Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildfire Communications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee reviews bill to speed repair of communications infrastructure after wildfires
Summary
Lawmakers and industry witnesses supported HR 1655, which would allow expedited rebuilding of communication facilities damaged in declared wildfire disasters by narrowing duplicative NEPA and NHPA reviews, while members asked about preserving environmental and cultural protections.
The House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands heard testimony on HR 1655, the Wildfire Communications Resiliency Act, a bill designed to speed repair and replacement of communications infrastructure damaged or destroyed in declared wildfire disaster footprints.
Representative Cliff Bentz (Bence in the transcript) introduced the measure and said the bill provides "a targeted exemption from these reviews for communication infrastructure projects located within the footprint of a declared wildfire disaster," applying only to facilities replacing damaged structures or upgrading systems for greater fire resilience. He told the subcommittee that in 2024 "nearly 2,000,000 acres burned in Oregon and approximately 900,000 of those acres are in my district" and said permitting delays can strand counties from emergency communications.
John Crockett, deputy chief for State, Private, and Tribal Forestry at the U.S. Forest Service, told the panel the agency "supports this bill and the goal to expedite approvals to rebuild communication infrastructure following natural disasters" and offered to work with the committee on technical refinements.
Industry witnesses supported expedited processes. Greg Andreas, general manager of Ponderosa Telephone, described long recovery timelines after the 2020 Creek Fire, saying the fire "burned nearly 400,000 acres and destroyed over 850 buildings" in his service territory and that his company’s preliminary restoration costs were about $4.1 million. Andreas said lengthy environmental and cultural reviews can delay reconnection and discourage residents from rebuilding; he called for streamlined approvals for projects that rebuild in the same footprint.
Members asked about protections for environmental and historic resources. Representative Kennedy and others pressed witnesses on how to avoid duplicating prior analysis while ensuring cultural resources receive appropriate consideration. Agency and industry witnesses pointed to the Mobile Now Act’s 270‑day deadline for wireless siting in some cases as an example of a timeline the agencies can meet when processes are aligned.
No formal legislative action was taken; members and witnesses said technical edits and interagency coordination would be needed before any final bill text is ready for a floor vote.
