Introduction
In advance of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) August 7th Open Meeting, NDIA, Public Knowledge, and X Lab met with staff from Commissioner Gomez, Commissioner Trusty, and the Wireline Competition Bureau, calling on the Commission to reconsider its plans for the upcoming Broadband Progress Report as outlined in the draft Notice of Inquiry (NOI) published on 7/17/25.
However, in advance of the meeting on 8/7, the Commission voted to adopt the NOI (see Public Knowledge’s statement on the vote here). As of this blog post’s publication, we do not know if the Commission adjusted the NOI with any of our suggested changes.
To better understand what this all means, let’s review the Section 706 report, how it has changed over the years, and why it matters.
Background
The 1996 Telecommunications Act not only established the Universal Service Fund (USF) and its programs, it also required that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regularly provide a report that determines “whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” The ‘regular’ (not annual, because as you’ll see from the archive, the Commission rarely publishes the report two consecutive years in a row) report is sometimes called “The Broadband Deployment Report” and at times has been called the “Broadband Progress Report.” To develop the report, Congress required the Commission to release a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) to gather information for the public record and inform the Commission’s final determination of whether ‘advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.” If the Commission determines that advanced telecommunications capabilities are not being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion. Congress charges the FCC to, “take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market.” The Commission first determined it was not meeting its universal and timely deployment goal in 2010 under the Obama-appointed Chairman, Julius Genachowski. Again, in subsequent years, the Commission occasionally found that the goal had not been met. Notably, the most recent report issued under Chairwoman Rosenworcel in 2024, found the goal was not met.
Over the years, what data is collected, how they are collected, and how they are reported have evolved. The report often contains tables of broadband deployment data by state and county. The speeds at which a state/county is considered served have been updated over time, as has the breakdown of the technologies the Commission reports on. The report also often contains broadband adoption data at various speed thresholds, sometimes broken down by state and sometimes by state and county.
Why the Report Matters
The data policymakers collect and the questions they ask about that data identify their policy priorities and impact the design of policy and programmatic solutions. If, for instance, we don’t have data to conclude that a lack of digital skills is a barrier to broadband adoption and use, then designing policy solutions for that barrier becomes more challenging.
To that end, in the 2024 Report, Chairwoman Rosenworcel determined that due to a number of factors, including the findings and mandates Congress included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) statutory language, that the question of “whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion” could not be fully answered by looking at Broadband Deployment data alone.
Instead, the 2024 report outlined additional categories and subsequent metrics the Commission should consider to determine whether it’s meeting its goals. They were:
- Broadband Affordability—Broadband affordability is one of the biggest barriers to broadband adoption, and thus, the 2024 Report determined it must assess broadband affordability as part of its overall assessment.
- Broadband Adoption—The Commission considered the goal of universal adoption to be “a universal lack of barriers to adoption other than service availability and service affordability,” such as the affordability of devices used to access broadband services and digital skills.
- Broadband Availability—The Commission defined broadband availability as consumers’ ability to purchase broadband service in areas where service is physically deployed. This includes all aspects of service quality, including latency, consistency of service, and other aspects (like service outages and inside wiring).
- Broadband Equity—The Commission stated it could “measure progress” toward the universal service goal of equitable access to broadband by implementing the Infrastructure Act’s directive to prevent and identify necessary steps to eliminate digital discrimination in access.
Additionally, the Rosenworcel report established a long-term target of 1,000 Mbps (download) /500 Mbps (upload) for households, noting that technology and households’ use of broadband changes over time.
This Year’s Report
Chairman Carr’s proposed Notice of Inquiry would reverse course from the 2024 Report and return to measuring “whether advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion” based on broadband deployment data alone. He also proposes abolishing the long-term goal of 1000/500 Mbps, among other things.
NDIA joined Public Knowledge and X Lab to urge the Commission to continue reporting on broadband affordability, adoption, availability, and equity, to set a goal to benchmark progress against, and to include additional questions in the NOI to better understand the actual state of broadband access on the ground. We argued that:
“As currently drafted, the Section 706 Notice of Inquiry under consideration by the Commission for the August Open Meeting fails to adequately center consumers, limiting the potential for robust analysis.”
We also urged the Commission to outline concrete success metrics like those outlined in the 2024 report.
“Due to the Affordable Connectivity Program funding lapse, abrupt shifts in the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program (BEAD), and the unlawful cancellation of Digital Equity Act funds, the U.S. already faces a race to the bottom, where substandard services in rural and low-income communities will undermine the nation’s competitiveness. Given these concerns, the Commission should further examine how long-term speed goals can better future-proof broadband infrastructure in the U.S.”
Once the NOI is published in the Federal Register, it is open for public comment for 30 days. Organizations can submit replies to original comments within 45 days of the NOI’s publication. NDIA plans to submit comments reiterating the points we outlined with our partners.