In a development that reverberates beyond American shores, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) in the United States has dramatically overhauled the regulations governing its massive $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) programme. This unforeseen move effectively sends participating states back to the drawing board in their quest to bridge the digital divide, a situation that offers both lessons and potential implications for Nigeria’s own ambitious broadband expansion goals.
The most significant change to the BEAD programme’s Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) is the removal of the previous preference for end-to-end fibre optic deployments. This means projects that deliver minimum speeds of 100/20 Mbps with latency of less than 100 milliseconds are now prioritised, regardless of the technology used. This shift away from an exclusive focus on fibre optic infrastructure opens the door wider for technologies like Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) and Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite internet, mirroring some of the infrastructure diversity Nigeria is exploring.
Adding to the upheaval, the NTIA has officially rescinded all prior Final Proposal approvals, including those from states like Louisiana, Nevada, and Delaware, which had already announced their chosen BEAD funding recipients. This effectively wipes the slate clean, forcing all US states and territories to revise their plans within a tight 90-day window to comply with the new NOFO. This “Benefit of the Bargain” clause mandates at least one additional subgrantee selection round to ensure the lowest-cost broadband option is chosen, irrespective of the technology employed.
For Nigeria, where robust broadband access remains a critical enabler for economic growth, education, and digital inclusion, this policy pivot in the US is worth noting. While Nigeria’s broadband strategy has always embraced a mix of technologies due to its vast and diverse geography, the American experience highlights the dynamic nature of broadband policy and the potential for shifts in preferred deployment methods based on evolving cost-effectiveness and technological advancements.
Experts like New Street Research Policy Analyst Blair Levin suggest that this new direction in BEAD could lead to large wireline operators disengaging from the programme, potentially leaving the field open to smaller, rural carriers, or even leading to litigation from those who view the new rules as an “existential threat.” The prospect of legal challenges and further delays, pushing actual BEAD deployments to 2026 or beyond, underscores the complexities of national broadband initiatives.
The increased flexibility for FWA applicants is particularly noteworthy. The new NOFO now explicitly states that providers using both licensed and unlicensed spectrum – or a combination of both – are eligible for funding. This is a significant departure from previous Biden-era BEAD guidance, which did not classify fully unlicensed spectrum deployments as “reliable” broadband. This change empowers Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) that rely entirely on unlicensed spectrum to compete for funding, provided they meet the stipulated speed requirements.
However, the inclusion of unlicensed FWA also introduces new complexities for states, as it will necessitate a re-evaluation of existing FCC maps to determine service coverage in BEAD-eligible locations. This could lead to revisions in individual state broadband maps and, according to Levin, potentially reduce the overall market size for all bidders due to the increased competition from diverse technological solutions.
Beyond the technology shift, the new NOFO has also stripped away several other BEAD requirements previously championed by the Biden administration, such as those related to workforce development, climate resiliency, and certain low-cost broadband stipulations. While BEAD subgrantees are still required to offer at least one low-cost service option, the NTIA now prohibits eligible entities from explicitly or implicitly setting the rate for this service.
The Communications Workers of America (CWA) has voiced concerns that the elimination of labor requirements and workforce development plans will “hinder states’ ability to appropriately manage local workforce needs” and undermine the creation of “good jobs” essential for a well-trained workforce. Similarly, Drew Garner of the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society warns that investing solely in the cheapest broadband infrastructure could be “a self-inflicted wound to American competitiveness,” especially as global powers like China and Europe are heavily investing in fibre to prepare for future technologies like Artificial Intelligence. This perspective provides a critical lens for Nigeria as it navigates its own broadband future, weighing cost-effectiveness against long-term national competitiveness and technological readiness.
