> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://broadbandbreakfast.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# O’Rielly: Too Late for NTIA to Pivot from Pro-Fiber Approach
- URL: https://broadbandbreakfast.com/orielly-too-late-for-ntia-to-pivot-from-pro-fiber-approach/
- Published: 2025-01-17T22:25:13.000Z
- Updated: 2026-03-11T05:58:59.000Z
- Description: Shifting away from fiber may not be practical.
- Author: Gabriel Dorner
- Tags: BEAD, NTIA, FCC, Michael O'Rielly, #with-siderail, #no-flux

WASHINGTON, Jan. 17, 2025 – Former FCC Commissioner **Michael O’Rielly** has raised concerns over the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s handling of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program under the Biden Administration, particularly criticizing its preference for fiber technology. 

In his [recent commentary](https://www.cablefax.com/regulation/oriellys-tmt-whiteboard-trump-should-consider-rewiring-bead?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com), O’Rielly described the fiber-first approach as costly and allegedly “violating the law’s technology neutrality requirement.”

However, he warned that it was likely too late to pivot away from fiber.

"Shifting away from fiber favoritism could take considerable time — filled with litigation — delaying broadband buildouts for months or even years,” O’Rielly said [in a blog posted by Cablefax](https://www.cablefax.com/regulation/oriellys-tmt-whiteboard-trump-should-consider-rewiring-bead?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com).

According to O’Rielly, the NTIA’s approach has discouraged broadband providers from participating due to its extensive mandates, which he argues exceed legal and logical bounds. 

“Turns out, providers rightly realized that government subsidies aren’t free when strapped with grenades,” he said.

He says prioritizing fiber was counterproductive when “cheaper technologies are comparable for pending needs.”

Due to the legal hurdles involved with a shift in policy, though, he suggests that the incoming Trump Administration clarify when more affordable or practical technology can or cannot be used in place of fiber. The current language was a bit ambiguous, he said.

“Perhaps a further relaxation or clarification of the alternative technologies structure, rather than a complete rebalancing act, should be a priority,” he wrote.