[Senate Hearing 115-90]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-90
EXPLORING THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM
TO THE U.S. ECONOMY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, AND THE
INTERNET
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 2, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
27-651 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
____________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
Internet:bookstore.gpo.gov. Phone:toll free (866)512-1800;DC area (202)512-1800
Fax:(202) 512-2104 Mail:Stop IDCC,Washington,DC 20402-001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking
ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MIKE LEE, Utah GARY PETERS, Michigan
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
TODD YOUNG, Indiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
Nick Rossi, Staff Director
Adrian Arnakis, Deputy Staff Director
Jason Van Beek, General Counsel
Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
Renae Black, Senior Counsel
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS, TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION, AND THE
INTERNET
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi, BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii, Ranking
Chairman MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
ROY BLUNT, Missouri AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
TED CRUZ, Texas RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
JERRY MORAN, Kansas CORY BOOKER, New Jersey
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska TOM UDALL, New Mexico
DEAN HELLER, Nevada GARY PETERS, Michigan
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MIKE LEE, Utah TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
SHELLEY CAPITO, West Virginia CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
CORY GARDNER, Colorado
TODD YOUNG, Indiana
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on March 2, 2017.................................... 1
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Schatz...................................... 2
Statement of Senator Nelson...................................... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Statement of Senator Klobuchar................................... 31
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................ 32
Statement of Senator Fischer..................................... 42
Statement of Senator Hassan...................................... 42
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 43
Statement of Senator Gardner..................................... 45
Statement of Senator Moran....................................... 46
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 48
Statement of Senator Peters...................................... 49
Statement of Senator Inhofe...................................... 52
Witnesses
Scott Bergmann, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, CTIA......... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Roger Entner, Founder, Recon Analytics LLC....................... 12
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Dave Heiner, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, Microsoft
Corporation.................................................... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Pat LaPlatney, President and Chief Executive Officer, Raycom
Media on behalf of the National Association of Broadcasters.... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Tom Stroup, President, Satellite Industry Association............ 25
Prepared statement........................................... 26
Appendix
ViaSat, prepared statement....................................... 55
Response to written questions submitted to Scott Bergmann by:
Hon. Deb Fischer............................................. 60
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 61
Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto.................................. 62
Response to written questions submitted to Dave Heiner by:
Hon. Deb Fischer............................................. 64
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 65
Hon. Brian Schatz............................................ 66
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 68
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to:
Pat LaPlatney................................................ 69
Tom Stroup................................................... 71
EXPLORING THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM
TO THE U.S. ECONOMY
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Communications, Technology,
Innovation, and the Internet,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in
room SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Roger Wicker,
Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Wicker [presiding], Thune, Blunt,
Fischer, Moran, Inhofe, Lee, Johnson, Capito, Gardner, Young,
Schatz, Nelson, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Markey, Booker, Udall,
Peters, Hassan, and Cortez Masto.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
Senator Wicker. Good morning. On behalf of my friend,
Senator Schatz, I'm glad to convene the first hearing of the
Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, Innovation, and the
Internet for the 115th Congress. So welcome to you all.
As we all know, in today's connected world, the demand for
spectrum increases with every new technology. Spectrum is the
lifeblood of this connectivity, improving the lives of people
around the globe.
Our discussion of spectrum policy today comes on the heels
of this committee's approval of the MOBILE NOW Act. Under
Chairman Thune's leadership, we have taken a significant,
bipartisan step toward freeing up spectrum for the next
generation----
Senator Klobuchar. I thought it was in keeping with the
Committee----
Senator Wicker.--and people should silence their devices,
by the way.
[Laughter.]
Senator Wicker. But right on key, for the next generation
wireless services with the approval of this legislation. I hope
to see Senate passage of the bill in the near future. Our
discussion of spectrum policy should continue. With rapid
growth in the use of mobile devices and the Internet of Things,
demand for spectrum will only increase.
Spectrum for mobile broadband is giving rural America the
tools and resources it needs. Applications that utilize mobile
broadband provide the means to deliver quality healthcare in
the most remote corners of our states and transmit real-time
data for improved crop production on our farms. Satellite
services are providing television, broadband, and Earth
observation for a variety of applications.
Next Gen TV has the potential to deliver better emergency
services and ultimately save lives. This is particularly
important to states like Mississippi that can be situated in
the paths of hurricanes, tornados, and other natural disasters.
Unlicensed spectrum offers opportunities for businesses of all
sizes to innovate and continue to fuel the vast expansion of
the Internet of Things. Although innovation demands more
efficient spectrum use, innovation will also be what solves the
problem of limited spectrum.
We are here today to talk about the value of spectrum to
the economy. We are here to talk about what we have learned
from the FCC's recent spectrum auctions and how unlicensed
spectrum is a vital piece of the puzzle. I also hope our
discussion will encourage a focus on the future of spectrum
policy and set the stage for this committee to look at ways to
address spectrum demand.
I would like to welcome all of our witnesses, and I will
introduce them in a moment after we have turned for an opening
statement to our colleague, Mr. Schatz.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening this
hearing and to the witnesses for being here today.
Spectrum is the invisible infrastructure that has become
the on-ramp to access the Internet. Thanks to mobile and
wireless technologies, people can read the news, transfer
money, watch shows, video chat with a doctor, all from their
mobile device. In a very short time, these technologies have
transformed our lives. With new 5G wireless networks and the
Internet of Things, demand for spectrum will continue to grow.
The value that that spectrum delivers to the economy is
hard to overstate. As we will hear from the witnesses today,
spectrum generates new investments, facilitates innovation, and
supports job growth across a range of industries. Advancements
in mobile and wireless clearly benefit consumers and most
industry sectors, but have also revolutionized citizen
engagement in politics, transformed news, and enhanced public
safety.
Although the focus of today's hearing is on the economic
benefits of commercial spectrum, it is vital to point out that
the Federal Government also has critical spectrum needs for
national security, transportation, weather forecasting, and a
wide range of other government services. So we must continue to
work with the agencies to ensure that they have the spectrum
resources they need now and in the future. But we should also
build on the successes of the Spectrum Relocation Fund to make
it more attractive for agencies to vacate or share bands with
more commercial users where that is possible.
Since we can't create more spectrum, we need to be more
creative in how we manage competing spectrum needs. I'm
confident that industry will find innovative ways to make
better use of the bands that they have, but we also need to
find a balance between the competing public and private sector
needs for more terrestrial and satellite capacity and the need
to have adequate spectrum available for both licensed and
unlicensed uses.
Spectrum policy has been a priority for this Congress and
this committee, which has passed the MOBILE NOW Act which would
make more licensed spectrum available and facilitate the
deployment of supporting infrastructure for 5G. MOBILE NOW also
includes a bill that Senator Moran and I introduced that will
require the government to develop a national plan for
unlicensed spectrum.
While a lot of attention focuses on how to make new
frequencies available for the licensed side, we also need a
clear plan to support continued innovation in the unlicensed
bands. These shared bands have become an affordable way for
people to get online. Consumers benefit, technology companies
benefit, and ISPs benefit from unlicensed spectrum. I trust
that the Committee will continue to work with the agencies and
stakeholders to make more bands available to commercial users
over the coming weeks and months.
While we do that, though, we also have a responsibility to
ensure that people from all walks of life, especially in rural,
isolated, or hard to reach areas across the country, have
access to wireless broadband services. I know that the Chairman
and many of our colleagues on the Committee share this point of
view.
To pursue new spectrum opportunities, every stakeholder
must be an effective partner in this conversation. A fully
staffed FCC led by a chairman and four commissioners is,
therefore, critical to accomplishing these goals. I am appalled
that the White House withdrew all pending nominations for
Federal commissions. That is an unnecessarily provocative act.
The administration should defer to congressional leaders on
both sides of the aisle on nominees for these commissions, as
has been the norm.
Of specific relevance to this committee is Commissioner
Rosenworcel's nomination. She has been a leader on spectrum
policy and a strong advocate for consumers. I hope that the
White House will re-nominate her and the Senate will keep its
commitment to confirm her as we should have done a year ago.
Thank you, Chairman Wicker, for initiating this important
discussion, and I look forward to the witnesses' testimony.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator Schatz.
We have a distinguished panel that we are looking forward
to hearing from at this point. Our witnesses include, from left
to right: Mr. Scott Bergmann, Vice President of Regulatory
Affairs CTIA--The Wireless Association; Mr. Roger Entner,
Founder and Lead Analyst, Recon Analytics; Mr. Dave Heiner,
Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Microsoft
Corporation; Mr. Pat LaPlatney, President and CEO, Raycom
Media; and Mr. Tom Stroup, President, Satellite Industry
Association.
Now, a lot of people have prepared, come long distances,
and put a lot of thought into this hearing. We have votes at
the top of the hour, but we want to be respectful of the time
and preparation of our witnesses. It is the Chair's intention
to proceed on with the testimony, and members will simply
proceed in and out during the two votes, which will begin at
the top of the hour, and we'll be able to proceed in that
fashion without having to recess and take the valuable time of
these participants.
So we'll begin to my left, and, Mr. Bergmann, you're
recognized for 5 minutes for an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT BERGMANN, VICE PRESIDENT,
REGULATORY AFFAIRS, CTIA
Mr. Bergmann. Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Schatz, and members of the Subcommittee. On behalf of CTIA,
thank you for the opportunity to speak about the significant
economic contributions of the U.S. wireless industry.
The power of wireless is transforming how we live and work
in every community across the country and in every sector of
the economy, and we're about to have a breakthrough with 5G,
the next generation of wireless. 5G will add trillions of
dollars to our economy and 3 million new jobs, from 333 in
Tupelo to nearly 3,500 in Honolulu. To deliver on this promise,
the wireless industry needs this committee's continued
leadership to deliver more spectrum and modernize
infrastructure siting policies.
The wireless industry today is a powerful contributor to
the U.S. economy. Our members have invested over $300 billion
over the last 10 years and are responsible for more than 4.6
million jobs. Consumers and businesses continue to adopt mobile
broadband, with data traffic increasing more than 25 times
since 2010 and expected to increase another five times by 2021.
America's wireless industry stands ready to invest another
$275 billion to deliver 5G networks that will be faster, more
responsive, and connect more devices. 5G will enable a new
generation of smart communities and unlock the Internet of
Things. It will unleash innovation and growth in industries
across our economy, from energy, healthcare, public safety, and
transportation. With mHealth, smart grids, and self-driving
cars, 5G will unlock trillions of dollars of economic benefits
and help save thousands of lives.
The U.S. has been the global leader in 4G LTE deployment,
and we're poised to lead in 5G. But the global competition is
fierce. China, Japan, South Korea, and the EU are all in the
chase, making spectrum available, streamlining siting, and
investing. The keys to U.S. leadership are sound spectrum and
infrastructure policies. Licensed spectrum, in particular, is a
key input in mobile networks and a powerful creator of economic
growth and jobs.
Fortunately, Congress and the FCC have taken bipartisan
steps to make spectrum available for wireless. Now, more work
remains to enable 5G leadership. Let me highlight a few steps
that the Committee can take.
First, we must ensure timely access to new spectrum made
available through the 600 megahertz incentive auction. The
auction will deliver 70 megahertz of spectrum for mobile
broadband and 14 for unlicensed use. It raised $19.6 billion,
making it the second largest FCC auction ever. We support a
seamless repacking process and are committed to working
collaboratively to achieve the FCC's 39-month schedule so that
5G is not delayed.
Second, the FCC's decision to dedicate high-band spectrum
to mobile services was also critical. The FCC can enhance those
rules by making targeted reforms and by acting on the
additional 18 gigahertz of spectrum identified in the MOBILE
NOW Act.
Third, we appreciate this committee's continued attention
to the spectrum pipeline. It takes, on average, 13 years to
reallocate spectrum for wireless use. This underscores the need
to start today. Policymakers should continue to review Federal
use of spectrum and consider ways to incentivize agencies to
use spectrum more efficiently.
Finally, we must modernize our Nation's infrastructure
siting policies so that wireless networks can be deployed
rapidly and efficiently. Current Federal, state, local, and
tribal siting practices were designed to review large cell
towers, not the small cells that will be essential for 5G.
Small cells are far less intrusive, the size of a pizza box or
a lunch box, and will be deployed by the hundreds of thousands.
We can remove barriers to deployment by addressing
burdensome local permitting, ensuring access to rights-of-way
and poles with costs and fees that are reasonable and cost-
based, modernizing our historic preservation and environmental
review processes, and directing agencies to speed deployment on
Federal lands and properties. With a continued focus on
spectrum and infrastructure, we'll be able to ensure that
wireless providers can continue to invest, create jobs, and
lead the world in 5G.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bergmann follows:]
Prepared Statement of Scott Bergmann, Vice President, Regulatory
Affairs, CTIA
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and members of the
Subcommittee, on behalf of CTIA, thank you for the opportunity to
participate in today's panel on ``Exploring the Value of Spectrum to
the U.S. Economy.''
This is an important and timely hearing. The power of wireless is
transforming how we live and work, in every community across the
country and in every sector of the economy. The next generation of
wireless, 5G, will add three million new jobs and half a trillion
dollars to our economy. To deliver on this promise, the wireless
industry needs more spectrum and streamlined siting rules to facilitate
our deployment of that spectrum. 5G cannot happen without this
Subcommittee's continued leadership and focus on spectrum.
Recent studies highlight the wireless industry's significant impact
on the U.S. economy today. By way of example:
We invest in America. U.S. wireless providers have invested
more than $300 billion in their networks over the last 10
years, including more than $32 billion in 2015.\1\ Indeed, a
2016 study of companies that invest substantially in the U.S.
listed wireless providers as the top two ``investment heroes.''
\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Annual Wireless Industry Survey, CTIA, http://www.ctia.org/
industry-data/ctia-annual-wireless-industry-survey (last visited Feb.
22, 2017).
\2\ Michelle Di Ionno and Michael Mandel, PPI, Investment Heroes
2016: Ignoring Short-Termism (Oct. 2016) https://docs.google.com/
viewerng/viewer?url=http://www.progressivepoli
cy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/InvestHeroes_2016.pdf&hl=en_US
We are a job multiplier. More than 4.6 million Americans
have jobs that depend directly or indirectly on the wireless
industry.\3\ And employing one person in the wireless industry
results in 6.5 more people finding employment, an employment
multiplier that outperforms scores of other sectors, including
manufacturing.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Roger Entner, The Wireless Industry: Revisiting Spectrum,
the Essential Engine of U.S. Economic Growth, Recon Analytics, at 18
(Apr. 2016), http://www.ctia.org/docs/default-source/default-document-
library/entner-revisiting-spectrum-final.pdf.
\4\ Coleman Bazelon & Giulia McHenry, Mobile Broadband Spectrum: A
Vital Resource for the American Economy, The Brattle Group, at 2, 20
(May 11, 2015), http://www.ctia.org-/docs/default-source/default-
document-library/brattle_spectrum_-051115.pdf (``Brattle Group
Report'').
We grow the economy. The wireless industry as a whole
generates more than $400 billion in total U.S. spending,\5\ and
the wireless industry's value-add is larger than the
agriculture and petroleum and coal production industries.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Brattle Group Report at 19.
\6\ Roger Entner, The Wireless Industry: Revisiting Spectrum, the
Essential Engine of U.S. Economic Growth, Recon Analytics, at 18 (Apr.
2016), http://www.ctia.org/docs/default-source/default-document-
library/entner-revisiting-spectrum-final.pdf.
We are only getting started. The mobile industry is expected
to make a value-added contribution of $1 trillion to the North
American economy by 2020, representing 4.5 percent of GDP by
the end of the decade.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ GSMA Press Release, Mobile Industry to Add $1 Trillion in Value
to North American Economy by 2020, Finds New GSMA Study (Nov. 1, 2016),
http://www.gsma.com/newsroom/press-release/mobile-industry-add-1-
trillion-value-north-american-economy-2020-finds-new-gsma-study/.
Spectrum is the key input in wireless, fueling our ``mobile-first''
life and future economic growth. We all know how wireless changes our
daily lives; launching more licensed spectrum into the marketplace is
also a powerful accelerant for economic growth and job creation.
Fortunately, members of this Subcommittee and policymakers more
generally have demonstrated a keen understanding of the critical role
spectrum plays--and have worked together to free up more spectrum. The
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has taken several notable steps
to help meet the need for more wireless broadband spectrum, including
opening up more than 10 gigahertz of high-band spectrum to help realize
the transition to 5G and launching the first-ever spectrum incentive
auction, which will soon repurpose 84 megahertz of low-band spectrum to
wireless broadband. Moreover, recognizing that we must continually
focus on the spectrum pipeline, Congress required Federal agencies to
relinquish 30 megahertz of spectrum over the next decade to support
consumers' ever-increasing need for mobile broadband services.
From the FCC to Capitol Hill, CTIA believes there is widespread and
bipartisan agreement on the profound impact of wireless--and spectrum
is the key. Despite this strong foundation, more spectrum will be
needed to fuel consumers' continued demand for mobile broadband and the
innovation that 5G will unlock for industries across our economy.
Growing Demand for Data and the Next Driver of Demand, 5G
The demand for mobile has skyrocketed in recent years, driving home
the need to free up more spectrum for mobile broadband. The amount of
data flowing over U.S. wireless networks more than doubled in 2015 \8\
to a level 25 times greater than in 2010.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Press Release, Americans' Data Usage More than Doubled in 2015,
CTIA (May 23, 2016), http://www.ctia.org/industry-data/press-releases-
details/press-releases/americans-data-usage-more-than-doubled-in-2015.
\9\ Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data Traffic
Forecast Update, 2016-2021 White Paper, Cisco (Feb. 7, 2017), http://
www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-
networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html (``Cisco VNI
2017'').
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
This is due to the advent of smartphones and tablets, massive
growth in mobile video (64 percent of all U.S. mobile data traffic
\10\), and the nationwide deployment of 4G LTE networks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Cisco VNI Forecast Highlights, 2016-2021 (United States--
Mobile Applications), http://www.cisco.com/assets/sol/sp/vni/
forecast_highlights_mobile/# Country (last accessed Feb. 23, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In just seven years, wireless providers have blanketed the country
with $200 billion in network spending to deliver 4G LTE mobile
broadband nationwide.\11\ Today, 99.7 percent of Americans have access
to 4G LTE service, and 95.9 percent can choose from three or more 4G
LTE providers.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Press Release, Americans' Data Usage More than
Doubled in 2015, CTIA (May 23, 2016), http://www.ctia.org/industry-
data/press-releases-details/press-releases/americans-data-usage-more-
than-doubled-in-2015.
\12\ Implementation of Section 6002(b) of the Omnibus
Reconciliation Act of 1993, Nineteenth Report, 31 FCC Rcd 10534, 39,
Chart III.A.2 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile broadband has unlocked opportunities for all Americans.
Whether you are low-income, a person with disabilities, or live in a
rural community, wireless has helped bring the United States closer to
closing the digital divide.\13\ In fact, nearly half of all American
homes are ``wireless-only.'' \14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., Aaron Smith, Record Shares of Americans Now Own
Smartphones, Have Home Broadband, Pew Research Center (Jan. 12, 2017),
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/12/evolution-of-
technology/ (noting that 77 percent of Americans now own a smartphone--
up from 35 percent in 2011--and nearly three quarters have broadband
service at home).
\14\ National Center for Health Statistics, Wireless Substitution:
Early Release of Estimates from the National Health Interview Survey,
January-June 2016 (December 2016) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/
earlyrelease/wireless201612.pdf (last visited Feb. 23, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And there is no end in sight when it comes to growth in mobile
demand. Cisco projects that mobile data traffic in the U.S. will grow
by a factor of five from 2016 to 2021, or roughly 125 times mobile data
levels in a decade's time.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Cisco VNI Forecast Highlights, 2016-2021 (United States--2021
Forecast Highlights), http://www.cisco.com/assets/sol/sp/vni/
forecast_highlights_mobile/# Country (last accessed Feb. 23, 2017).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Communities across the country, and industries including
agriculture, automobiles, healthcare, appliance manufacturing, and
energy, have already begun harnessing the power of wireless
connectivity. For example, farmers have been using wireless technology
to prevent the over- and under-watering of crops and to preserve
resources during droughts, demonstrating the benefits of the Internet
of Things (IoT) and next-generation technologies in rural areas.\16\
And medical researchers have been using wearables and movement sensors
to monitor and improve the progression of diseases such as
Parkinson's.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ David L. Sunding, Martha Rogers & Coleman D. Bazelon, The
Farmer And The Data: How Wireless Technology Is Transforming Water Use
In Agriculture (Apr. 27, 2016), http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/
487024/Telecommunications+Mobile+Cable+Communications
/
The+Farmer+And+The+Data+How+Wireless+Technology+Is+Transforming+Water+Us
e+In+Ag
riculture.
\17\ See Intel, Using Wearable Technology to Advance Parkinson's
Research (2015), http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/
documents/white-papers/using-wearable-technology-mjff.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are about to have a revolutionary breakthrough in the next
generation of wireless--known as 5G. 5G networks will be 10 times
faster and five times more responsive than today's networks. They will
be able to support 100 times more wireless devices from beacons to
wearables.
The deployment of 5G networks and increased competitiveness will
create jobs for communities of all sizes. From 333 new jobs in Tupelo,
Mississippi to more than 1,500 in Sioux Falls to nearly 3,500 in
Honolulu, and almost 8,000 in Jacksonville, cities and towns across the
country will benefit from the rapid deployment of next-generation 5G
services.
America's wireless industry is ready to make significant new
investments to bring these benefits to communities all over the
country. One recent study estimates that wireless operators will invest
$275 billion over the next decade to deploy 5G. That investment is
projected to create a new 5G job for every 100 Americans: three million
total jobs.
5G will unlock the Internet of Things. Machine-to-machine devices
make up about 23 percent of all wireless connections today but are
expected to grow more than five times to reach 58 percent of all
wireless device connections by the end of the decade.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Cisco VNI Forecast Highlights, 2016-2021 (United States--
Potential M2M Connections), http://www.cisco.com/assets/sol/sp/vni/
forecast_highlights_mobile/# Country (last accessed Feb. 23, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5G will also enable a new generation of Smart communities. 5G and
Smart Cities will have dramatic impact and savings for municipalities
and consumers. With 5G, integrated technologies that assist in the
management of vehicle traffic and electrical grids will produce $160
billion in benefits and savings through reductions in energy usage,
traffic congestion, and fuel costs.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See How 5G Can Help Municipalities Become Vibrant Smart
Cities, Accenture Strategy, at 1 (Jan. 12, 2017), http://www.ctia.org/
docs/default-source/default-document-library/how-5g-can-help-
municipalities-become-vibrant-smart-cities-accenture.pdf (``CTIA Smart
Cities Report'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5G will unleash innovation and growth for industries across our
economy.\20\ Sectors that are expected to leverage 5G's speed,
connectivity, and responsiveness, include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Wireless Connectivity Fuels Industry Growth and Innovation
in Energy, Health, Public Safety, and Transportation, Deloitte, http://
www.ctia.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/
deloitte_20170119.pdf.
Energy. Wireless-enabled smart grids could create $1.8
trillion for the U.S. economy, saving consumers hundreds of
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
dollars per year.
Health. Wireless devices could create $305 billion in annual
health system savings from decreased costs and mortality due to
chronic illnesses.
Public Safety. Improvements made by wireless connectivity
can save lives and reduce crime. A one-minute improvement in
emergency response time translates to a reduction of eight
percent in mortality.
Transportation. Wireless-powered self-driving cars could
reduce emissions by 40-90 percent, travel times by nearly 40
percent, and delays by 20 percent. That translates to $447
billion per year in savings and, more importantly, 21,700 lives
saved.
Each of these industry sectors is leveraging the wireless platform
today and stands to benefit from the increased speeds, connectivity,
and responsiveness that 5G is poised to deliver.
The Economic Benefits of Spectrum
To unleash 5G and these substantial economic benefits, the wireless
industry depends on policymakers to make additional spectrum available
for mobile wireless services. Indeed, there are few other actions the
government can take to jumpstart such dramatic private-led job creation
and economic growth.
CTIA favors a policy that supports both licensed and unlicensed
spectrum, recognizing that licensed spectrum is the foundation for our
world-leading 4G LTE networks. Licensed spectrum provides exclusive
access and clear interference protection rights, delivering the
certainty necessary for carriers to invest billions of dollars in
network deployment. This exclusivity is also critical to delivering the
high-quality, secure, and reliable service that consumers have come to
demand.
Licensed spectrum is a proven difference maker for the economy. One
recent study found that the introduction of 20 megahertz of AWS-1
spectrum increased U.S. GDP by $48.6 billion from 2011 to 2014.\21\ And
the economic value of all licensed spectrum made available to date is
estimated to be approximately $500 billion, with social benefits at
least 20 to 30 times that amount.\22\ A 2017 Accenture report projected
the future economic impact of 5G to be even more astounding: boosting
the U.S. GDP by $500 billion.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The Impact of 10 MHz of Wireless Licensed Spectrum, Recon
Analytics, at 1 (Dec. 2015).
\22\ Brattle Group Report at 1.
\23\ CTIA Smart Cities Report at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the right policies in place, wireless will have a profound
impact on U.S. economic growth. As one recent report concluded,
``[m]obile broadband is, and will continue to be, an essential catalyst
for the U.S. economy, spurring economic growth and innovation in
existing industries while motivating entirely new industries.'' \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Brattle Group Report at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other economic benefit of licensed spectrum is to our Nation's
debt. The U.S. wireless industry has now spent more than $100 billion
at FCC spectrum auctions for licensed spectrum--with most of that money
going straight to the U.S. Treasury, reducing the debt and funding
other Congressional priorities.
Global Leadership in Wireless
The United States has been the global leader in 4G LTE deployment
and we have the ability to lead in 5G as well. The wireless industry is
conducting a number of 5G trials across the country, building on years
of research and development investment. And as I noted previously, the
FCC opened up 10 gigahertz of high-band spectrum last year that serves
as an important down payment on the spectrum needed to support 5G. We
are well-positioned to lead, but this time around, global competition
is fierce.
Many nations are vying to seize the 5G leadership mantle. South
Korea, for example, has committed $1.5 billion to its ``5G Creative
Mobile Strategy,'' \25\ and expects to launch a 5G trial network for
the Winter Olympic Games in 2018.\26\ Japan plans to follow suit with
its own 5G trial network for the 2020 Summer Olympics.\27\ The European
Commission has committed 700 million Euros ($759 million) of public
funds to support 5G activities as part of its Horizon 2020
Programme.\28\ And this past September, the European Union released
``5G for Europe: An Action Plan'' that calls for making provisional
spectrum bands available for 5G ahead of the 2019 World Radio
Communication Conference.\29\ The EU and Brazil have an agreement to
develop 5G, along with similar key cooperation initiatives with South
Korea, Japan, and China.\30\ And the Chinese government has an ongoing
5G technology trial in the 3400-3600 MHz band \31\ and it has set
ambitious goals for domestic 5G as part of its Made in China 2025
project.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Tammy Parker, China, South Korea Commit to 5G Leadership,
While Japan and U.S. Rely On Private Efforts, Fierce Wireless (June 8,
2014), http://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/china-south-korea-commit-to-
5g-leadership-while-japan-and-u-s-rely-private-efforts.
\26\ Daniel Fuller, 2018 Winter Olympics To Have 5G Thanks To
Samsung And KT, Android Headlines (Oct. 28, 2016), https://
www.androidheadlines.com/2016/10/2018-winter-olympics-to-have-5g-
thanks-to-samsung-and-kt.html.
\27\ Joseph Waring, Docomo's 2020 5G launch `Not just for
Olympics', Mobile World Live (Oct. 7, 2015), https://
www.mobileworldlive.com/featured-content/home-banner/docomos-2020-5g-
launch-not-just-for-olympics/.
\28\ Jorge Valero, Europe Hopes to Make 5G Networks a Reality by
2018, Euractiv (Feb. 19, 2016), https://www.euractiv.com/section/
digital/news/european-industry-to-bring-5g-network-by-2018/.
\29\ Press Release, 5G for Europe Action Plan, European Commission,
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/5g-europe-action-plan
(Sept. 14, 2016).
\30\ Press Release, EU and Brazil Work Together on 5G Mobile
Technology, European Commission (Feb. 23, 2016), http://europa.eu/
rapid/press-release_IP-16-382_en.htm.
\31\ 5G Spectrum in Europe, Global Mobile Suppliers Association
(Dec. 23, 2016), http://www.slideshare.net/soksitha/5g-spectrum-in-
europe.
\32\ Lilian Rogers, What's at Stake in China's 5G Push?, ApcoForum
(Dec. 14, 2016), http://apcoworldwide.com/blog/detail/apcoforum/2016/
12/14/whats-at-stake-in-chinas-5g-push.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. wireless industry will continue to invest, deploy, and
innovate, but our continued global leadership depends on a committed
and comprehensive spectrum and infrastructure policy.
Policies to Advance the Economic Impact of Spectrum
CTIA encourages policymakers to take several actions to preserve
continued U.S. leadership in wireless, ensure the availability of 4G
LTE and 5G services for American consumers, and foster continued U.S.
economic growth. Moreover, as policymakers consider proposals to devote
hundreds of billions of, or even a trillion, government dollars to
infrastructure investment, we note that the wireless industry stands
ready to invest billions of its own dollars, if policymakers update
national and local siting and zoning rules to reflect the wireless
networks of today and tomorrow. These steps will expedite the wireless
industry's investment of over $275 billion, and will not cost taxpayers
a dime.
Incentive Auction. The successful 600 MHz incentive auction will
deliver 70 megahertz of new mobile broadband spectrum, and an
additional 14 megahertz of spectrum for unlicensed uses like Wi-Fi and
LTE-U/Licensed Assisted Access services. It has already raised $19.6
billion, making it the second largest FCC auction ever--by spectrum
allocated or by revenue. CTIA is keenly interested in ensuring timely
access to this spectrum, which is critical to our leadership in 5G
services. We support a seamless repacking process for remaining
broadcasters, and we are committed to working collaboratively to
achieve the 39-month transition. Three years and three months is
significantly longer than the wireless industry has had to wait to
begin deploying new services to consumers in recent auctions, and any
delay would put at risk 5G development, rural buildout, and be
inequitable to those companies investing nearly $20 billion in new
spectrum.
High-Band Spectrum. The FCC's decision last year to repurpose high-
band spectrum for mobile services was an important step for U.S.
leadership in 5G. The FCC should enhance those rules with targeted
reforms, and promptly move forward with the 18 gigahertz of high-band
spectrum previously identified by the FCC and this Committee through
the MOBILE NOW Act. In making additional high-band spectrum available,
the FCC should emphasize large contiguous blocks of exclusive, licensed
spectrum.
Spectrum Pipeline. We appreciate this Committee's continued
attention to the spectrum pipeline and the need to identify additional
spectrum bands that can meet the ever-increasing demands for mobile
broadband services. The process of bringing spectrum to market is time
consuming--it takes on average 13 years to reallocate spectrum for
wireless use. The AWS-3 band, for example, was a 13-year journey to
free up 65 megahertz of spectrum that culminated in a 2015 auction
resulting in more than $40 billion in revenues to the U.S. Treasury.
This underscores the urgency of beginning this process today, as the
ability of the United States to remain a global leader in wireless
depends on the ability of policymakers to identify sufficient licensed
spectrum.
We need a clear plan for additional licensed spectrum across a wide
and diverse range of frequencies to meet tomorrow's needs. As part of
this process, government should continue to review spectrum currently
allocated for Federal use and consider ways to incentivize Federal
agencies to use their spectrum resources more efficiently and
effectively. The direct impact of new spectrum cannot be
underestimated. For every 10 megahertz of licensed spectrum made
available, the U.S. GDP increases by more than $3.1 billion and U.S.
employment increases by at least 105,000 jobs.
Modernizing Infrastructure Siting Policies. Lastly, we must move
forward with modernizing infrastructure siting policies so that
spectrum can be fully utilized and wireless networks can be rapidly and
efficiently deployed. Wireless carriers invest billions of dollars
building cell sites to provide faster broadband wireless networks that
will enable new products and services. Unfortunately, current federal,
state, local, and tribal siting laws and policies were designed to
review large cell towers one by one, but not to process small cells
that are far less intrusive, more numerous, and leverage existing
structures. As a nation, we need to update those laws and policies to
remove barriers to efficient deployment of small cells and 5G services.
These outdated policies are slowing wireless providers' significant
investment and must be addressed.
To speed deployment of broadband services, Congress and the FCC
should address burdensome local permitting processes; modernize right-
of-way access and pole attachment policies; and streamline and clarify
the historic preservation and environmental review processes. We would
suggest reasonable shot clocks for new site and collocation permit
applications and broader application of existing deemed granted
remedies. Additionally, permit fees and other charges for wireless
siting should be reduced to reflect small cells' minimal impact and be
limited to the actual, incremental costs to localities for processing
these applications.
Federal agencies should also adopt streamlined policies to enable
small cell deployment on Federal lands, properties, and buildings. In
particular, streamlined processes for siting on Federal lands in rural
and remote areas would greatly improve the ability of the wireless
industry to serve these hard to reach customers.
By promoting sound infrastructure policies at the federal, state,
local, and tribal levels, we will enable wireless providers to invest
resources more quickly--expediting connectivity, adding jobs, and
advancing 5G leadership.
* * *
CTIA appreciates the opportunity to work with the Subcommittee,
Congress, and other interested parties to ensure that we have spectrum
policies that allow the wireless industry to meet growing consumer
demands and support U.S. economic growth to its fullest extent. We look
forward to engaging with you to accomplish these objectives.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. If CTIA can provide
any additional information you would find helpful, please let us know.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much.
At this point, our Ranking Member of the Full Committee has
a unanimous consent request.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Nelson. To insert my comments into the record on
this extremely important subject, and thank you, Mr. Chairman
and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, for holding this
hearing.
Senator Wicker. Without objection, the remarks will be
inserted at the appropriate place in the record.
Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement of Senator Nelson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Nelson, U.S. Senator from Florida
I want to welcome all of our witnesses for joining us and thank
Subcommittee Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Schatz for holding this
hearing on the value of spectrum to the U.S. economy.
The wireless sector contributes billions of dollars yearly to the
U.S. economy.
Frankly, very few of us today can imagine a world without our
smartphones and tablets, and even fewer businesses could imagine
running their operations efficiently and effectively without robust
wireless technologies.
And the integration of wireless connectivity into every facet of
the U.S. economy increases every day. In fact, according to some, the
day is not far away where the total number of wireless devices and
equipment will double or triple the number of humans living on the
globe.
Similarly, our Nation's broadcasters serve as pillars of the local
communities in which they serve. Free over-the-air broadcasting remains
an important and valuable use of spectrum. And the satellite industry
uses its spectrum to provide service and support to important Federal
Government customers. Satellite services can also reach customers in
even the most rural areas and provide important connectivity to so many
other spectrum-based services.
As I have said before, the Nation must have a balanced spectrum
policy to continue to support wireless technologies as an engine of
innovation for the Nation. That means we need additional licensed
spectrum, but also we have to make more spectrum available for
unlicensed services. The reality of spectrum utilization today is that
both licensed and unlicensed commercial wireless services will need to
share spectrum with other operators. As I have said before, we should
relocate spectrum when we can, and fully embrace spectrum sharing when
we cannot.
But in all of this talk of the value of spectrum to the economy, we
cannot forget the need to make sure that the Federal Government, and in
particular our national security and homeland security agencies, have
enough spectrum today and into the future for their mission-critical
operations. That's not to say that we should not have cooperative
conversations with those agencies to determine where there are
opportunities to make available additional spectrum to commercial
services. But those efforts should not hamper mission critical Federal
operations.
But this is not just a public safety and national security concern.
These same Federal spectrum operations make their own contribution to
the economic success of the Nation. The weather monitoring performed by
NOAA and NASA, along with the use of spectrum for satellites and other
sensors, provides essential information for transportation, shipping,
and environmental protection.
NASA's use of spectrum for near-Earth and deep space exploration
may lead the Nation into its next wave of technological innovation,
just as the lunar program did many years ago. And the spectrum that
powers the defense and intelligence community's wireless operations
translates into thousands of private-sector jobs in terms of the
government contractors upon whom those agencies rely.
Spectrum is a finite resource, and it is essential for Congress to
collaborate with the private sector and the public sector to make sure
adequate spectrum is available for all of these services. And as I am
sure we will hear from the witnesses today, the 5G revolution that is
coming quickly will need more spectrum and more infrastructure to reach
its full economic potential. I am glad this committee came together to
pass the MOBILE NOW bill earlier this year to help foster this 5G
revolution--a bill developed through that collaborative process. And I
know we will continue to work together to address additional spectrum
issues, including those being raised by our witnesses today.
Senator Wicker. Our next witness is Mr. Roger Entner.
Sir, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF ROGER ENTNER, FOUNDER,
RECON ANALYTICS LLC
Mr. Entner. Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Schatz, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for giving
me the opportunity to testify this morning. My name is Roger
Entner. I am the founder of Recon Analytics, a telecom research
and consulting firm with a focus on wireless. Today, I'm here
to discuss my research into the effect that the U.S. mobile
industry has on the U.S. economy and to highlight the
importance of Federal Government continuing to free up
additional spectrum to support 5G and future network
evolutions.
First, a quick overview of the U.S. mobile industry. In
2015, Americans spent 2.9 trillion minutes talking on their
mobile phones, sent 1.9 trillion text messages, 218 billion
pictures, and used 9.6 trillion megabytes of data. U.S.
wireless network operators have constructed over 307,000 cell
sites. From 2000 to 2015, U.S. network operators have spent
$77.8 billion to buy spectrum and have invested $423 billion to
build out and expand the capacity and speed of the networks.
Competition in the U.S. mobile industry is intense. Two
weeks ago, Verizon re-introduced its unlimited plan with HD
video. In less than 4 days, competitors matched and tried to
beat the offer. Just today, AT&T launched another new pricing
plan. Ninety-seven point nine percent of Americans can choose
from three network-based operators, and 93.4 percent can choose
from four operators plus more than a dozen virtual operators.
The mobile industry is equivalent of over-the-top competitors.
How does this relate into jobs? The mobile industry
directly and indirectly supports 7 million jobs in the United
States. These jobs are a function of the amount of investment
the companies spend to build the networks, operate the
networks, advertise their networks and services, and otherwise
work with a wide variety of vendors and others to create and
sustain what we know as the American mobile consumer experience
and the U.S. wireless industry. As a result, the mobile
industry contributed $194.8 billion in GDP in 2014.
The app and mobile content market is a $36 billion industry
whose very existence is dependent on the ubiquitous vast mobile
broadband network American companies have built. Companies like
Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb would be unthinkable without the direct
and immediate connections and data flows mobile networks give
them and their customers. Together, these three companies alone
are valued at $98 billion. To say that the U.S. mobile industry
is one of the driving factors to create new jobs and businesses
in a digital economy is an understatement. But there is no
guarantee the industry will be able to support the kind of
exponential demand for mobile networking that a fully connected
network economy is expected to need.
From 2008 to 2015, mobile data usage increased 643-fold and
growth is expected to continue unabated. And today, the
Internet of Things is the newest frontier for wireless, and it
has implications for improvements in manufacturing, healthcare,
transportation. There is not a sector in our U.S. economy that
won't be improved by access to fast mobile broadband networks.
Deploying new spectrum is the most effective and quickest
way to provide more capacity ahead of this tsunami of demand
and ensure the industry can continue to drive economic growth
and new job creation. Consider every 10 megahertz of deployed
licensed spectrum creates $3.1 billion in GDP and 100,000 new
jobs. The MOBILE NOW Act is a great next step in the journey to
clear more spectrum. But as demand for mobile services is
increasing, the need for spectrum is increasing as well.
My suggestions for policymakers are few but specific.
First, licenses should be allocated in larger channel sizes. 5G
deployments need at least 20 by 20 megahertz channels, ideally
in low, medium, and high frequencies. Second, 5G deployments
having access to cleared spectrum for which providers have
exclusive use. Third is to help streamline the approval process
for new and existing cell sites further.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify at this
important hearing. I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Entner follows:]
Prepared Statement of Roger Entner, Founder, Recon Analytics LLC
Introduction
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and Members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify this
morning. My name is Roger Entner and I am the Founder of Recon
Analytics, a boutique research and consulting firm focused on the
telecom industry, and, in particular, the wireless sector. For more
than 20 years, I have been tracking and reporting on the business and
technology evolutions occurring in the U.S. wireless industry.
For more than a decade, I have been analyzing the impact that the
mobile industry has had and can have across the U.S. economy,
especially with regard to promoting job creation. Today, I am here to
discuss this research and to highlight the importance of the Federal
Government continuing to free up additional spectrum to support 5G and
future network evolutions.
State of the U.S. Mobile Wireless Industry
I'd like to begin with an overview of the U.S. mobile wireless
industry:
There are more than 370 million mobile connections in the
U.S., of which 329 million are smartphones and regular phones.
In 2015, Americans spent 2.9 trillion minutes talking on
their mobile phones, sent 1.9 trillion text messages, 218
billion pictures and used 9.6 trillion MB of data. This
compares to 2.2 trillion minutes talking on their mobile
phones, 2 trillion text messages, 57 billion pictures and 388
billion MB only 5 years ago.
We have 307,626 cell sites in this country, compared to
183,689 ten years ago.
Competition in the U.S. wireless industry remains intense. When
Verizon reintroduced its unlimited plans with HD video it took its
three nationwide competitors only four days to match its offer. 99.9
percent of Americans have access to at least one wireless operator,
99.7 percent have the choice between two operators, 97.9 percent
between three operators, and 93.4 percent between four operators. In
addition, Americans can choose from a variety of plans that fit their
best needs with different amounts of data attached to them. Even the
smallest service plans now include unlimited voice calling and texting.
Other aspects of the industry also remain very competitive.
Americans can choose from dozens of devices from their mobile operator
or bring their own devices to use with their operator's service.
Americans also have a wide variety of choices how they pay for mobile
services.
U.S. Wireless Industry and Job Creation/Economic Growth
The mobile industry, directly and indirectly, supports 7 million
jobs in the United States. In 2014, wireless carriers spent more than
$21 billion on network equipment and another $27.1 billion on
professional services. The wireless industry contributed $194.8 billion
in GDP in 2014, up from $146.2 billion three years' prior. As of 2014,
mobile wireless services created a consumer surplus of $640.9 billion.
The carriers themselves are not the only source of job creation and
economic growth. The App and Mobile Content market--such as movies and
TV shows consumed on wireless devices--is a $36 billion industry. New
business models such as Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb that rely on fast,
mobile broadband networks would be unthinkable without mobile
connectivity. Together, these three companies alone are valued at $98
billion.
Keeping the Pump Primed with Additional Allocations of Spectrum is the
Single Most Important Factor to Keeping the U.S. Mobile
Industry an Engine of Economic Growth for the U.S. Economy
Over the last four decades, Congress and the FCC have provided the
wireless industry with increasing amounts of spectrum to expand network
reach and capacity. However, the allocations have consistently proven
to be stop-gap measures because more capacity begets demand for more
capacity. Initially, exploding demand for voice services was the big
driver for spectrum, but by 2008, data took over as the big driver.
From 2008 to 2015, data usage increased from 15 million MB to 9.6
trillion MB, a 643x increase.
Cisco and Ericsson are forecasting a 5-fold increase in data usage
in the United States over the next six years. In order to increase
capacity and download speeds to satisfy the demand for unlimited data,
especially video, the United States needs at least ten times more
spectrum allocated for commercial mobile use. While there are certainly
tremendous innovations happening in the world of spectrum efficiency
such as carrier aggregation technologies, increases in the efficiency
of wireless networks can only do so much. Deploying new spectrum is the
most effective and quickest way to provide more capacity and drive
economic growth and new job creation.
Deploying new spectrum has a direct impact on U.S. economic growth.
Every 10 MHz of deployed spectrum creates $3.1 billion in GDP and
200,000 new jobs.
The Internet of Things--The Next Frontier
The Internet of Things (IoT) is the next frontier of wireless.
Virtually every device benefits from being connected. Connected cars
are rapidly becoming the industry standard. Trucking companies are
tracking all their vehicles and the goods they transport at all times.
The medical community is undergoing massive change by remotely
connecting patients with doctors for tracking vitals and diagnosing
illnesses.
Video is also coming to IoT. Consumers and municipalities alike are
placing more cameras in their homes and cities and connecting them to
the web. Some are connected through unlicensed spectrum; some are
connected through licensed spectrum. Smart cities in particular will
rely on licensed spectrum to connect disparate assets.
Suggestions for Spectrum Policy in the 21st Century
The Mobile Now Act is a great next step in the journey to clear
more spectrum. But, as demand for mobile services is increasing, the
need for spectrum is increasing as well. In addition to dedicating more
spectrum for commercial mobile use, Congress and the FCC need to take
additional steps to facilitate continued growth in wireless use,
including for IoT.
For example, licenses should be allocated in larger channel sizes.
In the past channel sizes did not matter; now, they do. Fully realized
5G deployment needs at least 20x20 MHz channels.
Such deployments also need cleared spectrum for which providers
have exclusive use. Such use is preferable to sharing, which creates a
whole new set of challenges for licensees which could undermine 5G
deployments. In addition, all spectrum users--commercial and
governmental--need to use spectrum as efficiently as possible, which
will make surplus spectrum available for new uses.
While increasing the overall quantity of available spectrum is
important, it is also now critical to ensure that spectrum with
different propagation characteristics is made available for commerce
mobile use. We need more spectrum in low, medium and high bands for
specific usages. Low frequency spectrum is particularly useful to cover
large swaths of land and to provide service inside buildings. Medium
frequency spectrum provides coverage and capacity in many places. High
frequency spectrum is ideal for small areas of high usage to deliver
maximum capacity while minimizing interference with other cell sites.
Further, regulatory actions impede the deployment of new networks
and services. Local zoning regulations are often a roadblock to
deployment, slowing down, if not preventing, the deployment of new
equipment or even making modest changes to existing equipment. At a
minimum, the Federal Government could accelerate the deployment of
mobile services by streamlining the approval process for small cells,
DAS and other equipment that do not require the construction of a new
tower. In addition, Congress can provide regulatory certainty that
establishes a reliable planning framework to deploy more wireless
facilities by clarifying that broadband providers are not subject to
Title II of the Communications Act.
Conclusion
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify at this important
hearing. The wireless industry has helped drive economic growth and job
creation, even during the Great Recession, and can continue to do so as
long as Congress and the FCC implement sound spectrum and regulatory
policies. I look forward to answering your questions.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much.
Mr. Heiner, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF DAVE HEINER, VICE PRESIDENT, REGULATORY AFFAIRS,
MICROSOFT CORPORATION
Mr. Heiner. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to
testify. My name is Dave Heiner, and I am Microsoft's Vice
President of Regulatory Affairs. I'm pleased to have the
opportunity to speak with you today about the critical
importance of unlicensed spectrum to the U.S. economy.
We all use unlicensed spectrum every day without giving it
much thought. If you unlocked your car with a key fob or opened
your garage door with a remote this morning, if you make a
hands-free call in your car, you're using unlicensed spectrum.
If you have a fitness tracker, you're connecting to your phone
with unlicensed spectrum. And, of course, we all use Wi-Fi
every day. PCs, laptops, tablets, mobile phones, game consoles,
smart TVs, thermostats, web cams, lighting systems, and
countless other devices connect to the Internet and one another
with unlicensed Wi-Fi spectrum.
This success story is no accident. Congress and the FCC had
great foresight decades ago in opening up spectrum to
unlicensed use. Today, unlicensed spectrum is powering the
nation's Internet economy. We can see it all around us. For
example, most U.S. homes have a Wi-Fi connection. Away from
home, there are 94 million public Wi-Fi hotspots around the
world, and that is projected to grow to more than 500 million
by 2021. People want Wi-Fi wherever they go, and they want it
for all of their many devices. As of 2015, the industry had
shipped more than 10 billion Wi-Fi enabled devices.
All of this means, of course, that the unlicensed spectrum
is very heavily utilized. In fact, according to a report from
Cisco, in the United States, 55 percent of total Internet
traffic is carried over a Wi-Fi network. By comparison, just
3.4 percent of Internet traffic is carried by licensed mobile
networks. This flood of traffic has translated into enormous
economic growth. As detailed in my written testimony, a recent
study estimated that by this year, unlicensed spectrum would
contribute nearly $50 billion to the GDP and $547 billion in
economic surplus annually.
The public availability of unlicensed spectrum is important
to Microsoft because our customers depend on connectivity to
reach our services. Our business strategy is mobile first,
cloud first. What that means is enabling customers to use any
connected device to access Internet services running in massive
data centers, which we call the cloud. Our products like
Windows and Office used to be standalone programs, but no more.
Today, they are always connected, enabling new features and
being continuously updated with security and other
improvements.
In recent years, we have developed a new platform called
Azure to enable anyone to build and deploy cloud services
accessible via the Internet. Cloud computing is taking off
because it offers tremendous economic efficiencies. But the
cloud is wholly dependent upon connectivity, and the unlicensed
bands are the workhorse that enable it. For example, our
telemetry shows that 98 percent of Windows 10 devices are
connected to Wi-Fi, and nearly half of all the data that comes
onto and off those devices flows over the Wi-Fi connection.
Of course, unlicensed spectrum is more than just Wi-Fi. The
Bluetooth connections that we're all familiar with operate in
unlicensed spectrum as well. The Internet of Things depends
upon unlicensed spectrum, and TV white spaces technology, which
carries the promise of bringing broadband to rural communities,
depends upon unlicensed as well. The unlicensed bands have
spurred these and so many other innovations because they
provide immediate access to shared spectrum resources with low
barriers to entry and light regulation.
In closing, I would offer two suggestions to promote
optimal use of spectrum. First, Congress should advance a
balanced spectrum policy that includes both licensed and
unlicensed spectrum as is done in the MOBILE NOW Act, which we
support. Second, through this Act and others, policymakers
should look for additional opportunities in the low, mid, and
high-frequency unlicensed bands to help satisfy ever-growing
demand.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. At
Microsoft, we look forward to working with you to promote
optimal spectrum policy.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Heiner follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dave Heiner, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs,
Microsoft Corporation
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify. My name is Dave
Heiner, and I am Microsoft's Vice President for Regulatory Affairs. I
am pleased to speak with you today about the value of unlicensed
spectrum to the U.S. economy.
We all use unlicensed spectrum every day without giving it much
thought. If you unlock your car with a key fob, open your garage door
with a remote, make a hands-free call in the car, or buy a coffee with
an Apple Pay tap, you are using unlicensed spectrum. If you are
tracking your steps with a Fitbit, you are using unlicensed spectrum to
communicate with your phone. And, of course, nearly everyone uses Wi-
Fi. In fact, more than half of all Internet traffic transits over a Wi-
Fi connection. PCs, laptops, tablets, game consoles, smart TVs, mobile
phones, and other devices all routinely connect to the Internet via
unlicensed Wi-Fi spectrum. Together, these technologies combine to
create billions of dollars in economic value to the U.S. economy every
year.
Licensed spectrum is important too, and Microsoft is very much in
favor of a balanced policy that aims to promote the availability and
efficient use of both unlicensed and licensed spectrum. In developing
optimal spectrum policy, we think it is important to bear in mind that
unlicensed spectrum is carrying 16 times more Internet traffic than
licensed spectrum. That is remarkable considering there is
substantially more commercially viable licensed spectrum than
unlicensed spectrum below 6 GHz, where the vast majority of broadband
traffic resides. Wi-Fi traffic to the Internet is growing very
rapidly--by 2015, Wi-Fi handled more than half of all global Internet
traffic, wireless or wireline. That share of overall traffic continues
to rise. And Wi-Fi is ubiquitous: most U.S. households have Wi-Fi and
there are nearly 100 million public Wi-Fi access points around the
world. Looking forward, forecasters expect the number of Wi-Fi access
points to grow to well over 500 million by 2021.
Wi-Fi is only one of many uses of unlicensed spectrum. The low
barriers to entry and permission-less innovation enabled by easy access
to this shared resource has enabled large companies and small companies
alike to innovate in a wide range of wireless technologies and even
enabled the emerging category of the ``Internet of Things'' (devices
communicating with one another, and with users, via the internet).
Unlicensed spectrum is critical to innovation at Microsoft and the
technology sector
All of this is very important for Microsoft and, of course, for the
technology sector as a whole. Wireless connectivity is very much at the
center of the ``mobile first, cloud first'' business strategy that
Microsoft's CEO Satya Nadella is pursuing. From cloud computing to the
Xbox platform to the Internet of Things, Microsoft's ability to invest
and innovate depends on the availability of broadband spectrum governed
by commercially reasonable rules--so our individual and enterprise
customers have a great experience at home, at work, and on the go.
When I started at Microsoft in 1994, our software was primarily
delivered to customers via floppy disks or CD-ROMs. The software
typically had little interaction with the internet. Those days are
gone. All of Microsoft's major business lines are now dependent on
continuous and reliable Internet connectivity for key features and
continuous updating. Those businesses--Windows, Office, and our
relatively new Azure ``cloud'' platform--make Microsoft the third most
valuable company in the world. (The first two are Apple and Alphabet,
and they are dependent on Internet connectivity too.) Microsoft is
employing more than 70,000 people in the United States and investing
close to $13 billion in R&D annually (88 percent of which is spent in
the United States) to grow those businesses. The Microsoft cloud serves
over 1 billion customers, generating over 1 trillion data points every
day managed through more than 100 data centers around the world
connected to the internet. Cloud is critical to consumers, enterprises
of all sizes, and even governments--stimulating innovation and enabling
economic growth.
Our cloud services include Windows, Office 365, MSN, OneDrive,
Skype, Azure, Outlook.com, and more. And all of these services depend
upon consistent and ubiquitous Internet access for key features. For
example, Windows enables customers to synchronize their files to the
cloud and other devices and to ``roam'' settings and preferences from
one device to another. Windows includes Cortana, the personal digital
assistant that relies upon cloud processing to help people stay
organized and get things done. Our Office 365 customers are continually
getting new features, without having to wait years as in the past for
major new versions to be released. For all of these efforts, last-mile
connectivity is critical--and unlicensed spectrum is meeting that need
for us and our customers.
Microsoft's Azure cloud platform enables software developers to
quickly and inexpensively build new cloud services. More than 90
percent of Fortune 500 companies are using Azure today to efficiently
deliver enterprise solutions. GE Healthcare is an example. Microsoft
Azure powers mission-critical patient care applications for GE
Healthcare, including solutions that streamline communication between
clinicians, patients, and hospital administrators with secure,
centralized, real-time access to the diagnostic scans and reports that
physicians need to make decisions. And it is unlicensed spectrum--which
links the data to tablets, smartphones, and a wide variety of connected
devices--that makes all of this possible.
Microsoft's cloud also supports our new ``mixed reality'' platform,
HoloLens. Unlike virtual reality, ``mixed reality'' merges people,
places, and objects from the physical and virtual worlds together,
allowing users to interact with content and information in far more
accessible and intuitive ways. Developers have created apps for
HoloLens that range from games to art museum tours to simulated lab
experiments. Enterprise users can benefit from HoloLens too, with
architecture tools, power plant monitoring, and aircraft maintenance
training. Microsoft's HoloLens headset relies on unlicensed spectrum to
connect our customers to the worlds--physical and online--around them.
Microsoft's Xbox game console is dependent on unlicensed spectrum
too. Game consoles serve as central hubs not only for multi-player
gaming, but also for making calls on Skype, watching TV on Netflix, and
controlling home IoT devices. Advanced game consoles depend on Wi-Fi-
linked Internet access for all of these features, and they use
unlicensed Wi-Fi and Bluetooth technologies to distribute data to
different devices throughout our customers' homes, and to link game
controllers--including guitars and steering wheels--to consoles.
The businesses and consumers we serve expect every application to
work both in the office and on the go, and they expect access to the
same cloud applications on laptops, smartphones, tablets, and
wearables.
The unlicensed bands are the workhorses that make this happen. Our
telemetry shows that ninety-eight percent of Windows 10 devices are
connected to Wi-Fi and nearly half of all data flows over the Wi-Fi
connection. This is the case because consumers and enterprises
overwhelmingly use Wi-Fi to link to their fixed wireline broadband
service, whether that service is delivered by cable or a telco.
Unlicensed spectrum fuels economic growth
Of course, the importance of Wi-Fi is not limited to Microsoft, or
even to Internet firms generally. Wi-Fi access points serve an ever-
growing ecosystem of devices, including not only laptops, smartphones,
and tablets, but also doorbells, irrigation systems, thermostats,
refrigerators, lighting systems, and wearables.
Two relatively recent economic studies help to quantify the value
of unlicensed spectrum.
In 2014, Raul Katz, a professor at Columbia University, estimated
that by this year unlicensed spectrum would contribute $547.22 billion
in economic surplus annually and nearly $50 billion to the annual
GDP.\1\ He arrived at that estimate by building on his historical
assessment of unlicensed spectrum's economic value in 2013 ($222.4
billion in total economic value and $6.7 billion contributed to the
GDP)\2\ and analyzing two key drivers of growth in the area. First,
Professor Katz analyzed growing adoption of then-widely deployed
technologies and applications, including Wi-Fi-cellular off-loading,
residential Wi-Fi, Wireless Internet Service Providers, Wi-Fi-only
tablets, wireless personal areas networks, and radio-frequency
identification devices. As Professor Katz explained, research from a
wide variety of industry resources anticipated very rapid growth in
adoption of those technologies. For example, Cisco estimated that
between 2013 and 2017 the number of tablets in use in the United States
would grow by more than 300 percent and the Internet traffic generated
by each of those units would increase nearly five-fold. Dr. Katz also
accounted for increased economic value generated by the ``deployment of
emerging innovations, such as machine-to-machine communications and
agricultural automation.'' Though his estimate attempted to account for
those future developments, Dr. Katz underscored that ``estimates of
economic value of future technologies are extremely conservative.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Telecom Advisory Services, LLC, Assessment of the Future
Economic Value of Unlicensed Spectrum in the United States at 4 (Aug.
2014), http://www.wififorward.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Katz-
Future-Value-Unlicensed-Spectrum-final-version-1.pdf.
\2\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also in 2014 Richard Thanki conducted a study for the Consumer
Electronics Association focusing on retail sales attributable to
products that depend upon unlicensed spectrum.\3\ To estimate the
economic value generated by that spectrum, Thanki collected sales data
for the wide variety of devices that use it--Wi-Fi devices, but also
less obvious parts of the unlicensed ecosystem, such as broadcasting
hardware, medical devices, and baby monitors. Thanki concluded that
unlicensed spectrum generates more than $62 billion in ``incremental
retail sales value,'' a number that he cautions is overly conservative
because it focuses solely on ``the sale of devices using unlicensed
spectrum to end-users'' and does not attempt to quantify ``indirect
contributions in terms of savings, productivity, and utility'' that
``greatly exceed'' the study's assessment of direct benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Consumer Electronics Association, Unlicensed Spectrum and the
American Economy: Quantifying the Market Size and Diversity of
Unlicensed Services at 2 (Aug. 4, 2014), https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/
7521751149.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These indirect benefits, including the innovation gains described
above, should not be overlooked. In addition to its direct value in
driving the adoption of new devices and technologies, unlicensed
spectrum yields a wide range of indirect economic spillover benefits
that prove more difficult to quantify. These indirect impacts
reverberate throughout the economy in job growth, wage gains, and
productivity.
Unlicensed spectrum fuels innovation
Congress and the FCC had great foresight in enabling use of
unlicensed spectrum decades ago, and, in particular, the release of the
ISM band for unlicensed spread spectrum use in 1985. Today this
spectrum is powering our cloud economy. The unlicensed bands produce
the exceptional economic value discussed above because anyone can use
them as long as they follow basic FCC rules on power limits and
emission restrictions that are designed to protect other users from
harmful interference. Today, innovators of all types--incumbents as
well as start-ups--recognize this powerful combination of light
regulations and low barriers to entry. And this advantage has helped
make the Internet of Things a reality. But the growing number of IoT
applications will require access to enough low-, mid-, and/or high-
frequency spectrum to succeed. A variety of protocols operating in
unlicensed spectrum have been developed to enable IoT devices,
including Wi-Fi, zigbee, Bluetooth, WirelessHART, and z-wave.
Smart home technologies are already bringing unlicensed IoT
technologies into millions of American homes through devices like Sonos
connected speakers, which form their own mesh networks using the 2.4
GHz and 5 GHz unlicensed bands. Many other IoT devices rely on radio-
frequency identification, commonly known as RFID. RFID tags most often
use unlicensed spectrum to communicate with everything from container
cars to lost luggage. These popular devices are already on their way to
becoming ubiquitous. Ericsson has estimated that, by 2018, IoT devices
will surpass mobile phones as the largest category of connected
devices.
As you can see, unlicensed spectrum is critical to a wide variety
of technologies and applications, and the numbers tell the story of
just how much value this creates:
Innovators have seized on the opportunities created by
unlicensed spectrum to develop a wide range of new devices. In
January 2015, the Wi-Fi Alliance announced that the industry
had shipped its 10 billionth Wi-Fi device.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ WI-FI ALLIANCE, Total Wi-Fi device shipments to surpass ten
billion this month (Jan. 5, 2015), http://www.wi-fi.org/news-events/
newsroom/total-wi-fi-device-shipments-to-surpass-ten-billion-this-
month.
Unlicensed frequency bands support more traffic than any
other band. In the United States 54.9 percent of total Internet
traffic transited a Wi-Fi network. (By comparison, just 3.4
percent of total Internet traffic transited a mobile network
using licensed spectrum.)\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Cisco, VNI Forecast Highlights Tool: 2020 Forecast Highlights,
http://www.cisco.com/c/m/en_us/solutions/service-provider/vni-forecast-
highlights.html, (accessed Feb. 23, 2017).
We've seen tremendous investment in unlicensed access
points. To carry the huge wave of data I've described, the
number of public Wi-Fi access points around the world will grow
six-fold from 2016 (94.0 million) to 2021 (541.6 million).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Cisco, Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data
Traffic Forecast Update, 2016-2021 (Feb. 9, 2017), http://
www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-
networking-index-vni/mobile-white-paper-c11-520862.html.
In addition to delivering direct value to consumers and
enterprises, unlicensed networks are also valuable because they sustain
licensed networks. Mobile traffic is asymmetric: considerably more data
(especially video) is downloaded than uploaded. Licensed network
providers and device makers increasingly choose to offload downlink
traffic from licensed networks to Wi-Fi, harnessing the power and
pervasiveness of unlicensed access points. And, as data caps and speeds
become more of a concern, smartphone users now take advantage of Wi-Fi
as an option for their most data-intensive applications. By one
estimate, 85 percent of the traffic generated by smartphone video apps
goes over Wi-Fi--one of the reasons that ``although cellular data usage
on smartphones is growing, Wi-Fi data growth is dramatically outpacing
it.'' \7\ By 2021, 64 percent of the traffic from smartphones will be
offloaded from mobile devices to fixed networks via Wi-Fi or small
cells. For tablets, that number is projected to be 72 percent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Ericsson, Ericsson Mobility Report: On the Pulse of the
Networked Society at 25 (June 2016), https://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/
2016/ericsson-mobility-report-2016.pdf.
\8\ Cisco, supra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The flexibility in the FCC's unlicensed rules is also clearing the
way for innovators to take advantage of underutilized spectrum, such as
television white-spaces (TVWS). Certified TVWS devices allow consumers,
Internet service providers, local governments, and others to access
unassigned and unused spectrum that exists between television stations.
At these frequencies, a signal can travel over much larger distances
than conventional Wi-Fi, making it perfect for providing broadband
access to unserved and underserved rural areas. There are many
potential uses for such technology. As described in a recent article in
the The Economist,\9\ Microsoft researchers are using TVWS to collect
data from far-flung sensors on a farm in Washington state. The sensor
data, once analyzed in the cloud, enables the farmer to engage in
``precision farming,'' to minimize both irrigation and pesticide use.
And because FCC rules ensure that white-spaces devices will protect
over-the-air broadcasters and other licensed services from harmful
interference, they will add economic value without causing any harmful
interference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The Economist, TV Dinners: Unused TV Spectrum and Drones Could
Help Make Smart Farms a Reality (Sept. 27, 2016), http://
www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21707242-unused-tv-
spectrum-and-drones-could-help-make-smart-farms-reality-tv-dinners.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft has invested significantly in white-spaces technologies,
and is committed to their success. Even though the Incentive Auction
created uncertainty among white-spaces users and the developing
ecosystem, Microsoft has continued to invest in white spaces to ensure
that this technology lives up to its transformative potential once the
auction and repack is concluded and the FCC's updated rules are
finalized. We have spearheaded white-spaces projects in the United
States and around the world.
In southern Virginia, for example, Microsoft has partnered with
Mid-Atlantic Broadband Communications and the Commonwealth of Virginia
to use white spaces to bring high-speed Internet access into the homes
of previously unconnected students. In these areas, as many as 50
percent of school children lack access to high-speed Internet at home,
making it hard for them to do their homework, and excluding them from
the revolution in education that the Internet has brought for students
in many wealthier areas. Using white spaces, we are able to leverage
the fiber connections that run to these schools, allowing students in
surrounding areas to access school networks wirelessly from home. With
this single project, Microsoft and its partners will serve 7,500
primary and secondary school students when the system is fully
deployed. If deployed statewide, this approach could help to connect a
quarter million unconnected students in Virginia alone.
Microsoft has also worked to deploy white-spaces networks in
previously unserved parts of rural Africa, proving that this technology
will play an important role in U.S. and international communities where
infrastructure challenges are even greater. In Kenya, Microsoft and its
partners have used white spaces to deploy Internet access points in
areas that do not even have access to an electrical grid. We have used
white-spaces technologies to connect these rural access points to
distant fiber connections, and used conventional Wi-Fi to bring these
connections to individual devices. These access points are solar
powered, allowing them to be completely isolated from any other
physical infrastructure.
These projects are just the beginning. We are committed to taking
on more investments with partners around the United States this year,
with a focus on supporting connectivity, skills, and local innovation
in rural and underserved communities. We strongly support action at the
FCC to ensure that enough TV white-spaces channels remain available for
unlicensed use, and hope the FCC will finalize commercially reasonable
white-spaces rules soon so we can move ahead.
Next steps toward meeting the growing demand for unlicensed spectrum
As this Subcommittee has long recognized, radio spectrum is an
essential input to economic growth and innovation. Under the
Subcommittee's and full Committee's leadership, the United States has
adopted a set of core spectrum policies that can guide effective
decision-making by Federal agencies. Central among these are that
agencies should find additional spectrum resources to support
affordable broadband for all Americans and to meet the seemingly
insatiable consumer and enterprise demand for wireless data services.
Agencies should free new spectrum bands for commercial service and find
ways to use underutilized spectrum bands more efficiently through
sharing. And agencies should continue to advance a balanced spectrum
policy that identifies potential spectrum bands for licensed and
unlicensed use--in low, mid, and high frequency bands.
While the unlicensed ecosystem has produced exceptional economic
value and innovation to date, our existing unlicensed bands will not be
able to support the continued growth of wireless data produced by
consumers, enterprises, and the Internet of Things. Last month, the Wi-
Fi Alliance released the Wi-Fi Spectrum Needs Study. It concludes that
an additional 500 MHz to 1 GHz of spectrum is required to satisfy
expected growth in busy-hour demand for Wi-Fi through 2025.\10\
Importantly, the analysis also found that unlicensed spectrum should be
``assigned with sufficient contiguity such that wide channels of 160
MHz, or perhaps even wider in the future, can be constructed.'' \11\
Wider channels would enable greater throughput, which will result in
faster downloads for users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Quotient Associates, Wi-Fi Spectrum Needs Study: Final Report
(Feb. 2017), https://www.wi-fi.org/download.php?file=/sites/default/
files/private/Wi-Fi%20Spectrum%20Needs%20
Study.pdf.
\11\ Id at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our analysis of the Nation's spectrum bands, Microsoft
believes that spectrum sharing will be required to meet the demand for
unlicensed spectrum. Depending on the specific frequency range, sharing
may involve Federal or non-federal spectrum users. So we are strong
supporters of the MOBILE NOW Act, which would kick-start this process
by initiating proceedings on sharing mid-band spectrum for licensed and
unlicensed use.
We close with three recommendations.
First, the Subcommittee, both through MOBILE NOW and more broadly,
should continue to promote a balanced spectrum policy that includes
adequate unlicensed frequencies. Future spectrum needs will likely be
met through heterogeneous networks where different spectrum bands--some
licensed, some unlicensed--will be mixed and matched over the
communications path to provide the necessary bandwidth for a given
device at a given location at a given time. This means that Congress
and the FCC should act to free up new licensed, unlicensed, and shared
spectrum for wireless broadband at low, mid, and high frequencies. We
therefore support the MOBILE NOW Act, reported out of the full
Committee, and hope that the Committee will aggressively push agencies
to free new bands for commercial licensed and unlicensed services.
Second, the Subcommittee should oppose efforts to over-protect
incumbents through onerous technical regulations when the FCC permits
unlicensed users to access underutilized bands on a shared basis. Under
the Commission's rules, unlicensed devices cannot cause harmful
interference and cannot claim protection from interference. Yet some
incumbents seek far more than this. They ask Congress and the FCC to
impose technical rules that would hobble unlicensed technologies by
making investment uneconomic and creating a perpetual state of
regulatory uncertainty. Committee oversight of the FCC should therefore
ensure that the Commission adopts only reasonable technical rules that
support economically rational investment for growth in unlicensed
bands.
Third, the Subcommittee can lend its support to voluntary industry
standard-setting efforts. Standards bodies such as the IEEE have been
critical for decades in developing industry consensus standards for
unlicensed devices. Engineers from Microsoft work hard with their peers
at other companies to develop standardized techniques for sharing the
unlicensed bands. Given all the demand for access to unlicensed
spectrum, it is more important than ever that companies work together
at IEEE and in other appropriate standards organizations to ensure new
technologies share effectively and equitably with existing users. These
consensus-driven efforts can often obviate the need for costly
government regulation.
Thank you for addressing these important issues today. As I've
noted above, unlicensed spectrum plays a critical role in innovation
and our economy. We look forward to finalization of the TV white-spaces
rules, resolution of outstanding dockets relating to unlicensed
spectrum, and successful passage of the MOBILE NOW Act. At Microsoft,
we are committed to working with you to ensure that a balanced spectrum
policy continues to produce value for the American economy, support
innovation, and increase access to the internet.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much.
Mr. LaPlatney?
STATEMENT OF PAT LaPLATNEY, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, RAYCOM MEDIA ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS
Mr. LaPlatney. Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking
Member Schatz, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Pat
LaPlatney, and I'm the President and CEO of Raycom Media, where
I oversee 60 broadcast television stations stretching from
Hattiesburg to Honolulu, as well as a number of production and
digital media properties.
I'm testifying today on behalf of the National Association
of Broadcasters and its 1,300 full-power television stations
that serve communities across the country with free, locally
focused programming. I appreciate you inviting me here to speak
about the upcoming voluntary upgrade that broadcasters across
the country and in other parts of the world are making to the
next generation television standard, ATSC 3.0.
In a world where broadband access is an expectation on par
with electricity and water and social media is ubiquitous, the
importance of local broadcasting and the trusted news coverage
it affords is paramount. Through Next Gen TV, broadcasters will
deliver all of this, along with the most watched entertainment
programming and sports, to your constituents in new and
exciting ways.
So what is Next Gen TV? Next Gen TV is a crystal clear,
ultra high-def picture that enhances the broadcast viewing and
listening experience. Next Gen TV has more effective emergency
alerting capabilities that will save more lives. Next Gen TV
integrates the best of broadcast and broadband to offer
interactive content, such as dropdown menus of sports scores or
movie information. Next Gen TV enables access to broadcast
television through smart phones and tablets, ensuring that our
local stations' content is available virtually anywhere,
anytime, and through any platform that viewers desire.
Finally, Next Gen TV is spectrally efficient, meaning it
offers more channels for free with the same amount of spectrum.
No expensive cable bill or data plan is required. Simply put,
Next Gen TV will enhance the ability of local broadcasters to
impact the communities we serve.
The recent broadcast coverage of the tragic tornado in
Hattiesburg, Mississippi, and the hurricanes in the Puna
District on the Big Island of Hawaii provided ample evidence of
the potential viewer benefits that Next Gen TV will afford.
Through my stations' wall-to-wall coverage, Next Gen TV would
have enabled more and better emergency services, including
enhanced alerting, interactive menus of hyperlocal detail, and
the potential for mobile access had cellular signals failed.
A broad coalition, including public and commercial
broadcasters, consumer electronics manufacturers, and public
safety advocates, has petitioned the FCC to allow stations to
conduct a voluntary market-driven transition to this new Next
Gen TV standard. After several months, the FCC unanimously
approved a Notice of Proposed Rule Making last week.
Broadcasters stand willing and ready to make the necessary
investments in our infrastructure to enable an upgrade to Next
Gen TV. We simply need the FCC to quickly finalize these rules
in order to move forward. We applaud the FCC for its work to
date, and we encourage the Committee to stay engaged.
Before I conclude, I want to highlight one issue currently
before Congress that does pose challenges to viewers' ability
to enjoy the benefits of Next Gen TV--successful completion of
the broadcast incentive auction. As the auction winds its way
to completion, one thing is certain. The broadcast industry
will end up with less spectrum. So the ability of those
nonparticipating stations to repack successfully into a smaller
broadcast band without viewer disruption is critical.
To that end, I want to thank the Committee leadership,
Senators Moran and Schatz, as well as their co-sponsors,
Senators Blumenthal, Blunt, Fischer, and Udall, for the work on
draft legislation that ensures broadcasters will have adequate
time and resources to successfully repack following the close
of the incentive auction. Your legislation will make certain
that no consumer will lose access to their broadcast service as
a result of the repack. It is just this certainty that
investment in Next Gen TV requires.
Thank you, and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. LaPlatney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Pat LaPlatney, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Raycom Media, on behalf of the National Association of
Broadcasters
Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz and members of
the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to testify today on behalf
of the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB). My name is Pat
LaPlatney, and I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of Raycom
Media, where I oversee 60 broadcast television stations stretching from
Hattiesburg to Honolulu, as well as a number of production and digital
media properties.
I am testifying today on behalf of the National Association of
Broadcasters, where I serve as a member of the Television Board of
Directors and represent more than 1,300 full-power local television
stations. This includes stations owned by major networks like ABC, CBS,
Univision, Fox and NBC; separately-owned network affiliate stations and
independent broadcasters. Each of these stations serves its community
with free over-the-air television that combines locally-focused
content, including highly valued local news, with the most-watched
entertainment programming in the media landscape.
I appreciate you inviting me here today to speak about the
upcoming, voluntary upgrade that broadcasters across the country, and
throughout the world, for that matter, are planning to make to the Next
Generation Television standard, ATSC 3.0. Next Gen TV will drastically
improve and expand the experience of the large and growing population
of over-the-air broadcast television viewers--and in a more spectrally
efficient manner that requires no additional government funds. Next Gen
TV is based on an Internet Protocol backbone, which supports a seamless
blending of Internet and TV content. The result is a higher quality
interactive viewing experience that combines the best of broadcast and
broadband and that will enable innovative broadcasters to bring new
services to viewers. In today's increasingly fragmented video space,
Next Gen TV will improve the quality and features of the country's
most-watched programming, allowing viewers the potential to consume it
wherever and however they choose and permitting broadcasters to compete
more effectively against other digital video providers.
In a world where preteens have smartphones, broadband access is an
expectation on par with electricity and water, and social media enable
a wide range of viewpoints to spread around the globe instantly,
locally-oriented broadcasting and local news coverage from trusted
sources are more important than ever. Through Next Gen TV, broadcasters
are able to deliver to our viewers--your constituents--sharp ultra HD
images, in addition to interactive features, customizable content and
multichannel immersive sound. Viewers can also look forward to more
choices, more channels and more flexibility. Mobile devices and TV sets
equipped with Next Gen receivers will make over-the-air TV available
virtually anywhere. And it will provide even more effective alerting to
the public in times of crisis.
One need only look at the impact broadcasters have in their
communities today to recognize the potential public safety benefits
Next Gen TV affords local viewers. Earlier this year, near Hattiesburg,
Mississippi, a tornado touched down shortly before dawn, leaving a 25-
mile wake of destruction and four casualties. Local broadcasters gave
residents advanced warning of where to go, or not go, and provided a
communications lifeline to emergency services. Or look at Hawaii News
Now, which embedded news crews for an extended period of time in the
Puna District on the Big Island while back-to-back hurricanes battered
houses only to be followed by a threatening lava flow. Next Gen TV
would have enabled more and better emergency services, including
enhanced alerting, interactive menus with hyper-local detail and the
potential for mobile access even when cellular signals fail. Moreover,
Next Gen capabilities would enhance the recovery efforts of local
broadcasters, such as our local NBC affiliate WDAM-TV in Hattiesburg,
to publicize specific resources available to particular storm victims,
instruct viewers on safe havens and conduct fundraising drives.
Broadcasters live in the communities we serve. And regardless of
where they reside, our broadcasters are committed to ensuring that
local residents in communities across the country have the same
opportunities as people in large cities to benefit from advances in
technology. Next Gen TV is critical to affording these opportunities.
Next Gen TV represents a unique partnership between the technology
industry (CTA), first responders (AWARN) and commercial (NAB) and
public (APTS) broadcasters. We petitioned the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to allow stations to conduct a voluntary, market-
driven transition to this new standard, specifically outlining the many
ways viewers will benefit from this standard while also ensuring no
viewer disruption during the transition. To that end, any broadcast
upgrade to Next Gen TV will be facilitated by channel-sharing
arrangements that allow broadcasts to continue in the current standard
as well. In response to our petition, the FCC released on February 24 a
rulemaking notice proposing to authorize TV broadcasters to use the
Next Gen standard.
Some of my fellow panelists will outline the advancements they hope
to accomplish either on their current spectrum or in newly designated
spectrum bands over the years and decades to come. One thing they will
not say, however, is that they are asking the FCC for permission to
make investments to enable these innovations. In fact, broadcasters are
the only licensees required to ask the FCC for permission to innovate.
It's like having to ask the governor for permission to plant a garden
in your own yard.
Broadcasters are willing and ready to make the necessary
investments in our infrastructure to provide what we believe will be
truly groundbreaking improvements to free, over-the-air television for
the benefit of viewers across the country. The new standard will allow
us to transmit in Ultra High Definition with High Dynamic Range (HDR)
and enhance viewer experiences through interactivity, as well as
provide enhanced emergency and weather alerts to TVs, phones and
tablets. Most importantly, the Next Gen TV standard is flexible enough
to allow us to continue innovating within this new standard to adapt to
the next--and as yet unknown--ways consumers will want to consume
broadcast content in the future.
Before I conclude, I do want to highlight one issue currently
before Congress that poses challenges to viewers' ability to enjoy the
benefits of Next Gen TV--the successful completion of the broadcast
incentive auction. As the broadcast incentive auction winds its way to
completion, one thing is certain: We will end up with less spectrum for
broadcasting and fewer stations. In light of this, we will need to make
the most of the broadcast spectrum that remains, and provide the most
compelling services we can, to be competitive and continue serving our
communities. Next Generation TV provides a vehicle for broadcasters to
do just that.
To that end, I want to thank Senators Moran and Schatz, as well as
your cosponsors, including Senators Blumenthal, Fisher and Blunt, for
your work on draft legislation that ensures broadcasters have adequate
time and resources to successfully repack following the close of the
incentive auction. Legislation that ensures no television or radio
broadcaster will pay out of pocket to cover repack costs and that no
broadcaster will be forced off the air due to circumstances beyond
their control, provides the certainty that an investment in Next Gen TV
requires.
Thank you again for inviting me here today. I look forward to
answering any questions.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much.
Mr. Stroup, you're recognized.
STATEMENT OF TOM STROUP, PRESIDENT,
SATELLITE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION
Mr. Stroup. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and
members of the Subcommittee, I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am Tom Stroup,
President of the Satellite Industry Association.
Since its creation over 20 years ago, SIA has been the
unified voice of the U.S. industry on policy, regulatory, and
legislative issues affecting the satellite business. Like the
other industries represented on the panel today, the satellite
industry supports hundreds of thousands of jobs and generates
billions of dollars in revenue. Beyond strictly financial
metrics, however, I would encourage the Subcommittee to
consider that our very way of life depends on the benefits we
receive from satellite-based services and applications.
Satellites, providing truly ubiquitous coverage that
enables communications; Earth observation; and position,
navigation, and timing services, have transformed how we
communicate; how we map, navigate, and see our world; how we
produce food and energy; conduct banking; predict weather;
perform disaster relief; ensure national security; and so much
more. Of course, delivering these diverse services to a broad
range of customers is only possible because of our ability to
access spectrum.
Satellites have long played a central role in distributing
virtually all television content to American viewing audiences.
In particular, live events, like breaking news and sports,
depend on the point to multi-point coverage and high service
quality that satellites provide. Communication satellites also
provide connectivity to business networks, mobile platforms
like commercial aircraft and maritime vessels, as well as
direct to household consumers.
Satellite broadband, a high-quality and cost-effective
solution, is playing an increasingly important part in
addressing the digital divide across the United States,
including in the most rural and remote areas of the country
where it remains uneconomical for terrestrial services to
build. Today, the commercial satellite industry has
approximately 2 million customers nationwide enjoying high-
quality broadband services, no matter where they are located.
And with the addition of multiple high throughput, high speed
broadband satellites this year, we expect the prevalence of
broadband services by satellite to increase rapidly.
It is also extremely important to mention the critical
nature that satellites provide to our safety and national
security. Satellites are often the only means of communicating
after a natural or other disaster. Furthermore, they enable our
military to project power in the air, on land, and at sea. To
cite just one example, satellite communications enable agile
connectivity and efficient mission control for remotely piloted
aircraft carrying out critical missions abroad.
Let me turn to innovation and growth. Even as demand for
spectrum has increased, the satellite industry has developed
ways to use this limited natural resource more efficiently.
High throughput satellites, for example, rely on frequency re-
use and spot beam technology to produce increased output
factors upwards of 20 times that of traditional satellites,
meeting FCC benchmark broadband speeds. The industry has seen
similar increases in the capacity of its systems.
In another highly anticipated advancement in the industry,
hundreds of new high throughput, non-geostationary satellites
will soon provide additional high-speed capacity at low latency
levels. Existing high throughput satellites already support the
delivery of 3G and 4G services, and in the future, satellite
fleets will be a part of the system architecture that delivers
new 5G, IoT, and intelligent connected transportation services
to consumers.
Advances in commercial remote sensing satellites are also
occurring at a rapid pace. SIA member companies are launching
satellites that can view and sense the Earth across multiple
spectral bands at unparalleled spatial resolutions and with
unprecedented global coverage and re-visit rates. Data from the
U.S. remote sensing operators are building new markets based on
geospatial data from agriculture to business intelligence to
weather prediction.
Of course, all the breakthroughs we've seen because of
satellite technology should not be taken for granted. They
depend upon our industry's ability to access spectrum. In order
for our industry to sustain and meet the growing demand for
satellite services, we encourage regulators to continue to
allocate sufficient spectrum for satellite use. Together, we
have an opportunity to address the digital divide, meet the
growing needs of U.S. consumers, ensure our country's safety
and national security, and do so in a manner that utilizes
spectrum most efficiently.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you, and I'm
happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stroup follows:]
Prepared Statement of Tom Stroup, President,
Satellite Industry Association
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Schatz, and members of the
Subcommittee, I would like to thank you for holding this important
hearing and for the opportunity to appear before you today. I am Tom
Stroup, President of the Satellite Industry Association (SIA)\1\.
Before joining SIA in late 2014, I served as CEO of Shared Spectrum
Company (SSC), a leading developer of spectrum intelligence
technologies. For a little more than ten years, I also served as the
President of the Personal Communications Industry Association (PCIA). I
have also founded and run several companies in the technology industry,
including Columbia Spectrum Management, P-Com Network Services, CSM
Wireless, and SquareLoop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SIA Executive Members include: The Boeing Company; AT&T
Services, Inc.; EchoStar Corporation; Intelsat S.A.; Iridium
Communications Inc.; Kratos Defense & Security Solutions; Ligado
Networks; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Northrop Grumman Corporation;
OneWeb; SES Americom, Inc.; Space Exploration Technologies Corp.; SSL;
and ViaSat, Inc. SIA Associate Members include: ABS U.S. Corp.; Artel,
LLC; Blue Origin: DigitalGlobe Inc.; DRS Technologies, Inc.; Eutelsat
America Corp.; Global Eagle Entertainment; Glowlink Communications
Technology, Inc.; Hughes; Inmarsat, Inc.; Kymeta Corporation; L-3
Electron Technologies, Inc.; O3b Limited; Panasonic Avionics
Corporation; Planet; Semper Fortis Solutions; Spire Global Inc.;
TeleCommunication Systems, Inc.; Telesat Canada; TrustComm, Inc.;
Ultisat, Inc.; and XTAR, LLC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Satellite Industry Association is a U.S.-based trade
association representing the leading satellite operators,
manufacturers, launch providers, and ground equipment suppliers who
serve commercial, civil, and military markets. Since its creation
almost twenty years ago, SIA has been the unified voice of the U.S.
satellite industry on policy, regulatory, and legislative issues
affecting the satellite business.
Before I go any further into my remarks, let me first commend the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC), who I know will be testifying
here next week, and the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA) for decades of experience and for their foresight
in allocating spectrum to useful technologies and applications,
including satellite services. Their efforts have resulted in innovative
government and commercial capabilities, which have benefited U.S.
consumers and the Nation.
Today, the satellite industry supports over 213,000 American jobs,
many of which reside in the home states of several of this
Subcommittee's members. This number includes tens of thousands of well-
paying manufacturing jobs. Just to mention one area of growth, more of
these jobs will be added in states like Florida, where this week one of
our members will be breaking ground on a new plant.
The satellite industry's 2015 estimated revenue was $89 billion.
These figures of course do not reflect revenues from businesses made
possible by our services, services which, like satellites themselves,
are not always apparent. But satellites are constantly operating in the
background of space, enabling the American economy in ways consumers
might not be aware, such as supporting smartphone app transactions, to
use just one close at hand example. Beyond strictly financial metrics,
I would encourage the Committee to consider that our very way of life
depends on the benefits we receive from satellite-based services and
applications. Satellites--communications, earth observation, and
position, navigation, and timing--have transformed how we communicate,
how we map, navigate, and see our world, how we produce food and
energy, conduct banking, predict weather, perform disaster relief,
ensure national security, and so much more. Of course, delivering these
diverse services to a broad range of customers is only possible because
of our ability to access spectrum in a number of frequency bands.
I want to go into a little more detail on just a few of the
qualitative benefits we receive from satellites because of their
ubiquitous coverage, which enables cost-effective service even in rural
and remote areas.
Satellites have long played a central role in distributing
virtually all television content to American viewing audiences. In
particular, live events like breaking news and sports events such as
the Super Bowl and the upcoming NCAA Tournament depend on the point-to-
multipoint coverage and high service quality that satellites provide.
Communications satellites also provide connectivity--including
broadband connectivity--to business networks, to mobile platforms like
commercial aircraft and maritime vessels, as well as direct to
household consumers.
As you all know all too well, advances in information technology
and communications continue to spur economic growth in the United
States, but they also highlight a growing disparity between the haves
and have-nots. Satellite broadband, a high-quality and cost-effective
solution for broadband services, is playing an increasingly important
part in addressing the digital divide across the United States,
including in the most rural and remote areas of the country where it
remains uneconomical for terrestrial services to build. Currently the
commercial satellite industry has approximately 2 million customers
nationwide enjoying high-quality broadband services at reasonable
rates, no matter where they are located. This includes the 14 percent
of consumers that currently are not served by terrestrial broadband.
Commercial satellite operators, which have already invested billions of
dollars in the construction and deployment of high-throughput
satellites, offer service to those consumers today.
With the addition of multiple high throughput, high speed broadband
satellites this year, we expect the prevalence of broadband services by
satellite to increase rapidly and the number of satellite broadband
customers across the United States to continue to grow substantially.
Further, given that most of these satellites and their ground equipment
will be built in the United States, we should see the creation of
additional domestic design and manufacturing jobs.
It is also extremely important to mention the critical nature that
satellites, and the use of spectrum, provide to our safety and national
security. Satellite capabilities enable our military's ability to
project power in the air, on land, at sea and in cooperation with
allies. To list all of the ways satellites and spectrum are utilized by
the U.S. military and Intelligence Community would take too long and
quickly lead to classified discussions. So, I will mention just a few
examples.
Satellite communications (SATCOM), both commercial and
military, provide agile connectivity and efficient mission
control capability to our forces and operations in the
continental U.S. (CONUS) and forward deployed locations,
including for remotely piloted aircraft or (RPA), other
advanced weapons systems like the F-35, and U.S. Navy warships.
Capacity demand for the bands supporting these needs routinely
outpaces supply and continues to grow rapidly.
Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR)
satellites and aerial platforms are essential to capabilities
that allow us to see global threats to our nation, including
from missiles, terrorism, as well as more traditional
activities of enemy combatants and potential adversaries, and
they demand dedicated high-capacity satellite links.
The Global Positioning System (GPS) provides position,
navigation, and timing services which are critical to every
phase of military operations, commercial networks, critical
infrastructure, and more.
All of these satellite capabilities depend upon spectrum
availability and heavily factor in the Department of Defense's
decisions concerning future force structure and concepts of operation.
From individual special operations teams to large scale theater-level
air, land and sea operations, none of these would exist as we know them
today without the command and control and delivery of data that
satellites provide. In short, it is hard to overstate how integral
satellites are to our Nation's ability to defend our interests in a
conflict-filled world.
In addition, satellites play a critical role when our national
terrestrial communications infrastructure is unavailable because of a
national disaster, electrical outage or, worse yet, terrorist attack.
Unlike their terrestrial counterparts, satellite networks are not
susceptible to damage from such disasters, because the primary
repeaters are onboard the spacecraft and not part of the ground
infrastructure. Hand-held terminals, portable Very Small Aperture
Terminal (VSAT) antennas, and temporary fixed installations can all be
introduced into a post-disaster environment to provide support relief
and enhance recovery efforts. This is why the Department of Homeland
Security has designated commercial satellite systems as critical
infrastructure.
Indeed, emergency preparedness networks are increasingly including
satellite networks as part of their system design in order to ensure
sufficient resiliency and cost-effectiveness. Government and
intergovernmental agencies use satellite networks to provide seismic,
flood-sensing, and other early warning data. Public Safety Answering
Points (PSAPs) have begun incorporating satellite back-up into their
next generation 911 systems to cost-effectively mitigate potential
network outage risks caused by any ground-based or environmental
disruptions.
I alluded earlier to the fact that satellites have been relying on
the use of spectrum for many years, but this should not lead anyone to
conclude that the industry has been doing anything but driving
technology forward in exciting ways. So, let me say a word on
innovation and growth. The satellite industry is today investing tens
of billions of dollars to innovate and increase connectivity in the
U.S. and across the globe. Specifically, even as demand for spectrum
has increased, the satellite industry has developed ways to use this
limited natural resource more efficiently. High throughput satellites,
for example, rely on frequency re-use and spot beam technology to
produce increased output factors upward of 20 times that of traditional
satellites, meeting FCC benchmark broadband speeds. The industry has
seen similar increases in the capacity of its systems. The first
broadband satellite began service in 2008 with a capacity of 10
gigabits per second (Gbps) and today they have capacity of 180 Gbps or
more.
In another highly-anticipated advancement in the industry, hundreds
of new high-throughput (non-geostationary) satellites will soon join
existing operators in Low-Earth and Medium-Earth orbits to provide
additional high speed capacity at low latency levels. Existing high
throughput satellites already support the delivery of 3G and 4G
services, and in the future satellite fleets will be a part of a system
architecture that delivers new 5G, IoT, and intelligent, connected
transportation services to consumers.
To expand further on another area of growth, mentioned at the
outset, advances in commercial remote sensing satellites are also
occurring at a rapid pace. SIA Member companies are launching
satellites that can view and sense the Earth across multiple spectral
bands, at unparalleled spatial resolution and unprecedented global
coverage and revisit rates. The U.S. industry's capacity to monitor,
evaluate, and understand change is allowing for more frequent insights
into the impacts and opportunities of human activity in all aspects of
life and business, and enabling a data revolution from space. Data from
U.S. remote sensing operators are building new markets in agriculture,
mapping, business intelligence, and weather prediction; they are
supporting global efforts for humanitarian assistance and disaster
response; and they are providing unique information to the U.S.
national security community that, by virtue of it being commercial and
unclassified, can be shared at critical times with our allies and
partners.
One final, general note on innovation: the satellite industry also
helps drive our exploration of frontiers in science and space, ensuring
American technological leadership continues in these increasingly
competitive areas.
Of course, all of the breakthroughs we've seen because of satellite
technologies should not be taken for granted. They depend upon our
industry's ability to access spectrum. And here I would like to note
that satellites can and often do operate in bands with other users. In
most cases satellite networks have different--often higher--
requirements for sharing. In order for our industry to sustain and meet
the growing demand for satellite services, we encourage regulators to
continue to allocate sufficient spectrum for satellite use. In a
similar vein, we also ask the Senate and this Subcommittee to consider
how to pursue a balanced approach to making additional spectrum
available for future growth, that you ensure that satellite is a part
of that equation. Together we have an opportunity to address the
digital divide, meet the growing needs of U.S. consumers, ensure our
country's safety and national security, and do so in a manner that
utilizes spectrum most efficiently.
I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and I am happy to
answer any questions.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Mr. Stroup, and thank you all
for your excellent testimony and for helping us by staying in
the time. Now, as I explained earlier and I've gone over this
also with consultation with Senator Schatz--I will now turn the
gavel over to Senator Gardner, go vote, and immediately come
back. At this point, I think it's probably best to recognize
Senator Schatz for questions, and then we'll proceed along the
list that has been prepared for us by our staff.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chairman Wicker.
My first question is for Mr. Heiner. The use of wireless
devices in the unlicensed bands is so popular that the Wi-Fi
Alliance predicts that we will need another 500 gigahertz of
spectrum in the unlicensed bands to accommodate demands by
2025. I'm going to ask you three questions just in the interest
of time so you can knock them all out in a row.
Which bands are the most important for unlicensed spectrum
today? What are the industry's plans to identify more bands for
unlicensed spectrum? And then do tech companies generally agree
or differ greatly in terms of a strategy for the unlicensed
bands?
Mr. Heiner. Thank you for those questions, Senator Schatz.
I'll answer the first two sort of together. We very much need
to find and sort of utilize as efficiently as possible
additional unlicensed spectrum in the low, mid, and high-
frequencies. At the low end, around the 600 megahertz, after
the incentive auction, we have the possibility of really
investing very heavily in TV white spaces technology. That's
technology that enables signals to travel quite a long
distance, four or five miles. It's only--think of, like, FM
radio, 88 to 108 on the dial. Of course, an FM station can
cover the whole city--600 megahertz not far off from that. So
at very low power, we're able to serve an entire community. We
have an example of this coming up in southern Virginia as a
test pilot.
At the mid frequencies, that's where most Wi-Fi is today,
2.4 and 5 gigahertz, and that's very good spectrum for within a
home. It can penetrate a couple of walls. As you know, your
signal falls off outside the home. But we'd like more
contiguous spectrum next to what we already have to build out
more channels.
And then at the high end, at the millimeter waves, the
recent Spectrum Frontiers proceeding at the FCC has opened up
new spectrum, which we're very enthused about. This spectrum
can carry very heavy throughput, but only for short distances,
so we're talking about line of sight. And there are great
applications for that technology to be able, for example, to
have your PC connect to a monitor with no cables to stream
video within the home, for augmented reality scenarios where
you're wearing a headset and devices in the room are actually
communicating with the headset via these high millimeter waves.
So we very much want to see it in all three bands.
Senator Schatz. Mr. Heiner, in the interest of time, I'll
take the last question for the record so I can get to my second
and final question.
This is for Mr. Bergmann and Mr. LaPlatney. We all want
faster Internet service and better wireless service coverage
that will result from the current incentive auction. But at the
same time, a lot of us are concerned that consumers would lose
access to their local broadcast news if channels are forced off
the air in the repacking process. So the question for Mr.
Bergmann and Mr. LaPlatney is: Isn't there a way to balance
these concerns and make sure that member companies can deploy
quickly after the auction while also protecting our
constituents' access to local news?
Mr. Bergmann first.
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator. So we're absolutely
committed to a smooth transition process. We do believe it's
important to have timely access to that spectrum. We have
confidence that the FCC will be able to stick to its 39-month
schedule. The faster we get access to those bands, the faster
we can invest, create jobs, and build out our 5G spectrum, and
we're very confident that we'll be able to work collaboratively
to get that done.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Mr. LaPlatney?
Mr. LaPlatney. Thank you, Senator Schatz, again, for your
question, and thank you for your leadership on a bill to help
address these issues. We believe currently with the information
we have that both the time and the financial resources are
going to be inadequate, again, based on current information.
Speaking for Raycom, we got our letter, our repack letter,
about a month ago, and we will have 22 of our stations that
will need to be repacked in markets from West Palm Beach,
Florida, to Cape Girardeau, Missouri; Evansville, Indiana; and
Hattiesburg--or, pardon me--Biloxi, Mississippi.
It's a complicated process. For instance, a couple of our
markets will have to move from Channel 12 to Channel 8, and
that could involve--it will involve putting a new antenna
that's going to weigh potentially thousands of pounds more on
an existing tower. There's all kinds of issues surrounding
that. We've begun engineering studies already in a number of
these markets. So we're concerned about the timeline. We're
concerned about the amount of money. But we will work
collaboratively, and we'll work as quickly as we can to move
through the repack, to be as efficient and effective as we can
in working on this.
Senator Schatz. I'd just like to indulge the Chairman, if I
could have his indulgence for a minute.
Mr. Bergmann, can we have your commitment, yes or no, to
working out a solution that accommodates these very serious
concerns?
Mr. Bergmann. We're absolutely committed to working with
you, with our partners in the broadcast industry. Thirty-nine
months is an eternity in the wireless industry. As you can
imagine, after spending $20 billion to purchase something
that's essentially the value of T. Rowe Price or Hilton Hotels
or Jet Blue two times over, we want to make sure to put that
spectrum to good use. We'll absolutely work collaboratively
with you all to make that happen.
Senator Schatz. Thank you.
Senator Gardner [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Schatz.
Senator Klobuchar?
STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much.
Thank you to all of you. I love that the broadcasters are
having issues with the microphones.
[Laughter.]
Senator Klobuchar. I think we all know how important this
topic is. We have a very active broadband caucus, and, in fact,
Senator Capito and I led a letter that was signed by 48
Senators urging the President to include broadband in any kind
of infrastructure package, because I think we could really have
the potential of making something that's progressing even much
bigger. We've also been working on the dig once legislation
with Senator Gardner and Senator Daines to make it easier to
deploy broadband. But I specifically wanted to focus on rural
issues.
First, Mr. Bergmann, part of the MOBILE NOW Act that I
worked on with Senator Fischer would require the FCC to explore
ways to provide incentives for wireless carriers to lease
unused spectrum. How could leasing or disaggregating spectrum
in rural areas improve wireless service for rural customers?
Mr. Bergmann. Senator Klobuchar, thank you for the work
that you and Senator Fischer have done on the Rural Spectrum
Accessibility Act. We really think that's a creative tool that
can help. We recognize that our members compete to expand their
service maps. They want to serve the entire country. They took
LTE coverage from zero to over 99 percent in 7 years. But we
recognize that rural areas have particular challenges,
geography, topography, fewer people, and we really need to
think creatively about how to get there. The legislation that
you've worked on is a big part of that.
Getting access to that 600 megahertz spectrum will be
really important as well, too. It has those propagation
characteristics that enable us to provide service in rural
areas. So making sure we have that smooth and timely process to
get that spectrum put to use is really important.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Stroup, I am Co-Chair of the 911 Caucus and Senator
Nelson and I actually have announced new legislation, the Next
Generation 911 Act of 2017, to provide more Federal funding
through the existing 911 Grant Program. As you know, everything
is changing. 911 people are now using--can have the ability for
firefighters to get blueprints of buildings, and for people who
get stranded in the woods of Minnesota, we could use location
accuracy to find them. Can you explain how a satellite backup
can improve the resiliency of Next Gen 911 systems?
Mr. Stroup. The satellite networks today have ubiquitous
coverage and the opportunity to provide backup communications,
whether it's in time of an emergency or when people are lost.
So it is the ubiquitous nature of the coverage that allows them
to be able to enhance these services that are provided by
terrestrial providers.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you.
And then finally, Mr. LaPlatney, ensuring our
communications networks can effectively support public safety
includes natural disasters and emergency events--like we have
flooding in North Dakota and Minnesota--and these kinds of
things can destroy communications infrastructure. How can
public safety be enhanced by a Next Generation TV standard?
Mr. LaPlatney. So the Next Gen Television standard allows
for better targeted alerts in emergencies, whether it's
flooding or tornadoes or hurricanes. It also has the capability
to awake dormant televisions and mobile devices.
Senator Klobuchar. Did you just say awake dormant
televisions?
Mr. LaPlatney. Yes. Essentially----
Senator Klobuchar. I couldn't just let that go. What does
that mean?
Mr. LaPlatney. That's OK. You're all over me today,
Senator.
[Laughter.]
Mr. LaPlatney. So if you're asleep at 3 in the morning and
there's a tornado bearing down on you, this technology has the
capability to wake your phone up or wake your television up and
say, ``You're in the path of a storm. Please take cover.''
Senator Klobuchar. Wow. So it would turn it on without your
control.
Mr. LaPlatney. Essentially, turn it on, awake it.
Senator Klobuchar. All right. So this idea with the new
standards with the 911 and what we're working on here could
help to make that more standard across the country?
Mr. LaPlatney. Absolutely.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much. Thank you, all of
you. We're excited about the possibilities on a bipartisan
basis here to move forward on broadband as well as enhance 911
services.
Senator Gardner. Senator Cortez Masto?
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us. As a new member, I'm
excited to be working with you on this issue. First of all, let
me just say thank you for the bipartisan willingness to work
together.
The broadcasters from Nevada--and I represent the great
state of Nevada--have the same concerns that you just brought
out today, and it's nice to hear, Mr. Bergmann, you're willing
to work with them. So that's something I will be paying
attention to.
And then my colleague talked about rural areas. The
challenge for us in Nevada is getting access to wireless
broadband, you name it, in our rural areas for so many needs,
where we can bring telemedicine, we can bring education, we can
bring behavioral services through broadband wireless to those
areas. Thank you for your comments.
I'm curious if there are any other areas you can see that
we should be looking toward to incentivize and bring additional
services through wireless, through spectrum, that we should be
looking at in those rural areas. I know you addressed it with
access to 600 megahertz. Was there anything else that we should
be looking to do to enhance the ability to bring those services
to our rural areas?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto. Reaching
rural areas does require creativity, and as I mentioned, the
wireless industry invested $32 billion last year to try to
build out and improve its networks. And just to assure you that
we continue to expand that coverage footprint, just over the
last 2 years, we added 800,000 road miles to our coverage and
over 500,000 citizens. So we continue to make that a priority.
But you're right. We have to be creative, in addition to,
you know, creating incentives to share spectrum, and that
happens today in the marketplace. Verizon has a very successful
LTE in Rural America program, where it shares spectrum with
smaller companies that serve rural areas. Incentivizing that is
incredibly helpful. Having a robust mobility fund is important.
So we commend FCC for adopting a mobility fund at its last open
meeting and we look forward to that implementation.
I would say, particularly in western states, siting on
Federal lands is a real opportunity, where today, it can take 2
to 4 years to site on Federal lands. If we could speed that up,
you reduce the cost, you make it easier to get out there and
serve citizens who might be near areas with lots of Federal
land. So those are just a couple of ideas.
Senator Cortez Masto. That's very helpful. Thank you very
much.
Senator Wicker [presiding]. Thank you very much, Senator
Cortez Masto.
You know, I kind of felt like I would get a turn if we
proceeded in this fashion.
Let me start with you, Mr. Heiner. What's the takeaway in
terms of Federal policy coming out of this committee with
regard to the unlicensed spectrum? Do we need to leave it like
it is? What do we need to do? What decisions do we need to make
from a legislative standpoint or from a standpoint of giving
advice to our regulatory friends?
Mr. Heiner. Well, a couple of points I was mentioning a
minute ago, and so I won't repeat it at length now. But we do
need to encourage the FCC to enable unlicensed spectrum in the
low bands, the mid bands, and the high bands. There are a
couple of FCC proceedings that are open, and we look forward to
their conclusion.
In the incentive auction, for instance, which was a success
in that 70 megahertz was made available for licensed use and 14
megahertz for unlicensed use. We just need to finalize that and
get the repacking of the broadcast stations done and try to do
that in such a way that there are new unlicensed channels open
that are open in every part of the country, including urban
areas, so that the device manufacturers for TV white spaces
devices will know that if they sell their device, it can be
purchased and used any place. There are some open proceedings,
I believe, also relating to 2.4 gig and 5 gig, and then also up
in the millimeter bands. So we need to see all of them sort of
concluded in ways that encourage the unlicensed use.
The only other point I would make is, you know, it's
important that we all work together in the unlicensed space to
prevent interference to other users of the same frequencies,
and it's important that regulation not be so onerous that the
effect of it is actually to block people from using the
unlicensed spectrum. So we just need to find the right balance
there.
Senator Wicker. OK. I may ask other members of the panel if
they'd like to weigh in on that issue. First, let me talk about
another aspect of your testimony, and that is the data centers
that constitute the cloud. Where are these data centers
located? I understand a lot of them are right outside of town
here. How safe are they? How safe is their infrastructure? Then
I'll ask other members of the panel to volunteer if they'd like
to weigh in on either of these matters.
Mr. Heiner. Well, thank you for that question. You know, we
have----
Senator Wicker. It's not up in the air somewhere, is it?
Mr. Heiner. Yes, it's----
Senator Wicker. It's a big building.
Mr. Heiner. What happens is people used to go to the white
board and say, like, you know, we're going to connect to a
server someplace, and they would draw like an image of a cloud,
and then it became--you know, that's the cloud. The data
centers are on the ground. They are massive----
Senator Wicker. This could be front page news tomorrow.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Heiner. They are massive, massive buildings with just
racks and racks and racks of servers. You know, we have one in
Washington State on the Columbia River, and the idea is to get
hydroelectric power, you know, which is cheap and efficient.
But we have about 100 data centers around the world. We try to
have them close to--spread around the world to reduce latency,
so that, you know, we have a very fast connection to customers
wherever they are.
These are highly, highly secure facilities. People
sometimes worry about, ``Gee, if my data is in these
facilities, are they safe? Is it safer if I keep the data at
home?'' Our point of view is really that it's sort of like is
your data safe--is your money safe in a bank, or is it safer
under the mattress? And, actually, it's safer if it's
professionally managed. So we put tremendous resources into
ensuring that security of those systems.
Senator Wicker. If somebody launches a rocket propelled
grenade at my bank, I'm not going to lose my money. What if
they attack the fibers that connect to these data centers? Also
help me out--where are the bulk of them? You told me where
yours are. If you could answer those two----
Mr. Heiner. Well, they are spread around the world. In
terms of the effect of an attack on any one data center, all
the data is replicated and backed up in a professional way to
many, many other locations, and so that shouldn't be a concern.
In terms of where they're located, it really is all over the
world. The leaders in running these data centers, of course,
are Microsoft, Amazon, which has Amazon web services, and
Google, and they all have their own policies on where they site
them.
Senator Wicker. OK. Is there any other member of the panel
who would like to talk about either unlicensed spectrum or the
data centers that comprise the cloud?
Mr. Stroup, were you raising your hand?
Mr. Stroup. Actually, I was. This is somewhat related to
the question relating to the information in the cloud. One
member on the panel whose members provide service above the
cloud--one of the great advantages in times of emergency is
that infrastructure is protected from the kinds of attacks that
you mentioned or natural disasters. So that directly going to
the point that you had raised in terms of data in the cloud. It
does go to the security of the information in the
communications networks.
Senator Wicker. Yes, sir, Mr. Bergmann.
Mr. Bergmann. Chairman Wicker, just to the question about
providing both licensed and unlicensed spectrum, we believe
that's important as well, too. The wireless industry relies on
unlicensed spectrum and looks to launch new services in
unlicensed bands. I would just encourage this committee to
continue to focus on the needs for licensed spectrum as well,
too, particularly as we look towards 5G.
We're looking for high bands as an initial platform for 5G
services, and so one of the things that we want to make sure of
is that we have enough high band spectrum in large channels,
large contiguous channels. So even after the FCC adopted its
Spectrum Frontiers order last year, there are now 14 gigahertz
of spectrum for unlicensed use in the high bands and just under
four for licensed spectrum in the high bands.
So we really want to make sure that we have enough spectrum
there so that we can invest--again, the industry is looking to
invest $250 billion over the next 7 years, creating 3 million
jobs, really enabling us to take that 5G lead. So we just
encourage you all to prioritize both of those.
Senator Wicker. What, if any, recommendations do you have
to the FCC in this regard?
Mr. Bergmann. We would love it if the FCC would move
forward with its further notice, where it's teed up 18
additional gigahertz of high band spectrum that could be used
for 5G services, and we really want to make sure that the FCC
prioritizes licensed spectrum and make sure that we have enough
to maintain that leadership as we move from 4G into 5G.
Senator Wicker. Mr. LaPlatney, you emphasized Next
Generation TV in your testimony. What needs to happen at the
Federal level to help your goals become a reality?
Mr. LaPlatney. Thank you for the question, Senator Wicker.
There is an NPRM out there currently. I believe we're in a
comment period. And I think the short answer to your question
is just continued oversight by this committee. It would be the
hope of the industry----
Senator Wicker. That would be a Notice of Proposed Rule
Making.
Mr. LaPlatney. Correct. I'm sorry. Notice of Proposed Rule
Making--thank you--at the FCC. We're in a comment period now.
We expect that comment period to end sometime during the
summer, and it would be our hope that the standard would be
adopted sometime during the fall.
Senator Wicker. Have you made recommendations? Have you
responded to this notice with suggestions?
Mr. LaPlatney. Yes, sir. I think a number of industry
participants have.
Senator Wicker. Anyone else?
[No verbal response.]
Senator Wicker. OK. Well, Mr. Bergmann, many industries are
leveraging digital platforms for innovation and growth in
healthcare. It's a very exciting area in which we are actually
helping people lead longer and more meaningful lives. In
Mississippi, there's a great example of this called the
Diabetes Telehealth Network. It provides patients with remote
care management, resulting in cost savings of over $300,000 for
only 100 patients. Of course, we would like to write this
large. If expanded, this program could save Medicaid $189
million.
How do we ensure that there's sufficient spectrum available
to continue to fuel this innovation in tele-medicine and
provide quality healthcare access to all Americans regardless
of where they live?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We certainly agree
with you. mHealth is one of the most promising applications
that 5G looks to bring. Whether we're talking about remote
patient monitoring, chronic disease management, there are
tremendous opportunities to cut costs, as you mentioned, but to
also improve outcomes, to save lives and make sure that
patients have a better quality of life. So just a couple of
things that this committee can do, again, focusing on making
spectrum available in low, mid, and high bands, making sure
that we have licensed spectrum that enables us to provide those
guarantees of performance, that reliability and security that
we really want to have out of our health applications.
And then maybe a sometimes overlooked aspect is
infrastructure siting, particularly as we look to build out
high band spectrum which will have that incredible capacity,
five times the responsiveness, 10 times the speeds of what we
have today. It's important that we have this new 5G
infrastructure. So being able to site those small cells quickly
and without unnecessary costs or delays is really important.
Senator Wicker. Thank you. Anyone else want to talk about
telehealth?
Yes, sir, Mr. Heiner.
Mr. Heiner. Just one additional comment, which is that the
TV white spaces technology could also be very helpful for
telemedicine, because it has the capability, as I mentioned
earlier, of sending signals over long distances. And, in fact,
Microsoft has a system up and running in Botswana, where
circumstances can be difficult, specifically focused on
telemedicine, and in this way, the doctors in the more urban
areas are able to reach out to patients in rural areas.
Senator Wicker. Now, the administration believes, and I
support, certainly, in a general sense, the idea that
regulations many times, though well intended, have stifled job
creation, and that we need regulatory reform, not only from the
standpoint of legislation, but also coming out of the
administration. So would each of you five experts give us the
benefit of some recommendations, two or three recommendations,
that you might send to the administration for regulatory reform
in the early months of this administration?
Mr. Bergmann?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So just a couple of
thoughts. Certainly, two places where we would appreciate this
committee's guidance are with respect to the privacy
regulations and the open Internet regulations that the past FCC
adopted; in the case of privacy, where the FCC departed from
longstanding FTC precedent; in the case of Title II, where
public utility regulation was applied to broadband services.
Both of these areas are places where we believe the Committee
can help guide the FCC.
A third area, as we look forward toward things like the
Internet of Things, making sure that we have consistent
national framework to guide innovation in that space is very
important for the future growth of those services.
Senator Wicker. Let me make sure I understand what you're
saying with regard to Title II. It's your view that the FCC
made a mistake in that regard in recent years and that that
should be turned around?
Mr. Bergmann. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We're certainly very
encouraged to hear Chairman Pai talk about reversing that
decision and recognizing the competition and the innovation
that's happening in the mobile broadband space.
Senator Wicker. All right. Mr. Entner?
Mr. Entner. Thank you, Chairman. In my opinion, the
American people have benefited tremendously from a light touch
regulatory approach to telecom and technology, in general, and
the growth speaks for itself. I think we should return to light
touch regulation and make it possible for companies across the
whole competitive environment to compete with each other.
Competition is really the lifeblood here of the industry, and
Americans have benefited tremendously from it. I think that's
the importance here, that the same rules apply to everybody the
same way, no matter how they compete with each other with
similar services.
Senator Wicker. With regard to returning to light touch,
would you agree with Mr. Bergmann on the Title II issue?
Mr. Entner. I would.
Senator Wicker. All right. Now, members of the public
should know that the panel is a panel suggested by both the
Republican and Democratic membership of this committee. It's
not a one-sided show at all.
Would anyone care to take issue with either Mr. Bergmann or
Mr. Entner with regard to the Title II issue?
[No verbal response.]
Senator Wicker. All right. What suggestions do you have for
policymakers, the administration, Congress, or the regulators
with regard to regulatory reform?
Mr. Heiner. So I would just focus on unlicensed spectrum,
which is already a success story in terms of the very low
regulation that those bands entail. That low regulation means
that barriers to entry for innovators are incredibly low.
Anybody can, you know, dream up some device and transmit on the
frequencies with almost no regulation. So I would just urge the
Congress and the FCC to continue to maintain that approach,
which is a proven success, and expand to the extent possible
the amount of bandwidth available to unlicensed spectrum.
On the net neutrality point, I would just say that
Microsoft very much supports the core principles of net
neutrality, would like to see it enshrined, however that's
done. The specifics around Title II is not something that's at
all important to us.
Senator Wicker. Mr. LaPlatney, do you have anything to add?
Mr. LaPlatney. Yes, Senator Wicker. The broadcast industry
is highly regulated, and we would love to see the FCC take up
local ownership rules, the local media ownership rules. We
think there's--whether it's the newspaper or broadcast press
ownership or the local duopoly rule, we think that those
rules--it's time for those rules to be revisited. So that would
be our suggestion.
Senator Wicker. Mr. Stroup?
Mr. Stroup. Yes. First, I'd like to commend the FCC for
many of the modifications they made to the Part 25 rules last
year, working with the industry. However, we would like to see
them make some modifications to the restrictions on the
industry that were adopted in the Spectrum Frontiers proceeding
on where we can locate our Earth stations, and, of course,
going to the core of this proceeding, ensuring that there is
sufficient spectrum made available for the growth of the
industry.
Another area that we would recommend relates to export
reform. Fortunately, a number of the ITAR restrictions were
removed, allowing manufacturers of satellites to export and
compete in the market on a worldwide basis. But there were some
restrictions that remain with respect to Earth imaging, and we
would request that that be revisited.
Senator Wicker. Thank you very much.
Ranking Member Schatz, I've tried my best to stir up a
disagreement among these panelists, and I'm having an awful
time doing it. So I'll yield to you for a few questions.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If you need
disagreement, I think I can provide it for you.
My additional question is for Mr. Bergmann. The U.S. has
been a global leader in the development of mobile technology,
and there has been a lot of anticipation for the implementation
of 5G. In fact, the Committee passed MOBILE NOW in January,
which will make additional spectrum available for 5G networks.
My question for you, Mr. Bergmann, is can you put this in a
global context in terms of how we are viewed in the highly
competitive world of international technology companies and why
it's so important for the United States to lead on 5G?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator Schatz. We are clearly
recognized as the world's leader in 4G LTE. We invested first,
innovated first, and that's paid dividends over the last 7
years. If you look at the mobile ecosystem, the two largest
operating systems are both based here in the U.S. A stunning 76
percent of apps developers are located here in the U.S. So we
think it's paid tremendous dividends in terms of innovation. We
believe that 5G has seen more greater opportunities as we look
at these services that have much greater capacity to impact
industries across the economy and our consumers' lives.
So there truly is a global race. I mentioned some of the
other countries around the world that are taking steps to make
large swaths of spectrum available and to streamline the way
that they site that infrastructure and architecture. So it's
really critical that we do the same here in the U.S.
Senator Schatz. Can you flesh out what those new
opportunities are as opposed to the last generation?
Mr. Bergmann. Sure. So, you know, if we look at healthcare,
you look at the opportunity to have remote patient monitoring
or chronic disease management, or, as you look at the ability
to use high band spectrum, we have the opportunity to have
ultra HD, so you might have remote surgery and be able to
extend the reach of expert doctors beyond urban centers into
rural areas.
Similarly, in the education space, where you might have
virtual reality applications that allow students in Hawaii to,
in the blink of an eye, be in the center of the Roman Coliseum.
There are tremendous opportunities in transportation and energy
as well, too, where we have the ability to cut traffic times,
reduce fatalities, cut emissions. There are tremendous
opportunities associated with that.
Senator Schatz. So could you give me a status report? Where
are we? Who are our greatest competitors? Who is on top of
this? Are we already behind? Just tell me where we are.
Mr. Bergmann. I think we're really poised to lead. The
FCC's actions to make that high band spectrum available have
led to over two dozen trials here in the U.S. Companies have
already invested in R&D. So we're out ahead of the standards
process. One of our member companies announced just earlier
this week a pilot program to offer 5G services in 11 different
markets. So I think we're very much poised to lead. But it is a
race, and it will be important that we make the right policy
decisions here.
Senator Schatz. Who are we in a race with?
Mr. Bergmann. Japan, the EU, South Korea, China.
Senator Schatz. Thank you. Anyone else care to comment on
that?
Mr. Entner?
Mr. Entner. Thank you, Senator. I want to highlight the
importance of configuring the spectrum in large channel
configurations, because think of these channels as like water
pipes, and the bigger the pipe, the faster the speed. In the
United States, spectrum is typically allocated in 5 by 5 or 10
by 10 megahertz channels. Overseas, it is in 20 by 20 megahertz
channels very frequently.
And, inherently, how you can provide for speed is you have
now carrier aggregation, where you essentially can glue three
of these pipes together, three of these channels, and if you
glue together three 5 by 5s, it gives you 15 megahertz of
spectrum as one channel. Or if you glue together three 20 by
20s, that's 60. Inherently, whoever has the 20 by 20s will be
four times faster, and that is a really important consideration
to keep the U.S. competitive with the rest of the world.
Senator Schatz. And is one of our unique challenges the
spectrum currently allocated, I think, appropriately, to
national security and other needs, that maybe not every country
has quite that obligation and quite that same public policy?
Mr. Entner. It is within the existing spectrum, not
necessarily about different and new spectrum. It's just like
when we have spectrum, how do we divide up that spectrum?
Senator Schatz. Oh, this is within the bands that are
allocated.
Mr. Entner. Correct.
Senator Schatz. Is that an FCC decision that has to be
made, or are these technical changes that can be made at the
operating level?
Mr. Entner. Initially, it's an FCC decision of how they are
allocating the spectrum. If through pure happenstance, a
company wins several licenses in the market, and they lie next
to each other, they can create this. But that doesn't happen
very often. So through regulatory foresight, this problem can
be alleviated.
Senator Schatz. OK. Thank you very much.
A question for Mr. LaPlatney. I want to talk to you about
the Next Gen TV. You know, I understand the transition that was
made from analog to digital and the consumer benefits, the
economic benefits, and the need to sort of subsidize that
transition. As a television watcher, I can understand the
desire for better and better TV, more and more cross platform
utility, and sharper and sharper resolution.
But I'm not yet persuaded that this is as fundamental of a
shift as the analog to digital shift was, and I want to be
persuaded of how revolutionary this technology is, because I'm
not there yet. So give me your best shot.
Mr. LaPlatney. Well, so I think the best way to explain it,
you know, is the points we talked about earlier. So there's the
ability in this standard to better target emergency warnings,
including turning on devices, which I think is so far removed
from what we can do today. I think that's a much larger step
than the analog to digital. I think also the standard, because
of the hybrid IP broadcast architecture----
Senator Wicker. Can I just interrupt there?
Senator Schatz. What's that?
Senator Wicker. Let me just interrupt there. So what you're
saying is I've got a device on my night stand, and suddenly
there's a tornado. So what happens?
Mr. LaPlatney. So we could alert your phone.
Senator Wicker. So it turns my phone----
Mr. LaPlatney. On. If it has power, it would turn your
phone on, and there would be an alert that would come up and
say, ``You are in the path of a storm'' or ``You're in imminent
danger. Take cover immediately.'' In fact, you know, the
tornadoes that went through Hattiesburg back on the twenty-
first of January--if we would have had that technology, I
believe we could have saved some lives.
Senator Wicker. Nobody has that technology now?
Mr. LaPlatney. That technology is--we can alert, but this
technology allows us to target much more effectively. So, as an
example, today's alerts sometimes conform to county lines, and
as a tornado moves through geography, it doesn't conform to
county lines. So you could alert just those consumers in the
path of the storm, the polygon in front of the storm, as
opposed to Montgomery County and Prince George's County. It's a
much more targeted alert that would be more effective.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Senator Schatz, for letting me
interject there.
Senator Schatz. So I want to understand--when you talk
about Next Gen TV, it sounds like a platform that's integrating
several different kinds of new technology, because this ability
to turn on your device for civil defense, this preparedness
purpose, is not the--I mean, that's not the central technology
that I was thinking of when I hear about the Next Gen TV.
Mr. LaPlatney. Again, it's a hybrid broadcast standard, so
it allows better, more relevant advertising for our viewers and
users, and that, I think, is important to the broadcast
industry, because, currently, our targeting capabilities are
way behind our friends over on the mobile side or the cable
folks or Facebook or Google. And, you know, in a given market
today, Facebook or Google could take 40 percent, 50 percent, 60
percent of the advertising revenue to market. So there's that
capability.
It also offers the ability for a user to have a more Hulu
or Netflix type of experience. So you have a dropdown menu, and
you want to know what the score is of some game other than the
one you're watching, or you want to know who that actor is. It
allows that type of interaction. And then it also--you know, it
can transmit to suitably equipped mobile devices, which I think
for our industry is almost a game changer. As you know, the
growth----
Senator Schatz. It can transmit from the TV to----
Mr. LaPlatney. Tower.
Senator Schatz. Oh, from the tower to any platform, a
tablet or whatever it may be.
Mr. LaPlatney. Right, if it has a 3.0 chip in it. So it
would have to have a----
Senator Schatz. Aren't there other ways to do that right
now?
Mr. LaPlatney. There are ways to get a signal----
Senator Schatz. To get TV on your tablet, right?
Mr. LaPlatney. You can, but it's over IP, essentially. So
this is broadcast, and I think the key there is that if you--
and having four boys, I can tell you that we have data cap
issues in our house. And, you know, if somebody wants to watch
movies over 3.0, it's not going to hit their data cap. So if
they're consuming a lot of video----
Senator Schatz. Having one boy, I like it when we hit our
cap.
[Laughter.]
Mr. LaPlatney. So there are a number of different
capabilities, and it really is a--it's a game changer for the
industry.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Senator Fischer?
STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA
Senator Fischer. Thank you, Senator Schatz.
Senator Hassan?
STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Hassan. Thank you, Senator Fischer, and thank you
to all of the panelists. I, too, apologize for us being in and
out on this morning of votes.
Mr. Heiner, I wanted to follow up a little bit on your
testimony where you advocated for a balanced, all-of-the-above
approach to spectrum policy, and I can't agree more. I think
Granite Staters and folks around the country benefit most when
we have both licensed and unlicensed spectrum available to
them. You know, you talked about the example, I think, of the
wireless phone industry. I know that data from Cisco shows that
60 percent of wireless traffic was offloaded onto Wi-Fi
networks last year, which helped create a positive consumer
experience where network traffic was alleviated, and the
industry all around thrived as a result.
So can you elaborate a little bit more specifically on how
a balanced, all-of-the-above approach to national spectrum
policy that includes both licensed and unlicensed spectrum will
benefit rural communities, specifically?
Mr. Heiner. Yes, I'd be happy to, and thank you very much
for the question. Mr. Bergmann was describing just a few
minutes ago the possibilities of greater access for rural
communities through 5G and new spectrum, and what I would focus
on as well, then, is the possibility of using TV white spaces
technology.
So this is in the 600 megahertz band, where some new
spectrum was made available as a result of the incentive
auction, and this band has propagation characteristics such
that--at very low power and so, you know, low cost. A
transmitter can serve quite a large community.
So, for instance, we have this trial running--we're getting
it running--in southern Virginia, where the school has fixed
broadband access, so a wired connection. The students are
dispersed around that rural area, and through just a series of
just a handful of transmitters, we will be able to reach 7,200
kids and thereby address the homework gap. So in that region,
half the kids do have broadband at home and half the kids
don't.
So the concept is you give each of those--the kids who
don't--this little device that will only cost about $50, and it
picks up the TV white spaces signal and basically turns it into
a Wi-Fi signal. So in this manner, we can help to address the
homework gap.
Senator Hassan. That's fabulous. And I expect that there
would be telehealth applications as well?
Mr. Heiner. There would be. I mean, we were just actually
discussing that a minute ago. We have a trial in Botswana,
actually, specifically focused on telemedicine, and we're
bringing doctors, you know, in the urban areas to patients in
the rural areas through this technology.
Senator Hassan. Thank you very much.
I wanted to follow up, too, with Mr. LaPlatney, because I
am strongly supportive of the recent spectrum auction. I think
it holds great promise for innovation and our economy, and I'm
pleased to see it moving forward. You've talked this morning
about some of the challenges that broadcast stations face as
they need to move to different frequencies and to what I'm
learning as an industry term, repack. I've been talking with
broadcasters in New Hampshire and across the country, and I
know we all want to make sure we're prepared.
I wanted to just focus a little bit on the issue for radio
stations--I know we've talked about television broadcasting--
but, in particular, those that share towers with television
stations. I'm concerned that they could be negatively impacted
or temporarily go off the air. If so, are there any resources
or recourse available, or is there more that needs to be done
to address the issue for radio, in particular?
Mr. LaPlatney. Thanks for your question. There are a number
of towers, television towers, that have radio occupants
throughout the country. During the repack process, when we have
tower riggers climbing up and down towers, there will be times
where those radio antennas will be powered down or shut off. So
it's a real issue. It could be for hours at a time or for days
at a time.
So I do think something needs to be done. I really think it
just underscores the need for the FCC to take up a rational
approach to the repack, and I know that the members of the NAB
are currently in conversation with folks at the FCC around--
talking about this issue and trying to come up with some
answers.
Senator Hassan. Thank you very much.
Senator Gardner [presiding]. I see the Chairman of the Full
Committee, Senator Thune, has arrived.
Senator Thune?
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate the
Subcommittee having this hearing and putting together such an
excellent panel.
I just want to say how much I appreciate the work that you
all do connecting people across the country from remote rural
areas to cities to each other and the world and providing
education, entertainment, and public safety services, which
contributes greatly to the economy and to the quality of life
of every American. You all drive the innovation and investment
that's made the United States a leader in advanced wireless
technology. Our job in Congress is to make sure that,
consistent with our national security and public welfare
obligations, the market has access to spectrum and that
industry is not unduly burdened when getting the spectrum into
service.
This committee reported out a bill here recently called the
MOBILE NOW Act, and that makes a down payment on that
obligation. It would make available 255 megahertz of prime
spectrum, both licensed and unlicensed, in the next three
years, but that really is just the beginning. To meet America's
demand for mobile broadband, it's estimated that the wireless
industry will need more than 350 megahertz of new licensed
spectrum by 2019.
The MOBILE NOW Act would direct the FCC and NTIA to study
the potential for commercial service in a number of additional
spectrum bands, but having access to spectrum is only part of
the challenge. It can take years and tremendous investment to
deploy new wireless services, and so the bill also streamlines
the process of applying for easements, rights-of-way, and
leases for federally managed property and establishes a shot-
clock for review of those applications, which we think is
something that's essential.
MOBILE NOW would also establish a national broadband
facilities asset database listing Federal property that could
be used by private entities for the purpose of building or
operating communications facilities. I'm hoping we can get the
bill passed. I look forward to the full Senate acting on that
in the coming weeks and I'm very much focused on working with
our colleagues on this committee and the entire Senate and the
House in making the next payment toward America's wireless
leadership.
I just have one quick question I want to ask, and I want to
direct this to Mr. Bergmann. The widespread deployment of small
cells is a massive undertaking for companies and also for state
and local officials. Are there opportunities for companies and
government officials to work collaboratively and to streamline
the approval process so that it focuses only on sitings that
raise significant deployment issues?
Mr. Bergmann. So, thank you, Chairman Thune, and we
certainly commend you and Ranking Member Nelson and the
Committee for the work on MOBILE NOW, and that focus on
infrastructure is tremendously important as we look to lead in
that race to 5G, and, certainly, small cell deployment is an
absolutely critical part of that equation. Our companies are
looking to deploy hundreds of thousands of small cells to
deliver that high-capacity service, and being able to move
quickly is something that will reduce costs and enable us to
move faster.
Right now, today, there are challenges both with the local
zoning process and, as you mentioned, with Federal agencies. So
we would certainly appreciate this committee's attention to
finding opportunities to right-size that process so that we
exclude small cells, where appropriate, that are the size of a
pizza box or a lunch box. I don't think anyone thinks that the
process that applies to a 200-foot tower should apply when
you're putting a lunch box on top of an existing building.
So we would love to work with you to try to find
opportunities to speed those deployments. In the end, what it
will mean is $275 billion of investment and 3 million jobs. So
it's a real priority.
The Chairman. All right. We appreciate that.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and thanks again for the
opportunity to speak at this hearing.
STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Thune.
I'm going to go ahead and take my questions now, and then
Senator Udall is after this.
Mr. Entner, recently, in my home state of Colorado, a
company announced that they would be pursuing a launch of a 5G
pilot project in Denver, bringing us closer to the next
generation of wireless 5G. Of course, companies have to
evaluate or reevaluate their spectrum holdings to determine how
best to play a role in this wireless innovation. As you talk
about in your testimony, high, mid, and low band spectrum will
all be critical to building the next generation of wireless
service.
What are some of the specific bands you believe could help
advance this effort? I know Mr. Heiner was asked a similar
question. But could you elaborate a little bit further?
Mr. Entner. Thank you. We could certainly use more spectrum
below 1 gigahertz, as it is ideal to penetrate walls and cover
rural areas. Adjacent to the current bands would be most
appropriate. When we look at mid spectrum again here, bands
that are currently idle or largely idle would be appropriate
around navigation, for example, and then the large swaths in
the millimeter band that are actually unused at this time
should also be brought in, and the FCC has several proposals
here on this space.
I just want to bring to the attention of the Committee--you
know, over the last few weeks, all the wireless carriers have
reintroduced unlimited plans so that people like the fellow
witnesses here no longer have the problem with data caps. I
think it is unappreciated what impact it will have, actually,
on spectrum.
When we look at LTE, we currently are getting faster speeds
from our mobile networks than we get from Wi-Fi. And when
unlimited is now back, the whole incentive of using Wi-Fi has
been diminished significantly, because there is no cost
advantage anymore to shifting over to Wi-Fi. That will drive,
really, the demand for licensed spectrum further, and that's
why we need more spectrum.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Entner.
Mr. Bergmann, while the United States is a global leader,
as we've discussed today, in wireless service, other nations
are quickly catching up and trying to exceed advances in this
space, particularly nations like South Korea and Japan. It's
important that we retain our competitive advantage by being
number one in the world, and wireless technologies rely on
spectrum to operate. That's going to mean we need even more
spectrum than currently available for commercial and nonfederal
users, and that's why I support freeing up more Federal
Government spectrum for such uses.
What do you think the impact on American competitiveness
would be if we don't have adequate spectrum in the pipeline?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator Gardner. What we're seeing
is more wireless being integrated into every major sector of
the economy. We talked a little bit earlier about energy,
transportation, and healthcare. These are places where our
leadership in 4G gave us tremendous advantages. An apps economy
that didn't exist 7 years ago now employs over 1.6 million
people. So we want to make sure that in that race to 5G with
even more capabilities, we're out in front, and that we keep
innovation here in the U.S. That's why the work that you all
are doing on spectrum, on infrastructure siting is really
critical.
Senator Wicker [presiding]. Thank you.
Next is Senator Moran.
STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS
Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you very much.
Thank you all for being here. Let me start with Mr.
Bergmann, and I apologize for my absence for your testimony and
also most of the questioning, so you may be repeating in
answering me something that's already been asked. We've paid a
lot of attention to spectrum issues and want to make sure that
good things are happening.
Last summer, the FCC identified several high bands in their
Spectrum Frontier proceedings. Did the FCC do enough, or is
there a need for additional high band spectrum above 24
gigahertz for terrestrial mobile systems? What else can be done
to ensure?
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator Moran. The FCC's action in
the Spectrum Frontiers proceeding to make that high band
spectrum available is really important. That's going to be the
initial platform where 5G services are tested and launched. So
that's an important step. I really commend this committee for
your focus on additional bands, and at the FCC, the leadership
of Chairman Pai, Commissioner O'Rielly, Commissioner Clyburn,
all of whom have talked about the importance of high band
spectrum. They have a proceeding now where they've proposed to
make 18 additional gigahertz of high band spectrum available,
and that's spectrum that will deliver speeds that are 10 times
what we have today, services that are five times more
responsive--and when you think about applications like self-
driving cars, you want to make sure that you have responsive
services--and the ability to connect 100 times the devices that
we have today.
So as we think about the Internet of Things and what that
will open up in terms of opportunities for savings in the
energy sector, there's tremendous potential from that high band
spectrum. Making sure that we get that to market quickly, that
we have large contiguous channels, as my co-panelists have
said, and that we have an emphasis on licensed spectrum that
will allow us to provide that performance, provide that
reliability, and that security that we expect out of those
kinds of healthcare and other services is really critical.
Senator Moran. Let me turn to Mr. Heiner in regard to
unlicensed spectrum. Senator Schatz and I have worked on trying
to encourage a balanced approach to licensed and unlicensed
spectrum. Let me ask you about the continued demand for
unlicensed spectrum, I assume growing at exponential rates.
Where do we look? What bands might we find?
Mr. Heiner. Well, the demand is growing, you know, very,
very rapidly. We do need to look across all three bands: low,
middle, and high. Low, I've explained a little bit. It gives us
the opportunity for TV white-spaces technology to serve rural
areas, and it can work in urban areas as well. In the mid-
range, that's where we have the existing technology at 2.4 and
5 gig, and there are opportunities there to expand those bands.
And then in the millimeter bands, you know, we're very
enthused by the Spectrum Frontiers proceeding where spectrum
was opened up between 57 and, I think, 72 gigahertz. And as Mr.
Entner was saying, with that much spectrum, there's the
possibility of setting up wider channels. Those wider channels
have more throughput, and so it's a very efficient use of
technology.
A new standard has been developed. This is the industry
coming together on a consensus basis through a standard setting
body and creating a standard beyond Wi-Fi called WiGig, and the
Gig is for very high throughput. And I believe that standard
requires the 160 megahertz channels, which the millimeter bands
can afford. So we're very enthused about that.
Senator Moran. Keep looking is your answer, and look
everywhere.
Mr. Heiner. And keep--that's right.
Senator Moran. Let me turn to Mr. LaPlatney. Although I
didn't hear your testimony, I'm astute enough to know that you
mentioned my name, so thank you. Senator Schatz and I have been
working on an issue of importance. I come from a place in which
getting broadband opportunities to rural America is
significantly important. Spectrum matters to us, but so does
community broadcasting.
I want to indicate that we want to be in a position to make
certain that good things happen in this repack process. What's
going on that has a consequence on next-generation technologies
in your world?
Mr. LaPlatney. Well, so we are in the early stages of the
repack. We talked a little earlier about, you know,
broadcasters now doing engineering studies, and it appears,
based on current data, that there will be 1,000 to 1,100
stations repacked, which is a pretty significant number. So we,
as of today, believe that the amount of time we have to
complete the repack and the amount of money we have is
insufficient. So we will appreciate your continued oversight,
and as we get more information, we will certainly pass that
along, but we have some concerns today. That said, we will do
everything we can to make sure that if there's a way to do it
in 39 months, we're going to do it.
Senator Moran. I appreciate that. I think I would back the
idea that there's any desire to slow this process down. We all
want it to work very quickly for the benefit of all.
Mr. LaPlatney. Absolutely.
Senator Moran. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Senator Moran.
Senator Udall?
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Chairman Wicker, thank you so much.
This has been a fascinating panel, I think, with a lot of
excellent testimony. So thank you for bearing with us in the
middle of the vote and continuing here.
As you all know, today, there are more wireless devices
than there are people in the United States, and with so many
new wireless devices connecting to the Internet, we could face
a spectrum crunch that could hinder the next Internet
revolution. That's why I'm pleased that my Spectrum Challenge
Prize Act has been approved by this committee. This contest
would provide a significant monetary award to the first person
who finds a way to make spectrum use vastly more efficient.
This approach helps incentivize more innovators and researchers
to focus on the problem and will help use American ingenuity to
solve it.
Chairman Wicker, I'm also pleased that Mr. LaPlatney is
here to give a broadcaster's perspective. We tend to forget
that broadcasting is our first wireless technology and is still
relevant today.
Mr. Bergmann, my first question is for you. Senator Moran
and I worked in 2015 to reform the Spectrum Relocation Fund.
This multimillion dollar fund pays the cost of relocating
Federal users when a particular spectrum band is auctioned for
commercial use. The Spectrum Pipeline Act made $500 million of
existing money available for R&D and pilot projects that could
lead to more efficient Federal use of spectrum. Last year, OMB
issued guidance to agencies for proposing plans to use these
funds.
Mr. Bergmann, do you agree that the OMB should continue to
make Spectrum Reallocation Fund resources available to Federal
agencies that are exploring how to use spectrum more
efficiently?
Mr. Bergmann. Senator Udall, we truly appreciate the work
that you and Senator Moran have done to improve the Spectrum
Relocation Fund. That's a really important tool for making sure
that there are the right incentives and opportunities for win-
win solutions to put spectrum to efficient use. We know that
Federal agencies have exclusive or primary access to somewhere
between 60 percent to 70 percent of the spectrum below 3
gigahertz. So trying to make sure that we're using that
spectrum efficiently and trying to identify opportunities to
make that available for commercial use is a really important
goal, and that tool is a very strong one.
We believe that there truly are opportunities for win-wins.
The AWS-3 auction was an opportunity for government users to
upgrade their systems and resulted in making available 65
megahertz of spectrum that went on to produce the world's
largest--or the U.S. largest spectrum auction. So we certainly
appreciate your work on that.
Senator Udall. Thank you, and I appreciate that answer.
Mr. Heiner, your testimony briefly discusses cloud
computing. This is a topic of keen interest to me, and Senator
Moran and I have worked together for several years now on
Federal IT reform legislation and oversight to increase cloud
adoption. I believe replacing so-called legacy IT systems with
modern solutions can save the Federal Government billions of
dollars and improve cyber security.
Can you share more about why Microsoft and other companies
are increasingly leveraging the cloud and what that means for
future broadband connectivity needs?
Mr. Heiner. Yes, and thank you for the question. You know,
every 15 years or so, there's a major shift in the computing
landscape. We had the mainframe era in the 1960s; then the
revolution of personal computing; then the shift to client
server computing, so these were PCs and then servers running,
you know, in the back end at enterprises; and today, it's cloud
computing.
The basic concept is that it's incredibly economically
efficient to run servers in central locations, these data
centers, rather than at each individual company. The analogy
someone offered is to energy, where in the 1880s, it was a
revolution that you could have electric power, and each factory
had its own generator. And someone dreamt up, ``You know, I'll
make power for the whole city,'' and then we had Con Ed, and
that was much more efficient.
Well, it's similar with the cloud as well. So, you know, we
really believe--and we're seeing it in the marketplace--that
enterprises around the world will be more efficient and will
have better access to data analytics and even artificial
intelligence techniques if they are delivered via the cloud.
The same is true for the Federal Government, and, obviously,
it's a big lift to move legacy systems over to that new
approach, and it will take a long time. But we believe that
ought to be done as well.
Now, the cloud is operating its data centers in remote
locations, and so people need connectivity to reach those data
centers. It's just as simple as that. It's an absolute, you
know, sine qua non for the cloud computing to have first-rate
connectivity, and that's whether it's licensed or unlicensed.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much
And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Senator Peters?
STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thanks to each of our panelists today for your
testimony on a very important subject.
Mr. Heiner, I have a question for you in some area that I
find particularly fascinating, and that's what's being done by
American manufacturers that are using the white space spectrum.
I was particularly intrigued by some of the work that Microsoft
is doing in Virginia to help the homework gap by using white
spaces to leverage the fiber connections that run through these
schools and allows students in the surrounding areas to access
their school's network wirelessly from home, which is
incredibly important for education today.
In your estimation, what must be done at the FCC to ensure
that we have enough TV white space channels available so that
we can have this kind of unlicensed use that can be so
beneficial?
Mr. Heiner. Well, we just need to conclude the incentive
auction process and the so-called ``repacking'' of the TV
channels in such a way that there's as much spectrum available
for TV white spaces as possible. And, in particular, there's
this possibility of having vacant channels in some areas where
there are not enough TV stations to fill up all the available
spectrum, and we'd like to see as many vacant channels as
possible that we can leverage for TV white spaces and also have
a system where, from coast to coast in both rural and urban
areas, certain channels are just set aside for TV white spaces.
In that way, the device manufacturers will know that they can
build a device and it can be deployed any place in the country.
Senator Peters. Do you see any other challenges in
expanding school connectivity, which I think is so important,
or things that we should be working on?
Mr. Heiner. Well, it's a question of setting up incentives
for investment. You know, nothing is free. But the technology
is very efficient. We can have low-power transmitters that are
relatively inexpensive, and the devices in the students' homes
are relatively inexpensive as well. We do have a petition
pending at the FCC to try to clarify that the E-rate program
should cover TV white spaces as well as the other means of
access to the Internet, and we hope that moves forward.
Senator Peters. Mr. Entner, I know you addressed this next
topic in your written testimony. I don't think you addressed it
before us here as a panel. But this is really to all of you. I
think it's an important question for us to think about. We know
that the advances in technology that we're seeing are all
accelerating at an exponential rate, and that curve seems to
get steeper and steeper every year as we go forward.
Then on our side, when it comes to public policy, we know
the rate of progress from us moves at a pretty consistent rate,
which is called the ``snail's pace,'' as it goes forward, which
means that it is tough for some of our regulatory agencies to
keep up, particularly if they're underfunded, lack personnel,
lack expertise. They probably need all those things, but we
also know that that's a difficult sell in this current fiscal
environment. So we have to look for opportunities to
collaborate with academia, standard setting bodies, industry,
to come up with some voluntary standards to deal with all of
these various technologies to kind of find a unified approach.
Mr. Entner, you mentioned this in your written, but if you
want to expand on that--and I would certainly encourage the
other witnesses if you have some thoughts as to how we put
together these kinds of partnerships to make sure that we're
allowing the technology to flourish and innovation to flourish,
but also dealing with some of the regulatory challenges
associated with it.
Mr. Heiner. Well, I would just touch on the benefits of
collaborative industry standard setting. The Blue Tooth
technology that we're all using every day--that was a voluntary
industry standard. Wi-Fi is a standard, and WiGig, which I
referred to earlier. Certain issues can arise in terms of
avoiding interference when you have shared spectrum with other
users in that spectrum or in adjacent channels, and sometimes
it seems as if the FCC regulation may get a little heavier than
is needed to really address those concerns, and we would
encourage that wherever possible the industry work together,
again, through standard setting bodies to achieve that.
More broadly, I think we need to work with the
International Telecommunications Union, and Microsoft, for its
part--we are sort of part of the government delegation to the
worldwide spectrum discussions that are going on through the
ITU, and we very much support the efforts of working with
academics as well.
Mr. LaPlatney. Thank you for your question, Senator Peters.
I would suggest that the ATSC 3.0 has been a tremendously
collaborative and very quickly moving process relative to past
standard changes, and I think the last time we changed the TV
standard, it took 19 years. This particular transition, or this
standard development, is moving at a much quicker pace, so
we're encouraged by that, and encouraged by the current FCC
that's helping us to move that along. So thank you.
Mr. Stroup. I think we saw the beginning of that
opportunity in some discussions between the wireless industry
and the satellite industry in the Spectrum Frontiers
proceeding, something that becomes more important as we look at
the millimeter wave bands, because despite all of the
discussion that's taken place, many of those bands have been
identified for the growth of the satellite industry. And the
topic of service to world areas came up several times during
the course of the discussions today. That's been an area where
the satellite industry has been providing service, including
telemedicine services, for decades.
I noted in my testimony the growth of the industry, the new
high throughput satellites that are being launched--already
have been launched and providing FCC broadband speeds, and the
continued growth with all Earth orbit satellites. So being able
to access that spectrum and, in some cases, on a shared basis
continues to be very important, and, hopefully, it will be done
through voluntary discussions.
Senator Peters. Great.
Mr. Bergmann. Thank you, Senator Peters. I would say the
wireless industry participates in a variety of different
standard setting bodies, both for unlicensed spectrum and for
licensed spectrum. It's a tremendously important tool for the
industry in terms of being able to develop and bring new
products to market. Certainly, one reason why we like a mix of
both unlicensed and licensed spectrum is with licensed
spectrum, we're able to bring new services to market quicker
sometimes, because we can launch services before standards are
developed.
To your point about collaborative processes, I think that's
another great one. That's certainly a model that we in the
wireless industry have embraced, whether it's wireless
emergency alerts or 911 location accuracy. We've found a
successful ability to partner in those two cases with public
safety, but in other cases as well, too, to try to advance
public policy goals in a flexible and nimble way.
Senator Peters. Right. Thank you.
Mr. Entner. Thank you, Senator. I think one of the things
that--as you mentioned, technology is progressing
exponentially, whereas government policy not always is
following the pace. I think it just needs more foresight so
that we are using more ambitious goals in what we are clearing
and making available to industry.
I think, overall, the technology and telecom industry has
worked very well together. One notable example is, for example,
LTE-U and license assist access. So I think we should encourage
these types of voluntary processes with a light touch
regulatory environment.
Senator Peters. Thank you.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Senator Peters.
Senator Inhofe?
STATEMENT OF HON. JIM INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess the panel
knows that we're simultaneously meeting with other committees,
so I have to reprogram my Senate Armed Services concerns here,
and so I don't know really what you've already gone over.
Mr. Bergmann, deployment of the next generation of
telecommunications technology will allow faster Internet
speeds, which will require a substantial infrastructure
investment. Now, have you really discussed what we can do? This
is Congress. We're your partner, and we want to help. What
should we be doing?
Mr. Bergmann. So, Senator Inhofe, you're right. We're
facing a great opportunity and a great challenge. As we look to
lead in 5G, we recognize that it's a whole new network, built
not just around tall towers, but also around hundreds of
thousands of small cells that are the size of pizza boxes or
lunch boxes that will enable us to have these much faster and
much higher capacity services.
A couple of things this committee can do is to work with us
to make sure that local permitting processes are not overly
burdensome, to make sure that we have access to rights-of-way
and poles on a timely basis and at fees that are reasonable and
cost-based, to make sure that Federal agencies move quickly and
have deadlines. So, particularly, as we look to parts of the
country that have large areas of Federal lands or Federal
buildings, the delays today can be on the order of 2 to 4 years
and sometimes much longer than that. So if we can start to
shorten some of that siting, we'll be able to get that
infrastructure out there more quickly and more cheaply.
Senator Inhofe. I spent 30 years on that side of the table.
The problem I had with the Federal Government very often was
predictability and knowing in advance what's going to happen.
You mentioned the towers. You have to know well in advance
before huge expenditures are made and what the rules are going
to be when you finally get to the point where you're going to
try to make it happen. I assume that would be one of your
concerns.
I understand that consumer demand for wireless has more
than doubled in 2015 alone. I didn't know this. I'm the newest
one on this committee. To meet this, you have to rely on
licensed spectrum, which you exclusively own, and unlicensed
spectrum, which anyone can use. Could you share with the
Committee why it's important to use both licensed and
unlicensed spectrum to meet the growing consumer demand, which
has doubled in the last year alone?
Mr. Bergmann. Sure, Senator. Both licensed and unlicensed
are really important parts of the wireless industry's ability
to serve. We offload traffic to unlicensed spectrum. We're
looking to launch new LTE-based services in unlicensed
spectrum. Licensed remains the foundation of mobile networks,
and that's a place that enables us to build in highly reliable,
highly secure services. So as we look to 5G and the kinds of
things like self-driving cars or remote surgery, where we want
to have a really high level--a high quality of service,
licensed will be a critically important part of that overall
equation.
Senator Inhofe. Yes. And, Mr. Heiner, Microsoft has been a
leading innovator in the use of unlicensed spectrum. Congress
and the FCC have directed more spectrum be made available,
balancing between licensed and unlicensed spectrum. Do you
believe there is an appropriate balance between the two,
licensed and unlicensed?
Mr. Heiner. Well, I think a theme coming out of the hearing
today is everyone on this side of the table would like to see
as much spectrum as possible allocated to both licensed and
unlicensed use. We speak very much in terms of a balanced
spectrum policy. That doesn't necessarily mean, like, 1
megahertz for unlicensed and 1 megahertz for licensed. At
different bands, it may make more sense to allocate more to
licensed or more to unlicensed in a particular circumstance.
We are enthused about the extra bandwidth that opened up in
the 600 megahertz band as a result of the incentive auction,
and we're enthused about the Spectrum Frontiers proceeding,
where new spectrum has opened up as well.
Just to your point about predictability, of course, that is
important, too, because you need to know ,sort of, years ahead
in order to plan and develop standards and then build devices.
It's been a little bit of a challenge in the TV white spaces
area over the past 10 years, where the rules have been a little
bit in flux. We really feel like we need to move forward with
investing in that technology now, and we're, sort of,
redoubling our efforts, and we feel like the rules are sort of
almost done, and so we're ready to move forward.
Senator Inhofe. Yes, I like to bring that up because that's
true with any issue we could be talking about right now. It
seems like government doesn't have the understanding that they
really need to know what's going to be expected of them next
year or 10 years from now because the investment sometimes has
to be made way in advance.
I'm sure you covered quite a few things. I apologize for
those of us on Armed Services not being here.
That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wicker. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
Well, this has been a very interesting and enlightening two
hours. I think this was an important hearing with a very
talented and knowledgeable panel. We've been interrupted by
votes and other committee meetings, so it may be that you did
have to reiterate a few themes, but that's helpful to us also.
Thank you very, very much.
We'll stand adjourned and express our appreciation on
behalf of the entire Subcommittee.
Without objection, the record will stay open for two weeks.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of ViaSat
Satellite Broadband White Paper
Exploring the Value of Spectrum to the U.S. Economy to explore
the future spectrum policy and how wireless technology benefits
consumers and the economy.
ViaSat, as a leading provider of satellite and terrestrial
broadband communications solutions would like to thank the Committee
for holding this important hearing on the future of spectrum policy and
for providing an opportunity to submit input for the record.
Spectrum is the life blood of wireless technology, both terrestrial
and satellite, and our industries collectively need to be good stewards
of its use, work together to enable spectrum sharing where feasible,
and continue our efforts to increase spectrum efficiency for the
benefit of consumers, emergency response teams, enterprise users,
government/military users, and for the benefit of the American economy.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ViaSat uses a wide variety of technologies, both terrestrial and
satellite, to provide spectrum-based broadband service to about 700,000
residences and small business, and about 1,000 aircraft, including
United Airlines, American Airlines, JetBlue, Virgin American, and the
United States government's senior executive service fleet.
We also deliver broadband service on unlicensed frequencies to over
10 million Wi-Fi access points worldwide.
ViaSat's advanced satellite broadband network technology has
revolutionized the efficient use of spectrum, increasing the total
network capacity provided by the spacecraft and associated ground
infrastructure. Typical spacecraft systems dedicated to satellite
communications have historically delivered a mere 2-3 Gbps of capacity.
Ten years ago, the top speed provided was 1.5 Mbps.
Today, ViaSat has surpassed all satellite providers in capacity
with advanced spectrum use and reuse techniques implemented in ViaSat-1
in November 2011 with its 140 Gbps of capacity--fifty to seventy times
more total capacity that what previously was in place. We're now
offering 25/3 Mbps service in many parts of the Nation over ViaSat-1.
ViaSat is continuing this revolutionary efficient reuse of
spectrum, with the launch of ViaSat-2, scheduled in April 2017, which
will deliver over 280 Gbps of capacity (twice the amount on ViaSat-1).
ViaSat-2 will have seven times the coverage of ViaSat-1, and will be
able to support 25/3 Mbps service.
ViaSat's global fleet of third-generation (ViaSat-3) satellites
begin launching in 2019. Each of the ViaSat-3 spacecraft efficiently
use spectrum to deliver over 1000 Gbps of capacity, more capacity than
of all of the existing satellite communication spacecraft on-orbit
combined. That is seven times what we have on ViaSat-1 today. And
ViaSat-3 will support even faster speeds.
In a decade, ViaSat has achieved nearly three orders-of-magnitude,
1000-fold, improvement in spectrum efficiency. We have significantly
increased the number of broadband users we can support, we are
providing faster and faster speeds, we're on a path to provide
virtually unlimited data allowances, and we're winning customers from
terrestrial alternatives. In other words, we're providing a fully
competitive broadband alternative, and are reaching consumers in urban,
suburban, and rural locations and also serving users in the airborne,
maritime, and land mobile environments.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
These developments have made possible by new spectrum sharing
techniques--advanced methods of spectrum reuse that do not affect other
spectrum users.
By increasing spectrum efficiency through reuse and sharing
techniques, ViaSat has been able to reduce the ``cost per bit'' of
delivering broadband service. Achieving this result was critical to
developing a high-quality broadband product and affording millions of
Americans an effective competitive alternative to wired and wireless
terrestrial services.
ViaSat's broadband customers include individual consumers, small
and large businesses, emergency response teams, government and military
users, and major airlines such as United, JetBlue, Virgin, and now
American. The locations of ViaSat's Ka-band broadband network customers
at fixed locations are shown in figure 1. Figure 2 shows typical flight
routes of the many commercial aircraft that have Wi-Fi powered by our
satellite broadband service.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
In fact in America, over 2 Million Personal Electronic Devices
(PEDs) connect every day to these broadband Internet networks, with
over 1 Million PEDS operating on commercial aircraft Wi-Fi service each
month.
ViaSat also provides these satellite broadband services to
emergency response organizations, like the Red Cross, businesses,
schools, medical facilities, and government and military users for
their essential missions and communications needs.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
``Service providers around the world share concerns about running
out of bandwidth. Business challenges surrounding continued bandwidth
growth, linked to video, mobility, and cloud applications, are
significant. Service providers also report declining revenue from a
cost-per-bit perspective, so not only does the network need to grow, it
also needs to grow more cost effectively.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Cisco, Connect-World, the information and communication
technology (ICT) decision makers' magazine, 18 Jan 2015
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ViaSat's satellite broadband service currently relies primarily on
a fleet of three spacecraft and associated ground segment:
(i) Ka-band payload on Anik F2
(ii) WildBlue-1, and
(iii) ViaSat-1, it's first-generation, high-capacity satellite.
To continue to acquire customers and to expand the infrastructure
to deliver broadband service competitive with terrestrial alternatives,
ViaSat's network of earth stations will continue to expand. To
illustrate as shown in Figure 4, ViaSat-1 with capacity of 140 Gbps
uses 20 earth stations to connect to the Internet backbone. ViaSat's
second-generation ViaSat-2 doubles this capability, and requires more
than 40 earth stations to to connect to the Internet. With the planned
deployment of multiple third-generation ViaSat-3 high-capacity
satellites, each of which will provide over 1 Terabit per second (over
1,000 Gbps) of throughput and support even higher customer speeds,
hundreds of earth stations to connect to the Internet are required.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
These earth stations are distributed across the United States--they
are not primarily located in remote or rural areas. To the contrary,
they are located close to the customers and connections to the Internet
backbone, which are often in more populated areas as seen in Figure 1.
These revolutionary advances in efficient use of spectrum leading
to higher capacity have been made possible by incorporating greater
bandwidth into satellites, facilitated by the FCC's decision to
allocate 2.5 Ghz of the Ka-Band for satellite services (in each
direction) after: (i) wisely predicting the increased demand for
satellite-based services that exists today; \2\ and (ii) correctly
recognizing that satellite operations might not be able to be ``fully
and economically accommodated in the only frequency bands [then]
available.'' \3\ Specifically, ViaSat's newest spacecraft are designed
to operate across a wide range of the Ka band. ViaSat-1 was the first
commercial spacecraft to operate across that range. ViaSat-2 and
ViaSat's third-generation, ViaSat-3 spacecraft under construction will
employ even more of this satellite spectrum to provide increased
capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Proposed Frequency Allocations and Radio Treaty Matters, 37
Fed. Reg. No. 151, 15714-717, 15733 (Aug. 4, 1972); corrected at 37
Fed. Reg. 25175 (Nov 28, 1972); Frequency Allocations and Radio Treaty
Matters, 38 Fed. Reg. No. 40, 5565, 5595-7 (Mar. 1, 1973).
\3\ Establishment of Domestic Communication-Satellite Facilities,
Further Notice of Inquiry and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 25 FCC 2d
718, at 2 (1970) (citing Establishment of Domestic Communication-
Satellite Facilities, Report and Order, 22 FCC 2d 86, at 11 (1970)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large parts of this segment currently is used by the earth stations
that aggregate and interconnect to the Internet backbone, and in a
manner that is compatible with existing terrestrial uses of same
spectrum. In fact, these types of earth stations have successfully
shared spectrum with authorized terrestrial users without any reported
cases of interference. ViaSat also obtained authority to reuse this
spectrum to serve aircraft above 10,000 feet, likewise in a manner that
is compatible with existing terrestrial uses.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ViaSat's focus is on providing efficient and cost-effective
broadband solutions, regardless of technology, and it works with and
employs terrestrial-based communications to meet the communications
needs of its customers.
By way of example, ViaSat recently acquired NetNearU Corp., a
wireless network systems provider that delivers managed Wi-Fi Internet
access services on unlicensed frequencies to over 10 million Wi-Fi
access points worldwide.
Leveraging the management platform acquired in that transaction,
ViaSat now provides wireless network systems that deliver broadband
service to consumers, businesses, and government customers, in
buildings and through outdoor hotspots.
Our experience as a leading provider and innovator of
communications technologies, including those that rely on shared
spectrum, and as a provider of both satellite and terrestrial wireless
services, is depicted in Figure 5; more bandwidth and higher data
allowances leads to increased customer satisfaction.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ViaSat is uniquely positioned to offer insights in this Committee
supporting solutions for making the most efficient use of spectrum
while enabling flexibility for the development and operation of a wide
range of technologies and services.
In conclusion, ViaSat, like other wireless broadband providers,
requires access to additional spectrum to meet the insatiable demand
for higher speeds and data requirements. ViaSat will continue to
innovate and develop mechanisms for sharing the valuable spectrum
resources to facilitate state-of-the-art broadband service delivery.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Deb Fischer to
Scott Bergmann
Question 1. Mr. Bergmann, as you know, estimates suggest that as
many as 50 billion devices may be connected to the Internet by 2020.
The advancement of the Internet of Things has the potential to
stimulate economic growth and enable consumer benefits through the
sharing of data from device to device. However, it will also increase
the demand for spectrum. What can we do to ensure there is adequate
spectrum available to meet the needs of the growing Internet of Things?
Answer. CTIA appreciates your leadership on this issue and supports
the bipartisan DIGIT Act you introduced with your colleagues to
encourage the growth of the Internet of Things. There is broad
consensus among policymakers, CTIA's members, and other stakeholders
that more spectrum needs to be made available in order to supply the
capacity needed to meet the public's insatiable demand for wireless
services--demand that will further accelerate with the next generation
of wireless networks, 5G, and the Internet of Things. With the recent
close of the FCC's Incentive Auction, for the first time in several
years there are no other auctions scheduled. Identifying substantial
amounts of spectrum across a variety of bands, with a clear, defined
timeline, should be a national priority. The MOBILE NOW legislation
takes important steps toward achieving that objective, and should be
part of a comprehensive, ongoing plan to designate low-, mid-, and
high-band frequency to meet the public's growing reliance on wireless
connectivity. Given that it takes on average 13 years to reallocate
spectrum for wireless broadband use, we encourage Congress to provide a
clear plan for additional licensed spectrum across a wide and diverse
range of frequencies to meet tomorrow's needs.
Question 2. Mr. Bergmann, a recent study by Deloitte observed that
to realize the full potential of 5G networks, it is imperative for
governments at all levels to make the permitting and regulatory process
more efficient. As we work here in Congress and with the FCC to develop
a process for the deployment of small cell technologies, where should
we focus our efforts?
Answer. Unlocking the promise of 5G networks requires modernized
permitting and regulatory processes that will enable wireless providers
to deploy the infrastructure needed to support those networks. Small
cells are already being deployed across the country to create greater
capacity to accommodate the ever-increasing demand for 4G LTE services.
And 5G will require initial deployment of as many as 300,000 new small
cells around the country in just the next few years--roughly as many
cell sites as have been built over the last 35 years.
States and localities across the country are beginning to
understand the importance of small cell technologies. They are working
to update their permitting processes to reflect this evolution and
position their communities to be the connected, smart cities of the
future. The Nebraska legislature is currently considering the Small
Wireless Facilities Act (LB 389), supported by CTIA, which will remove
barriers to efficient deployment of small cell wireless infrastructure.
But in many localities across the nation, siting and zoning regulations
create barriers that impede wireless infrastructure deployments,
including small cells. These barriers take several forms. First, some
localities prohibit new wireless infrastructure altogether, or impose
restrictions that have the effect of prohibiting it. For example, some
have enacted moratoria on all new wireless deployments, prohibiting any
facilities in downtown or residential areas, and/or imposed design and
operating requirements that make deployment technically and
economically infeasible. Second, some localities take very long times
to approve new deployments, as long as eighteen to twenty-four months,
despite the urgent need for the facilities to accommodate ever-growing
consumer demand. Third, some localities impose excessive fees for
access to local rights of way that far exceed any costs they may incur
from reviewing permit applications and managing deployments along
public rights of way. And wireless providers often face annual fees for
each small cell that can reach thousands of dollars or more per
facility, which can make deployment cost-prohibitive and divert
resources away from new investment, particularly in rural areas.
Congress and the FCC can address these barriers, while maintaining
localities' traditional role in permitting new facilities, by
prohibiting unreasonable restrictions that impede investment, putting
time limits on review periods, and curbing excessive and discriminatory
fees.
In addition, modernizing the review process for wireless
infrastructure deployments on Federal lands and Federal properties
would also facilitate additional network investment to advance wireless
coverage and 5G capabilities for the public and the Federal Government.
MOBILE NOW includes much-needed Federal siting reforms. But the lack of
a uniform practice across agencies for conducting siting reviews, the
failure to use a standard siting agreement, and delays in those reviews
have impeded new infrastructure. Additional Congressional oversight
over agencies administering Federal lands to address these issues, and
agencies' adoption of standardized processes and deadlines for action,
would do much to advance needed new infrastructure on the nearly 30
percent of lands across the Nation that are owned by the Federal
Government, including lands and properties in hard-to-serve rural and
remote areas.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Scott Bergmann
Question 1. In your written testimony you state: ``We would suggest
reasonable shot clocks for new site and collocation permit applications
and broader application of existing deemed granted remedies.
Additionally, permit fees and other charges for wireless siting should
be reduced to reflect small cells' minimal impact and be limited to the
actual, incremental costs to localities for processing these
applications.'' Is CTIA advocating broad preemption of state and local
siting laws and regulations?
Answer. CTIA is not advocating broad preemption. However, the
Federal Government has long played a role in promoting communications
networks and providing guiderails for state and local authority where
necessary to achieve deployment goals. In 1993, for instance, Congress
took action to prohibit state and local governments from regulating
rates for personal wireless services and from restricting access to the
marketplace for new entrants. Again, in 1996, Congress acted to limit
state and local government authority over tower siting by mandating
that they consider requests to site wireless facilities within a
reasonable period of time. In 2009, the FCC interpreted that language
to create specific timelines for acting on collocation and other
applications and, in 2014, further updated its rules to implement
provisions of the 2012 Spectrum Act that further recognized the
evolution of wireless technologies. Now, consistent with these past
legislative and regulatory efforts, we are seeking to further modernize
the Federal approach to reflect the challenges of today's and
tomorrow's networks. States and localities have legitimate interests in
managing the siting of wireless facilities. We are asking only that the
FCC to interpret the Communications Act to ensure localities issue
permits for wireless facilities within reasonable times, without
unreasonable requirements or discriminatory policies, and with fees
that fully recover their costs to process those permits. In particular,
many local laws and regulations governing the placement of small
cells--including where they can go, how long it takes to review their
applications, and how much it costs--are the same for the requirements
that govern traditional macrocell deployments. Yet, small cells are
much smaller facilities, usually no more than a few feet in any
dimension, and are typically placed on poles along local streets or on
existing structures such as rooftops, water towers, and the sides of
buildings. They have far less potential for visual and other impacts
than the traditional macrocell towers that existing state and local
procedures were designed to address. Streamlining permitting procedures
for these smaller facilities will account for their limited impact and
will greatly speed deployment of critical facilities needed to support
the public's exploding demand for broadband.
Question 2. If CTIA is not advocating Federal preemption of state
and local law, is CTIA willing to partner and coordinate with groups
that represent state and local governments and Tribes in order to come
up with an outreach and capacity building game plan that includes
things like: education about small cell and 5G services, model
applications, best practices in handling applications, concerns about
fee gouging, discussions of legitimate public interests and concerns of
local communities?
Answer. CTIA and our members work closely with state and local
organizations and remain committed to continuing that dialogue. Our
members have worked successfully with state and local governments to
develop state laws and ordinances. For example, in Arizona and Colorado
legislation to streamline siting of small cells was recently adopted.
These bills were the result of discussions with organizations
representing many jurisdictions across the state. CTIA and our members
will continue to engage with state and local organizations on similar
legislation as well as on other efforts to improve wireless siting
processes in other states while ensuring that actions to modernize our
Nation's infrastructure policies are not delayed. The FCC's recently
created Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee is an ideal forum for
such discussions, as it is designed to provide timely, informative
feedback to the FCC on ways to improve the state and local permitting
processes. CTIA also has worked with tribal representatives for many
years regarding ways to modernize the process while protecting tribal
interests. CTIA has participated in several meetings and working
sessions toward those ends, and looks forward to working with Congress,
the FCC, and the tribal representatives to update these processes.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto
to Scott Bergmann
Question 1. Mr. Bergmann, in your testimony you mentioned a number
of sectors that benefit from the wireless industry. I was interested in
you elaborating about innovations on the public safety and
transportation side. Could you give me some specific examples and where
we're going in the future?
Answer. Today's Fourth Generation (``4G'') wireless services are
delivering innovations that directly benefit public safety and
transportation. Fifth Generation (``5G'') wireless services, with their
higher speeds and more robust capabilities, promise even more
innovations in these sectors.
On public safety, the improvements in data speeds, capacity and
latency that 4G and 5G offer over previous wireless technologies can
provide first responders with on-the-scene access to building
information, traffic flows, improved E911 network capabilities, and
other critical information. And rescue services will be able to
transmit more extensive data about patients to the hospitals that will
receive them, improving emergency medical care. The January 2017
Accenture report on 5G that I referenced in my testimony identified
other public safety benefits such as more robust, integrated video
surveillance, wireless sensors to identify the use of firearms, and
flood sensors to provide motorists with route guidance to steer them
away from flooded roads. Likewise, the January 2017 Deloitte study that
I mentioned found that a 60-second improvement in first-responder
response due to improved wireless connectivity translates to a
reduction of eight percent in mortality.
4G and 5G can deliver similar benefits to the Nation's
transportation systems. As I noted in my testimony, these technologies
are essential for wireless-powered self-driving cars, which could
reduce vehicle emissions by 40-90 percent, cut travel times, and save
tens of thousands of lives. The Accenture report explained how 5G will
help communities to enhance public transportation, reduce traffic
congestion, and generate revenues from more efficient public parking
systems. The various public safety and transportation innovations,
coupled with the use of smart electrical grids, 5G-enabled smart cities
can see $160 billion in benefits and savings.
Question 2. Also, since you addressed this in your testimony, are
there specific telecom infrastructure siting stories or issues with
places like public lands, that make up 84 percent of my state, or
tribal lands, that you can share and you've seen that we should be
addressing? Also please include your specific ideas on how we alleviate
them. Lastly, please elaborate on examples of the kinds of local siting
and zoning rules that have become the most challenging to your members.
Answer. The wireless industry's ability to build facilities on
Federal lands is important in all states but is particularly critical
in Nevada because of the vast expanse of Federal lands there. CTIA
members have worked with the multiple Federal agencies that manage
those lands. While facilities have been constructed, many more are
needed to ensure that Federal employees who work on those lands, and
the public that lives on or visits them, can benefit from 4G and 5G
wireless connectivity. But the lack of a uniform practices across
agencies for conducting siting reviews, the failure to use a standard
siting agreement, and delays in those reviews have impeded new
infrastructure. Additional Congressional oversight over agencies
administering Federal lands to address these issues, and agencies'
adoption of standardized processes and deadlines for action, would
materially promote needed new infrastructure in Federal lands across
Nevada and elsewhere.
CTIA members also work closely with tribes when seeking to site
wireless facilities on tribal lands. In addition, however, tribes play
a role in reviewing the siting of wireless facilities on non-tribal
lands--and it is this review of non-tribal land siting that was the
focus of my testimony. CTIA supports the dual goals of protecting sites
of historic, religious, and cultural significance to Indian tribes, and
delivering nationwide communications services to all Americans. The
tribal review process for siting on non-tribal land, which is a
consultative role, can nonetheless take an extremely long time and fees
can be costly. The Federal Government can provide some guidance to
streamline the review process while ensuring sites of historic,
religious, and cultural significance are protected.
Finally, local siting and zoning rules are extremely challenging
for CTIA's members because they block needed wireless investment. These
local obstacles take several forms. First, some localities prohibit new
infrastructure altogether, or impose restrictions that have the effect
of prohibiting it. For example, some have enacted moratoria on all new
deployment, prohibit any facilities in downtown or residential areas,
and/or impose design and operating requirements that make deployment
technically and economically infeasible. Second, some localities that
do not prohibit new deployments often take very long times to approve
them, often six months or longer and even over a year, despite the
urgent need for new facilities to accommodate ever-growing customer
demand. Third, some localities impose excessive fees for access to
local rights of way which far exceed any costs they may incur from
reviewing permit applications and managing deployments along local
streets. CTIA's members face annual fees for each small cell of
typically thousands of dollars or more, which make deployment cost-
prohibitive and thus block new investment. CTIA is working with
Congress, the FCC, and states and localities to modernize the state and
local siting and zoning rules and ensure that fees for use of public
properties and rights of way are based on the actual, direct costs to
the communities for reviewing those applications and managing the
public rights of way.
Question 3. With the barrier of siting broadband projects on
Federal public and tribal lands, would you favor an interagency working
group that coordinates agencies like the Federal Communications
Commission, the Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
and National Telecommunications & Information Administration to come up
with streamlined solutions to barriers denying rural Nevadans quality
online access? Who are the other stakeholders or Federal agencies that
would need to be represented in these discussions to ensure we close
the digital divide?
Answer. Yes, CTIA supports the creation of such an interagency
working group with the goal of identifying ways to improve and
streamline procedures for siting wireless facilities on Federal and
tribal lands. To effectively develop modernized policies that reflect
the evolution of wireless infrastructure, the working group must
include other Federal agencies with substantial Federal land holdings,
including NTIA; Department of Defense; the Department of Agriculture,
including the U.S. Forestry Service; the Department of the Interior,
including the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and
the Bureau of Indian Affairs; and the Department of Transportation;
among others. It should also include the General Services
Administration (``GSA'') because of GSA's responsibilities to manage
Federal buildings and properties, which can serve as sites for new
infrastructure. Such a working group should consider the benefits of
shot clocks and standardized processes and fees for siting wireless
facilities on Federal lands. Adoption of these changes could help
alleviate the delays currently experienced by the industry in locating
facilities on the nearly 30 percent of lands in this country that are
owned by the Federal Government.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Deb Fischer to
Dave Heiner
Question. Mr. Heiner, as you know, estimates suggest that as many
as 50 billion devices may be connected to the Internet by 2020. The
advancement of the Internet of Things has the potential to stimulate
economic growth and enable consumer benefits through the sharing of
data from device to device. However, it will also increase the demand
for spectrum. What can we do to ensure there is adequate spectrum
available to meet the needs of the growing Internet of Things?
Answer. Senator Fischer, Microsoft appreciates your leadership on
advancing policies that support the growth of the Internet of Things
(IoT). Microsoft is a provider of the hardware, software, and cloud
services that power IoT. We help our customers connect, monitor, and
manage millions of devices and related assets, and we provide the cloud
services that help organizations unlock the value of new business
models that are possible only through the combination of connected
devices, machine learning, and big data analytics that power IoT.
Today, the majority of IoT traffic is carried over unlicensed
spectrum. The specifics of a given IoT application determine its
spectrum requirements such as frequency, size of the channel required
for the IoT data (bandwidth), and how often the IoT data needs to be
sent. It is still early, but it may turn out that applications such as
IoT in agriculture can most cost-effectively be delivered using
periodic transmissions over narrowband low-frequency spectrum, while
other IoT applications, such as remote operation of devices or
equipment, may require high-bandwidth, high-frequency, almost
continuous transmissions, with a guaranteed high quality-of-service.
Microsoft expects over time that there will be a continuum of
spectrum requirements across different IoT applications and use cases.
Microsoft agrees with your assessment that the growth of IoT traffic
will increase demand for spectrum. At present, Microsoft does not
believe additional spectrum bands be should allocated specifically for
IoT use. With some exception, IoT-enabled devices and equipment will be
either at a fixed or part of or attached to something that is moving.
For this reason, Microsoft suggests that the Congress authorize the
Commission to identify low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum currently
allocated to either mobile and/or fixed wireless services and inquire
about the corresponding changes to the technical and services rules
required to enable a full range of IoT devices to share the band
without causing harmful interference to incumbents.
We believe that it makes sense for latency-sensitive IoT
applications or those that require an assurance of high Quality of
Service to require licensed spectrum. For this reason, a mobile
operator should be able to use its existing licensed spectrum for IoT
applications. With respect to unlicensed spectrum, Microsoft envisions
that, in some bands, unlicensed IoT devices will be able to share
spectrum with incumbent services under the Commission's Part 15
regulatory framework.
For example, Microsoft is pioneering the application of cloud-based
IoT and analytics using the unassigned and unoccupied spectrum in the
broadcast television bands, known as the TV White Spaces (TVWS).
Signals in the TV bands travel much further and pass through more
obstacles than signals at higher frequencies for the same radiated
power level. Therefore, TVWS frequencies are particularly well-suited
for IoT for agriculture applications.
Last September, an article in The Economist \2\ documented our work
on cloud-powered IoT solutions for agriculture. The goal of this work
is to leverage cloud-services, connectivity, and sensors to improve
agricultural yields on small farms. This work is happening under an
experimental license obtained from the FCC. We have found that while
unlicensed IoT devices can access the TVWS as long as they meet the
FCC's technical and operational rules, these rules were created with
wide channels for broadband communication in mind and do not adequately
accommodate narrowband IoT applications. To be clear, Microsoft
strongly supports last-mile broadband service delivered over the TVWS.
The company has been engaged in the policy and regulatory discussions
regarding TVWS for more than a decade, and only in recent years has
begun exploring the potential of the UHF and VHF bands for IoT use in
addition to broadband.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21707242-
unused-tv-spectrum-and-drones-could-help-make-smart-farms-reality-tv-
dinners
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft believes that the FCC's technical rules for TVWS access
can be modified to accommodate both wideband and narrowband
applications. Microsoft, therefore, in principle would support
complementary changes to the FCC's technical rules for TVWS devices
that will accommodate a full range of narrowband IoT applications,
including in the agricultural domain.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Dave Heiner
Question 1. We need to think creatively about how to promote
broadband buildout in rural America and in a way, that takes advantage
of advances in technology and leverages existing infrastructure. This
will both speed deployment and make sure we are spending our precious
broadband dollars efficiently.
In rural Washington, there are Public Utility Districts and Port
Districts that have deployed fiber to run their own operations. Often,
these fiber networks have excess capacity. We should be figuring out
ways to leverage these kinds of existing infrastructure to extend
broadband into unserved areas.
In your written testimony, you talked about the ability of
unlicensed spectrum to meet the need for last mile connectivity.
Microsoft has had success with TV White spaces technology in rural
areas around the globe.
Based on your experience, what are the key features that make these
projects work? Specifically, what type of partners are you working
with? What type of broadband infrastructure are you leveraging and what
type of legal or regulatory environment is best to permit this type of
innovation?
Answer. Senator Cantwell, under Microsoft's Affordable Access
Initiative, we develop partnerships with local Internet access
providers and other local entrepreneurs to deploy new last-mile access
technologies, cloud-based services and applications, and business
models that reduce the cost of Internet access and help more people
affordably get online.
Microsoft's participation is intended to reduce the technical,
business, and (in some countries) regulatory risk associated with
launching such efforts in hard-to-reach and often economically
distressed areas around the world, where the first hurdle is often
convincing potential Internet access providers that such a business is
viable. Our comprehensive approach means addressing all potential
barriers and, depending on where the project is located, may include
suitable consumption models and payment methods, relevant applications
and services, reliable Internet access, access to power, and access to
capital. It also means that we must leverage the existing local
infrastructure to the greatest extent possible to increase
affordability. Over time, Microsoft's role in each project winds down,
because we have absolutely no interest in becoming an Internet service
provider.
One last-mile access technology featured in many of our Affordable
Access Initiative projects are devices that can access the TV white
spaces (TVWS). Radio waves in the TVWS (unused UHF and VHF channels)
travel further and can penetrate common building materials better than
radio waves operating at higher frequencies for a given transmitted
power level. The UHF and VHF TV bands are global spectrum bands,
potentially leading to economies of scale for TVWS devices. Access to
the TVWS is authorized today on an unlicensed (i.e., free and open
access) basis in the U.S., Canada, UK, South Korea, and Singapore.
Other countries have initiated consultations regarding access to the
TVWS under a variety of proposed rules. In countries where there are no
applicable laws or rules in effect, Affordable Access Initiative
projects using TVWS spectrum obtain temporary authorizations from the
relevant National Regulatory Agency. The challenge is that where there
are no rules in place there is regulatory uncertainty, which weighs
heavily on investment decisions.
Question 2. As we are thinking about broadband infrastructure, does
a focus on technology neutrality make sense to support unlicensed
spectrum use or should we be focusing on fiber?
Answer. Senator Cantwell, I agree that we need to think creatively
about ways to promote broadband buildout and affordable access across
rural America. Microsoft believes that regardless of where someone
chooses to live in the United States, they should be able to access the
Internet at broadband speeds. It is equally essential that the
broadband access be available at a price point that is affordable to
rural consumers, but also is profitable to the service provider. Fiber
is a great long-term goal. However, given the distances often involved
in reaching rural and remote areas, challenging geography such as
mountains, limitations of specific technologies, cost considerations,
etc., most of these last mile broadband networks will consequently be
wireless, heterogeneous, and all backhauled to the nearest Internet
point-of-presence, which will most likely be a fiber-optic cable
connected to the Internet backbone. We also see fixed broadband
delivered over satellites as being a viable option in certain
circumstances.
Our experience with a number of overseas Affordable Access
Initiative projects in remote areas is that the last-mile TVWS network
is really only a segment of a larger broadband network. TVWS radios can
operate point-to-point and point-to-multipoint, the latter of which is
similar to how Wi-Fi operates. At a given power level, there is a
tradeoff between the size of the coverage area of a fixed TVWS radio
and the amount of data in megabits per second a network can carry. We
have found that fixed TVWS transmitters can operate at data rates
providing robust broadband access at distances greater than 10
kilometers. This means that other wireless network technologies must be
used in conjunction to connect the TVWS network to the Internet point-
of-presence. Depending on the distances and the terrain involved, the
wireless signal may have to bounce off multiple point-to-point
microwave dishes to cover the span.
For this reason, Microsoft views unlicensed access to the TVWS as a
tool for network designers to use when and where appropriate in the
design of communications networks. It is a tool, though, that requires
regulatory authorization, because it must not cause harmful
interference to other users of the spectrum bands. The simple answer
here is that unlicensed access to the TVWS is complementary to optical
fiber with respect to enabling affordable broadband access in rural
America. The Committee can and should support policies that allow
optical fiber to be cost-effectively deployed further out in less
densely populated areas and support policies that ensure a sufficient
amount of unlicensed spectrum is available in rural markets for
incorporation into last-mile broadband access networks.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Dave Heiner
Question. Do tech companies generally agree or differ greatly in
terms of a strategy for unlicensed bands?
Answer. Most tech companies that prioritize unlicensed spectrum are
generally in agreement that more unlicensed spectrum in needed. When
advocating for specific low, mid, and high frequency bands, companies
sometimes have varying business-specific interests. As I mentioned in
my testimony, Wi-Fi is an important use case of unlicensed spectrum.
The Wi-Fi Alliance, which is a not-for profit organization consisting
of the worldwide network of companies including Microsoft that form the
Wi-Fi ecosystem, has identified the frequency range 5950-7250 MHz (`6
GHz band') as a spectrum band that warrants consideration for its
potential to support unlicensed gigabit-speed Wi-Fi.
Increasingly, as consumers access the broadband Internet wirelessly
over their portable devices, the critical metric is becoming the speed
to the device rather than the speed to the home or to the curb. As
broadband service providers in more densely populated areas are now
beginning to offer gigabit broadband access to the home and office, Wi-
Fi congestion could become a bottleneck that keeps individual consumers
from experiencing gigabit speeds on their devices.
In densely populated areas, during busy times of the day, most
users can only access channels in the 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi band that are 20
MHz wide. In addition to the individual channel size being too small to
support gigabit Wi-Fi, the 2.4 GHz band as a whole often suffers from
congestion due to its comparatively small size and the enormous
quantity of applications (Bluetooth devices, microwave ovens, baby
monitors, etc.) that use the band in addition to Wi-Fi. This congestion
is most noticeable during the busiest hours and in the busiest places,
and degrades the mobile experience for all Wi-Fi users.
Segments of the 5 GHz band are being used for Wi-Fi. Some of these
sub-band segments requires Wi-Fi devices to use a technique called
Dynamic Frequency Selection to ensure that the device does not cause
harmful interference to military and other radar systems.
IEEE 802.11n protocol allows for 20- and 40-MHz wide channels in
the 5 GHz band. A newer standard, IEEE 801.11ac protocol allows for 40-
, 80-, and 160-MHz wide channels in the 5 GHz band. Wi-Fi devices
accessing 160-MHz wide channels can attain gigabit speeds. The vision
for 5 GHz band (5150-5850 MHz) gigabit Wi-Fi established several years
back assumed that it would concurrently support multiple contiguous
160-MHz channels. Last fall, NTIA reported its conclusion that it would
not be possible for unlicensed Wi-Fi devices to share spectrum with
Federal and other license holders in the 5350-5470 MHz band. That
decision means that a maximum of two 160 MHz channels can operate in
the 5 GHz band at the same time.
The Wi-Fi Alliance commissioned a study \1\ on spectrum needs for
future Wi-Fi use. The study determined the amount of spectrum required
to support Wi-Fi traffic by taking into consideration existing and
future device capabilities and projected deployment needs for business,
residential, and public locations under two different growth scenarios.
Four key findings on the report released in February 2017 are:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://www.wi-fi.org/beacon/alex-roytblat/wi-fi-study-reveals-
need-for-additional-unlicensed-spectrum
The ever-growing number and diversity of Wi-Fi devices along
with increased connection speeds and data traffic volumes will
exceed the capacity of spectrum currently available in the 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
GHz band by 2020;
Between 500 MHz and 1 GHz of additional spectrum in various
world regions may be needed to support expected growth in Wi-Fi
by 2020;
If demand for Wi-Fi exceeds expected growth, then between
1.3 GHz and 1.8 GHz more spectrum may be required by 2025; and
Wi-Fi spectrum needs to be sufficiently contiguous to
support 160 MHz wide channels, which are required to support a
growing number of bandwidth-intensive applications and to allow
maximum Wi-Fi benefits to be attained.
The Wi-Fi Alliance initiated a process to identify potential
spectrum bands to address the Report's findings. Based on criteria such
as the availability of large contiguous blocks of spectrum to support
multiple 80- and 160-MHz channels, a Wi-Fi signal's ability to
penetrate two walls across the frequency range, limitations in the
power of the client device (e.g., game system, handset, tablet, laptop)
across the frequency range, a current allocation for mobile services,
etc., the focus was narrowed to sub-10 GHz spectrum.
The experience of several Wi-Fi Alliance members, including
Microsoft, in the unsuccessful multi-year effort to examine sharing the
5350-5470 MHz band with Federal and other users led the organization to
look at spectrum bands where there was little or no Federal usage. In
the 6 GHz band, Federal usage begins at 7025 MHz and continues at
higher frequencies, with some breaks. Discussions with several Wi-Fi
radio manufacturers indicated that current 5 GHz radios can be rapidly
modified for 6 GHz operation. Review of the types of communication
services operating in the band indicate that it would not be a good
candidate for licensed use. The Wi-Fi Alliance also noted complementary
efforts in Europe to begin study of the 5925-6425 MHz band for
potential Wi-Fi use on a shared basis.
Separately, several Wi-Fi Alliance members, including Microsoft,
have banded together to support an independent measurement, modeling,
and mitigation effort to determine whether Wi-Fi devices can share
spectrum with the other users of the 6 GHz band without causing harmful
interference.
Microsoft is under no illusion about the magnitude of the challenge
ahead to develop mitigation strategies and techniques enabling
unlicensed devices to share access with incumbent 6 GHz band license
holders. However, the consensus of the Wi-Fi community is that all-in-
all, the 6 GHz band is the most promising and practical place to look
to address its future spectrum needs. Our starting point is examining
whether a Wi-Fi access point operating both indoors and outdoors with a
maximum radiated power of 4 Watts EIRP can share the 6 GHz band
successfully with incumbents. Measurement data and modeling will guide
mitigation efforts and overall direction.
Microsoft requests that, in future spectrum legislation, the
Committee include language directing the FCC to begin the process for
amending the technical and service rules necessary for Wi-Fi to share
the 6 GHz band with incumbent users. Additionally, we ask the Committee
to consider authorizing NTIA's Institute for Telecommunication Sciences
in Boulder, Colorado to perform measurements and provide other
technical support of industry as it relates to the 6 GHz efforts. If
nothing else, an authorization provides a signal to help focus the
organization's priorities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Dave Heiner
Question 1. Microsoft's website describes using TV ``white space,''
the unused bandwidth between television channels, ``to bring broadband
connectivity to some of the 4 billion global citizens who are not
currently online'' (see https://www.mi
crosoft.com/empowering-countries/en-us/decent-work-and-economic-growth/
tv-white-space/). Do similar opportunities exist within the United
States to deploy broadband to unserved and underserved areas?
Answer. Senator Udall, under Microsoft's Affordable Access
Initiative, we develop partnerships with local Internet access
providers and other local entrepreneurs to deploy new last-mile access
technologies, cloud-based services and applications, and business
models that reduce the cost of Internet access and help more people
affordably get online. The Initiative supports both domestic and
overseas projects. The `homework gap' project in southern Virginia is
an example of the type of collaborative project supported under the
Initiative.
Unlicensed TV White Spaces (TVWS) devices is one such new last-mile
access technology that can serve as an important tool for the designer
of broadband networks connecting rural communities. Microsoft views
high-power fixed-wireless TVWS devices as part of a heterogeneous
network that can provide last mile connectivity between the nearest
Internet point of presence and unserved and underserved areas within
the United States. TVWS radios can operate point-to-point for wireless
backhaul and operate point-to-multipoint, similar to Wi-Fi.
The reason we refer to TVWS as a network element is that there is a
design tradeoff between range and the megabits per second that can be
delivered. Based on our experience, under the current technical rules,
the sweet spot for a TVWS radio's range is somewhere over 10 kilometers
for commercially attractive data transfer rates. For communities within
10 kilometers of the nearest Internet point-of-presence, a single TVWS
network can provide connectivity. Communities located considerably
beyond 10 kilometers from the Internet point-of-presence may require
the broadband network to combine multiple wireless technologies (and
frequencies) to cover the distance. To increase the affordability of
the resulting broadband service, the Initiative looks to leverage the
existing local infrastructure to the greatest extent possible.
Question 2. Many school children in New Mexico and across the
country face a particularly cruel aspect of the digital divide: the
homework gap. Teachers increasingly assign homework that requires an
Internet connection. This makes just getting assignments done a real
challenge for the nearly one-third of New Mexico kids without access to
the Internet at home. When former FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel
and I visited Hatch Valley High School, we heard from students,
teachers, parents and school administrators about the need to ensure
all kids have access to broadband. Students told us how they go to the
school parking lot or local Pick Qwik store to access free Wi-Fi and
complete their homework. Could you share more about how Microsoft is
developing new approaches to help close the homework gap?
Answer. Microsoft and its partners are extending the E-rate-covered
broadband Internet access service of 18 participating schools to the
homes of eligible students that live in Charlotte County and Halifax
County, Virginia via wireless transmission using TV White Spaces
technology over unlicensed spectrum--at no additional cost to the E-
rate fund and for no charge to the students. This pilot project will
assist in closing the homework gap for thousands of eligible students
in the participating school districts. They will obtain authenticated
access to their school Internet service, subject to the same rules and
restrictions applicable to their Internet connectivity in school, so
that the students can conduct research, do their homework, collaborate
on projects with other students online, and pursue other educational
opportunities from the safety and convenience of their homes. In the
longer run, ISPs--in conjunction with the schools they serve in other
areas--could use this technology to close the connectivity gap for the
millions of other students across the United States who either cannot
afford or do not have access to the Internet at home. Microsoft and its
partners submitted a petition to the FCC asking it to clarify that this
is permitted under the existing E-rate rules and, if not, to issue a
waiver for the project. The petition is pending.
Question 3. I am interested in learning your thoughts about how to
craft spectrum policy that is ``future proof.'' The United States
Frequency Allocation Chart (available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/
files/ntia/publications/january_2016_spectrum
_wall_chart.pdf) indicates that essentially all available spectrum has
already been allocated. So the challenge today seems to be finding
efficiencies and repurposing spectrum when new uses become important.
How do we ensure that allocations made today do not unintentionally
prevent us from meeting spectrum needs in the future?
Answer. Senator Udall, a fundamental challenge in developing laws
and regulations regarding information and communications technology
policy is that the technology (and market opportunities) moves much
faster than Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
can react. Spectrum policy is no different. What makes spectrum policy
even more challenging is that, as you rightly point out, essentially
all spectrum considered for some form of wireless communications has
already been allocated to one or more commercial radio communication
services or for Federal use. It means spectrum policy is often a hard-
fought zero-sum game where there are clear winners and losers, which
makes it an even more challenging process. It usually takes many years
between when a spectrum band is identified for repurposing at a policy
level and when the repurposing of the band has been completed and the
new service is up and running.
Microsoft believes that the continued demand for spectrum can be
met more rapidly by increasing spectrum utilization through static and
dynamic spectrum sharing between and among different radio
communications services, and, where possible, with unlicensed devices
as well. The potential for spectrum sharing will be different for every
spectrum band based on the radio service(s) operating in the band, how
they are deployed, the protection requirements, mitigation techniques
available, etc. This detailed technical work is best left to the expert
agency, the FCC. If Federal spectrum use is involved, the FCC needs to
consult with NTIA.
Nonetheless, Congress can play a significant role in defining the
objectives of our spectrum policy. For example, Congress can make clear
that the Commission:
should identify and examine for shared use more low-, mid-,
and high-frequency spectrum bands:
should ensure that a balance of licensed and unlicensed
spectrum is available:
should signal that the technical and service rules for
accessing shared spectrum are fair and economically feasible;
and
should take steps to discourage spectrum warehousing, which
can create an artificial shortage.
Ultimately, spectrum policy should support long-term competition in
broadband services and be technology-neutral to the greatest extent
possible.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Pat LaPlatney
Question 1. Mr. LaPlatney, your testimony states that you oversee
Raycom Media's 60 broadcast television stations stretching from
Hattiesburg to Honolulu. This includes ABC, CBS, and NBC affiliate
stations. President Trump declared via Twitter on February 17th that
``FAKE NEWS media'' including ``NBCNews, ABC, CBS'' and others are
``the enemy of the American People!'' (see https://twitter.com/
realDonaldTrump/status/832708293516632065). President Trump reportedly
later told a gathering of conservatives in Washington, D.C., that ``A
few days ago I called the fake news the enemy of the people, and they
are--they are the enemy of the people'' (see Jackson, David. ``Trump
again calls media `enemy of the people' '' (see Jackson, David. ``Trump
again calls media `enemy of the people'.'' USA Today. Feb. 24, 2017.
available at http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/24/
donald-trump-cpac-media-enemy-of-the-people/98347970/). Do you agree
with President Trump that ABC, CBS, or NBC News are enemies of the
American people?
Answer. Senator Udall, we take great pride in the fact that Raycom
Media is a trusted source of emergency information and news in every
community we serve. Respectfully, we disagree with that
characterization of the media.
Question 2. Could you share your views on the importance of the
First Amendment protection of press freedom and the role of a free
press in our democracy?
Answer. The right to speak freely without fear of incrimination and
the right of the press to challenge the government and root out
corruption remains one of the most important rights our founders
enshrined in the Constitution. Broadcasters have been, and continue to
be, proud stewards of these ideals in the modern media age. It is a
mission we hold dear to our hearts. We shine a light on injustice and
empower citizens to take action. In this digital world, it is very easy
for the average American to find information that confirms their
beliefs rather than challenges them. This is where local broadcasters
play such an important role in our democracy. We present the public
with facts, provide information about issues that matter to people
where they live and remind viewers about the incredible acts of service
taking place in our communities. As newspapers continue to struggle,
broadcasters have been carrying the mantle for locally focused
investigative reporting. In fact, Raycom Media launched a new national
investigative unit in late March which will produce high impact,
interesting and informative series of national importance with a core
focus on localism. The national unit will work closely with local
investigative units across Raycom media properties placing a spotlight
on subject areas of importance to your constituents.
Question 3. I appreciate the availability of free, over-the-air
television. Although broadcasting is one of our first ``wireless''
technologies, it still provides a lot of value for many Americans,
particularly during severe weather events or other emergencies. So I am
excited about continued innovation and upgrades to TV broadcast
technology. Your testimony describes new and enhanced services
broadcasters will be able to offer TV viewers thanks to the ATSC 3.0
standard. Will these ``Next Gen TV'' features be available in rural
areas that still lack reliable broadband service?
Answer. Senator, we are grateful for your appreciation of free,
over-the-air (OTA) broadcasting and your support for ATSC 3.0. The
renaissance of local TV is playing out in New Mexico and across the
country as over 17 percent of U.S. TV households now rely exclusively
on OTA signals (according to Gfk market research) for television
viewing. While ATSC 3.0 deployment will be a station-by-station
determination, we expect that deployment to be national in scope across
a range of markets--urban and rural. One important factor that is
essential to the successful deployment of ATSC 3.0 is a successful
completion of the voluntary incentive auction repack. As we work
through the extremely complicated repack as quickly as possible, we
look forward to working with you on ensuring that New Mexican's that
receive a TV signal today, will be able to do so after the auction.
This will allow your constituents that live in more remote portions of
the state to benefit from these new innovative services and help close
the digital divide.
Question 4. I am concerned about reports that there is no intention
of making the new ATSC 3.0 standard ``backward compatible'' with older
television sets. Will viewers with older TVs still be able watch their
favorite over-the-air channels after broadcasters switch to ATSC 3.0?
Answer. Next Gen TV is not backwards compatible with the current
standard, meaning that current television sets cannot receive Next Gen
TV signals without additional equipment. That is why broadcasters have
proposed to protect consumers during the Next Gen TV deployment by
partnering with other stations in their market to continue to transmit
their programming in the current standard as well. This will ensure
that every viewer maintains access to broadcast programming whether it
through the current signal, or an ATSC 3.0 signal. Serving viewers is
our business, and we have no interest in leaving viewers behind.
Question 5. The transition from analog to digital TV transmission
forced consumers to either buy a digitally-compatible TV or a digital
converter box to continue to watch over-the-air channels. The Digital
Television Transition and Public Safety Act of 2005 (PL 109-171)
authorized a TV Converter Box Coupon Program that provided up to two
coupons worth $40 each to eligible households that wanted to continue
to watch broadcast channels without buying a new TV. My understanding
is that this $40 coupon covered the full cost of purchasing a converter
box. Will there be an equivalent to a digital converter box available
to TV viewers who have older TV sets that are not compatible with ATSC
3.0? If so, how much will it cost?
Answer. We anticipate that consumers interested in receiving Next
Gen TV signals will have several options. These could include
purchasing a new television set, a gateway device that will receive
Next Gen TV signals over-the-air and transmit them on a consumer's home
wireless network, or a small device that a consumer could plug into
their existing television set. Consumers will also have the option to
continue receiving broadcast programming through the current standard.
At this point, it is too soon to predict pricing points for any of
these options, and NAB is not advocating for a government subsidy to
cover these costs.
Question 6. I am interested in learning your thoughts about how to
craft spectrum policy that is ``future proof.'' The United States
Frequency Allocation Chart (available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/
files/ntia/publications/january_2016_spectrum
_wall_chart.pdf) indicates that essentially all available spectrum has
already been allocated. So the challenge today seems to be finding
efficiencies and repurposing spectrum when new uses become important.
How do we ensure that allocations made today do not unintentionally
prevent us from meeting spectrum needs in the future?
Answer. Broadcasters operate in only one spectrum band, and our
innovation strategy contemplates doing more within that current
capacity. While our competitors continue to seek more and more spectrum
allocations in multiple bands, broadcaster innovations will enable the
ability to do more with less. Next Gen TV allows broadcasters to make
even more efficient use of their existing spectrum, providing customers
with better service using the same 6 MHz channels stations use today.
Encouraging this kind of innovation, without making overly prescriptive
regulatory requirements a condition of permission to innovate, is the
best way to future proof spectrum policy.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Tom Stroup
Question 1. Do you have any suggestions for universal service
reforms or other policy changes that would help expand broadband access
in rural and remote areas where satellite providers can offer Internet
access more affordably than cable, wireline and wireless providers?
Answer.
Satellite Industry Association \1\,\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SIA Executive Members include: The Boeing Company; AT&T
Services, Inc.; EchoStar Corporation; Intelsat S.A.; Iridium
Communications Inc.; Kratos Defense & Security Solutions; Ligado
Networks; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Northrop Grumman Corporation;
OneWeb; SES Americom, Inc.; Space Exploration Technologies Corp.; SSL;
and ViaSat, Inc. SIA Associate Members include: ABS U.S. Corp.; Artel,
LLC; Blue Origin: DigitalGlobe Inc.; DataPath Inc.; DRS Technologies,
Inc.; Eutelsat America Corp.; Global Eagle Entertainment; Glowlink
Communications Technology, Inc.; Hughes; Inmarsat, Inc.; Kymeta
Corporation; L-3 Electron Technologies, Inc.; O3b Limited; Panasonic
Avionics Corporation; Planet; Semper Fortis Solutions; Spire Global
Inc.; TeleCommunication Systems, Inc.; Telesat Canada; TrustComm, Inc.;
Ultisat, Inc.; and XTAR, LLC.
\2\ These proposals are supported by all SIA members except for
AT&T, which abstains from participation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broadband Definition \3\,\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 47 CFR 8.2 (a) ``Broadband Internet access service. A mass-
market retail service by wire or radio that provides the capability to
transmit data to and receive data from all or substantially all
Internet endpoints, including any capabilities that are incidental to
and enable the operation of the communications service, but excluding
dial-up Internet access service. This term also encompasses any service
that the Commission finds to be providing a functional equivalent of
the service described in the previous sentence, or that is used to
evade the protections set forth in this part.''
\4\ FCC 2016 Broadband Progress Report, FCC 16-6. Speed benchmarks
are 25 Mbps download/3 Mbps upload (25 Mbps/3 Mbps) for fixed services
and the report states that ``the current record is insufficient to set
an appropriate speed benchmark for mobile service.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To begin, there are no real limitations on what broadband can
become, and therefore, it is better to avoid rigid definitions at the
early phase of deployment. Rather, it is more appropriate to define
broadband in terms of evolving performance characteristics, based on
the technologies and applications that consumers want and use, not
fixed ``top down'' performance definitions. In the past, there has been
a singular focus on ``speed'' as the sole factor that should define
broadband (e.g., Gigabit service). While this may be important for some
applications, it may not be necessary at arbitrary levels for all
essential applications or on all devices. Different speeds may be more
suitable to different types of applications. Furthermore, the
government should ensure that reforms or changes encourage the
provision of enterprise broadband as well as consumer broadband.
Enterprise broadband is heavily relied upon by U.S. businesses--
including small business in rural and remote areas--that fuel the U.S.
economy and provide a multitude of products and services available to
U.S. consumers.
Other factors such as differentiated service or pricing models,
data caps, service availability, jitter, bursting, symmetry, latency,
mobility and portability may emerge to play a role in consumer
broadband choice and requirements. Given a competitive market, those
solutions that are most responsive to consumer needs and preferences
should succeed, while those that do not respond to such needs and
preferences are likely to fail. Universal service policies should
reflect these preferences by embracing consumer choice not government
preferences and should be structured to be technology neutral
Technology Neutrality \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Maxwell, Winston J. and Bourreau, Marc. ``Technology Neutrality
in Internet, Telecoms and Data Protection Regulation'' Computer and
Telecommunications Law Review, Issue 1, 2015. According to Maxwell and
Bourreau, technology neutrality refers to a) where ``technical
standards designed to limit negative externalities (e.g., radio
interference, pollution, safety) should describe the result to be
achieved, but should leave companies free to adopt whatever technology
is most appropriate to achieve the result''; b) that ``the same
regulatory principles should apply regardless of the technology
used.''; and c) that ``regulators should refrain from using regulations
as a means to push the market toward a particular structure that the
regulators consider optimal.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technology neutral funding is also important. Government funding
decisions that favor one technology over another interfere with market
forces, including investment and deployment decisions by the private
sector. On the other hand, for areas that are truly difficult for the
market to serve, the government should offer funding for the broadband
providers that offer the best value for universal service dollars. This
ensures that the American Universal Service Fund (USF) contributor gets
the ``most bang for the USF buck'' and that broadband service reaches
the most subscribers with the limited budget.
USF Portability
Another idea that has been around for a while is ``portable
consumer subsidies.'' Under this proposal, existing USF subsidies would
belong to the consumer who would have the option of transferring to
other broadband service providers and taking their subsidy with them.
This would be similar to number portability for telephone service. This
would introduce consumer choice in the process and open up competition
for USF dollars, allowing the consumer to choose the service that is
best suited for his or her needs rather than government mandated
technologies.
Question 2. Could you address concerns that satellite Internet
service providers do not currently offer fast download speeds with low
latency that can match the offerings of wireline and wireless Internet
service providers? Do you expect newer generations of satellites and
other innovations to make satellite broadband more competitive with
other types of ISPs?
Answer.
Today's Advanced High-Speed Satellite Broadband Networks
To borrow a phrase from a recent commercial campaign, today's
satellite broadband service is not ``your father's satellite
broadband.'' Just as satellite TV and satellite radio took time to
develop and become significant competitors in the video distribution
and audio markets a decade ago, satellite broadband is becoming
competitive in the broadband market. With base speeds on new high
throughput broadband satellites reaching 25/3 Mbps and beyond for
residential, aviation wi-fi, maritime and enterprise customers, to name
a few, we are now seeing customers turn to satellite broadband as an
alternative to DSL, cable, and, in some cases fiber, in urban and
suburban markets as well as rural and remote areas. Up to one-third of
satellite broadband customers are former cable or DSL subscribers.
The newer high throughput broadband satellite designs are allowing
higher speeds and data volumes, as well as supporting more subscribers
for both voice and data services. Keeping up with the trends of
Internet traffic, today most of the demand (80 percent and growing) is
for over-the-top video downloading (e.g., Netflix, Hulu, YouTube). Very
limited amounts of Internet traffic are latency-sensitive. Therefore,
satellite broadband, that connects consumers directly into enterprise-
level fiber, is often a better solution than existing terrestrial
networks. In fact, experience shows that many consumers prefer
satellite broadband over terrestrial solutions because of price,
service, and the type of applications that they routinely use.
Future LEO/MEO Satellite Broadband Networks
In addition to today's advanced geostationary broadband satellite
networks, there are new low earth orbit (LEO) and medium earth orbit
(MEO) satellite systems under design and anticipated for launch and
operation the next few years. Many of these systems will be able to
offer low latency broadband that competes directly with terrestrial
networks. They could also complement high throughput geostationary
satellite networks, all making satellite broadband a viable alternative
for consumers.
Appropriate Policy Choices Are Critical
In order to facilitate the full use of these advanced satellite
broadband networks, policymakers need to make the right choices by
allocating sufficient spectrum resources and not put the regulatory
finger on the spectrum scale in favor of purely terrestrial wireless
technology. Technology neutrality is also critical in the context of
making subsidy choices where the government must encourage competition
among platforms. This will allow satellite broadband to flourish as a
competitor to incumbent technologies, reducing the need for regulation,
and increasing choices for American consumers, wherever they may choose
to live and work.
Question 3. I am interested in learning your thoughts about how to
craft spectrum policy that is ``future proof.'' The United States
Frequency Allocation Chart (available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/
files/ntia/publications/january_2016_spectrum
_wall_chart.pdf) indicates that essentially all available spectrum has
already been allocated. So the challenge today seems to be finding
efficiencies and repurposing spectrum when new uses become important.
How do we ensure that allocations made today do not unintentionally
prevent us from meeting spectrum needs in the future?
Answer. It is critical that any spectrum policy adopted by the
United States not favor one technology over another--either explicitly
through one policy or implicitly through technical rules that by
application advantage one over the other. There needs to be competition
among competing platforms. Given the enormous investment costs of
providing communications services--particularly satellite services--the
expansion of one service should not come at the expense of another.
Today, in many cases, spectrum is shared among different, but
compatible services and is being used efficiently by the satellite
industry. The satellite industry has been sharing spectrum successfully
for many decades--both in the context of coordinated use among
satellite operators, but also with a number of non-satellite services,
e.g., fixed backhaul.
It is also critical to remember that there is a wide variety of
spectrum needs for communications services other than those that meet
individual consumer demand. For example, enterprise broadband, is
relied on by small, medium, and large U.S. businesses through the 50
states, fuels the U.S. economic growth and provides a multitude of
products/services available to U.S. consumers. Banking transactions
rely on satellite communications services, as does the distribution of
almost all video programming throughout the United States. Our military
and first responders utilize commercial satellite broadband
technologies for mission critical applications. As policy makers make
spectrum allocations and licensing decisions, the broader needs of the
country must also be considered and the impact of these decisions must
be appropriately weighed.
Finally, it is critical to understand that spectrum ``need'' can
also be met by innovation rather than solely by additional allocations.
Because of changes in technology, the same amount of spectrum is often
able to be used much more efficiently today than it was even a decade
ago--enabling demand to be met through innovation.
While it may not be possible to future proof all allocation
decisions, creating a regulatory environment that incentivizes and
rewards innovation in spectrum compatibility with incumbent users and
maintaining a technology neutral approach to the delivery of services
in the United States will go a long way to ensuring that the U.S. leads
both at home and abroad in technology and services.