatedly violated the law and defied congressional intent in a manner that is increasing the cost of internet service and, I fear, opening the door to waste, fraud, and abuse.
Hidden behind the veil they call the benefit of the bargain, the Trump administration forced states to throw out their broadband plans and bullied state broadband offices into awarding as many locations as possible to Elon Musk's SpaceX on the basis that it is the cheapest option. It's not the best option or the right option, but the cheapest option. When it comes to critical infrastructure like bridges or pipelines, and yes, broadband, Americans just want the job done right. Even then, low Earth orbit, LEO, broadband solutions like Musk's Starlink are only cheaper than the alternatives if you do not factor in each technology's lifespan and cost over time. And let me be clear, satellite connectivity is an important component of the broader communications ecosystem.
But NTIA's changes to the BEAD program ignore the fact that Starlink is already accessible to the public. Although prohibitively expensive for many Americans, any household or business currently lacking internet access could sign up today without one dime of taxpayer money. At the end of the day, all NTIA has done is secure hundreds of thousands of locations where satellite is now the lone monopoly provider, robbing consumers of choice and competition that are fundamental to making service affordable to middle-class families. By taking thousands of miles of fiber off the map, the Trump administration has unnecessarily condemned vast swaths of rural America to the connectivity equivalent of a Band-Aid, ignoring the spirit and intent of this generational infrastructure investment. To make matters worse, NTIA has yet to demonstrate with any certainty that LEO providers will meet and sustain the statutorily required performance metrics at scale.
And the Trump administration is also failing to enforce the statutory requirement of law that BEAD grantees offer a low-cost service option that is truly affordable to qualifying consumers. This is yet another example of the Trump administration driving up everyday costs on hardworking American families. It's bad enough costs are skyrocketing as a result of Trump's reckless tariffs and his reckless war of choice with Iran, but now his administration is defying the law and refusing to ensure consumers have access to low-cost service options for their internet service as the law intended. While households are finally being connected under BEAD, the Trump administration's inexcusable revamping of the program not only stopped getting shovels in the ground, but it's also increased costs. And now we're seeing broadband providers leave the BEAD program and surrender their awards one after another, not because of decisions made by the states, but because of moving goalposts and mismanagement from NTIA.
To minimize the damage already done, NTIA must immediately deliver each state's non-deployment funds with maximum flexibility for their use, consistent with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act. And time is literally running out to put these dollars to good use, and the delays have gone on long enough. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Richard Hudson
Thank you. We have now concluded with member opening statements. The chair reminds members that pursuant to committee rules, all members' opening statements will be made part of the record. I'd like to thank our witness for being here today to testify before the subcommittee. Our witness will have five minutes to provide an opening statement, which will be followed by a round of questions from members.
The witness here today before us is the Honorable Ariel Roth, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications and Information and Administrator, National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Welcome, Administrator Roth. Also on behalf of the committee, I'd like to extend a warm welcome to your husband, Yaakov, and your parents, Mark and Peggy. I know they're proud, and we're very happy to have you with us here today. We extend our welcome.
Administrator Roth, you're recognized for five minutes for your opening statement.
Make sure your mic's on there.
April Roth
I do that all the time too. Chairman Hudson, Ranking Member Matsui, and members of the subcommittee, it's great to be back, and thank you for the opportunity to testify today. It's been nearly a year since I was confirmed to lead NTIA, and I am grateful for the opportunity to work alongside the dedicated public servants at the agency to advance an ambitious agenda: developing the largest spectrum pipeline in our nation's history, ensuring nationwide broadband availability, strengthening public safety communications, and promoting American leadership in the technologies of the future. It's especially meaningful to appear before you just days before our nation celebrates its 250th anniversary. Throughout our history, breakthroughs in communications have helped expand opportunity, accelerate the exchange of ideas, and strengthen American prosperity.
From the telegraph to the telephone to wireless, satellite, the internet, and now AI, America has repeatedly led the technologies that shape the modern world. At NTIA, our responsibility is to ensure that the next generation of communications technologies continues that tradition by removing obstacles to innovation, expanding opportunity, and strengthening American leadership. Consistent with the Working Families Tax Cut Act and President Trump's memorandum establishing US leadership in 6G as a national priority, NTIA is moving aggressively to identify at least 500 megahertz of spectrum for commercial use. Thanks to our progress across the 7 gigahertz, 2.7 gigahertz, 4 gigahertz, and 1.675 gigahertz bands, we are on track to meet that target ahead of our statutory deadline.
To support transparency and accountability, NTIA recently launched spectrum.gov so that Congress, industry, and the public can track progress in real time. NTIA is strengthening engagement in international standards bodies, preparing aggressively for the 2027 World Radiocommunication Conference, supporting American leadership at the ITU, and helping ensure next-generation networks are built on secure and resilient technologies rather than standards shaped by authoritarian regimes. Another major priority has been reforming the BEAD program. When this administration took office, BEAD was weighed down by unnecessary red tape, market-distorting restrictions, and requirements that exceeded the statute. Under Secretary Lutnick's leadership, we restored the program's focus to its core mission: connecting Americans through competition, accountability, and respect for the law.
By embracing technology neutrality, encouraging meaningful private investment, and focusing on fiscal discipline, NTIA's benefit-of-the-bargain reforms have produced more than $21 billion in savings while expediting deployment. Today, nearly every state and territory has received approval of its final proposal, and Americans are already being connected through the reformed program. NTIA is also working to improve connectivity in tribal communities through reforms to our Tribal Broadband Connectivity and Native Entity programs that reduce administrative burdens and maximize the impact of federal dollars. Public safety communications remain another core priority. NTIA applauds this committee's leadership on FirstNet reauthorization and the bipartisan efforts to strengthen governance and accountability for the network.
Thanks to NTIA's enhanced oversight of FirstNet, Secretary Lutnick was able to secure an additional $2 billion in value under the contract, enabling further expansion of coverage and connectivity for first responders. In addition, NTIA continues to support this committee's bipartisan effort on Next Generation 911, including through our recently released study providing updated data on nationwide implementation costs. Finally, I want to mention NTIA's work on excessive screen time in schools. As a mother of six, this issue is deeply personal to me. Technology has a role in education, but it should support learning, not replace the reading, writing, critical thinking, and face-to-face interaction children need to thrive.
As parents have become increasingly concerned about the amount of screen-based instruction their children receive during the school day, NTIA has convened parents, teachers, researchers, and our partners across this administration to ensure federal policies put children's learning and healthy development first. NTIA is delivering results across our core missions. As our nation marks 250 years of freedom, innovation, and ingenuity, we remain committed to advancing policies that remove barriers, unleash private sector innovation, and help ensure America leads the next technology frontier. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
Richard Hudson
Thank you. We'll now begin questioning, and I recognize myself for five minutes. Administrator Roth, let's jump right in. When can we expect guidance on how states can use remaining BEAD non-deployment funds?
April Roth
No, I understand that everyone and the members of the committee in particular are very focused on this question. NTIA is extremely outcome-driven. We saw those results through our management of the BEAD program. We inherited a program that had been weighed down, and we course-corrected it and saw incredible outcomes, both in terms of taxpayer savings, faster deployment, and universal connectivity.
And we want to see the same effective outcome outcomes when it comes to the remaining funding that states have worked so hard to produce. We want the funding to be to produce real measurable outcomes, be non-duplicative, non-distortionary, and you know, I think we're really focused on getting the funding right. We're we've received a tremendous amount of interest and comments on how the funding should be used and so we're proceeding cautiously in producing the guidance so that we can ensure that this funding achieves the same success as the first segment of the BEAD program. And we plan to release guidance this summer.
Richard Hudson
Well, I appreciate that answer and I think your track record on the BEAD program writ large was it was excellent and so that at least in my case creates some trust that you will handle this appropriately and correctly, but obviously we want to make sure that these funds are used, but to your point, we want to make sure they're used correctly and effectively so they actually reach real people out there. So I appreciate the care with which you're using, but we want to work with you to get this done as quickly as we can. You and I have talked many times, you know I'm a strong supporter of NextGen 911 and and have called for upgrading across the country to NG911. We are having conversations across the aisle here to try to come to some bipartisan consensus on this issue, but I have said that I think some of these non-deployment funds could be used to fund this NG911 upgrade. Will you take this into consideration as you're making your plans with this money?
Speaker 6
Absolutely, it was one of the recommendations that we saw when we held public listening sessions on the use of the funds and thank you for your leadership on on this issue, Chairman Hudson. I I should have mentioned that it was I've really enjoyed working with you on public safety communications ever since my second day on the job visiting your district and Alamance County for a FirstNet groundbreaking. NTIA has sought to provide helpful information to this committee on Next Generation 911 and applaud your efforts on this issue through our recently updated updated study. I've personally visited several 911 centers, most recently in Fairfax County during Public Safety Telecommunicators Week, and it's just very clear that ensuring that we see upgrades to modern IP-based technologies are critical for better response times, better location tracking, and triage of calls. So looking forward to appreciate the opportunity to work with you and the committee on this on your bipartisan efforts on this issue.
Richard Hudson
I appreciate that. And I should have mentioned the study you did on the cost was crucial and you moved very quickly on that and that really gives us the facts we need I think to move forward with this program. So thank you for that. Going back to BEAD program writ large, I understand that some providers have rejected their awards and have backed out of the program. What is NTIA doing to ensure that homes and businesses these providers were supposed to serve ultimately receive service?
April Roth
Thank you for the question. So our goal is to see universal ubiquitous connectivity through BEAD. That's the law and and we've and we're achieving that. To level set, we have seen some changes in the BEAD program. I think that's to be expected in a program of this size.
We've only we've only seen about 1% of BEAD locations affected by changes, but the good news is that we planned and we have a process in place to ensure that areas that are subject to changes get served.
And we've successfully backfilled in about a dozen states where that's occurred. And we're eager to ensure ubiquitous connectivity. There are multiple reasons for why a provider would back out, but ultimately we're ensuring that providers that can deliver on their obligations are participating in the program.
Richard Hudson
That's great to hear. So the folks who may be backing out represent about 1% of the coverage and you've been able to successfully backfill those cases.
That's right.
Richard Hudson
That's great. Thank you for that. My time has expired. I will now recognize the ranking member for five minutes for her questions.
Doris Matsui
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Administrator Roth. NTIA doesn't have the authority to regulate broadband rates and force states to give up their consumer protections. Yet NTIA is instructing companies receiving federal broadband dollars to insist that states include contract terms exempting these companies from state consumer protections like affordability and net neutrality. Administrator Roth, you've said, and I'm quoting from your October 2025 Hudson Institute remarks, "Any state receiving BEAD funds must exempt BEAD providers throughout their state footprint from broadband-specific economic regulations such as price regulation and net neutrality." California has strong consumer protections, including our own net neutrality law, and has long negotiated stronger broadband contracts to protect consumers.
Yes or no, should California lose broadband funding because it wants stronger consumer protections than what NTIA requires?
April Roth
No, we believe that every state, including California, should get access to broadband through the BEAD program. What we, our job is to implement the law, and the law specifically tells us to ensure the timely and effective deployment of broadband projects through the BEAD program. And we know that one of the challenges of deploying broadband is an inhospitable regulatory environment. We want to ensure that the program's successful, that these projects are successful, they're not subject to default, and so we're doing our job by ensuring that the states do their part to provide that regulatory environment.
Doris Matsui
Okay, what specific authority did Congress give NTIA to require California to suspend or limit enforcement of its own consumer protection laws, not just for BEAD-funded networks, but for companies' broadband operations throughout the state?
April Roth
The law requires NTIA to provide rules and guidelines on the effective deployment of broadband through the BEAD program. We know and history has shown that government price regulation undermines incentives to invest, particularly in rural areas where deployment is already challenged. And so regulations that are hostile to that investment, as we saw in the under the previous rules, providers stayed away because precisely because of hostile rate regulation mandates. We don't want to see that mistake happen again.
Doris Matsui
But I'm asking where Congress specifically authorized NTIA to affect legal rights and obligations outside the scope of the BEAD-funded project.
April Roth
We are not preempting any state laws. What we are saying is that states have to, with respect to BEAD projects, because our mandate and our jurisdiction is BEAD, BEAD projects need to be protected from regulations that undermine the success of the BEAD program and BEAD projects.
Doris Matsui
So you're saying that NTIA could actually tell them to just forget about any consumer protections in this case in a state?
April Roth
I think that our focus is on rate regulation. We're motivated or we're driven by evidence and data. A bipartisan Congress recognized or or actually precluded NTIA from rate regulating in the BEAD program precisely because of data showing that rate regulation harms investment. We don't want to jeopardize the success of BEAD projects and so therefore we've entered agreement into agreements with the states where they've promised to ensure a a healthy regulatory environment so that these projects can be successful.
No, we support consumer protections.
Doris Matsui
Okay, well, I think I'm going to have to follow up with you later on that. Congress passed a bipartisan infrastructure law to connect Americans to affordable reliable broadband. It did not condition broadband funding on whether a state regulates AI. Yet the Trump AI executive order directs NTIA to withhold broadband funding from states with so-called onerous AI laws. California has led the nation on both broadband and responsible AI.
It shouldn't have to choose between protecting consumers and receiving broadband funding. That's why I co-authored the Guardrails Act to repeal this dangerous executive order. Now Administrator Roth, yes or no, can an executive order rewrite law?
April Roth
You know, I serve the President and I implement the law and those two things are not in conflict. Executive orders are lawful direction to executive branch agencies.
Doris Matsui
So okay, so what specific provision in the bipartisan infrastructure law authorizes NTIA to condition BEAD funding on a state's AI laws?
April Roth
So no final decision on the on the report has been made. I'm not going to prejudge outcomes before we've completed our review. What I can say is that our report the the report will comply with the law. I think that it's but it's also important to keep in mind the as we've seen there's a and as the executive order shows there's a a symbiotic I'm sorry I'm out of time.
You can complete your answer.
Yeah, a symbiotic relationship between broadband deployment and and AI. AI is how consumers broadband is how consumers get AI and AI is increasingly becoming embedded in broadband network architecture. So I think so the you know the it's per our mandate to ensure timely and effective deployment of of broadband it's important that the regulatory environment reflect reflect those those outcomes.
Richard Hudson
Great, gentlelady's time has expired. Chair now recognizes the chairman of the full committee Mr. Guthrie for five minutes for his questions.
Brett Guthrie
Thank you, I thank you for being here Administrator Roth. As I mentioned in my opening statement the Working Families Tax Cut directed NTIA to identify 500 megahertz of federal spectrum for allocation for commercial. I understand that some bands have already been identified for commercial use and that studies are underway on others. How quickly can these studies be completed from there from from there and how quickly can we expect these bands to be ready for auction?
April Roth
Thank you Chairman Guthrie and it was great to meet with you as I started my role as NTIA Administrator. Thank you for your leadership and the committee's leadership on spectrum. Getting more spectrum into the marketplace is a core priority of this administration and we're working aggressively to meet the mandate set out for us in the Working Families Tax Cut Act. We are on track not only to meet the meet that mandate but beat it thanks to the President's leadership in the winning the 6G race presidential memorandum. And we're going to identify spectrum in the 7 gigahertz band ahead of schedule by the end of this year.
And we're at NTIA, we're extremely focused on on this mission. We're working on four studies at once, which is which is unprecedented. And and so we're working with the FCC and other federal partners to get spectrum studied and identified as quickly as possible so that we can meet Chairman Carr's goal of five auctions during this administration.
Brett Guthrie
Well, I was going to ask you how we could help you speed this up. It sounds like you're in the express lane already getting this done, huh? Is there things we could help you with to get it done faster, or do you feel like you're pretty comfortable the way this is going?
April Roth
Yeah, no, we're working very fast. We were able to secure funding in the 2.7 gigahertz band in half the time it took the previous administration. So, you know, but at the same time, what what we're working on and how we can get spectrum identified is through the spectrum relocation fund process, which is really essential to ensure that we have the certainty over what we're auctioning and under what parameters so that an auction can be successful.
Brett Guthrie
So let me follow up. So a major component of reallocating spectrum from federal to non-federal uses is spectrum reallocation fund. We've heard that these there can be barriers to agencies utilizing these funds, ultimately delaying new spectrum getting into the hands of commercial users. What can Congress do to reform the spectrum relocation fund so that it can be better used as an incentive to encourage federal agencies to relocate?
So, you know, we would defer to Congress, but and we will abide by the law in the SRF.
Brett Guthrie
You have suggestions on how we can improve it? You have suggestions for how we can improve it?
April Roth
Yeah. So one of the things that that we've seen is that some of the timelines perhaps could be truncated to more to get get funding to the agencies more quickly and enable us to complete our studies quicker. You know, one timeline that the committee could consider would be the the 60-day congressional notification timeline. There's also a six-month identification congressional notification timeline for transition funding. So we'd be happy to work with you and the committee on finding ways to expedite this process and get funding enable agencies to secure funding more expeditiously.
Brett Guthrie
So thanks. So now for the World Radiocommunication Conference that takes place next year, obviously in China. So it's critical that we have a we go there strong with a unified position. And so can you discuss the status of the preparation for the World Radio Conference 27 and our ability to develop a unified position on different agenda items? So how's the preparation going?
Where are we? And can we have a unified position?
April Roth
This is a core focus of of this administration. We're working aggressively with our interagency partners to get our positions identified well ahead of WRC so that we can build an international commission of a coalition of like-minded partners and build support for those positions. One of the ways NTIA did that was by holding a training in Ghana with 27 key regulators from 20 different African countries. The agenda at WRC is is going to be very satellite-heavy. And so we worked with those regulators to promote US commercial space interests, a very important which is a very important area strategically for us.
Brett Guthrie
What kind of extra considerations do you have to give given that it's in China?
April Roth
Yeah, so one of one of the things that we need to do is ensure effective leadership at the ITU. The plenipotentiary conference where those where upcoming elections are happening is in is this November. And so we're working to ensure that Doreen Bogdan-Martin wins her election as Secretary General of the ITU as well as the US wins in its other elections. Effective leadership is important to ensure that we can promote our interests in an effective way at WRC without surveillance or or interference.
Brett Guthrie
Thanks. So my time's expired. So thank you for your answers and I yield back.
Frank Pallone
Thank you, Chairman. I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Pallone, for five minutes for your questions.
Thank you. And as I've mentioned, I have serious concerns that your tenure as NTIA administrator has shown a pattern of decision-making ranging from irresponsible to outright unlawful. And the common thread that ties it all together is a dereliction of your duty to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars. For instance, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law specifically prioritizes broadband technologies in the BEAD program that are the most reliable, scalable, and future-proof, meaning that they will not become outdated or obsolete in the near future. But instead, you force states to prioritize the cheapest bids regardless of a technology's scalability or longevity.
And it's difficult to ignore the growing list of similarities between your new BEAD program and the failed Trump Rural Digital Opportunity Fund program. Both incentivize a race to the bottom, fraught with numerous provider defaults and open the door to waste, fraud, and abuse. And worse, by imposing arbitrary per-location price caps, you fail to accurately reflect the actual cost to serve the rural low-density locations that are the specific target of the BEAD program. And the decision to ignore the law has redirected valuable funding away from infrastructure that would last for decades to subsidies instead for Elon Musk's satellite service, which we know faces affordability, reliability, and spectrum capacity constraints and is widely more expensive for customers in the long run. Yet you have issued no guidance on how they are supposed to ensure that SpaceX does in fact have the capacity to serve every location they've been awarded.
So let me ask, Administrator Roth, what evidence do you have to suggest that LEO broadband will be able to meet the law's performance requirements at all times for the entirety of the locations it has been awarded?
April Roth
I agree that the law is what should govern our decisions, and that's exactly what we've done by restoring technology neutrality in the program.
Frank Pallone
But do you have any evidence to suggest that LEO broadband will be able to meet the law's performance requirements?
April Roth
So maybe I could just, you know, just to explain, rather than requiring a tech mandate on the states, we enabled the states to determine which technologies would work in different areas given that we have diverse conditions across the country. And that's, Congress wrote the law in that manner. Congress set out performance requirements.
Frank Pallone
Well, I understand, but, you know, I, look, let me issue this. In order to verify compliance with the law, will NTIA publicly release the results of BEAD subgrantee speed and performance testing or direct the states to publish performance testing results? That's a way for us to get to the bottom of it.
Yeah, that's in our rules. Each provider is required to, is required to abide by our performance standards and make...
No, I'm asking if you'll publicly release the results of the BEAD subgrantee speed and performance testing or direct the states to publish performance testing results. That's a specific question. Yes or no?
Yes, aggregated data is required.
Frank Pallone
All right, I appreciate it, because I do believe transparency is important to verify compliance with the law. I'm also concerned that you've restricted states' ability to hold delinquent providers accountable or penalize subgrant recipients for failing to deploy or reserve capacity. And I think it's critical that we have some level of insight and accountability into the BEAD program going forward. So NTIA's semi-annual report requirements for the BEAD program mandate that states submit detailed progress reports every six months. And this report is designed to track progress across the various stages of the BEAD grant rollout.
So my last question is, Administrator, will you commit to publishing these semi-annual reports online while protecting confidential information, just as NTIA did for the Broadband Technology Opportunity Program? Again, specific question. Will you commit to publish these semi-annual reports online?
I understand there's some certain confidential information, but, you know, that would not be included, but will you agree to publish those?
Frank Pallone
I appreciate it. I wrote in a November 2025 letter to you that good stewardship of taxpayer dollars is as much about the quality and value of the dollars spent as it is about the bottom line. So I am concerned about, you know, these investments, you know, being made, you know, at the cheapest level as opposed to what I consider quality, and I think that that's wrong. But I appreciate your responses today and we'll follow up. Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 18
I appreciate that. You look like you wanted to say something. I'll give you a few seconds to answer that if you'd like.
April Roth
I would just say that we agree we want every American to have high-quality broadband service. Our view is that performance is the gold standard, not any particular technology. That's how Congress wrote the law, and Congress was right to write the smart to write the bipartisan Congress was smart to write the law like that, given incredible innovation.
Frank Pallone
Well, I don't think that's what you're doing, but I appreciate your responses today because I think we'll have some transparency, hopefully, based on your responses. So thank you.
Richard Hudson
Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired. The chair will now recognize the vice chair of the full committee, representative from Georgia, Mr. Allen, for five minutes for your questions.
Rick Allen
Thank you, Chairman Hudson, for holding this hearing, and thank you, Administrator Roth, for being here today. Georgia has been recognized as the best state to do my home state to do business in 12 years in a row. It obviously because of our favorable business environment there, but also the cost of deployment of resources and that kind of thing. In fact, a home in California costs three times the same home built in Georgia. And so in deploying these funds, it's, it's interesting, I, you know, I, again, we make governance for deploying funds throughout the country, but doing business in some states is nearly impossible because of either labor agreements or other things, which affects my district.
But getting back to Chairman Guthrie talking about the 2.7 gigahertz band, he talked about the timeline. Can you tell me a little bit about the factors that present the greatest risk to that timeline and what this committee and Congress can do to assist NTIA in expeditious identification in the auction? What's, what's holding this up?
Um, so maybe I could just speak to just mention, thank you for meeting with me in your office. It was really great to meet with you, and I agree that with your point that regulatory conditions in a state are very important for ensuring swift deployment of broadband. It's something that we've really taken a heart in BEAD. And I think is was your question about spectrum?
April Roth
So I would say we are moving aggressively and nothing is holding anything up. We are working aggressively across all the bands that we're studying to get them identified and into the marketplace as quickly as possible.
April Roth
Yeah, I mean, as I think one of the things to look at is potentially timelines for the ability to secure spectrum relocation funds, which is a critical part of NTIA's work to identify spectrum for commercial use. But that being said, we are working aggressively. We just, the SRF funds for the 2.7 gigahertz band just completed the congressional notification process, so funds are going to be available imminently to begin those studies. And we're working across all of the bands that were identified. We're going to get seven gigahertz identified by...
April Roth
Yeah, we are working around the clock to get spectrum identified, given its...
Rick Allen
All right, I've got a few more questions. Rural broadband access and connectivity issues remain a top concern for my constituents again because of the policies of the previous administration as far as labor agreements and all this other stuff. Recently, NTIA chose to apply FCC pole attachment rules and regulations across the entirety of a pole-owning subgrantee's footprint as a condition of participation in the BEAD program, including to entities like cooperatives that are exempt from these rules. Can you explain the requirement and the rationale for including it in BEAD?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman. I think it really goes back to your point that ensuring that there's a hospitable environment to innovation is critical to our ability to deliver on our statutory obligation of ensuring BEAD projects are carried out in a timely and effective manner. We've really tried to learn from the past, and one of the past lessons that we know is that pole access can be a serious impediment when it comes to getting projects deployed in a timely and effective manner. And so our job is to ensure that BEAD doesn't get held up by pole access and that there is a cop on the beat. Section 224 of the Communications Act still applies, and state laws still apply to the extent that they govern municipal and cooperative poles, but there is a risk that in BEAD, because pole owners have entered BEAD markets, that incentives aren't necessarily aligned with the goals of BEAD, and so we just need to have a cop on the beat on poles.
Rick Allen
Well, these co-ops electrified America. They're doing a great work. Come down and talk to them about how best to do this before you implement something that they have to deal with. I have another question I'll submit it for the record because I'm out of time and I yield back. Thank you very much.
Speaker 16
Thanks, the gentleman, the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Representative Soto, for five minutes for your questions.
Darren Soto
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Unfortunately, rural America has lost faith in the rollout of the rural broadband program. We've seen 18 months of bureaucracy, 18 months of talk, 18 months of delay. A lot of my folks back home think that the rural broadband plan was actually the smaller rollout of the American Rescue Plan broadband, because that's the only thing that's happened to date since 2021. We saw March 11th, 2021, the American Rescue Plan was signed into law.
In December 1st, 2022, Florida was one of six states to get funds under the American Rescue Plan Capital Projects Fund. And in February 2nd, 2023, Governor DeSantis announces Yeehaw Junction, Kenansville in our district received $4 million, and Deer Park and Bull Creek received $3.6 million to deploy fiber and connect rural areas of Osceola County. I can tell you this was a huge change for a lot of folks down there, everyone from small business owners like realtors, folks who are using Wi-Fi and GPS and other technologies for cattle and citrus and smart farming. It was a big help for them. But then you contrast it to the BEAD program itself, passed into law November 15th, 2021.
July 18th, 2022, we saw the letters of intent due from governors. By 2022 in August, they submitted their applications. By 2023, NTIA announced allocations for all states. And then in January 2025, the president unfortunately paused the BEAD program to revamp it. But here we are in, gosh, 18 months later and we still see I think only Louisiana's the only state that's had some broadband actually built already.
Florida's program was approved in January 7th of 2026, which we appreciate. But we I guess my question, Secretary Roth, is when will Floridians actually see broadband built in Florida?
April Roth
So we agree that expediting broadband needs to be front and center and it's been front and center of everything we've done in course correcting the BEAD program. We, you know, had to we had to course correct the program when we got here precisely because the program had failed to connect any Americans in the during the previous administration. And now, only a year after the restructuring notice, we have deployment out the door. I was recently in Ogallala, Nebraska, for the groundbreaking of a BEAD project where a fixed wireless provider was delivering gigabit service to a community. That was a technology that was prohibited from participating and they're delivering excellent service to the to the community and on an expedited timeline.
We wouldn't have seen that if we had had put all of our eggs in one basket.
Speaker 21
Reclaiming my time, I think that's great. And we certainly want broadband and cellular and satellite to be part of it. We launch SpaceX and Blue Origin rockets from Central Florida and was part of getting some discretion early on before in the last administration. I do think that's got to be a part of it. And this committee stands ready to work with you to speed this up a little bit.
Two states is, you know, a long cry away from where we need to be and we want to work with you on that. And I yield back.
April Roth
Gentleman's time has expired. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Representative Latta, for five minutes for your question.
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thanks for holding this really important hearing today. And Secretary, thanks very much for being with us today. You know, it was a privilege of mine to chair this subcommittee and did a lot of work during the time when we saw BEAD come online. But let's just let's make get some dates right here.
It was 2021 that BEAD became law. Is that correct?
That's correct.
And the Trump administration came in in January of 2025?
Correct.
Speaker 24
You know, it was a privilege of mine to chair this subcommittee and did a lot of work during the time when we saw BEAD come online. But let's just make some dates right here. It was 2021 that BEAD became law. Is that correct?
That's correct.
Correct.
Speaker 23
And how much deployment was made in that period of time from 2021 to January of 2025?
Speaker 23
Not a single. Not anything. Period. Zero. And we had at that, it was an estimated at that time that we had 8 million households across this country that did not have broadband at that time.
And during that period of time from 2021 to 2025, zero got deployed. I know that I was out in my district and we were, I was at one of my community colleges and they were trying to get people instructed in how to deploy broadband because of thinking that it was going to be happening quickly. But the, you know, the locals knew more about things than in Washington, D.C. And they said, one of the meetings I was at, number one, we didn't have the people that had the right training to get them out there to deploy. And the second thing they told me was they didn't have the trucks with a bucket on them that might take a year and a half to two years.
And I asked the previous folks at NTIA if they'd even considered that. And they said no. So there's a lot of other things out there that were contributing factors, but to just get this deployed is really important. Were there regulations out there at the time that really put things behind for states to try to get the broadband deployed during the previous administration?
April Roth
Yes, we saw there were a plethora of negative consequences from the red tape and hostile mandates that were on the program when we inherited it. But thanks to our reforms, we, states were able to target projects to the right areas based on their unique circumstances. You know, we're seeing increased skin in the game with a 40% nationwide project match, which is really indicative of projects being sustainable. And we're on track to connect the entire country, whereas there was a real risk, including identified by the 2025 OIG report, that under the previous rules, certain states were going to run out of money and areas would be left behind.
Speaker 25
And here's another situation I think you have to think about. The longer we take to get something done in this country with regulations and there's money that's been appropriated, because of inflation, it's worth less. So would that be a contributing factor out there too that we have to consider that, you know, we don't have the $42.8 billion that have been appropriated?
April Roth
Yeah, no, through increased, through taking out red tape, participation went up. Providers that had previously stayed out came back to the table. That brought down prices and created much better outcomes for consumers. You know, even within fiber projects, there was one company that won an award in a Midwestern state in 15 counties. Its ask to the government decreased from $2 million from between the previous rules and under our rules.
That's a real win for taxpayers.
Speaker 23
Well, you said a real magic word here in Washington, cutting red tape. That's music to a lot of people's ears. Secretary, you know, the NTIA had not been reauthorized for over 30 years. And legislation that I worked on that's been signed into law is making sure, you know, it's important that we get that NTIA into the next century, you might say. Could you speak to the changes they've made to the deployment program to ensure that we don't repeat what happened in the previous administration with the changes that we've made for reauthorization for NTIA?
Speaker 27
Could you speak to the changes that've made to the deployment program to ensure that we don't repeat what happened in the previous administration?
I've only got about 39 seconds.
Yeah, no, we stripped out red tape and hostile mandates. We restored the program to its statutory mission and we've seen incredible results from that in terms of participation, a diverse technology mix, more skin in the game for taxpayer for projects and universal connectivity on a more expedited timeline, projects currently getting deployed as we speak.
Speaker 23
In my last eight seconds, when do you expect to see breaking ground in Ohio?
April Roth
Well, the state is working with providers to sign subgrants and thanks to our work in expediting permitting, we will see continued groundbreaking in 2026 and scaling into 2027.
Robert Latta
Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. My time's expired and I'll submit my other questions for the Secretary in writing. Thank you.
Raul Ruiz
Thank you. The gentleman's time's expired. The chair will recognize the representative from California, Mr. Ruiz, for five minutes for your questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Across much of rural America and my district, reliable broadband is a dire necessity. I have spoken with and seen families whose children have had to rely on hotspots or public Wi-Fi to complete their homework and with patients in rural communities who have struggled to access telehealth appointments. In fact, some of our school buses have hotspots and they have to park in a near trailer parks and neighborhoods so the kids can go and use their school buses just to use the internet. When a child cannot learn from home or a patient cannot connect with their doctor, the digital divide becomes a barrier to opportunity, education and healthcare.
That's why ensuring affordable, reliable broadband reaches every community is so important and for too many rural and tribal communities, the promise of high-speed internet remains fulfilled, unfulfilled. Families continue to struggle with inadequate connectivity, students still face barriers to completing schoolwork and tribal nations are often left waiting at the back of the line for infrastructure investments that other communities take for granted. That is why Congress created the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment or the BEAD program to close the digital divide once and for all. So California was allocated nearly $1.9 billion through the BEAD program and has spent years working with local governments, providers and tribal nations to develop its plan. Yet communities in my district are still waiting for certainty as NTIA continues reviewing state proposals under quote-unquote revised, revised program requirements.
Administrator Roth, thank you for visiting me last week in the office. I had a wonderful conversation. Can you provide a timeline for when California's BEAD final proposal will receive NTIA approval?
April Roth
Thank you and thank you for meeting me in your office. It was really interesting to discuss the issue that you mentioned of children's technology use. Really appreciated our conversation. In terms of California, we want to see every state, last state approved, including California. We have communicated certain challenges that we've seen.
April Roth
Yeah, so right now the ball is in California's court. We've, we've communicated changes that we're going to need to see in order to ensure that the proposal complies with our rules and the principles of benefit of the bargain. And we're really looking forward to getting that, getting California across the finish line, as well as all states and territories.
Raul Ruiz
So while California continues to wait for its final approval, all states, tribal nations, local communities still lack clarity about how remaining BEAD resources can be used and who will benefit. I will remain deeply concerned that we continue to face delays on this issue. So we were explicitly promised that guidance would be issued this month, and, and it has not happened. The continued failure to deploy it is unacceptable. We need, we need certainty, we need completion of these guidance.
Administrator Roth, can you commit that NTIA's funding decisions will be based on statutory program requirements and broadband deployment needs rather than state policy disagreements?
April Roth
Absolutely. Our job is to implement the law, and that has been front and center for us as we've approached the BEAD program, and I think is evident from the decisions we've made.
Raul Ruiz
I also remain concerned about the long-term stability of the Universal Service Fund. Communities in my district, including rural agricultural communities and tribal nations, depend on these programs to remain connected. That is why I introduced the Tribal Internet Expansion Act, which would ensure that tribal nations are explicitly included within the statutory framework guiding universal service policy rather than relying solely on administrative discretion. While I was pleased NTIA finally announced new funding opportunities for tribes under existing programs that had been on hold, I am disappointed by how long those processes were delayed and that the announcements were made only when you were right about to appear before this committee. Administrator Roth, can we get your commitment that NTIA will work with Congress to strengthen tribal broadband access and support policies that recognize tribal nations as essential partners in achieving universal service?
April Roth
Absolutely. We respect tribal sovereignty at NTIA, and we actually held two tribal consultations in developing our TBCP guidance in January. And ensuring that tribes get universally connected has been at the heart of our reforms to the TBCP program.
Thank you, I appreciate that.
Speaker 32
Gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the representative from Virginia, Representative Griffith, for five minutes for your questions.
H. Griffith
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We had a lot of delays in getting the plan approved originally during the Biden administration. Virginia was one of the first to submit. But I'm glad to see that as a part of what you all have reworked, that you've allowed for low Earth orbit satellite internet to be used as a part of the BEAD program. I may have told you when you came to my office or may have mentioned it in the hearing, I don't remember where, but I actually had a gentleman in Grayson County, Virginia, who came to me and said, you know, we're never going to get it.
And the bottom line is, in a mountainous region of Virginia, they may not be as big as the mountains out west, but you can't run fiber to every nook and cranny, every holler out there, and we're going to need low Earth orbit. And he was thrilled when I told him that that had now been included as a part of the plan and looks forward to that getting some lower cost for him to be able to get the low Earth orbit internet availability. And further, I have to say, I think it's very prudent, and I think you might agree, to have redundant technologies in regions for critical broadband customers like hospitals and schools. You probably want to have more than just one.
And I also bring up Grayson County because that was part of the, it borders North Carolina, and it got hit hard by Hurricane Helene. And I went out and observed a road that was completely gone, just gone. And in the roadbed was the fiber. So that end of the county that had had fiber was out for months because of that. Now, fortunately, the hospital in the region was not affected by that because it was far enough to the east that it didn't get as much damage.
They had other issues, but they didn't have that issue. But don't you think that the allowing BEAD to be used with low earth orbit satellite will help our hospitals and our schools to stay online in times of natural disaster?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman, and really grateful for the opportunity to meet with you and discuss your district's challenges, especially as such a rural part of Virginia. And I really agree with you that different technologies are going to work in different areas. That was what the bipartisan Congress recognized in writing the BEAD law. It set out performance requirements that each technology had to meet. Our gold standard is ensuring that projects meet those performance requirements, but it didn't make sense, given the diverse conditions of our country, to force a one-size-fits-all solution down the states, especially as you mentioned that different technologies work differently.
Fiber is an incredible technology, and indeed most of our program is fiber. But as we've seen, there have been incredible innovations in fixed wireless technology. A technology that just was seen as inferior now can provide gigabit service even in non-line-of-sight environments. And similarly with satellite, we've seen incredible increases in throughput and latency, new generations of satellites coming online, new launches. And I think it's just not correct or a reflection of reality to consider a single technology inferior.
It's at odds with America's historical approach to facilities-based innovation and competition that has made America's broadband the best in the world.
H. Griffith
I appreciate it. Now let me shift to a maybe a little more difficult subject because you've got good folks competing, but there have been some, and you all have updated BEAD to provide guidance explicitly conditioning funding on following pole attachment statutes. Will you commit to referring entities for FCC enforcement and clawing back BEAD funding if pole attachment statutes are not followed by the BEAD grant recipients?
April Roth
Yes, so part of our role right now at NTIA is oversight and ensuring that projects are deployed in a timely and effective manner. And part of that is working to figure out where there are challenges on the ground and working with companies and states to address those. And we have a process in our rules and our terms and conditions specifically on addressing permanent challenges.
H. Griffith
And last but not least, I will just note that I thought it was interesting, not only did we have delays in the Biden administration, but there were requests earlier for you to talk about some laws and where did you all get your authority.
And I remember because of the problem we had in Virginia with the Biden administration that one of the things they were trying to force at that time was that there be a specific low-cost plan that met the approval of the Biden administration. And yet the law specifically prohibits you from you're supposed to have a low-cost plan, but it specific the law specifically prohibits you from deciding what that low-cost plan is, doesn't it?
April Roth
I agree. The law specifically prohibits from rate regulating and micromanaging markets in that way. I think a bipartisan Congress recognized that that was not the right approach to get to maximize participation and success in the program.
And I yield back.
Richard Hudson
Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired. The chair now recognizes the representative from California, Mr. Peters, for five minutes for your questions.
Scott Peters
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Ms. Rothblum, for joining us today. And thank you also for meeting with me earlier on. In November 2021, Congress voted to invest over $42 billion to advance America's goal of universal broadband service, with over $1.8 billion reserved for California in the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment, or BEAD, program. And when I came to Congress, one of the things I heard all the time was about rural broadband.
Republicans were really concerned about that. And in the pandemic, we learned that the digital divide wasn't just rural-urban. It was also it existed in wealthy cities like my own. And so this was a really important thing. It was a huge advance.
And I have to say, I was critical of the Biden administration's deployment of this. I was frustrated that after three years, we didn't have any projects in the ground. And the witness came here when the Republicans took the majority and they she the witness, the Democrat witness, said the states hadn't gotten through the paperwork yet. They said she said it was hard to do. And I thought that the criticism of the Biden administration was in many respects very fair.
And this administration came in promising to speed up the timelines. And after months of silence on BEAD funding at the beginning of last year, NTIA requires states to go through an entirely new process, the benefit of the bargain round. And because of this additional round, states that were on the cusp of receiving funding at the beginning of 2025 were delayed by at least 11 months. Then NTIA missed its own deadline to issue non-deployment guidance by months. That threatened the ability of states to do critical permit process overhauls to ensure the success of the program.
California has still not received its funding for this critical program. California is one of only two states that has yet to receive final proposal approval from NTIA. And we know that if California were to receive NTIA approval today, my state will still need to seek final approval from NIST, receive the notice of its award, sign its award agreement, a process that is likely to take anywhere from an additional six months to a year. That's if if NTIA were to approve California's final plan today. After months of going back and forth between NTIA and California on its final proposal, with multiple rounds of curing earlier this spring, California thought it was nearing final approval.
And then after months of silence from NTIA, NTIA recently sent California a completely new round of curing requests, with new issues and questions NTIA had never previously raised. So we all know California will not be seeing the money anytime soon, leaving our unserved and underserved rural and urban communities behind. Administrator Rothblum, can you explain how changes brought under your leadership have fulfilled your claims of accelerating BEAD deployment, and when should Californians expect to see shovels in the ground?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman, and it was great to talk to you in your office. Where and thank you for giving me the opportunity to explain some of the challenges that we've seen in California.
I told you one of one of the challenges that I think you mentioned in in our approach to curing was that there were some mapping anomalies. We found, you know, we've oversight of the program and conducting our due diligence is really important to ensure protection of taxpayer dollars. And there were several examples in California where we, you know, there were requests for really exorbitant amounts of money ostensibly to serve apartments in the middle of nowhere. And so we had to work with the state to ensure that we address those mapping challenges. We're working with the state.
We intend to we look forward to receiving California's revised proposal so that we can get so that we can get California and all states and territories across the finish line. But I think that the data speaks for itself with respect to expediting projects. Thanks to our restoring the project the the program to its statutory mission, we've already seen deployment.
Scott Peters
You said that before. You said we've got we've got projects in Louisiana. We got a project in Nebraska. And that to me, you know, that's not that great. What we have now is instead of a three-year delay, we have a five-year delay.
The witness is here blaming the states. The witness is here telling about how it's hard. The same things we heard from the Biden witness when you all came into the majority. I hope you're not breaking your arms patting yourself on the back that this is better. This is the same.
This is the same. We have a instead of a three-year delay, we have a five-year delay. And I would love to see some of the same frustration that I showed with the administration of my own party on the other side of the aisle to see the Republicans showing frustration with this with this implementation. Because this is unacceptable. It's as unacceptable as it was at the beginning of this term.
I have more questions, but I'll submit them in writing. I yield back.
Speaker 34
The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes Representative Fulcher for his five minutes of questions.
Russ Fulcher
Thank you, Madam Chair. Administrator Roth, I want to start with a with a thank you. In in May, we had sent an inquiry in regard to the possible use of next generation 911 deployment and and didn't get a full answer yet for a number of reasons. However, you were very responsive. And just the response means a lot, keeping us keyed in on the status.
In my state, we have a lot of rural space. And the rural broadband deployment is a big, big deal. In addition to being a member of Energy and Commerce, I'm also on Natural Resources. And one of the things that we struggle with is a permitting process for this deployment. That's a that's a huge issue for us and a huge issue in terms of how this deployment is handled, the timeliness of which it's handled, what not.
To what extent is NTIA involved or or suggestions have you got in regard to working with federal, state for this permitting process? A lot of this is on or related to federal land. We've got about 34 million acres of that. To what extent is NTIA involved with that and what's happening there?
April Roth
Thank you and thank you for the opportunity to meet with you. So permitting is front and center of our efforts to expedite deployment in the BEAD program. We're really focused on, you know, not just getting paperwork out the door, but actual deployment. And we know that permitting has been one of the historical challenges when it comes to broadband deployment. What we've done at NTIA is we've we've introduced a software cloud-based software software tool to really expedite and automate the permitting process.
We have 47 categorical exclusions that will apply to we estimate about 95% of BEAD projects. And and through our through our software tool, we've seen really a much more expeditious process. A process that used to be email-based and took three to six months is now taking 48 hours, according to one of the state broadband directors. And and the proof is in the data. There were 25,000 locations just got through our our permitting process thanks to that thanks to that tool.
And we're working with other federal agencies, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Council on Historic Preservation, to, you know, expedite things at the federal level. But as you said, there are also a lot of challenges at the state and local level. And so we are working with states to, you know, streamline processing, expedite timelines, reduce permitting costs, because ultimately that's what will make the BEAD program successful and, you know, avoid default. And I also commend this committee's efforts to address some of those challenges through its legislation.
Russ Fulcher
Our experience is most of those challenges on permitting have been federal, but understand that there's also the state and local. Just keep that in mind, it's a big issue for us in rural Idaho. Shifting gears a little bit, you'd referenced the study, or that's been talked about briefly, but the One Beautiful Bill calls for a study of the 2.7 megahertz band. What's the timeline on that in terms of completing that study?
April Roth
So we are working aggressively to complete that study and get spectrum identified in that band. We actually just finished the 60-day congressional notification process to get SRF funding to incumbent agencies, NOAA and the FAA, so that we can complete the requisite studies and identification and get the spectrum auctioned. It's certainly one of the bands that we're working with the FCC to get auctioned as soon as possible.
Speaker 38
What's the speed bumps in that regard? Is it personnel, is it lack of responsiveness from other entities?
April Roth
No, I think one of the benefits of the President's leadership on spectrum and his presidential memorandum on winning the 6G race is that he's really identified getting spectrum auctioned as a national priority. And so we're working really cooperatively with other agencies, including the incumbents, to get their systems upgraded and the spectrum identified for auction. And we're also really working very closely with the FCC on this to, um, figure out ways to expedite timelines and get the, achieve the goal of five auctions during this administration.
Speaker 39
Okay, I do have a question on 1675 megahertz and 7 gigahertz, but I'm going to put that in writing because my time is up. So with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Troy Carter
The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Carter, for five minutes of questions.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Administrator Roth, for joining us today. In January 2025, Louisiana became the first state in the nation to secure federal approval for a plan to deploy 1.3 billion dollars in funding under the original Broadband Equity Access and Deployment, or BEAD, program. A program that designed to ensure that everyone, regardless of zip code, has access to affordable, reliable, high-speed internet. But instead of building on that progress, the Trump administration forced states to redo years of approval planning, which delayed deployment and caused unnecessary uncertainty. While Louisiana's revised plan has now been approved again, roughly 800 million in Louisiana's BEAD non-deployment funding remains frozen.
Those dollars meant to expand telehealth, strengthen workforce development, improve digital skills, and help rural and underserved communities fully participate in today's economy, not sit idle.
These delays are unacceptable. Every day they continue to cost communities the connectivity, growth, and opportunity they deserve. Administrator Roth, Louisiana kept its bargain in a bipartisan manner, first under Democratic Governor John Bel Edwards and then Republican Governor Jeff Landry. We worked with state, local, and federal partners to become the first state in the nation with an approved BEAD plan. Our communities have done their part.
Why hasn't NTIA done theirs? What's the hold up in releasing the deployment funds?
April Roth
Well, thank you, Congressman. Louisiana has, as you've seen, been extremely successful in its final proposal. The Governor of Louisiana has spoken publicly about the benefits of the bargain reforms in promoting ubiquitous connectivity across the state, and we've already started to see deployment. We want to ensure that-
Troy Carter
I'm sorry, I have about two minutes left. Can you just tell me what's the hold up, respectfully?
April Roth
We're trying to get the guidance right, not just rush money out the door, because-
Troy Carter
So, but when the Biden administration was trying to get the guidance right, you said they were wasting time. You can't have it both ways. Let me ask you a quick question, yes or no. Can you assure me that Louisiana will receive its full BEAD allocation, including the 800 million in non-deployment funds?
Troy Carter
Can you assure us that we'll get it? We have, so now it's in your court. Can you assure me and the people of Louisiana that the 800 million in non-deployment funds will be unfrozen?
Is that a yes?
Yes, we are fully intent-
Troy Carter
Okay, thank you. Thousands of rural economically disadvantaged locations in Louisiana were initially slated for fiber in January 2025, have now, under the benefit of the bargain round, had BEAD funding diverted to Elon Musk's satellite services. How do you justify delivering lower quality broadband to rural and underserved communities under BEAD when higher performance options like fiber are available and states like mine are willing and able to invest in rural communities?
April Roth
As I've said, performance is the gold standard, and the law was written in a tech-neutral way, and our job is to ensure that every last community gets priority broadband through-
Troy Carter
But how do you justify going to an inferior product over a more superior product?
April Roth
Well, different types of technologies work better in different communities. Fiber can be great. In some places, it's really exorbitant. There was an example in Louisiana where-
Troy Carter
Would you agree that Louisiana had passed all of its tests, was ready for everything to go, had shovels ready to go on ground? So what's different now? The only thing different now is a new administration that clearly wants to put its fingerprint on it, and I'm fine with that. But don't send us backwards when, in fact, Louisiana, under a Democratic Governor and a Republican Governor, did all the right things, and now the people of Louisiana are being punished, one, with a delay, two, with 800 million dollars in non-deployment funds being frozen, and three, now getting an inferior product. That doesn't sound like progress.
That sounds like gamesmanship.
Troy Carter
You mentioned your comment that we were, you acknowledged that we were first, that we got it right. But now we're being punished by getting an inferior product after the fact, when in fact we'd gone through all those batteries of tests, all of those hoops, all of those jumps among two different administrations, only to find it rechecked, redone, and now we're getting less money, inferior product. That's just not cool. I'd love to meet with you, Administrator Roth, and have a more in-depth conversation. My time is expired now, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Speaker 46
Gentleman's time has expired. I'll let the witness take a few seconds if you'd like to respond to that.
April Roth
I guess I could, I would welcome the opportunity to meet with you. Our view is that performance is the gold standard. And I think that the view that, you know, one technology is a one-size-fits-all solution or future-proof just doesn't reflect reality when we've seen incredible amounts of innovation in diverse technologies. Even in the last five years, we've seen incredible progress in fixed wireless, a service that's become extremely popular among consumers and is increasingly becoming viable and scalable. And the same goes with respect to satellite.
We've been seeing incredible increases in the technology that I think weren't anticipated several years ago. And I think that goes to show the importance of taking a non-distortionary, tech-neutral approach to the program that recognizes diverse conditions in the country and also doesn't put a thumb on the scale for innovation. Innovation has—
Speaker 43
Mr. Chairman, respectfully, if you're going to give the witness an opportunity to continue to speak—
Sir, I gave you an additional minute.
Speaker 45
But she didn't answer my question. You just gave her an opportunity for commentary.
Well, I gave her the opportunity to answer.
No, you gave her an opportunity for commentary.
Speaker 44
Gentleman is not recognized. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Bilirakis.
Gus Bilirakis
What I'd ask you to do is answer the question and not offer commentary.
Gentleman is not recognized. Mr. Bilirakis, you're recognized for five minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very much. In coordination with the NTIA and the FCC for the past several years, I've been working on legislation that would continue to address tweaks to our telecommunications networks by the Chinese Communist Party and other countries of concern. That work has ultimately led me to the Firewall Act, introduced today by myself and Congressman Soto, who happens to be on the full committee. The Firewall Act would forever ban federal telecommunications funding from companies that choose to purchase fiber optic cable from China.
Now's the perfect time to implement such a ban since Chinese fiber is only a small percentage of the United States market today. Let's not make the same mistake twice. We must end this before we're struck with another multi-billion dollar rip-and-replace type program. Assistant Secretary Roth, question again. Can you discuss some of the threats that exist and could exist with the systemic use of Chinese-produced fiber optic cable?
And what are your thoughts on instituting a funding ban on companies that choose to ignore these risks, please?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman, for your leadership. The fiber supply chain is something that NTIA closely monitors. In our administration, the BEAD program, fiber is critical infrastructure. And, you know, it's passive, but we should still be very deliberate in terms of looking at the supply chain and ensuring that federal dollars don't deepen reliance on untrusted supply chains and Chinese influence.
Um, I think the broader lesson of the past decade is that, um, building a trusted supply chain is, is, is less expensive in the long run, um, in, in terms of unwinding dependence later. And I haven't had a chance to look into your legislation yet, but I, I, I look forward to, to looking into it and would stand ready to be of assistance, especially as we've, uh, looked at this, looked at these supply chain issues in the context of the BEAD program.
Gus Bilirakis
Yeah, I look forward to the conversation. Thank you. Uh, as a member of the China Select Committee, I'm concerned about the World Radiocommunication Conference being hosted in Shanghai and how China is using its position to undercut American connectivity priorities, including Wi-Fi, satellite, and other technologies. Uh, again, Secretary Roth, what steps is the administration taking to ensure that the United States and our allies will be able to fully participate in Shanghai?
April Roth
Thank you. It's such an important question and an issue that this administration has prioritized. Um, one of the things is that we need to ensure is that we build a coalition support around our positions going into WRC. And, so, and we're actively doing that. NTIA recently held a training with 27 regulators from 20 different African countries to, uh, work on building support for US strategic priorities when it comes to commercial space, given that the WRC agenda is going to be so satellite-focused.
Um, and we also equally are, are working on finalizing our positions on agenda item 1.7, which focuses on the fut- future of 6G, um, given that strategic importance to us. So, uh, we, we are working to finalize our positions in advance of CITEL in the fall. Um, but, you know, it's, it's not just, um, finalizing positions that's important, also ensuring effective, uh, leadership at the ITU. And so we are working to, uh, promote, uh, US leadership in, uh, ITU elections, um, including through our participation at the, uh, Plenipotentiary Conference in the fall. Um, and, you know, we're, there, there, there, we, we are working across our workstreams to advance American leadership at the ITU, as well as, uh, other standard-setting bodies like 3GPP.
Telecom is global in nature and ensuring that, uh, global standards reflect our strategic priorities is incredibly important to, uh, US, uh, economic and national security.
Debbie Dingell
Very good. Uh, thank you. I appreciate your participation today and thank you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
I thank the gentleman. Chair recognizes the gentlelady from Michigan, Representative Dingell, for five minutes for her questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks for having this hearing and thank you to the administrator for being here today. This committee has a responsibility to conduct oversight of NTIA. And as many on this committee know, we've made significant progress under the last administration and I hope we can keep moving forward in the right direction on broadband deployment, affordability, mapping, and spectrum policy. Uh, I want to talk specifically today about BEAD implementation in Michigan, which I've discussed with you before, Madam Administrator, and the importance of continued coordination between NTIA and the states to ensure that the projects are moving forward. Michigan will connect nearly 200,000 locations through the BEAD program, the third highest number of eligible locations in the country.
We secured Michigan secured 920 million in federal funding and more than 550,000 million in private investment for a total of 1.47 billion. This funding will support over 31,000 miles of new fiber infrastructure across our state. However, states are still awaiting the guidance regarding the allowable uses of BEAD non-deployment funding. The Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act is clear that these funds can support complementary efforts like expanding permitting capacity, workforce development, digital adoption, mapping, and planning that are necessary to close the digital divide. You said you've said that speed is your priority, but since NTIA paused the use of non-deployment funds in June 2025, the revised BEAD policy notice that month, states have been left without clear direction on how to move forward.
NTIA also missed your imposed self-deadline of March 26 to issue updated guidance, creating uncertainty for states attempting to plan around more than 20 billion dollars in remaining non-deployment funding. I'm sure states, including Michigan, are ready, I know they are, to put resources to work alongside deployment projects to ensure communities can fully access and benefit from reliable, affordable broadband service. Administrator Roth, can you provide a timeline on when NTIA expects to issue updated guidance on non-deployment funding and how NTIA is working with states to ensure these funds can be used effectively and consistent with congressional intent without further delays?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman Thanedar, and thank you for meeting with me in your office. You know, these funds were freed up because our benefit of the bargain reforms were so successful in driving down costs and ensuring universal connectivity. And we want to ensure that these remaining funds produce the same measurable wins for taxpayers. And we're actively working on the guidance right now to use these dollars responsibly. As you know, we received an unprecedented amount of feedback on potential ways the dollars should be used, so we've just been focused on getting our guidance right at this point, which has taken us a which has taken additional time.
And so we are as you asked on about a timeline, as I said to Chairman Hudson, we expect to release the guidance this summer.
Debbie Dingell
I'm going to hold you to that. I've also heard concerns about the process requiring states to remove locations from BEAD projects when changes are made to the FCC broadband service location fabric, even in situations where those homes or businesses clearly need service. Can you tell us how NTIA is working with states to ensure that technical or mapping revisions do not unintentionally leave eligible communities behind, and are you considering additional flexibility for states to address these situations?
April Roth
Thank you. So in the BEAD law, the BEAD law requires us to follow the FCC maps and also run a challenge process in determining which eligible which areas were going to be eligible for BEAD funding. That was important for two reasons. First of all, we needed to give bidders the certainty they needed to know what they were bidding on and also to ensure that there was a requisite challenge process to ensure that the program wasn't engaged in overbuilding. And so, you know, maps are constantly changing as conditions change.
We regularly update the FCC with our data and where BEAD deployments are occurring. Um, and, you know, our our eligible areas, you know, given that, don't may not match up perfectly with the FCC maps, but that's because of the need to that's because we were required to run a challenge process. Um, you know, we're given that such changes happen over time, one of the ideas that's been proposed for the remaining funds has been a cleanup round to address locations that have, you know, become potentially unserved after we established eligible areas in the BEAD program.
Richard Hudson
Gentlelady's time has expired. The chair now recognizes the representative from Texas, Mr. Pfluger, for five minutes for your questions.
August Pfluger
Hey, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Assistant Secretary Roth, I want to thank you for your efforts to reduce fraud, waste, and abuse, specifically, and it's been talked about today, the efforts here on BEAD-funded projects with, you know, just the wastefulness that you've uncovered, that you're preventing, and delivering the intended dollars to rural areas that truly need it. So thank you for that. I want to kind of shift gears. I've heard from domestic manufacturers who invested tens of millions of dollars in new equipment and facilities to supply BEAD projects with American-made optical fiber, and they did so based on the assurances that domestic fiber supply would be available to support them, and that supply hasn't materialized, and now there's idle equipment and unfilled jobs sitting on the sidelines.
So just in from your perspective, based on what NTIA is seeing today, are those supply commitments being met? And if not, can NTIA act to help that? And are there examples where NTIA would consider a targeted waiver to support American manufacturing jobs?
April Roth
Thank you for your question, and thank you for meeting with me and for your kind words on addressing waste in the BEAD program. Effective oversight of the program is so critical to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used responsibly and also ensure universal connectivity because there were projects that were, if we hadn't done so, there had been a risk raised by the OIG that we would run out of money, which I think no one on this committee would have wanted. In terms of fiber and availability, we want to ensure that projects are deployed expeditiously, so we've actively monitored the fiber supply chain in the program, and fiber producers have given us their word that fiber will be delivered on time to BEAD projects, and we expect them to honor their commitments.
Speaker 48
Yeah, it's unfortunate some of the companies have not met their contractual requirements. So would you see a case where if those domestic manufacturers, you know, don't do that and they have a contract with the government with the BEAD program, I mean, are there waivers that y'all would consider for the specifically for Made in America type issues?
April Roth
NTIA has an ability to, there's a process for waiving BABA, or the Buy America provisions as you reference, but we don't anticipate a waiver at this point as long as domestic manufacturers step up as they've promised. I think it also goes to show the importance of having, you know, a mix of technologies in the program. Putting our eggs in one basket, I think, would have been, wouldn't have been a good outcome for ensuring expeditious and timely deployment of universal broadband.
Speaker 48
Thank you, and we'll certainly be watching that and working with you. One of our top legislative priorities is the PROTOCOL Act, which would consolidate the FCC's broadband maps and NTIA's data into a single and consistent and reliable source.
The bill would also require other federal broadband agencies to use this unified data. It would work with the states. It would do the work of trying to consolidate this. So my question, currently more than 130 broadband programs exist across 15 different agencies. So you can, I mean, consolidating it and understanding it and gleaning the important pieces of vulnerabilities or gaps is really important on it.
From your perspective at NTIA, what's the benefit of requiring other agencies to coordinate with NTIA and use a single harmonized broadband data set when planning and funding infrastructure projects?
April Roth
Thank you for your leadership on this issue of mapping. It's so important to have accurate data in order to ensure that federal dollars are protected, given that challenge that you referenced of the multiple different programs, 100 different broadband programs across 15 different agencies. So that risk is quite real. You know, we have relied on the FCC maps and run a challenge process in our administration of BEAD. We work with the FCC, but definitely welcome the opportunity to work with you and thank you for your leadership on potential ways to make mapping even better.
Speaker 48
Thank you. Lastly, I'm out of time, but I'll submit a question for the record dealing with the BEAD program and the money that Texas has promised to match, which is a billion and a half dollars, just to make sure that the federal and the state pools of money are deconflicted. So I'll submit that for the record, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Richard Hudson
Gentleman's time has expired. The chair now recognizes the representative from Ohio, Mr. Landsman, for five minutes for your questions.
Greg Landsman
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Administrator Roth. I want to start with the cybersecurity work. This is a huge concern of mine. The current system is a patchwork across several agencies in terms of reporting, prevention, mitigation efforts.
There's been some discussion about expanding your role, the administration's role, in dealing with the cybersecurity threats, protecting us. Can you talk a little bit about what that would look like, whether NTIA's role would be expanded, what that would look like, your approach, your thinking on this?
April Roth
No, thank you. This is a real important issue. NTIA, we're not a regulator, but we do play a role in ensuring secure networks. We, in BEAD, for example, states are required to get attestations from BEAD providers that they have cybersecurity risk management plans in place, as well as similar plans for supply chain risks. And NTIA also has works on cybersecurity in the context of our communications supply chain risk information program.
We provide information on latest best practices to companies, including small and rural communities. So I think we could, we do play and could continue to play a really important role in terms of training and providing information on best practices as well as on supply chain risks.
Greg Landsman
So you'd welcome the role of expanding some of the work that you guys are doing in cybersecurity if the DHS CIRCIA rule includes an expanded role for you all?
April Roth
I haven't had an opportunity to dig in on that issue, but I would be happy to get back to you more in depth on that.
Greg Landsman
Yeah, I would love to keep the conversation going because it does seem like additional leadership is needed that you all could play, do play, but could play an even bigger role. The reporting requirements piece is is a challenge as you know folks who experience an attack or or believe there's an issue, the reporting requirements differ by agencies and I so I have a bill that would streamline that so there's just the one reporting protocol. How important do you think that is, you know, in terms of what you what you hear and see on a daily basis?
Speaker 55
I I think that generally speaking, streamlining reporting requirements is a really great way to advance efficiencies and promote American technology leadership.
Greg Landsman
Yeah, I I agree. One last thing, the we have a bill that would make it easier to get broadband out to communities, our RAIL Act, which I think we talked about. It it takes advantage of the public right-of-way and streamlines the process for getting that broadband over the railroad tracks, which has become a challenge because the railroad companies oftentimes take forever and upcharge these providers. How important that that's for the FCC, but obviously something similar would apply to what you all are doing. Are you seeing opportunities to do similar sort of reforms in terms of getting the broadband out?
April Roth
Yes, this has been a very strong focus of NTIA. As you know, permitting is as one of the biggest challenges when it comes to effective and expeditious deployment of broadband. We've we focused on what we can do at the federal level to streamline permitting, particularly through automating certain processes and working with other agencies. But as you recognize, state and local and challenges can be even even greater.
Speaker 53
And you may have done this before, but have you submitted your list of permitting reform recommendations to this to this committee?
Daniel Goldman
I think that would be great. Yeah, I would we'll follow up. Great. Okay, thank you. I yield back.
Speaker 54
Gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the representative from Texas, Mr. Goldman, for five minutes for your questions.
Daniel Goldman
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here today, Ms. Roth. Texas is facing uncertainty around the release of BEAD funds necessary to manage program changes, rebid 31,000 locations, and keep broadband deployment projects on schedule. What is causing these funds to be held up and how will NTIA ensure that any delays do not make it harder for Texas to reconnect these vacant locations or leave Texans with lower quality service options?
April Roth
Thank you for your question and thank you for meeting with me. Texas was able to submit a very successful final proposal. They were actually the last state to submit their initial proposal under the previous rules, but because the state really did a really amazing job of looking at each project area by project area closely and, you know, evaluating every technology in every different area, the state produced really incredible results and and has a really diverse mix of technologies reflecting the diverse topography and geography of the state. And, you know, they're achieving universal access with a 32 percent match, which is above the statutory requirement, is a really great indication of the project's sustainability and success.
And so right now the state is signing contracts with providers. That can be a challenging process and NTIA has stood ready to help the state whenever there have been and providers whenever there have been issues or questions. But ultimately, thanks to our work to streamline permitting, we expect to see contracts signed. And I think Texas is one of the states that already has a contract signed with a LEO provider enabling instant access to BEAD service.
Daniel Goldman
Thank you. And following up on that, Texas being a national leader in wireless innovation, semiconductor manufacturing, telecommunications, as you know, NTIA's spectrum decisions will directly affect jobs and investment across our state. As NTIA implements the spectrum provisions that we passed last year and evaluates the 2, 4, and 7 gigahertz bands, can you update us on the progress of that work and how implementing these provisions advanced US and Texas leadership in 5G and 6G and next-generation community technologies?
April Roth
Yeah, no, as you said, Texas is a leader when it comes to technological innovation. I was, I actually recently visited the Ericsson 5G factory, which was so incredible to see the kind of automation that is bringing next-generation connectivity to the state and to the country and the world. I think, you know, as you said, as you mentioned, you know, getting our spectrum identified under the Working Families Tax Cut Act is one of our best ways to promote that continued innovation, increase economic growth, promote national security as well as domestic jobs. And so we're laser-focused on completing that identification and getting more spectrum into the marketplace as quickly as possible so that the US can continue to lead in this area.
Daniel Goldman
Great. Thank you again. Thanks for being here. And since you've joined NTIA, how have you seen the BEAD program change and what steps does NTIA need to take to make sure communities are getting connected?
April Roth
We've seen incredible success through our stripping out of red tape, removal of burdensome rules, allowing the states to determine, like Texas, which technologies would work in different parts, in different project areas. And, you know, we've seen results from that. We're getting deployment out the door. We've seen deployment in multiple states already. And that was thanks to our embracing an all-of-the-above solution to the program consistent with how Congress wrote the law.
And, you know, we're very excited about the deployment that we're starting to see and will continue to see in the months ahead.
Speaker 58
Great. Thank you again. Thanks for being here. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 56
The gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the representative from New York, Representative Clarke, for five minutes for your questions.
Yvette Clarke
Good morning and thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Matsui, for holding this important hearing today. It is a long-overdue hearing given the issues at NTIA. Access to affordable, reliable, high-speed broadband is no longer a luxury. It is an absolute necessity for economic survival, education, even healthcare in our increasingly digital society.
When Congress passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we made an historic $42 billion investment in the BEAD program with a clear statutory mandate to build sustainable, future-proof networks and close the digital divide once and for all. Unfortunately, under Administrator Roth's leadership, the NTIA has systematically undermined those goals. By spending 18 months restructuring the program to the benefit of the President's political benefactor, NTIA has created a chaotic environment where states are forced to stall deployment and taxpayers are left wanting longer for inferior service. Most alarmingly, NTIA has effectively abandoned its statutory commitment to priority broadband projects using high-quality fiber infrastructure, aggressively shifting focus towards temporary satellite options while refusing to enforce statutory low-cost service options for struggling families. To rush to subsidize billionaires and now a trillionaire has led to the abandonment of public interest by this administration and may only serve to solidify a new era of digital redlining.
Administrator Roth, historical redlining in the analog age is sadly being directly mirrored today by digital redlining in broadband accessibility during your tenure at NTIA. The BEAD program was structured so that the states would propose the affordable low-cost service options for low-income families. Congress wrote that into law and yet, your agency is prohibiting the states from having any say in what the low-cost option should be and letting the ISPs set the option themselves. If NTIA refuses to let the states ensure that the low-cost option internet service providers are offering is actually at an affordable rate, how can you claim that you're fulfilling your mission? Is there any cost for a low-cost option that you would consider to be too high?
Or what tools do states have to ensure that low-cost options is in fact affordable? What specific guardrails is the NTIA utilizing right now to ensure that low-income and minority communities are not digitally redlined out of this historic infrastructure build-out?
April Roth
I agree with you that broadband should be affordable. Our job is to implement the law and Congress has precluded from regulating rates. And I think that's attributable to a broad recognition in data that rate regulation harms investment. In contrast, competition has been hugely successful in promoting broadband affordability and, you know, you even just take fixed wireless, one of the greatest and fastest sources of broadband competition and affordability in home broadband markets. You know, I think that I think that's why we've focused so much on clearing the runway to innovation and ensuring that BEAD isn't putting its thumb on the scale.
After all, one of the most competition as competition has been the most effective source in bringing down prices. I know that, you know, sometimes, you know, subsidies can be one way of looking at it, but we take a more broad approach. One of the best ways that we can use our authorities to promote affordability is through expanding access to spectrum and getting better services into the marketplace. And I think that our nation's historic approach to innovation and facilities-based competition is is just evident in in the amount of incredible innovation.
Yvette Clarke
And Administrator, I've only got like 30 seconds left. I'd like to discuss that further with you.
That sounds great, but in the practical application of it, it does not, it does not pan out that way. Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Speaker 59
Thank the gentlelady for yielding back. The chair now recognizes the representative from California, Mr. Obernolte, for five minutes for your questions.
Jay Obernolte
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Administrator Roth, thank you for your testimony today. I think you've heard some bipartisan frustration with the slowness of the rollout of BEAD funding. And to be clear, this frustration predates your tenure in the agency. It predates this administration. It's been frustration across the aisle with both Democrat and Republican administrations, and this is in red and blue states.
So I hope that you're taking this to heart. This is an indication when you hear this kind of frustration across the aisle that it's not a problem with one state or another state, it's a problem with the system. And this critical, this funding is critical to getting broadband connectivity rolled out to our constituents, and I'm hoping that you will take this to heart and try and eliminate some of the bottlenecks so we can get this funding flowing, because that was our intent when we appropriated it. I was very happy to hear you talk about freeing up 500 megahertz of spectrum in your opening testimony. We all know the strain that spectrum is under.
I've seen some very alarming projections that say that if nothing is done by the year 2030, just four years from now, that over 50 percent of peak traffic will not have spectrum available, particularly as AI puts more and more demands on that. So I'm very happy that NTIA is focused on that. I wanted to ask specifically about the 2.7 gigahertz band. In HR 1 last year, we directed NTIA to work with stakeholders to clear that spectrum and gave you auction authority for that. Could you tell us a little bit about when you think that that auction might occur?
April Roth
Thank you for your question, and I agree that we need to get the 2.7 gigahertz band identified as quickly as possible so that it can get auctioned and that providers can, and that it can benefit the commercial marketplace. We're working around the clock on our, to do our part to get spectrum identified. I'm grateful that soon the incumbent agencies will have access to their spectrum relocation funds so that we can complete our critical engineering work to have a successful auction. And we're working closely with the FCC on timelines and figuring out ways to expedite the process of getting, of seeing that spectrum auctioned as soon as possible.
Jay Obernolte
Do you think that that might occur by the end of your tenure in the agency?
Jay Obernolte
Okay, I'm glad to hear it. I was also very happy to hear you talk about FirstNet reauthorization in your opening testimony. That's something that's critically important to me as someone with a very rural district with a critical need for first responders to be able to communicate. One of the things that I have been a little frustrated by is the fact that FirstNet does not currently interface with any of the low Earth orbit satellite operators. As you know, Starlink, for example, already has direct-to-cellphone operational capability and others will soon have that capability.
It seems crazy that we're not enabling our first responders to use that. Can you talk a little bit about what NTIA and Congress can do to make sure that new commercial satellite systems are available to first responders through FirstNet?
April Roth
I agree that first responders should have access to the best technology available. That's FirstNet's mission to maximize public safety outcomes for the public and for first responders. And I think part of that is really empowering the FirstNet board to determine which investments are needed to maximize public safety outcomes. And I applaud this committee's work on FirstNet. One of the things that the legislation that you've advanced does is clarify roles and responsibilities and really empower public safety's role in increasing public safety seats on the board, improving institutional expertise through staggered terms, as well as really clarifying that public safety is responsible for identifying the strategic use of funding and ensuring that it's public safety that drives the budget and the setting of priorities.
And then NTIA can conduct its contract oversight and performance accountability to ensure that those priorities are being carried out. And thanks to our work, Secretary Lutnick was able to, our oversight, we were able to secure an additional two billion dollars in value for FirstNet under the contract.
Well, we'll keep working with you on that. My time has expired, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Speaker 65
Thank the gentleman for yielding back. The chair will now recognize the representative from California, Representative Barragán, for five minutes for your questions.
Nanette Barragán
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Administrator Roth, you are nominated by the president, correct?
Correct.
Correct.
Speaker 64
So you serve at the pleasure of the president and work for the president.
Speaker 63
Is it safe to say that since you've been confirmed by the Senate, you've spoken to the president?
I'm not going to get into the...
Speaker 63
I'm not asking you to get into the conversation. I'm asking you if you have had a conversation with the president since you've been confirmed. That's it. It's a yes or no. You're a lawyer, you know this.
April Roth
Yeah, no, I think that it would be inappropriate for me to speak to internal deliberations. Obviously, we speak to the White House.
Speaker 66
I'm not asking for an internal deliberation. It's a simple question. Whether you've spoken to the president is a yes or no. Asking you about the content of that is a different question. Have you spoken to the president?
Speaker 63
Okay, for whatever reason you're afraid to say whether you've actually spoken to the president. That is actually concerning because it's a very simple yes or no. You as an attorney know, if I'm asking about the content of a conversation, that could be attorney-client privilege, that's a different question, and you wouldn't instruct your client not to answer whether you've even spoken to a lawyer. So it's extremely frustrating that this hearing, you have just been talking through answers, not answering questions, but kind of like avoiding some of them. Okay, so you may or you have not spoken to the president.
Has anybody asked you to hold up the California application for BEAD money?
April Roth
No, and we're working actively to get California's application approved.
Speaker 63
Okay, I know you're working actively. I've heard that. But I find it a little hard to believe that the two states that haven't been approved are some of the bluest, the two bluest states that we've got, and you have 54 other states and territories that have already met the requirements.
Is California being held to a different standard than the other states you've already approved?
April Roth
No, in fact, that's precisely what we're working on is ensuring that California gets held to the same standards that we've held other states to.
Speaker 69
Okay, is, has the NTIA communicated their concerns to California in writing?
April Roth
Uh, we have, we have certainly communicated our concerns to California and I, um, I can't speak to the, I can't, I, I can't speak to our, uh, our, our deliberations with the state, but we, we have certainly communicated those, those concerns to California.
Speaker 63
So you're unaware if they're in writing. Uh, what does California need now, what they need now really is certainty. Communities can't plan broadband projects around uncertainty and they can't connect families with funds that haven't been approved. So I, I would urge you and the NTIA to move quickly, uh, to resolve any of these remaining issues that, uh, that you're saying California, uh, has had. So, Administrator, I want to move on to another topic.
The Digital Equity Act created two major grant programs: the State Capacity Grant Program, which helps states expand digital access for local libraries, schools, and nonprofits, and the Competitive Grant Program, which awards grants directly to community organizations. Last year, the Trump administration canceled both. Now the Justice Department says in court the Competitive Grant Program can move forward if a race-related provision of the law is severed. Does NTIA believe the State Capacity Grant Program can also move forward?
April Roth
Uh, on the advice of my legal, uh, at the advice of my legal counsel, I can't discuss the Digital Equity Program as it's, uh, currently in active litigation. Um, I can speak to the, uh, Native Entities Grant Program funding, uh, that we recently, uh, provided guidance on in a, in a new NOFO.
Speaker 63
Okay, I'm gonna, I'm just, you know, California was awarded more than $70 million in state capacity grant funding to help more people afford access, uh, access and use high-speed internet before the Trump administration canceled the program. Now Republican-led states like Texas, Florida, Alabama, and Louisiana also had millions. The communities across the country deserve a clear answer and a path forward for all of the digital equity ants, grants programs. It's been extremely frustrating, um, at some of the responses or non-responses, and it's been extremely frustrating, um, at the lack of speed in the deploying the BEAD dollars. Now it was said, you know, people were frustrated in the last administration, but then this administration came in and just took even longer and made it, uh, more delayed.
And with that, I yield back.
Daniel Goldman
The gentlelady yields. The chair recognizes the gentlelady from Florida, Representative Cammack.
Kat Cammack
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it and thank you to, uh, our guest for being here today. I'm just going to jump right into it. I know we've had several conversations, um, and you know I'm the wife of a first responder back in Florida, so this issue is near and dear to me. So, chairing the NextGen 911 Caucus, I know firsthand how critical our reliable emergency communications are and where so many of our gaps exist.
So, I noted in your testimony that updated NTIA estimates show nationwide NextGen 911 implementation costs have fallen significantly down to between 5.8 and 9.27 billion, which is candidly a major shift from prior estimates. Given that lower cost estimate, what do you see is the biggest barrier to nationwide deployment right now? And how can we make sure that our states and localities have the flexibility and support that they need in order to finish the job?
April Roth
Thank you so much, uh, Congresswoman Cammack, and it was so great to meet with you in your office and I applaud your leadership on, uh, public safety issues, uh, which are obviously near and dear to your heart.
And so, you know, I've visited 911 centers firsthand and have seen the benefits of AI tools and modernization of technology to improve location data and dispatch and ultimately better outcomes for public safety. I think that some of the obstacles that we've seen are obstacles that come to interoperability and ensuring that different jurisdictions are able to talk to each other, that data is able to flow with calls, and ultimately get better resilience and response times. You know, and also the other, one of the other challenges is that some states have invested significantly in NG911 and others have not. I know that the legislation that the committee has advanced takes account, takes account of that reality. But we stand ready to help the committee in its efforts to advance this critical priority, and we did that through our recently released study on nationwide implementation costs.
Kat Cammack
Well, and let me jump to the kind of dovetailing into that. So we've obviously seen that there are challenges, you highlighted interoperability just now, and how it can be fragmented across different agencies and programs. And we talked about the legislation that we had introduced, the Public Safety Communications Act, which would create a dedicated Office of Public Safety Communications within NTIA. And we did that because currently it is not codified. We want to see this codified so we can streamline a lot of the efforts that are being undertaken at the moment and also strengthen accountability.
So from your perspective, yes or no, would creating a permanent dedicated office within NTIA improve coordination, accountability, and long-term strategic planning for public safety communications, yes or no?
Speaker 73
And what would you say is the biggest gap within the current structure?
April Roth
Thank you, I appreciate your focus on this. I think that elevating public safety communications is obviously a core responsibility of ours, and so codifying the office would certainly put increased emphasis and focus on this area, especially as we enhance our oversight of FirstNet and engage in NG911 improvements. And so I would welcome the opportunity to work with you on this legislation and strengthening our public safety role.
Kat Cammack
Absolutely. Well, and just for the record, if this legislation were to be signed into law, it would help ensure that our first responders have access to resilient, reliable communications, especially when lives are on the line, correct?
Certainly, yes.
Kat Cammack
Excellent. Well, that about does it on my end. You answered all my questions. So thank you again for your time today and thank you for appearing before the committee. With that, I yield.
Kathy Castor
The gentlelady yields. The chair recognizes the gentlelady from Florida, Ms. Castor, for five minutes of questioning.
Well, thank you. Welcome, Madam Administrator. You know, inflation is high and everything costs so much these days, and one of the ways that we can help our neighbors back home is with more affordable internet service. That was part of the intention of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and all of the BEAD funding to get out quickly, and I have to tell you, I'm very disappointed. I've heard your testimony today, I disagree that what has happened has not been timely and effective at all.
In fact, it was very troubling you cannot answer Representative Soto's direct question on when Florida would receive money after all of these years. And it's also been very troubling what Rep. Barragán touched on, the cancellation of the digital equity competitive grants. The city of St. Petersburg back home won a 6.9 million dollar grant, it was the only one in the state of Florida, that was to pay for hotspots and equipment for people who need internet access for jobs and training.
That grant was arbitrarily and illegally cancelled by the administration. It has now been challenged in federal court. Would you commit that if the federal court determines that the administration did act arbitrarily and illegally to restore those grant funding, that grant funding?
Speaker 74
Following the law is of utmost importance. Absolutely, we would abide by the law.
Kathy Castor
Okay, thank you for that. And the law also requires that internet service providers provide a low-cost option for consumers. Certainly then you would agree that it is helpful for customers to know what the low-cost service option will be in their location, right?
Kathy Castor
Good, thank you, because I think transparency is important. That's why the law requires NTIA to publicly disclose each state's low-cost service option after you approve the final proposal before funds are dispersed. So here's kind of a lightning round of yes or no. Do you commit to abiding by this provision of the law and publishing the low-cost service option so that customers know upfront what they will be paying?
Kathy Castor
Great. Do you think that it is helpful for customers to know when their provider is going to change the price of their broadband subscriptions, yes or no?
Kathy Castor
Do you commit to allowing states to require sub-recipients to tell the state and their customers they are changing the low-cost service option and what that new cost will be?
April Roth
I agree with price transparency. I think that we also have to abide by our requirement, which is that we're not allowed according to the law to engage in rate regulation.
Kathy Castor
But here's the problem. Under NTIA's BEAD restructuring policy, you are prohibiting states from setting the low-cost service option and instead you've decided that ISPs should propose their own low-cost service option, even though you stated numerous times during your confirmation hearing that you would follow the law. This appears to be a flagrant violation of the statute, which specifically requires the states to define and submit to NTIA for approval a low-cost service option that will apply to sub-recipients. What authority do you have that authorizes you to ignore the plain statute?
April Roth
We are not ignoring the statute. We are abiding by our requirement to ensure the timely and effective deployment of broadband projects. And we agree that affordability is important and we are promoting affordability across our workstreams.
Kathy Castor
All right, then Madam Administrator, under your new policy then, which again is in violation of the law that you swore to uphold, would it be acceptable for an ISP to charge $1,000 a month as the low-cost option, yes or no?
April Roth
Yeah, so I think that if you're an ISP, you want people on your network and competition is the best regulator of price.
Speaker 75
But yes or no, would you agree that they can say we're going to charge $1,000 per month as the low-cost option?
April Roth
I don't, I think that would be at odds with getting customers on their network. I also don't, if I could just respond, I think it's also important to keep in mind data that we have. This is a very competitive, dynamic marketplace, especially with the entry of new competitors, including two satellite providers coming online. And the data just shows that...
Kathy Castor
And on that and on that point this is I wonder you know it's widely known that that fiber is more affordable. Now I'll grant that Starlink in remote areas can be a can be important for access but overall when you look at all of the data fiber has a lower monthly cost than Starlink. Starlink requires you a lot of upfront equipment that's very expensive. So I wonder is has that gone as you've you've sought to kind of restructure things and push Starlink and favor them did you not take into account the affordability piece for for consumers? And then and then here's my
The gentlelady's time has expired.
Yes ma'am.
April Roth
So we require that a that satellite providers in the program defray the upfront cost that's they're required to provide customer premises equipment to providers free of charge and we've also structured our rules to promote affordability and adoption particularly through our through state or states' milestone payments structuring contracts that encourage providers to add consumers to their network as well as
The gentlelady's time has expired. Gentlelady yields. Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina Mr. Fry for his five minutes of questioning.
Russell Fry
Thank you Mr. Chairman for having this hearing today and thank you Administrator for for being here. I'm going to talk about BEAD for a second. Administrator I hear my colleagues on the other side the aisle say that this administration is acting illegally with regard to BEAD but we know that the last administration failed to follow that statute. Can you tell us the ways in which the last administration did not follow BEAD as written and in what ways are you correcting that?
April Roth
Thank you for your question and thank you for for meeting with me earlier this year. So the we abiding by the law is of utmost importance to us. You know under the previous administration we saw red tape and hostile mandates that drove away participation from the program raising costs. Another way that that we saw you know a departure from the law that was written by Congress was through an extreme technology mandate that was forced on the states that didn't take into account the way that the law was written. The law set out performance requirements each provider no exceptions must meet those performance requirements to participate under BEAD.
You know there are only there are only excellent broadband options in our program no inferior services every provider must meet the requirements in the law and there are no exceptions to that. And and by course correcting our our approach in that way we were able to not only save $21 billion but we were able to ensure universal broadband availability and and there was a significant risk identified by the OIG in 2025 that under the previous unlawful approach certain states would have run out of money. I think everyone can agree that that would have been a bad outcome.
Speaker 78
Thank you for that. I'm going to switch gears real quick. We've got a World Radio Conference coming up next year in Shanghai China. China will undoubtedly try to undermine US position and flood the zone with their proxies. I think a lot is at stake in our technology race with the CCP at the World Radio Conference particularly our leadership in 6 gigahertz band and the growth of our unlicensed Wi-Fi ecosystem that is really the envy of the world.
Almost 100 countries have followed the United States' lead in making all or a portion of their 6 gigahertz band available for unlicensed use.
What steps is NTIA taking to protect the success of our approach and encourage additional countries to adopt unlicensed use in 6 gigahertz at the World Radio Conference?
April Roth
I again, ensuring that we lead the world at the 2027 WRC is front and center to our agenda. And as you identified, one of our priorities is protecting the American position when it comes to the 6 gigahertz band. That's an area that China has identified for its approach to 6G and ensuring that we promote our strategic interest when it comes to 6G is very important. And one of the ways we can do that is by providing, building a coalition of support around alternative bands. And we're working actively to identify bands for agenda item 1.7, which is the agenda item that's going to cover next generation 6G bands.
I think it's also, you know, tying back to your first question, I think it's also very important to recognize that the agenda is going to be very satellite focused. And one of the things that we've tried to do at NTIA is ensure that our domestic policies and international policies are working in concert. And one of the, I think, the real drawbacks to the previous tech-biased approach was that it sends a message to the rest of the world at a time when we're actively promoting our leadership in commercial space to the rest of the world and where it's so strategically important. It sends a very counterproductive message that these certain technologies are technologies where we lead are inferior, especially when the actual data shows that not to be the case.
Russell Fry
Switching gears again, what is NTIA doing, what steps is it taking to maintain US competitiveness in 5G and future development of 6G? I wasn't in here for some of this, so you may have already covered it, but other nations are obviously aggressively pursuing leadership in that. And so what are we doing ourselves to maintain that competitive edge?
April Roth
We're aggressively identifying 500 megahertz under our requirements under the Working Families Tax Cut Act. The most important way to do that is increasing access to spectrum. And then the other component that I would focus on is our participation in international standards and ensuring that international standards reflect our priorities for 6G.
Speaker 77
The gentleman yields. The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Kelly, for five minutes of questioning.
Robin Kelly
Thank you to Chair Hudson and Ranking Member Matsui for holding this morning's hearing, and thank you, Administrator Roth, for being here. Your testimony reports that 54, 56 states and territories have approved BEAD final proposals. Illinois is one of the two left out. The state submitted its proposal in September 2025, revised it by early April 2026, and built a plan that connects every eligible location in the state, nearly 157,000 in total, and more than 135,000 of them in rural or underserved areas. It does this on budget while leveraging over 575 million in private funding.
Then on May 26th this year, NTIA told the state that approval depends on cutting another 100 million from deployment and denied Illinois a short extension before today's deadline with no stated reason beyond supposed cost savings. I know these are just numbers on a press release to you, but to me, these are households that will lose out on more reliable broadband that will be cheaper for us all in the long run.
In my district that cut runs over 2.2 million, money set aside to connect homes and farms with no service today. Illinois did the work and I want to know why it is still waiting. They met every standard, and met every standard your own testimony praises, and will NTIA approve its final proposal and by what day?
April Roth
Yeah, we've communicated changes to Illinois that we need to see. Illinois's proposal that was submitted to us just didn't meet the mark in terms of finding efficiencies and meeting the principles in the benefit of the bargain reforms. But we remain eager to get Illinois across the finish line and we're working with the state to ensure that happens. We're looking to the totality of the circumstances and we are, we look forward, the ball's currently in Illinois's court and we look forward to seeing their revised proposal.
Robin Kelly
I hope that is true because they met every standard your own testimony praises. Can you assure this committee that LEO satellite providers receiving BEAD funds will be held to the same speed and service standards as every other technology receiving BEAD funding?
April Roth
Absolutely. In this, in administering the BEAD program, our focus has been on ensuring that we abide by the same performance requirements for every technology and every provider participating in the program. Congress established fair rules for participation and our role is to allow innovators to compete, especially when the government just doesn't have a great track record for predicting the course of technology and this field is just so dynamic. We judge technologies according to objective performance standards rather than government preferences and the result has been better outcomes for consumers and deployment on a more expeditious basis.
Okay, thank you. No more questions, I yield back.
Speaker 81
The gentlelady yields. The chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Indiana, Mrs. Houchin, for her five minutes of questioning.
Erin Houchin
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Administrator Roth, welcome, it's great to see you. I want to spend my time on a couple of things that matter enormously to families and communities that I represent and one in particular that I think matters to parents across the country and that is protecting kids in a digital world. And I also want to talk about expanding access to broadband and the NTIA sits at the center of both of those. I want to thank you for your work on screen time recommendations that you've worked on in a past role.
But Administrator Roth, empowering parents over their children's technology is one of my top priorities as a member of this committee. What role can the NTIA play in addressing this very important issue?
April Roth
Thank you so much, Congresswoman Houchin, it was great to meet with you to discuss this issue and thank you for your leadership on the issue of children's online protection, I know an issue that you've is very near and dear to your heart and that you have tremendous expertise on. You know, I think NTIA has, this is something that is near and dear to my heart as well as a mother of six. I can tell you that when I speak to parents across the country, I think there's a feeling that they have little visibility, particularly into their children's screen time, particularly during the school day. And at the same time, there's this growing body of evidence that suggests that we've digitized classrooms faster than we've evaluated educational consequences. And ensuring that federal policy reflects positive educational outcomes for children is very important.
One book that I recently read on this issue is The Digital Delusion by Dr. Jared Cooney Horvath, a neuroscientist who really shows that screen-based instruction can undermine learning, including memory retention, comprehension, and so we need to grapple with this.
And one way we've done that is by hosting listening sessions on this topic.
Erin Houchin
And that brings me to my question. I note that you recently held a listening session on excessive screen time use, and you heard from parents and researchers during that session. I think you've alluded that there were concerns that were extended beyond simply cell phone time and limiting cell phones in schools. You identified some broader issues with the classroom education technology itself, a concern that I share: the laptops, the devices, the digital curricula that are in front of kids much of the school day. Where do you go from here from the listening session, and how can Congress be helpful?
April Roth
Thank you. So as you know, there's addressing parental empowerment is a is a priority across this administration. HHS is active on this, so is the FCC. They're currently reviewing a program called E-Rate. And I think this is an example of where we've all seen that well-intended programs can potentially create unintended consequences.
And it's important to ensure that federal programs operate in the interest of children and support healthy outcomes, not just focused on pushing money out the door. And so one of the ways that we're building on our previous convening is we're planning we're hosting an additional listening session really focused on ensuring that those voices that we want to see in this proceeding—parents, teachers, researchers, students—really are able to contribute. Because sometimes, you know, when it comes to federal policymaking, agency proceedings, you know, tend to don't always enable those stakeholders to contribute. They can be dominated by more corporate interests.
Erin Houchin
I want to turn to broadband. I have about a minute left. Where we're talking about deployment times and permitting, how is the NTIA working with states to improve transparency and predictability with local permitting? Are you encouraging best practices like consolidated applications or shot clocks to keep projects on track?
April Roth
Yes, we're working with the states on all different types of ways to expedite permitting at the state and local level, including roundtables, single points of contact, elevating issues to NTIA when there's a challenge that providers are facing. And so we are have been working closely with the states, including on, as you said, expediting timelines so that we can have expeditious deployment in the BEAD program.
Erin Houchin
And in my remaining 20 seconds, several states—Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas—have established pole replacement funds to address the high cost of replacement. Does the NTIA view these state-led initiatives as useful models for breaking down pole barriers within the BEAD program?
Speaker 85
Certainly, I think addressing access to poles, as we've discussed, is critically important and something that we're certainly looking at as one of the proposals for the remaining BEAD funding.
Thank you so much. I yield back.
Robert Menendez
Gentlelady yields. The chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Menendez, for his five minutes of questioning.
Your agency is responsible for implementing a once-in-a-generation broadband investment known as the BEAD program, which would connect American families and small businesses to reliable and affordable internet. Thank you, Chairman. Administrator Roth, thank you for being here today. You testified at your Senate confirmation hearing on March 27th, 2025, and you responded to questions for the record from that hearing as part of your confirmation process. Is that correct?
Speaker 84
You were asked whether New Jersey would keep its full BEAD funding of more than $260 million, to which you answered, quote, "If confirmed, I will work to release allocated funds to the states consistent with NTIA's statutory authority." Is that correct?
Robert Menendez
But your agency is now calling more than $200 million in New Jersey's approved BEAD funding, quote, "savings." Administrator Roth, yes or no, will New Jersey receive the full $260 million in BEAD funding that NTIA allocated?
April Roth
Yes, we will abide by the law, which allocates funding to each state according to a formula.
Robert Menendez
So, because what you're communicating publicly is that there have been savings, but you're also telling me that New Jersey will get the full $260 million. And I just want to make sure that, because that seems to be a disconnect between what would be savings, but if we're getting the full 260, there's not really a savings.
Sir, can you repeat your question?
Robert Menendez
You're saying there's $200 million in, quote, "savings," but you just told me that New Jersey will get the full $260 million. That seems to be inconsistent.
April Roth
No, as I said, we are operating under the assumption that every state will be able to get access to their remaining funds. We're very proud of the savings that we were able to achieve in the program, thanks to our benefit-of-the-bargain reforms, and we are working to ensure that that savings can be used in an effective manner.
Robert Menendez
And you would agree that there's a difference between savings and the illegal impoundment of millions of dollars appropriated by Congress?
Yes, no, we are not impounding any money.
Robert Menendez
Okay. You also told Congress you would follow the law and release all BEAD funding to the states, which would include funding for broadband adoption. But for months, your agency has kept states waiting for the broadband guidance they need to submit full BEAD plans, forcing them to submit proposals that don't include non-deployment funding. Originally, the first deadline, I believe, was March 11th, 2026, but that deadline passed. Is that correct, for non-deployment guidance?
We have not issued the guidance yet, but we're working on it.
And then Secretary Lutton testified to Congress at the end of April that it would be released in the next two months. That has not happened. You're saying this summer, and you also, I believe, testified earlier that you want to get the guidance right. Is that correct?
April Roth
Yeah, certainly getting the guidance right is critical. Rushing it out the door without careful planning would be irresponsible.
Robert Menendez
Can you share what the remaining items are that need to be resolved before the guidance can be issued?
April Roth
You know, I can't speak to our internal deliberations and work product, but we are working actively to complete our work on the guidance. As you know, there was an unprecedented amount of interest and ideas floated as to how the funding should be used, and we need to do our due diligence to ensure that the guidelines are effective and outcome-driven in the same way that the...
Robert Menendez
But at some point, right, the criticism of the last administration could be the same criticism levied against this administration, which is that at some point we need to go, right? And there have been multiple deadlines, self-imposed deadlines, that now have passed, and states are looking for this guidance because the law says that each state can submit only one final BEAD plan for that state's full broadband funding to help people get online. Yet NTIA isn't enabling states to develop full BEAD plans or allowing them to spend their entire broadband allocation upon final review. So I'm curious how that is consistent with the law.
So it was they were not doing a good job of administering the program, but then they were also, you know, making it harder for the program to be administered. And I'm really focused on what we do going forward because what we spend a lot of our time here unfortunately is going back and forth between prior administrations and my focus is on what we're doing now. And we need to go because, you know, we represent I represent a densely populated area, there are people that represent rural areas. We need connectivity. And we need to have an assurance that states like New Jersey will get the two full $260 million so we can start getting to work.
I look forward to continuing to work with you, and I thank you for your time. I yield back.
Speaker 92
The gentleman yields. The chair now recognizes the gentlewoman from Virginia, Ms. McClellan, for her five minutes of questioning.
Jennifer McClellan
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Director Roth. Congress created the BEAD program to ensure every American has access to reliable, affordable high-speed internet. And in Virginia alone, over 133,000 homes and businesses are expected to be connected through this historic investment. Every day these projects are delayed, however, is another day that families can't access telehealth, students struggle to complete homework, small businesses can't compete, and public safety agencies remain without the connectivity that they need. Administrator Roth, it's now been more than 100 days since NTIA's self-imposed deadline to issue updated guidance on allowable uses of non-deployment BEAD funding.
And at that same time, uncertainty throughout the economy has made planning broadband projects even more challenging for states and providers. So I have a number of questions, and in the interest of time, I'm going to ask yes or no questions. If you think you need more than a yes or no, just say it's not a yes or no and I'll come back to it if I have time. So first, do you agree that the sections of the country that still need to be connected are among the most expensive to connect?
Speaker 88
Do you agree that every month BEAD deployment is delayed means millions more millions more Americans remain without access to broadband for longer?
Speaker 86
I'm going to come back to that, I just want to set a baseline. Do you agree that prolonged uncertainty may make it harder for states and broadband providers to plan and execute projects?
Speaker 93
Do you agree that states and localities know their communities best and should have a say in how they develop and deploy broadband networks?
April Roth
Yes, and that's precisely why we empowered the states to determine which technology would work best under for pursuant to the law.
Speaker 90
Thanks. Do you agree that states need clear guidance from the NTIA to move forward?
Speaker 89
Can you commit that NTIA will provide states with timely guidance so they can continue deploying broadband without unnecessary delays?
Jennifer McClellan
Can you commit that NTIA will work with states to resolve implementation questions as quickly as possible rather than allowing projects to sit idle?
April Roth
Yes, expediting the deployment of of projects is front and center in our oversight of BEAD.
Speaker 91
And can you assure me that the OMB proceeding on grant administration is not an effort to claw back non-deployment funds?
April Roth
I am not familiar I I don't no, I do not we are operating under the assumption that states will be able to use their non-deployment funds.
Speaker 86
Okay. So I want to thank you for that, because Congress created this historic investment to connect everyone with affordable, reliable high-speed internet service. And as we both agreed, this funding is necessary because the locations left unconnected are among the most expensive to connect, and NTIA plays a critical role in connecting them.
I want to turn to broadband mapping. Now I know there's been a lot of discussion around why it took BEAD so long, but we both agree, would you agree that the first step was we needed to know where current networks were deployed so we didn't overbuild?
Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 86
So that mapping project was critically important to the success of BEAD?
Speaker 86
And Virginia invested significant time and resources in validating the broadband coverage area, and I know a number of states did and some it was harder than others. How is NTIA ensuring that state-identified corrections are incorporated quickly so that BEAD dollars reach the communities that remain unserved rather than overbuilding?
April Roth
So as you said, we followed the FCC maps and ran a challenge process which was critical to preventing overbuild in the BEAD program, and we continue to work with the FCC on ways to ensure that the maps reflect the reality on the ground. That was evident also in our work to conduct oversight over DC's broadband proposal, which would have directed BEAD funding to locations that either weren't broadband serviceable or already had already had broadband. So, you know, conducting oversight and really looking, drilling down into proposals and asking questions is really critical to ensuring that taxpayer dollars are used effectively.
Jennifer McClellan
Okay. Now during your Senate confirmation hearing, you testified that you would abide by the law in implementing the Digital Equity Act. If the federal courts uphold that statute, including the provisions identifying covered populations such as individuals who are members of racial or ethnic minority groups, will you commit to implementing the law consistent with both the court's decision and Congress's intent?
Earl Carter
The gentlelady yields. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Carter, for five minutes of questioning.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary Roth, for enduring this long hearing. Appreciate it. You're almost there, so hang in there. Secretary, I've got the honor I have the honor and privilege of representing the state of Georgia, the coast of Georgia, over a hundred miles of pristine coastline, beautiful area. But I'm very proud of my state.
We received 1.3 billion dollars in BEAD funds and that was obviously to help us in the unserved and underserved communities. I don't know how familiar you are with Georgia, if at all, but there really are two Georgias. There's Atlanta and everywhere else, and I represent everywhere else. And South Georgia really does need this. We need broadband and we need we need it to be extended there.
Two of the major drivers of broadband deployment are permitting reform and then the access to spectrum. I sponsored a piece of legislation, the American Broadband Deployment Act. Are you familiar with that?
April Roth
Yes, and I applaud you on your leadership to address permitting through through congressional oversight.
Speaker 96
Okay. How would the permitting reform contemplated by my American Broadband Deployment Act help with the BEAD program?
April Roth
So permitting is certainly something that we've really thought creatively on addressing in our reforms to the BEAD program. You know, we've as you know, we've focused both on state barriers and federal barriers, which can be a little bit easier to address for us. State and local barriers can be a little bit more challenging. We've worked with the states to streamline processing and expedite permitting timelines as well as minimize permitting costs, really with the goal of ensuring that BEAD projects are successful and aren't subject to default. But we would welcome, you know, further assistance from Congress on this on this effort as it is as it is proven as it is so challenging.
Earl Carter
Well, if as you know, we passed it out of subcommittee and committee and it went to the floor. It was scheduled to be voted on.
Speaker 97
Unfortunately, we had to pull it at the last minute because we did get some opposition, particularly to the shot clocks. Are you familiar with that part of it as well?
Earl Carter
Okay. Any opinion on that? I mean, you know, I had a lot of feedback from local officials. And listen, I was a mayor in another life and I get it. I never liked the federal government or the state government telling me what I was supposed to be doing.
But at the same time, that has proved, I think, to be a problem and a hurdle that a lot of the companies are trying to get past. So, any opinion on that?
April Roth
Yes, no, I think it, I applaud your leadership. I think that, you know, that often you see that opposition to efforts like that can be not necessarily consistent with the goals of BEAD. The goals of BEAD are universal broadband deployment. We've really tried to address overhead costs that not only make permitting slower, but also add costs to companies. So I think addressing permitting is also an important way to address some of the affordability challenges that members on the committee have identified.
Sometimes you see localities treating some of these projects like a piggy bank and that's counterproductive, I think, to getting better connectivity in some of these places.
Earl Carter
What has NTIA done to encourage state and local governments to streamline their permitting processes in order to expedite deployment for BEAD?
April Roth
We have terms and conditions in the BEAD program that are critical to preventing defaults and promoting the effective deployment of projects. And those requirements focus on a 90-day approval timeline, minimizing costs, and really working together to address local barriers, including access to poles. And we're working with the states to implement those requirements. And but we would appreciate the opportunity to work with Congress as we address these challenges.
Earl Carter
Well, let me ask you this, just an open-ended question. What, how should we in Congress structure this to make it permitting reform, to make sure that spectrum policy translates into real broadband deployment? Because that's what this is for, as you well know. We want to have deployment.
April Roth
Absolutely. And I welcome the opportunity to work with you on this really critical issue that's not only important for better connectivity and better broadband affordability, but also our national leadership when it comes to next-generation technologies. We certainly don't want an inhospitable permitting environment to result in American technology being left behind.
Great. Well, thank you very much again for being here and appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Speaker 99
The gentleman yields. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, for his five minutes of questioning.
Paul Tonko
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome, Assistant Secretary Roth. This hearing is long overdue. And over the past year, it has been deeply disappointing to watch the NTIA's implementation of the BEAD program. I've worked for years to expand broadband access throughout New York's Capital Region and across the country. And I'm concerned that this administration's actions are putting our goal of universal, reliable, and accessible and affordable broadband at risk.
So, Secretary Roth, you mentioned in your testimony that NTIA is focused on returning the BEAD program to its statutory objective. And in your confirmation hearing, you stated you would follow the law. Yet NTIA is now prohibiting states from setting the low-cost service option as the law requires, and instead you have decided that service providers have the sole discretion to propose their own low-cost service option. If your goal is to faithfully implement the statute, can you explain what authority you have to ignore that statutory language?
April Roth
The low-cost service option remains a statutory requirement and remains in place. What we have done is we have made clear that rate regulation according to the law is prohibited. You know that's how Congress wrote the law and our job is to implement the law. I think bipartisan Congress recognized that that rate regulation drives up costs and undermines participation in the program. We saw that from the history of the BEAD program and we've really restored the program to its statutory mission.
But we've taken but I agree that affordability is important and there are many levers that we've pulled in order to promote affordability particularly through expanding clearing the runway for innovation expanding access to spectrum and minimizing permanent costs which have actually are actually more effective in promoting broadband affordability.
Paul Tonko
Reclaiming my time here. Just again I'm concerned about ignoring the statutory language. So is it your view that a statutory condition that applies only to providers voluntarily accepting federal grant funds is really the same as regulating rates in the broader marketplace?
April Roth
The low-cost service option remains a legal requirement. It's up to the states to you know enforce its contracts with providers. But NTIA is not is prohibited by the law from from regulating or setting rates.
Paul Tonko
In your testimony you also claimed to be aiming for universal connectivity. How can you make that claim if there are households that cannot afford to subscribe?
April Roth
I agree that affordability is incredibly important and and we've structured the BEAD program in a manner that I think promotes affordability in a much better manner than than previously including by promoting competition and not scaring away participation. You know one of the things one of the the trends that we've seen in the last few years is actually that broadband prices are coming down and real prices adjusted for inflation have come down more than 7% per year between 2020 and 2026. That's thanks to a competitive facilities-based competition environment. We want to promote that environment and part of the way that we did that was by ensuring that we took a technology-neutral approach to the program as Congress intended while ensuring that each project meets the the standards of of priority broadband.
Paul Tonko
Yeah I still see it as walking away from the statutory language and not really regulating rates in the broader marketplace. Now to make matters worse NTIA went beyond non-enforcement of the law's low-cost provision with term 50 of the BEAD general terms and conditions. NTIA is attempting to preempt state laws like New York's Affordable Broadband Act that requires providers operating in New York to offer specific low-cost options for qualifying households. Despite this I'm proud that New York has remained committed to enforcing its Affordable Broadband Act to ensure low-income households have access to affordable internet service. Interestingly just days after New York Governor Hochul announced that New York BEAD New York's BEAD program would move forward alongside the Affordable Broad Act NTIA began circulating a document this document BEAD subgrantees protect your rights.
I ask Mr. Chair that for unanimous consent to enter the guidance this guidance into the record.
Without objection.
Paul Tonko
Now, this document advises BEAD subgrantees that they should raise concerns directly with NTIA if they believe state-imposed requirements conflict with federal BEAD conditions, including those related to cost. Did you approve the release of this document? Were there any outside organizations involved in any part of this production?
April Roth
Ensuring that rate regulation is not hampering BEAD projects and undermining the timely and effective deployment of BEAD projects is part of our statutory responsibility. And we were, we think that this guidance is critical to ensuring the success of the BEAD program.
April Roth
No, we, we, our rules apply the law. And there are lots of outside organizations recently, you know, there is, that have published ample data showing the significant negative costs of rate regulation on the deployment of broadband projects. So if we, we have the statutory responsibility to ensure timely and effective deployment of broadband projects, it's critical that we don't, that projects are not put at risk.
The gentleman's time has expired.
Speaker 102
Mr. Chair, I have other questions that I'll get to the subcommittee to have answered by the assistant secretary. Thank you, I yield back.
Daniel Goldman
The gentleman yields. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Dr. Joyce, for his five minutes of questioning.
John Joyce
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Matsui for holding this important hearing. And thank you to Secretary Roth for being here with us. As I've said before and I will say again, rural communities cannot be left behind as technology develops at such a rapid pace. This includes broadband infrastructure. And thanks to the work that's being done at NTIA, we are closer to connecting every rural community in America, closer than we've ever been before.
Under President Trump and your leadership, BEAD program reform under NTIA has led to less red tape and more connections. Streamlining the program and accelerating deployment, that's what matters. It matters to my constituents. It matters in getting rural communities the connectivity that they deserve. In the district that I represent in Pennsylvania, connection sometimes at best can be spotty.
Geographic challenges like mountains create real-life barriers when it comes to connectivity. My constituents rely on broadband power. Precision agriculture is part of that. Telehealth is part of that. Education is part of that.
And my constituents desperately need that. This Congress, I introduced the Broadband and Telecommunications Rail Act with my colleague from California, Mr. Peters, and my colleague from Ohio, Mr. Latta, to provide a necessary and reasonable framework to allow broadband deployment along railroad rights-of-way. This bill prioritizes safety and efficiency, and I look forward to continuing my work in Congress to increase broadband coverage in rural communities without burdensome red tape and unnecessary delays. Placing our rural communities at the center of our work to deploy broadband is essential to ensuring that universal broadband availability is there for all Americans. Administrator Roth, in your written testimony, you mentioned that you're focused on ensuring universal broadband availability.
Would you please describe how the benefit of the bargain can achieve this and how this is critical reform that is so necessary and will ultimately benefit rural communities?
April Roth
Thank you, Congressman Joyce, and it was a real pleasure to meet with you a few months ago. BEAD's mission is clear, it's to close broadband gaps. And, and that's been our, our central focus.
One of the ways that we did that was by removing red tape, which increased participation in the program across all technologies. I think that our role is to implement the law and not add extraneous mandates that divert from the goal of universal broadband access. In applying the law, we've also been clear that government set the benchmarks in the law for what defines a priority broadband service, and it's up to each technology and provider to prove to each state that they could meet those requirements. But there was no technology preference in the law, and it also doesn't reflect the current state of technology to freeze technology in place. As a result of our providing, of eliminating these burdens and getting our program in line with congressional language, we were able to see not just increased participation, but universal broadband availability.
Every last community connected, whereas there was a real risk under the previous rules that overspending would cause some communities to be left behind, and we can all agree that that would have been a bad outcome. And each technology in the program, each provider needs to play by our rules, they need to meet the performance requirements in the law, but it's up to each state to determine what technologies work for different areas, not for Washington to impose and shove down their throats a one-size-fits-all solution.
John Joyce
In light of the BEAD reforms that you have been overseeing at NTIA, under these reforms and your leadership during the past year, would you please speak about how broadband deployment has been accelerated across the country, from state proposal submissions to funds being released? Talk to us about the timeline and how you have expedited that.
April Roth
Yes, so just in one year from our release of our restructuring notice, we've already seen deployment in several states. One of those states was Nebraska. I visited Ogallala, Nebraska, to witness one of the first BEAD projects, and one of the things that was so significant was that the project was delivering gigabit service to the community through a fixed wireless service, unlicensed fixed wireless, that was precluded from even participating during the previous administration. I think that goes to show the importance of letting the market and market innovators work rather than putting our thumb on the scale on a single technology, especially when that technology was able to deliver such high-quality service to the community in such an expeditious manner. I think consumers, and speaking to Deb Armknecht, the American who got the service through that technology, she was so thrilled, she didn't care how she was getting her broadband service, she just wanted it to work.
The gentleman's time has expired.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Speaker 105
The gentleman yields. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Balderson, for his five minutes of questioning.
Troy Balderson
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Secretary, thank you for being here today, and I'm the last one, so I think you're done. Since the administration issued its updated BEAD guidance last year, states have moved much more quickly through the approval process. Based on what NTIA has learned from working with states and providers, what additional improvements do you think could help accelerate broadband deployment and encourage even greater participation from rural providers?
April Roth
So I think that one of the things that we've focused on at NTIA has been really clearing the path to innovation. We've seen thanks to our history's facilities-based intermodal history of competition that competition has been the most effective way not just of promoting better access to communications but innovating in a manner that helps rural America. As I've said, some of the biggest, this most significant progress that we've seen in connecting rural Americans haven't come from subsidies, they've come from innovation itself. And so what NTIA can do is pull certain levers to promote that. One of the best ways we can do that is by expanding access to spectrum, which we're currently doing through our mandate under the Working Families Tax Cut Act.
And another way that we're doing that is by, you know, trying to address overhead costs. I think any efforts that we can take to address permitting obstacles are really helpful in increasing broadband deployment as well as innovation.
Troy Balderson
Okay, thank you very much. In the congressional district that I represent, electric co-ops are a major source of essential services, and many are working to expand broadband access in rural communities. We've heard that certain BEAD requirements may affect their long-standing statutory frameworks and financial models. Could you share how NTIA is approaching these concerns and what flexibility might exist to ensure cooperatives can participate successfully in the program?
April Roth
Thank you for your question. So just in line with that goal of expediting and increasing broadband deployment, the law requires that we issue rules governing the program to ensure that BEAD projects are deployed in a timely and effective manner. And one of the things that we've learned from history and broadband programs past like the RDOF is that pole access can be one of the most challenging areas that can affect the timely and effective deployment of broadband projects. And especially as, you know, you've seen pole owners enter broadband markets, their incentives may not always be aligned with the goals of the BEAD program. So what we've done in our rules is ensure that there is a cop on the beat, that to the extent that there is a gap in regulation of timely access to poles in order to serve that goal of timely and effective deployment of broadband projects.
And, you know, to the extent that there are pole owners that don't want to participate in the program, we have a process in place to ensure that every last area is served and if necessary, we can use a different provider.
Troy Balderson
Okay, thank you. Follow up on that, as states move from planning into construction, what role does NTIA see itself playing in helping states resolve implementation challenges that arise from provider feedback, particularly from smaller broadband companies, electric cooperatives, and local fiber providers?
April Roth
One of the things that we really pride ourselves on is ensuring that we are overseeing the program actively and, you know, seeing what challenges providers are facing. We wanted to, you know, we've seen a diverse mix of providers in the program, and I think that was thanks to our rules that really refocused the program on its core mission. You know, when it comes to smaller providers, one of the things that we've focused on is monitoring the fiber supply chain, which is something that, you know, we know that some providers are concerned about. But we are grateful that major fiber producers have made promises that BEAD providers will get their supply on time.
And I think additionally, um, you know, really focusing on working with states on on permitting obstacles through things like permitting roundtables, single points of contact, elevating challenges to NTIA, um, is is another way that we're we're really working to ensure effective and and expeditious deployment.
Okay, thank you very much.
Daniel Goldman
Gentleman yields. Seeing there is no further members wishing to be recognized, I would like to thank our witness for being here today. I remind members that they have 10 business days to submit questions for the record, and I ask the witness to respond to the questions promptly. Members should submit their questions by the close of business on July 15, 2026. Without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.