6,000 BEAD projects need 86K+ permits, report finds

As states and internet service providers prepare to roll out more broadband under a $42 billion program, a new report found that permitting is a major obstacle to getting it done.

Researchers found that 86,402 distinct permits would be required for the 6,933 terrestrial projects planned under the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment program. Over half of projects require more than 10 permits, while 1 in 7 require more than 20 across the state, local and federal levels, according to the report released last week by the New York Law School’s Advanced Communications Law and Policy Institute.

Of those projects, researchers said, 95% require a federal environmental review, 76% require state permits — typically through the highway right-of-way — 71% need agreements with private entities or other third parties and 62% need municipal permits. The report said a typical build engages with eight separate entities, each with a separate process.

Questions around permitting continue to swirl as the feds dole out BEAD cash. Lawmakers across the political spectrum have been asking if the process can be tweaked to get projects built quicker, or if it works as intended to protect local residents. The new rules on this federal program, however, have some worried that projects may be stymied before they even begin.

“The thing with BEAD is there are timelines around the project,” said Michael Santorelli, ACLP’s director and a co-author of the report. “They only have about four years to build, and because of the new rules really driven down how much money they were getting for these projects. They're on a stricter budget; they have compressed timelines within which to operate. These permitting processes can add time and money to the build process, even for a simple project.”

The Commerce Department and National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which run the BEAD program, announced various rule changes last year that they said were designed to save taxpayer money. Those savings are estimated to be worth around $21 billion, half of what was appropriated for the program under the 2021 infrastructure law.

But the report raised concerns that having less money available could result in projects being delayed or scrapped as the cost and complexity of permits remains, in some cases, high. The biggest driver of permit requirements are wetlands and floodplains, the report found, but thousands more are required to cross existing infrastructure, including roads and highways (4,964 projects), railroads (3,072 projects) and transmission and pipeline corridors.

For states and localities, which typically manage those sorts of permitting requests, that can present numerous challenges, Santorelli said.

“When you get down to the local level, and depending on where you are, where you're building, counties or localities might be under-resourced, they might not be able to handle multiple requests,” he said. “They might not have timelines in place or processes that require them to make a decision quickly. There might not be rules in place that put a cap on how much they can charge for a permit.”

The fragmented nature of the permitting structure in the U.S. can also be frustrating, Santorelli said, even though it appears to be a “bug” or a “feature of the American way of government.” Different permits at different levels of government may have overlapping requirements but need separate paperwork, while the issue of which level of government has jurisdiction remains a thorny one.

In an opinion piece for Route Fifty late last month, Brandon Tatum, CEO of the National Governors Association, and Jonathan Spalter, CEO of USTelecom, said projects can end up “trapped in overlapping reviews from multiple agencies operating on different timelines with no coordination and no accountability for delay.”

“That is not oversight,” the pair continued. “It is obstruction by inaction. Death by a thousand paper cuts.”

It’s an issue that lawmakers have looked to address. Repeated hearings in the House and Senate have featured calls to reduce or streamline the permitting process to get projects built quicker, while elected officials have passed some legislation to that end. But it remains tricky, especially as local government groups are keen to preserve their authority and not be preempted by federal legislation.

In the meantime, Santorelli said the federal government could consider providing states and localities with some of the leftover BEAD money to help staff up their permitting offices, in addition to their mandated permitting roundtables that look to resolve delays and disputes while collecting complaints from subgrantees.

But the disagreements around permitting go far beyond just broadband, Santorelli said, and touch various other areas including building affordable housing, data centers and electricity infrastructure while looking to protect the environment, neighborhoods and the public right-of-way. Hopefully, he said, the discussions around BEAD can help push the conversation forward.

“Hopefully this will draw attention to the issue, and looking longer term, there could be a more concerted effort at the state level in particular to really take a hard look at what their localities are doing on so many different issues, try to streamline things, and provide some of the consistency that's needed,” Santorelli said.