NextNav Inc.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for standing by. My name is Kelvin, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to NextMap's first quarter 2026 earnings call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question during this time, simply press star, followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, please press star one again. Thank you. I would now like to turn the call over to Jared Polak. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to NextNav's first quarter 2026 earnings conference call. Participating on today's call are Mariam Sarand, NextNav's Chief Executive Officer, and Tim Gray, NextNav's Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, let me remind everyone that this call will include certain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meeting of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements may be identified by the use of the words may, anticipate, believe, expect, intend, should, could, and similar expressions. Such forward-looking statements, which may relate to NextNet's forecast of future results, future prospects, developments, and business strategies, are subject to known and unknown risks uncertainties and assumptions, many of which are outside of NextNav's control and could cause actual results to differ. In particular, such forward-looking statements include the achievement of certain FCC-related milestones and FCC approvals, NextNav's projections, plans, objectives, and expectations, and NextNav's future business strategies and competitive positions. These statements are based on management's current expectations and beliefs, as well as a number of assumptions concerning future events. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance upon the forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made, and NICNAV undertakes no commitment to update or revise the forward-looking statements except as required by law. For additional information regarding risks and uncertainties, please refer to the risk factors and other disclosures contained in the company's filings with the SEC. Following prepared remarks, the company will host an operator-led question and answer session. In addition, a replay of our discussion will be posted to the company's investor relations website. I would now like to turn the call over to Ms. Durant. Please go ahead, Miriam.

Thank you, Jared. Good afternoon, and thank you all for joining us today. As we have discussed previously, the FCC moved forward to formally send a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, or NPRM, focused on promoting the development of PNT technologies and solutions through a standard interagency review process. We believe this represents a critical step that underscores the FCC's focus on addressing the national security urgency of identifying resilient backups and complements to GPS. This positive milestone was achieved in rapid time and with extraordinary momentum under this administration. We know the draft NPRM continues to proceed through the interagency review processes, including review by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or OIRA. These processes are designed to incorporate perspectives from all stakeholders, and we are actively supporting that work. While OIRA reviews are relatively new for FCC rulemakings, review across executive branch agencies has been a long-standing process. Importantly, we continue to work constructively with the FCC and other government agencies to support these processes. The timing remains subject to these ongoing reviews. The FCC has a long history of evaluating technically complex and nationally important issues and finding pathways to successful resolution. Its process has worked for decades, time and time again, including in spectrum matters more complex than ours. What we believe has been particularly constructive about this proceeding is how the public comment process that followed the FCC's March 2025 notice of inquiry, or NOI, accelerated the discussion. The NOI generated a depth and volume of responses typically seen following an NPRM, surfacing various matters earlier than usual. As a result, MCSNAP has been addressing what are often post-NPRM matters earlier on, which we believe has made this proceeding more advanced at this stage than comparable proceedings. This is in part why activities such as joint testing with the railroads are occurring today. We believe this approach is constructive as bringing later stage considerations into the record earlier may improve the efficiency of a post-NPRM phase moving towards report and order. In addition to the ongoing interagency review of the draft NPRM, as we've discussed previously, the FCC has granted experimental authorizations to MEXNAP to support both our 5G PNT network testing in Santa Clara County, California, and joint testing with railroads at their testing facility in Pueblo, Colorado. Our 5G PNT network testing marks an important step towards commercialization. I will reiterate that our ongoing network testing is moving in parallel to the NPRM process, and while railroad testing is relevant to the broader record with the FCC, neither of these efforts are a prerequisite to the FCC issuing an NPRM. In addition to our ongoing collaboration with railroad stakeholders, we continue to engage with the tolling industry. Last week, we attended the IBTTA Technology Summit in Orlando, Florida, where we spoke with tolling technology vendors, operators, and IBTTA executives to express our interest in pursuing a collaborative approach to coexistence considerations and validation efforts based on our intention to work with the vendors and operators to ensure protection of tolling operations. With our progress, it is not surprising that we have recently seen a significant increase in opposition activity. This increased activity has included a recent attempt to stall the NPRM through the House Appropriations Committee. This attempt to circumvent the FCC has concerned government and industry, as it is widely viewed as a dangerous precedent for U.S. spectrum policy. Former Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Greg Walden described the attempt as interfering with the FCC's process. As Walden specifically noted, it's really early in the process to drop a bunker buster bomb on the FCC technology review process. We agree. and further view these attempts as simply underscoring the strength of the existing record in the NOI proceeding, a record that led the FCC to advance an NPRM. We fully trust the FCC and interagency processes and firmly believe concerns can be addressed during an NPRM process. Chairman Carr shared at an event in April that one of the biggest priorities for us at the FCC is to help support alternatives to GPS. And further said, we want everyone that has a technology that could potentially be a compliment to GPS to get a fair shot at any regulatory changes they might need. So while we've seen increased opposition activity, we stand by our engineering and are proactively seeking to address concerns raised by stakeholders within industry and the Hill. In addition to our long history and continued constructive engagement with various federal agencies, we are continuing to build a highly targeted coalition of third party supporters and actively engaging with both supporters and opponents on the Hill. We're also placing emphasis on sharing real world evidence that supports our engineering analysis in the record. Just last week, we conducted a real-world coexistence demonstration using our 5G PNT network and a standard RFID reader with multiple RFID tags. This put recent claims about RFID interference to the test through a live demonstration at 20 feet between the 5G transmitter and the RFID reader, a setup that is far more extreme than seen in real-world circumstances. That test showed that RFID technologies are resilient by design and can continue to operate alongside 5G signals in the lower 900 megahertz band without operational impact. Outside of our regulatory development, NEXTAP continues to build momentum across the broader policy and industry ecosystem. We are actively participating in high-level dialogues including at the Milton Global Conference last week and through my role on the CCIA Board of Directors, where discussions increasingly focused on AI and the critical need for additional spectrum to support AI in the immediate future. At Nexav, we understand that wireless networks and reliable PNTP are the underlying invisible infrastructure powering successful expansion of the AI systems that will define the next decade of the autonomous economy. Further, NextNav filed comments in the FCC's proceeding in support of President Trump's national strategy of American drone dominance. We're excited to move into the next phase of sensing technologies and have joined the Okudu Ecosystem Foundation. The Department of War's Future Generation Wireless Technology Office launched the Okudu initiative and leads its ongoing development. Finally, as market dynamics evolve, we remain in active dialogue with potential partners across not only wireless carriers, but also satellite operators and big tech, among others. to help realize our strategic goal of enabling a 5G-based backup and complement to GPS. From our perspective, what was already a constructive commercial environment has only improved as interest continues to expand for access to low-band spectrum. Taken together, we believe these developments reflect steady, disciplined progress across regulatory, technical, and strategic fronts. From our perspective, the engineering case for a viable GPS backup is well-supported by our technical study. We are equally confident in our position as a one-of-a-one within a system of systems requiring capabilities that only Nextaft can provide, a unique combination of wide-scale positioning, timing, and 3D geolocation services, which are commercially viable and we believe can be made available during the current administration with swift action from the FCC. Moreover, our solution is future-proof and does not require taxpayer funding. Our conviction remains unchanged. We see a path to resolving technical and policy questions within the time-tested FCC and interagency decision-making process As we continue to engage constructively with both supporters and our opponents, our confidence is based in part on the knowledge that the FCC is historically renowned for getting the process right. With that, I will turn things over to Tim for a review of our financials. Tim?