One of the provisions of the IIJA legislation that created the BEAD grants is a directive that States should take steps to reduce costs and barriers to fiber deployment. The legislation lists specific ways that States can reduce the cost of BEAD grant project: promoting the use of existing infrastructure, adopting dig-once policies, streamlining the permitting processes, providing cost-effective access to poles, conduits, easements, and rights-of-way, and requiring reasonable access requirements.

The IIJA hoped that States would reduce barriers, reduce costs, and shorten timelines for BEAD project. The legislation not only wants States to make these changes for building along State highways but implies that States should ask counties and municipalities to make the same changes. The language also suggests making special exceptions for building BEAD infrastructure and not necessarily for other construction.

Anybody who has ever built fiber would agree on the benefits that come from most of the items on the list. The IIJA was enacted in November 2021, and states have had two years to react to these federal suggestions. I am sure that some States considered these recommendations in the last two years and perhaps even made a few improvements in processes. But I’ve seen very little evidence that most States have taken any action, and for the most part, States seem to have ignored the IIJA directive.

I’ve written many times about these same issues over the years, and I wonder if States have the ability or even interest to tackle these changes.

Use of Existing Infrastructure. I’ve been advocating this for years. There is a huge amount of unused fiber sitting in networks built by state highway departments, school systems, county and city networks, and statewide networks that could be a big benefit for commercial fiber deployment. But there are always reasons cited why governments won’t share fiber. There might be legislative prohibitions or restrictions from the original funding source that built the fiber. Governments might not want to expend the effort and cost to provide access to the fiber. Some governments worry about security.

Dig-once Policies. This is an idea that policymakers seem to love, but the market doesn’t value. There have been some successes with dig-once, particularly when an ISP already wanted access to fiber along a road that is under construction. But mostly, this policy goes nowhere. Road builders don’t want to incur any extra cost or schedule delays to accommodate fiber. Unless an ISP is part of the process, nobody wants to pay for conduit or access points. Even when conduit is built, it often doesn’t have the access points that ISPs want. Dig once builds disjointed stretches of infrastructure that don’t connect to other networks at the endpoints. To get infrastructure everywhere with dig once would probably take a hundred years.

Streamlining the Permitting Processes. This idea is at the top of most ISP’s wish list. While some states have worked to make it easier to build along state highways, in many cases, the state permits are the hardest to obtain. Most States have zero sway over influencing the processes for city and county roads, and trying to intervene or impose rules would set off an intense battle over state versus local rights.

Cost-effective Access to Poles, Conduits, Easements, and Rights-of-way. This is an interesting request in the IIJA because it conflicts with FCC jurisdiction over these issues. About half of the States still follow the FCC rules for these issues. The other half of States have their own rules but are only allowed to differ from the federal rules in relatively minor ways. States certainly can set fees for using State infrastructure but have limited power elsewhere.

One of the most interesting aspects of this legislative directive is that it is aimed mostly at State Broadband Offices. Most of the changes listed above either require legislative change or would mean making changes at embedded bureaucracies like State Highway Departments – two things that are far outside the reach and power of a State Broadband Office.