Broadband Internet for Small Ports Act

Bill Number

H.R. 1838

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Science, Technology, Communications

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-03-28: Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.

Last Updated

2025-04-01T08:06:13Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The Broadband Internet for Small Ports Act (H.R. 1838) aims to expand broadband internet access in rural areas of the United States, including its territories, by amending the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. It focuses on providing loans and grants to support broadband deployment, with special emphasis on rural ports and agricultural lands to boost economic activities like trade, farming, and precision agriculture (the use of technology for efficient crop and livestock management).

Key Provisions

• Priorities for Funding Applications:
• Gives top priority to projects serving unserved rural areas (where broadband is unavailable) and adds a new priority for rapid broadband deployment on cropland and ranchland to support precision agriculture.
• Establishes equal priority for projects that expand broadband in rural ports, defined broadly as any U.S. port on navigable waters (including harbors, marine terminals, and state/territory-formed ports) used for goods movement.
• Requires the Secretary of Agriculture (who oversees the program) to verify unserved rural communities through consultations with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC, the agency regulating communications) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA, which manages broadband mapping), plus site-specific testing. These verifications must be reviewed and potentially adjusted every two years via public notice in the Federal Register (the official journal for government notices).

• Funding Adjustments:
• Grants are capped at 50% of project development costs, but the Secretary can approve up to 75% for projects in extremely underserved rural areas (e.g., high poverty or low population density).
• Loans can cover up to 90% of project costs (increased from 50%), with repayment terms shortened in certain cases (e.g., from 3 to 2 years for specific conditions).
• Ensures funded projects provide service levels at least as good as those supported by the FCC's universal service high-cost program (federal subsidies for rural telecom).

• Application and Reporting Requirements:
• Mandates timely feedback and decisions on funding applications.
• Recipients must submit precise location data (geolocation) for new or upgraded broadband within 30 days of project milestones or completion to track buildout progress.

• Flexibilities for Implementation:
• Allows the Secretary to commit (obligate) funds before completing full environmental, historical, or other reviews if a later site-specific review (focused on exact locations like towers or poles) can be done without delaying the project.
• Requires at least 1% of funds to be set aside for program oversight and accountability measures.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Amendments to Section 601 of the Rural Electrification Act:
• Expands eligibility priorities to include rural ports and precision agriculture projects, which were not previously highlighted.
• Increases grant maximums (from a flat cap to up to 75% in targeted cases) and loan coverage (to 90%), making more funding available for high-need areas.
• Introduces mandatory verification processes for unserved areas, including inter-agency coordination and periodic reviews, to improve accuracy over prior self-reported data.
• Adds new requirements for geolocation reporting and timely application processing, enhancing transparency and efficiency.
• Permits pre-review fund obligations for environmental checks, streamlining deployment while maintaining safeguards (a shift from stricter pre-obligation rules).
• Redesignates subsections for clarity and ties broadband levels to FCC standards to avoid overlaps with existing federal telecom support.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will handle more applications and verifications, requiring coordination with the FCC and NTIA. This could increase administrative workload but improve data accuracy for broadband mapping. A 1% fund set-aside supports better oversight, potentially reducing waste.
• On Citizens: Rural residents, especially in ports and farming areas, gain better access to high-speed internet, enabling remote work, education, telemedicine, and precision agriculture tools that could boost farm productivity and incomes. Unserved communities (about 20-30% of rural U.S. areas) may see faster coverage.
• On International Relations: Enhanced broadband in rural ports could improve U.S. trade efficiency (e.g., faster cargo tracking), strengthening economic ties with trading partners, though no direct foreign policy changes are involved.
• Broader Economic Effects: Supports rural economic development by modernizing infrastructure, potentially creating jobs in telecom installation and port operations.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Rural Communities and Residents: Primary beneficiaries, particularly in unserved or underserved areas, ports, and agricultural zones.
• Port Operators and Businesses: Small rural ports gain priority funding, aiding goods movement and logistics.
• Farmers and Agricultural Entities: Benefit from prioritized broadband for precision agriculture, improving efficiency in crop monitoring and resource use.
• Telecommunications Providers: Eligible for loans, grants, and guarantees to deploy or upgrade services in rural areas.
• Federal Agencies: USDA (lead implementer), FCC, and NTIA (for data sharing and standards); states and territories (for port definitions and local projects).

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens accountability through geolocation reporting and inter-agency verification, reducing risks of fraud in federal funding. The environmental review flexibility could face challenges under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, which requires impact assessments) if site-specific reviews are deemed insufficient, but it includes safeguards to comply. No conflicts with constitutional rights are apparent.
• Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce (broadband and ports) and spend for the general welfare (rural development), without infringing on free speech or other protections.
• Political: Promotes bipartisan rural infrastructure goals (introduced by Democrats but appeals to rural interests across parties). Could influence future broadband policy by integrating ports and agriculture, potentially setting precedents for targeted federal subsidies amid debates on digital equity and closing the urban-rural divide.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Del. Plaskett, Stacey E. [D-VI-At Large]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Moore, Barry [R-AL-1]

Recent Actions

• 2025-03-28: Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.
• 2025-03-04: Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
• 2025-03-04: Referred to the Committee on Agriculture, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
• 2025-03-04: Introduced in House
• 2025-03-04: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Broadband Internet for Small Ports Act — issued 2025-03-04 — PDF (9 pages)