Overview
Title
To amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the ACCESS BROADBAND Act to provide for improvements to the broadband Deployment Locations Map of the Federal Communications Commission and the broadband infrastructure funding database of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The PROTOCOL Act is a plan to help show where and how internet connections are built across the USA by making maps and information better, so everyone can see and understand where internet money is being spent.
Summary AI
H.R. 9450, also known as the PROTOCOL Act, is a bill introduced in the House of Representatives that aims to enhance broadband infrastructure mapping and funding information in the U.S. It proposes amendments to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the ACCESS BROADBAND Act by improving the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Deployment Locations Map and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) broadband funding database. The bill requires additional data elements, promotes coordination between the FCC and NTIA, mandates state reporting of broadband deployment supported by federal and state programs, and requires federal agencies to use the FCC map when allocating broadband infrastructure funding. The aim is to improve accessibility and transparency regarding broadband deployment efforts across the country.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, officially titled the "Provide Rigorous Oversight To Optimize Connectivity and Offset Latency Act" (PROTOCOL Act), seeks to amend the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the ACCESS BROADBAND Act. The primary objective of this legislation is to enhance the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) broadband Deployment Locations Map and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration's (NTIA) broadband infrastructure funding database. By doing so, it aims to provide better oversight and management of broadband infrastructure projects in the United States. Improvements include adding more detailed data elements to the maps and databases, ensuring coordination between federal entities, and mandating state reporting on broadband deployment and funding use.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several issues arise from this proposed legislation. One concern is the complexity and verbosity of the bill's language, which may pose a challenge for stakeholders to fully understand its provisions. Additionally, the bill places a heavy emphasis on states to provide accurate data but does not address disparities in resources that could affect reporting quality. The lack of accountability measures for federal agencies that fail to use the Deployment Locations Map appropriately raises questions about effective implementation. Furthermore, privacy concerns may emerge regarding the disclosure of sensitive broadband infrastructure locations in state reports. Lastly, the bill does not outline clear protocols for maintaining and updating these tools over time, which is crucial for ensuring their accuracy and reliability.
Impact on the Public
Broadly speaking, the PROTOCOL Act could have a positive impact on the general public by potentially improving broadband infrastructure deployment across the country. Enhanced data collection and transparency through improved maps and databases could lead to more informed decision-making regarding broadband funding, which may result in better and more equitable internet access for underserved areas. However, if states struggle with reporting accuracy or if there are inconsistencies in how federal agencies utilize the map, these positive outcomes might not be fully realized.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
States and state agencies are responsible for accurately reporting broadband funding and deployment activities. This may prove challenging for those with limited resources or capabilities, making it difficult to comply with federal reporting requirements. The bill could also impact private entities and cooperatives involved in broadband projects, as unclear definitions of entity types might lead to differential treatment or confusion in the application process. Federal agencies, tasked with leveraging improved mapping tools in funding decisions, may experience burdens due to the lack of specified consequences for non-compliance. Finally, the general public and communities in rural and underserved areas may benefit from a more coordinated national effort to expand broadband access, although these benefits depend on the successful implementation and execution of the PROTOCOL Act's provisions.
Issues
The bill places significant responsibility on states to provide accurate data regarding broadband deployment and subgrants, but it does not address how discrepancies in resources and reporting capabilities between states will be managed (Section 2, State reporting).
There are potential privacy concerns regarding the disclosure of sensitive information about broadband infrastructure locations in state reports, which could be unintentionally exposed if not properly handled (Section 2, State reporting).
The bill mandates the use of Deployment Locations Map by federal agencies when awarding broadband infrastructure funds but does not specify the consequences or accountability measures if an agency fails to comply, which could lead to inconsistent implementation (Section 2, Required use of FCC map by Federal agencies; outreach by FCC).
The bill's language regarding the requirement for outreach by the FCC to federal agencies about their map-usage obligations might lack clarity on workflow and could lead to ineffective implementation (Section 2, Required use of FCC map by Federal agencies; outreach by FCC).
Complex and verbose language in the bill, with numerous nested clauses and cross-references, could make it difficult for some stakeholders to fully comprehend the legislation, thereby hindering transparency and understanding (Section 2, Improvements to FCC broadband Deployment Locations Map and NTIA broadband infrastructure funding database).
The requirement for federal agencies to integrate several data elements raises concerns regarding data accuracy and consistency, as the bill lacks details on how the FCC and NTIA will coordinate to maintain these standards (Section 2, Coordination between FCC and NTIA).
The language does not adequately define what constitutes a 'type of entity not listed in clauses (i) through (ix),' which could lead to subjective interpretations and potentially unequal treatment of entities applying for broadband deployment support (Section 2, Improvements to FCC broadband Deployment Locations Map).
The bill lacks provisions for maintaining and updating the Deployment Locations Map and data tools over time, leading to potential discrepancies and inaccuracies that could affect decision-making and fund allocation (Section 2, Improvements to FCC broadband Deployment Locations Map and NTIA broadband infrastructure funding database).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The PROTOCOL Act is a law that can be briefly referred to as the "Provide Rigorous Oversight To Optimize Connectivity and Offset Latency Act."
2. Improvements to FCC broadband Deployment Locations Map and NTIA broadband infrastructure funding database Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines improvements to the maps and databases used to track and manage broadband infrastructure projects. It updates the data requirements for federal programs, ensures coordination between the FCC and NTIA, mandates state reporting of broadband deployment data, and requires federal agencies to use these resources when funding broadband projects.