Congress exempts broadband from environmental review on federal lands
H.R. 2298 — Reducing Barriers for Broadband on Federal Lands Act of 2025 · Filed by Russ Fulcher (R-ID) · Introduced Mar 24, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill exempts broadband infrastructure projects on federal lands from two major environmental and historical review laws: the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Broadband providers installing fiber, copper lines, towers, or wireless equipment in rights-of-way on federal property no longer need to prepare environmental impact assessments or consult with agencies about effects on historic sites. The bill benefits broadband companies by removing regulatory delays; the public loses transparency into environmental and cultural impacts of these projects.
Why we flagged it
The bill's operative mechanism is a categorical exemption from two foundational environmental and cultural-resource laws. It is framed as a broadband-access measure but functions as a deregulatory rider that strips procedural protections, not as a substantive broadband-deployment program.
What the text implies
- NEPA exemption eliminates the requirement to disclose cumulative environmental impacts of multiple broadband projects on the same federal lands, preventing public understanding of aggregate effects on ecosystems, water resources, or wildlife habitat.
- NHPA exemption removes mandatory consultation with Indian tribes and state historic preservation offices, potentially allowing destruction or damage to sacred sites, archaeological resources, or historic structures without tribal or community input.
- The exemption applies to all rights-of-way on federal lands (except Interstate highways), including sensitive areas like national forests, BLM lands, and lands adjacent to national parks, with no carve-out for high-value environmental or cultural zones.
- Broadband providers retain the ability to use federal rights-of-way but face no requirement to consider or disclose alternatives that might minimize environmental or cultural harm, shifting all discretion to the provider.
- The bill does not require broadband providers to conduct environmental or historic review voluntarily; it only removes the legal mandate, creating a race-to-the-bottom incentive for minimal due diligence.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
Citizens lose mandatory environmental review and historic preservation consultation on federal lands. While broadband expansion is a public good, the bill removes the mechanism by which the public learns about and can comment on environmental damage, cultural site destruction, or alternative routing. The exemption is categorical and applies to all broadband projects in rights-of-way, regardless of sensitivity or scale.
Who stands to gain
- broadband infrastructure providers (wireline and wireless)
- telecommunications companies deploying fiber and tower networks
- construction and engineering firms contracted for broadband installation
Named in the bill
broadband providers, Federal land management agencies (BLM, Forest Service, etc.), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Indian tribes, State historic preservation offices
Where it stands
- Mar 24, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Mar 24, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Natural Resources and House Committee on Energy and Commerce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for…”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
3 lobbying clients named this bill on 5 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $5,245,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 25 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 61% of bills with at least one filing.
Russ Fulcher, the sponsor, reported $350,070 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle. $2,500 of that came from 1 PAC tied to these lobbying clients.
- Charter Communications Inc — $5,020,000 on 2 filings
- Wta -- Advocates for Rural Broadband — $225,000 on 2 filings
- Telecommunity — $0 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (2,001 characters) on Jun 3, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress exempts broadband from environmental review on federal lands” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr2298 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.