[Senate Hearing 115-790]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 115-790

   THE RACE TO 5G: EXPLORING SPECTRUM NEEDS TO MAINTAIN U.S. GLOBAL 
                               LEADERSHIP

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                             JULY 25, 2018
                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation
                             

                  [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                             


                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov

                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                    
55-217 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2024                   



       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                   JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman
ROGER 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                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JAMES INHOFE, Oklahoma               GARY PETERS, Michigan
MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  MAGGIE HASSAN, New Hampshire
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  JON TESTER, Montana
                       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

                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on July 25, 2018....................................     1
Statement of Senator Thune.......................................     1
Statement of Senator Nelson......................................     3
    Letter dated July 10, 2018 to Senator Dianne Feinsteina and 
      Senator Kamala Harris from Carolyn Coleman, Executive 
      Director, League of California Cities......................    23
    Letter dated July 11, 2018 to Hon. Amy Klobuchar from Heidi 
      Omerza, President, League of Minnesota Cities..............    24
    Letter dated July 13, 2018 to Hon. Charles E. Schumer from 
      Peter A. Baynes, Executive Director, New York Conference of 
      Mayors.....................................................    27
    Letter dated July 16, 2018 to Hon. Bill Nelson from Amy 
      Zubaly, Executive Director, Florida Municipal Electric 
      Association................................................    28
    Letter dated July 17, 2018 to Hon. Maria Cantwell from 
      Victoria Woodards, Mayor of Tacoma and Woodrow E. Jones, 
      Jr., Chair, Public Utility Board...........................    29
    Letter dated July 20, 2018 to Senator Chuck Schumer from John 
      Cohn, Mayor, City of Rye...................................    30
    Letter dated August 6, 2018 to Chairman John Thune and 
      Ranking Member Bill Nelson from Mayors regarding ``S. 3157, 
      The STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act''.................    31
Statement of Senator Schatz......................................    34
Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    37
Statement of Senator Gardner.....................................    39
Statement of Senator Tester......................................    42
Statement of Senator Capito......................................    45
Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    47
Statement of Senator Moran.......................................    49
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    51
Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    53
Statement of Senator Wicker......................................    54
Statement of Senator Markey......................................    56
Statement of Senator Hassan......................................    59
    Letter dated June 11, 2018 to Hon. Cory Gardner and Hon. 
      Maggie Hassan from a diverse group of public advocates, 
      educational organizations, taxpayer organizations and 
      associations in support of S. 1682.........................    60
Statement of Senator Blumenthal..................................    63
Statement of Senator Lee.........................................    65
Statement of Senator Udall.......................................    67
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    69

                               Witnesses

Hon. Meredith Attwell Baker, President and Chief Executive 
  Officer, CTIA..................................................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
Dean R. Brenner, Senior Vice President, Spectrum Strategy and 
  Technology Policy, Qualcomm Incorporated.......................    10
    Prepared statement...........................................    11
Craig T. Cowden, Senior Vice President, Wireless Technology, 
  Charter Communications.........................................    12
    Prepared statement...........................................    14
Tom Stroup, President, Satellite Industry Association............    17
    Prepared statement...........................................    18

                                Appendix

Letter dated September 20, 2017 to Governor Jerry Brown from 
  Martin L. Pall, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Biochemistry & Basic 
  Medical Sciences, Washington State University..................    73
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Meredith Attwell 
  Baker by:
    Hon. John Thune..............................................    76
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................    77
    Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................    78
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................    79
Response to written questions submitted to Dean R. Brenner by:
    Hon. John Thune..............................................    84
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................    85
Response to written questions submitted to Craig T. Cowden by:
    Hon. John Thune..............................................    87
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................    87
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................    88
Response to written questions submitted to Tom Stroup by:
    Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto..................................    90

 
                   THE RACE TO 5G: EXPLORING SPECTRUM
                NEEDS TO MAINTAIN U.S. GLOBAL LEADERSHIP

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 
SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. John Thune, 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Thune [presiding], Wicker, Blunt, Cruz, 
Fischer, Moran, Heller, Inhofe, Lee, Capito, Johnson, Gardner, 
Nelson, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Blumenthal, Schatz, Markey, Udall, 
Peters, Baldwin, Hassan, Cortez Masto, and Tester.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

    The Chairman. Good morning. This morning, our Committee 
meets again to examine the issue of spectrum needed to maintain 
U.S. global leadership in next-generation wireless services.
    5G, with gigabit speeds, extremely low latency, and the 
ability to connect tremendous numbers of devices, sounds like a 
wireless service from the future. But make no mistake, the 5G 
evolution is upon us. The race to lead the world in 5G has 
begun. It's a race we must win, but, by many accounts we are 
already behind China and other nations in key areas. Here is 
what's at stake: 5G is expected to contribute $275 billion in 
new investment, $500 billion in economic growth, and 3 million 
new jobs. It is estimated that American leadership in 4G 
contributed more than $100 billion to our Nation's economy. We 
have the technology. The technology created by American 
industries, including those represented here today, leads the 
world in next-generation mobile communications. But, that is 
only part of the equation. Spectrum and deployment are 
critical. We must ensure that wireless providers have spectrum 
on which their systems can operate, and they must be able to 
deploy those networks in a reasonable and timely manner.
    The MOBILE NOW Act, legislation that I introduced with the 
Ranking Member that was enacted earlier this year, addressed 
both of these critical components. But, as we noted at the 
time, it was just a down payment. There is much more to do. We 
will address ways to reduce barriers to deployment in the near 
future. Senator Schatz and I introduced the STREAMLINE Small 
Cell Deployment Act a few weeks ago. It reflects many months of 
hard work, of meetings with stakeholders from across the 
country, and of negotiation, and it is still a work in progress 
as we try to bring the benefits of 5G to American consumers, 
reap the benefits of 5G leadership for America, and respect the 
important role that State and local governments play in 
deployment decisions. It has been a pleasure working with 
Senator Schatz and his team, and I look forward to continuing 
our work.
    But, today our focus is on spectrum. It is the lifeblood of 
wireless communications. If we do not have enough of the right 
kinds of spectrum available, we simply cannot have the speed 
and the connections that we need. This is particularly 
important for those of us in more rural parts of the country. 
The business cases for delivering 5G to New York and Chicago 
are much different than for Sioux Falls and Spearfish. If 
inadequacy of spectrum resources makes 5G less viable, it will 
be the rural areas that no longer make business sense.
    The Federal Communications Commission has concluded that 
next-generation wireless networks will require efficient use of 
the low, mid, and high bands of spectrum. The FCC, acting in a 
bipartisan manner, has moved forward with bold proposals to 
make thousands of megahertz of high-band spectrum available for 
licensed and unlicensed, fixed and mobile use, and it has 
taken--I should say, and it has proceedings underway to make 
even more high-band spectrum available. And the broadband 
incentive auction completed last year was an important 
contribution to much-needed low-band spectrum, although we must 
identify additional low-band spectrum for auction in the near 
future.
    With regard to mid-band spectrum, however, the United 
States is falling significantly behind. This is particularly 
troubling because mid-band spectrum is crucial to the initial 
deployment of 5G. Both the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration and the FCC have taken important 
steps in the last several months to make mid-band spectrum 
available. But the fact remains that only 150 megahertz of mid-
band spectrum has been specifically identified for likely 5G 
use, and that is on a shared basis under a creative, but novel, 
licensing scheme. This puts us far behind both China and South 
Korea in this regard, and represents a serious threat to 
American leadership of next-generation technology.
    The FCC's current proceeding on the 3.7 to 4.2 gigahertz 
band is considering new approaches to get mid-band spectrum to 
market quickly while protecting key satellite and related 
broadcast and cable operations in that band, including 
providers like Midco, in South Dakota. I look forward to 
hearing from our witnesses today on that matter.
    While we pursue licensed spectrum for 5G, we also must be 
mindful of the critical role that unlicensed spectrum plays 
throughout the communications landscape. Wi-Fi operating on 
unlicensed spectrum is responsible for a tremendous and growing 
amount of the data transmitted in our homes and offices, and is 
expected to play an increasing role in the handoff of traffic 
originating or terminating on licensed spectrum, as well, as in 
the Internet of Things. It was in recognition of these facts 
that MOBILE NOW required identifying 100 megahertz of spectrum 
below 8 gigahertz before 2023. I recently wrote to the FCC, 
noting that the 6 gigahertz band had particular promise for 
unlicensed use, and noting that much more unlicensed spectrum 
would be needed soon.
    As we consider specific spectrum bands that can be made 
available for licensed and unlicensed use, we must also ensure 
that our policies and procedures keep spectrum in the pipeline. 
In that regard, I want to commend the bipartisan work of 
Senators Wicker and Schatz on SPECTRUM NOW, and Senators 
Gardner and Hassan on the AIRWAVES Act. I also appreciate that 
Senators Cruz, Markey, and several other members of our 
committee are actively exploring new ideas for making 
additional spectrum available.
    Making the Spectrum Relocation Fund a better resource for 
studying spectrum and relocating Federal incumbents is 
essential if we are to efficiently make Federal spectrum 
available for commercial use. Identifying spectrum resources, 
not just for the next 3 years, but for the next 10 years and 
beyond, is essential if we're to retain American leadership.
    We have a distinguished panel before us today, and I look 
forward to hearing your thoughts on how we can deliver the 
benefits of 5G to the American people and secure continuing 
American leadership in next-generation telecommunications. 
Thank you all for being here.
    I turn now to Senator Nelson, our Ranking Member, for his 
opening remarks.

                STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

    Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman, I will short-circuit my 
remarks, because you've laid it out quite well.
    I just want to say that I'm pleased that the Committee is 
going to hear from the satellite industry, which is essential 
for the Nation's communication networks. And there's a lot of 
promise in the future of these communications systems that are 
satellite-based. Many of these worldwide constellations are in 
the testing phase, and even Facebook has confirmed its interest 
in developing a satellite broadband platform. And, of course, 
that's going to bring additional activity to the Space Coast, 
which has already come alive with the exceptional number of 
rocket launches. We're seeing the rocket launches come back 
into this country with a launch industry that we had only hoped 
for, years ago.
    Also, I want us to remember that we need to maintain a 
balanced spectrum policy to support various types of wireless 
technologies as the engine of innovation, Senator Markey. 
Innovation. That means that we need additional licensed 
spectrum for 5G and other services. And we can't forget the 
need to make sure that the Federal Government--in particular, 
our national security and Homeland Security agencies--have 
enough spectrum today and into the future for the mission-
critical operations. So, it remains essential for us to make 
sure adequate spectrum is available for the next-generation 
wireless services.
    We were able to pass the MOBILE NOW bill earlier this year 
to help foster this 5G revolution. It was bipartisan, as the 
Chairman said. We're going to work together to address the 
additional spectrum issues.
    And, although the purposes of this hearing is spectrum, I 
want to say something about infrastructure. It's true that 5G 
networks are designed around denser wireless infrastructure 
made up of many small cell facilities. The Chairman has a bill 
on this siting process. We have all received passionate 
feedback on this. And I want us to have a robust conversation 
about the bill at a future hearing that we must include 
participation by local government and all the interested 
stakeholders.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
    As I said, we've got a great and distinguished panel with 
us today. We have the Honorable Meredith Baker, who's President 
and Chief Executive Officer of CTIA--The Wireless Association. 
We have Mr. Dean Brenner, Senior Vice President, Spectrum 
Strategy and Technology at Qualcomm; Mr. Craig Cowden, who's 
Senior Vice President, Wireless Technology for Charter 
Communications, Inc.; and Mr. Tom Stroup, who's President, 
Satellite Industry Association.
    Thank you all for being here. We look forward to hearing 
from you. And if you could confine your oral remarks to about 5 
minutes, we'll make sure that your entire statements are 
included as part of the permanent record, and it'll give us 
time to get to questions from our members.
    So, Ms. Baker, I look forward to hearing from you. Please 
proceed.
    Thanks.

           STATEMENT OF HON. MEREDITH ATTWELL BAKER,

          PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CTIA

    Ms. Baker. Terrific. Thank you, Chairman Thune. We really 
appreciate you and Ranking Member Nelson and all of the members 
of the panel for holding this very important hearing.
    I'm Meredith Baker. And, on behalf of the wireless 
industry, we are grateful. We are also grateful for the way 
that you have phrased this hearing as ``The 5G Challenge,'' 
because you are right, we are in a global race. And I'm happy 
to report that, with your leadership, we can win this 
technological race, if we act fast.
    Before we talk about the race, what is 5G? Well, 5G is the 
next generation of wireless service. Over the last 10 years, we 
have spent our time working on connecting everyone. Over the 
next few years, with 5G, we will connect everything. 5G 
networks will be 100 times faster and five times more 
responsive. This will power our economy: 3 million new jobs and 
$500 billion to GDP. But, those numbers just scratch the 
surface, because the key, to me, is what 5G enables. Pick an 
industry in your state, from South Dakota to Florida. Pick a 
constituency that needs something. 5G will help enable 
innovative new solutions, from telehealth to precision 
agriculture. That is why the 5G race matters the most. We can't 
allow tomorrow's advancements in healthcare, in transportation, 
in energy to be exported overseas. After all, we don't want 
``Uber for healthcare'' to start in China. And make no mistake, 
other nations see what our wireless leadership has done for our 
economy, and winning the 5G race is their opportunity to seize 
those benefits.
    So, where does the United States stand internationally? A 
year ago, candidly, I was worried. It came as no surprise to me 
that the experts found that the United States was behind China 
and Korea--South Korea--in 5G readiness. While we led the race 
to 4G, we found ourselves behind in 5G. Most significantly, we 
lacked concrete plans to address our Nation's spectrum needs 
and our outdated siting rules. The good news--we have 
responded, like I knew our industry would, with decisive 
action. 5G standards have been finalized. All the national 
carriers will launch 5G this year, years ahead of the original 
schedule.
    We are ready to build tomorrow's infrastructure. In fact, 
the U.S. wireless industry is projected to invest $275 billion 
of our own money to deploy 5G. But, we need some policy help 
from you to make it happen. That's why I'm heartened by this 
Committee's swift response to address the exact reforms we need 
to win the race. The Committee is well positioned to ensure 
that we, one, have enough spectrum for our 5G future, and, two, 
have new siting rules for our new networks.
    Today's hearing focuses on the first. Spectrum is the 
critical input for wireless services. MOBILE NOW, enacted 
earlier this year, was a key bipartisan downpayment. Thank you. 
Looking ahead, Senator Gardner and Hassan's AIRWAVES Act 
provides the schedule of new spectrum auctions we need to win. 
And on siting, tomorrow's networks will be built on small 
cells, the size of backpacks. The challenge? They can take an 
hour to install, but up to a year to get approved, because the 
current rules treat everything like a 200-foot tower. Here 
again, I commend Senators Thune and Schatz for their STREAMLINE 
Act that provides a commonsense and balanced framework to 
modernize our rules while preserving local authority. I urge 
swift action on AIRWAVES and STREAMLINE to help us win the 5G 
race.
    I want to leave you with three closing points:
    First, I want to commend FCC Chairman Pai and the entire 
FCC for committing to win the 5G race. The progress that they 
have made on our core priorities this year is laudable.
    Second, in taking steps to win the 5G race, we should also 
redouble our efforts to shrink the digital divide. I think the 
rural dividend in the AIRWAVES Act is an innovative solution 
that could really make a difference.
    Last, rapid execution on the key legislation that you've 
identified is critical. 5G is a race, after all. While we have 
made great progress, other nations are not standing still. 
China is making available millions of sites for new networks, 
and South Korea just had a huge spectrum auction last month. To 
help quantify the stakes of moving fast, Accenture concluded 
that if we can speed up deployment by just one year, 365 days, 
we can add an extra $100 billion to the U.S. economy. Let's do 
that.
    I look forward to working with you so the U.S. leads the 
world in wireless once again. Thank you. And I look forward to 
your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Baker follows:]

        Prepared Statemnt of Meredith Attwell Baker, President 
                   and Chief Executive Officer, CTIA
    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and members of the 
Committee, on behalf of CTIA and the U.S. wireless industry, thank you 
for the opportunity to testify today.
    CTIA applauds this Committee's commitment to advancing U.S. 
spectrum policy, and securing U.S. global leadership in the mobile 
marketplace. Today's hearing on the race to 5G comes at a critical 
time. The wireless industry needs your help to realize 5G's tremendous 
potential to create jobs, grow the economy, and ensure future 
innovation happens first here in the United States. With your 
leadership and the important legislative agenda you have before you, 
I'm confident the U.S. can win the 5G race.
Winning the Race to 5G
    5G is the next generation of wireless, and our new networks will 
offer speeds up to 100 times faster than today's services, enable 100 
times the number of devices, and be five times more responsive than 
today's. I'm excited by 5G's promise to drive transformational 
improvements in health care, education, transportation, and nearly 
every other industry. 5G will help create the smart industries and 
opportunities of the future, including smart communities, precision 
agriculture, and the Internet of Things.
    The United States is not alone in identifying the global 
competiveness at stake in the potential of 5G services. Other 
countries, from Asia to Europe, are moving aggressively to lead the 
world. The United States currently ranks third in overall 5G readiness, 
behind China and South Korea, according to an Analysys Mason report 
released earlier this year.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Analysys Mason, Global Race to 5G--Spectrum and Infrastructure 
Plans and Priorities, (Apr. 2018), https://api.ctia.org/wp-content/
uploads/2018/04/Analysys-Mason-Global-Race-To-5G_
2018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    China's position is due primarily to its government's aggressive 
steps to provide access to significant new spectrum bands for 5G. That 
commitment includes the Chinese regulatory authority's decision to 
release at least 100 megahertz of mid-band spectrum (with a focus on 
3.4-3.6 GHz) and two gigahertz of high-band spectrum (above 24 GHz) to 
each wireless provider. In South Korea, the government just completed 
an auction for 3.5 GHz and 28 GHz band spectrum. And the siting of 
wireless facilities in China and South Korea is dramatically easier, 
faster, and less costly than in the U.S.
    It's clear: the global race to 5G is on, and the stakes are high. 
The nation that leads on 5G will capture millions of new jobs and 
billions in economic growth.
    Under your leadership, the United States has led the world in 4G 
services. According to a study by Recon Analytics, the launch of 4G 
nearly doubled the number of U.S. wireless-related jobs in just three 
years, and 4G leadership helped drive nearly $100 billion GDP 
growth.\2\ 4G also helped create the world-leading app and sharing 
economies in America. Conversely, losing wireless leadership in the 
transition from 2G to 3G and 3G to 4G had significant, long-term, 
negative effects on the European and Japanese telecommunications 
sectors. The rest of the world has seen what 4G wireless leadership has 
meant to our economy and now seeks to leverage 5G and seize those 
benefits for themselves.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Roger Entner, How America's 4G Leadership Propelled the U.S. 
Economy, Recon Analytics (Apr. 16, 2018), http://reconanalytics.com/
2018/04/how-americas-4g-leadership-propelled-the-u-s-economy/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The good news is that while there's work to do to catch up to China 
and South Korea and fend off other countries on 5G, the United States 
is well positioned to win the race if we act fast and put the right 
policies in place.
    For our part, U.S. wireless providers will invest some $275 billion 
in 5G-related networks--creating three million new jobs and adding $500 
billion to our economy according to Accenture. All the national 
providers have announced aggressive deployment schedules with the 
launch of services as early as this Fall, years ahead of schedule. 
American network and technology companies are investing aggressively to 
ensure that equipment, handsets, and devices are ready for American 
innovators and consumers to leverage the power of the new 5G platform.
    But our industry cannot win the race to 5G alone. We need your help 
to capture global leadership. Today's hearing is focused on spectrum, 
one of the two critical areas where we need your help to modernize our 
Nation's approach. The second is modernizing siting rules for 
tomorrow's networks.
Defining A 5G Spectrum Policy
    Other countries are releasing hundreds of megahertz of new spectrum 
to promote 5G because they recognize sufficient spectrum is key to 
winning the 5G race and unlocking the corresponding economic and 
societal benefits. To fully realize the connected life and Internet of 
Things breakthroughs we are talking about this morning, we need more 
spectrum, and we need it now.
    CTIA commends this Committee, the Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC), and the Administration for the ongoing work in identifying and 
repurposing spectrum for 5G. With your support, the wireless industry 
has invested hundreds of billions of dollars in private capital in 
acquiring and building out spectrum. But the need for additional 
spectrum remains pressing. A predictable pipeline of spectrum will do 
much to advance U.S. 5G interests, and help us match the aggressive 
efforts foreign governments are taking to allocate spectrum for 5G 
services. Encouragingly, the Committee has identified all the right 
bands. Now it is only a matter of us finishing the job fast.
    MOBILE NOW. Congress has already made an important ``down payment'' 
with the MOBILE NOW Act, bipartisan legislation championed by Chairman 
Thune and Ranking Member Nelson. CTIA thanks this Committee for its 
leadership in enacting this legislation earlier this year. Among other 
things, the MOBILE NOW Act directs the FCC and the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to identify at 
least 255 megahertz of Federal and non-federal spectrum for licensed 
and unlicensed wireless broadband use by December 31, 2022. With this 
direction from Congress, the FCC and NTIA are working to advance 5G 
here in the United States. MOBILE NOW also helped jump-start our 
Nation's focus on mid-and high-band spectrum, leading to important 
steps taken by the FCC to make available new spectrum. The Bipartisan 
Budget Act of 2015 also directed the Administration to provide access 
to important low-band spectrum, which is a key component of our 
Nation's future spectrum planning as well.
    AIRWAVES. From that foundation, CTIA strongly supports the 
Advancing Innovation and Reinvigorating Widespread Access to Viable 
Electromagnetic Spectrum (``AIRWAVES'') Act, which establishes a much-
needed schedule of future spectrum auctions critical to U.S. global 
leadership in 5G.
    CTIA thanks Senators Gardner and Hassan for introducing the 
AIRWAVES Act, and Committee cosponsors Tester, Young, Cortez Masto, and 
Johnson for their support. This bill enjoys broad bipartisan backing in 
both the Senate and the House. It also boasts bipartisan support from 
Chairman Pai and the FCC Commissioners, and has attracted widespread 
praise from a broad and diverse array of organizations, including the 
Consumer Technology Association, Connected Nation, the African American 
Mayors Association, and Public Knowledge (as represented in a letter 
attached hereto).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Letter from CTIA et al. to Senators Cory Gardner and Maggie 
Hassan (June 11, 2018), available at https://api.ctia.org/wp-content/
uploads/2018/06/AIRWAVES-Senate-Support-Letter-004.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The AIRWAVES Act sets a timeline for auctioning a series of key 
low-, mid-, and high-band frequencies over the next five years. By 
recognizing that we need different types of spectrum to unlock the full 
complement of 5G services, Senators Gardner and Hassan have identified 
a core challenge we face in the U.S., the lack of access to sufficient 
mid-band spectrum. To achieve our 5G goals, we are going to need 
different types of spectrum, and mid-band is key as it can offer both 
capacity and coverage. Unfortunately, the U.S. ranks sixth globally in 
terms of mid-band spectrum availability. AIRWAVES remedies that by 
providing access to the same spectrum bands being made available 
throughout Asia and Europe.
    Congressional deadlines, like those in AIRWAVES, have always been 
an essential tool to enable U.S. spectrum leadership by ensuring timely 
access to new spectrum. This auction schedule will allow wireless 
providers to plan and build their 5G networks to maximize efficiency 
and robustness. And knowing when and what spectrum will be auctioned 
creates a 5G pathway for industry ``verticals'' such as telemedicine, 
smart agricultural systems, and connected vehicles.
    CTIA urges the Committee, and the Congress, to move this 
legislation forward expeditiously. Passage of the AIRWAVES Act is the 
most important step the Committee can take to ensure that our Nation 
has the spectrum resources it needs to compete and win the 5G race.
    Other Key Initiatives. We also support the Supplementing the 
Pipeline for Efficient Control of The Resources for Users Making New 
Opportunities for Wireless (``SPECTRUM NOW'') Act, introduced by 
Senators Wicker, Schatz, Udall, and Moran. This bipartisan legislation 
would help government agencies more efficiently and effectively manage 
spectrum resources. The Act allows use of approximately $8 billion in 
existing Spectrum Relocation Fund monies to support research into the 
feasibility of Federal spectrum users either relocating or sharing 
spectrum with non-federal users.
    Key Administration and FCC Roles. In addition to legislative 
action, Congress should continue to encourage work at the FCC and NTIA 
to promote the development of a 5G spectrum agenda. CTIA commends 
Chairman Pai and the FCC for their commitment to winning the 5G race 
and the significant steps taken this year to address our Nation's lack 
of access to mid-and high-band spectrum.
    High-band spectrum will be critical to high-capacity future 
wireless services and applications. Yet at the start of 2018, there 
were no planned auctions for these spectrum bands. To the FCC's credit, 
and as envisioned by MOBILE NOW and AIRWAVES, Chairman Pai has 
announced the auctioning of five separate bands of high-band spectrum 
by the end of next year, starting this Fall. The FCC's decisiveness 
here should be commended.
    Similarly, the FCC also has seized on the need for additional mid-
band spectrum and is working to optimize rules for the 3.5 GHz band for 
mobile broadband, and the FCC launched a new proceeding to evaluate 
repurposing up to 500 MHz of mid-band spectrum between 3.7 and 4.2 GHz 
just this month. At the same time, the Administration has initiated its 
important review of the 3.45 GHz band under Administrator Redl's 
leadership at NTIA. These are important steps, and we urge the FCC and 
the Administration to commit to a clear auction schedule as soon as 
practicable for these three critical mid-band spectrum opportunities. 
Congressional support and encouragement for these initiatives would be 
beneficial, and would be strongly bolstered by timely passage of the 
AIRWAVES Act.
Promoting Small Cell Deployment
    While not the focus of today's hearing, the other key set of 
reforms needed to secure 5G leadership is modernizing siting rules to 
allow the accelerated deployment of new wireless networks and small 
cells. Small cells are about the size of a backpack and are typically 
installed on utility poles, streetlights, and the sides of buildings. 
They complement existing cell towers by densifying wireless 
infrastructure and provide the capabilities needed for next-generation 
networks.
    Building Tomorrow's Networks. To handle growing mobile data demands 
and unlock new 5G applications, wireless providers will need to install 
hundreds of thousands of small cells in the next few years. Recent 
estimates have projected we will need over 800,000 small cells by 2026. 
To put that into perspective, our industry has a little over 150,000 
cell towers in operation today, built over 30 years. If we do not 
update our approach and greatly accelerate the approval and deployment 
process, we will not be able to construct the networks we need fast 
enough to win the 5G race.
    The good news is that a small cell often can be installed in about 
an hour. The challenge we face is that governmental approval processes 
can take more than a year, and the application and fee structures are 
often mismatched with the smaller footprint of tomorrow's networks. 
Indeed, many rules, regulations, and fees for wireless infrastructure 
applications are outdated, designed for a world in which 200-foot cell 
towers were the norm and the necessity. Globally, the process for 
siting small cells and other wireless infrastructure is often simpler 
and more streamlined, while our 20-plus-year-old approach hampers the 
ability of U.S. operators to compete. Our new networks need new rules 
to keep pace, and we need to start our 5G buildout this year.
    While we applaud the efforts of many cities and 20 states to update 
their approaches to facilitate small cell deployment, we risk falling 
further behind in the 5G race absent a clearly articulated national 
framework. As Congress has done before, America needs a modernized, 
national policy framework for small cell deployment that accommodates 
state and local interests while advancing our national interest in 5G 
leadership.
    A Bipartisan National Framework. Congress should expeditiously 
adopt the bipartisan Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization 
of Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance Small Cell 
Deployment Act (``STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act''). We applaud 
and thank Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz for proposing such a common 
sense framework.
    The STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act addresses the central 
barriers to deployment of 5G infrastructure, while maintaining 
localities' prerogatives with regard to safety and neighborhood 
aesthetics. CTIA strongly supports the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment 
Act and urges it passage.
    Other Key Reforms. Additional measures that would make great 
strides toward modernizing siting processes include Senators Wicker and 
Cortez Masto's SPEED Act and Senator Moran's RAPID Act, which 
modernizes the Federal siting approval process, and Senators Heller and 
Manchin's work on the Rural Broadband Deployment Streamlining Act, 
which builds on Federal reforms in MOBILE NOW and injects much-needed 
deadlines and reforms for siting requests on Federal lands.
    The FCC's Important Role. Here again, under this Committee's watch, 
the FCC has similarly focused its attention on the need for 
infrastructure reform to promote small cell deployment. Led by Chairman 
Pai and Commissioner Carr, the FCC has taken a holistic approach to 
modernizing its rules with a clear focus on winning the 5G race. 
Earlier this year, the FCC updated historic preservation and 
environmental rules to reflect the differences between 200-foot towers 
and small cells. The Commission is now focused on equally important 
reforms updating the FCC's national guidelines and guardrails for local 
communities' small cell approval procedures. We urge Congress to 
encourage the FCC's excellent work in this area.
    Need for Urgent Action. Just as with spectrum policy, we have 
bipartisan support for critical 5G infrastructure initiatives that will 
help us close the gap with China and South Korea. A report prepared by 
Accenture last week found that accelerating infrastructure deployment 
by just one year would also result in an additional $100 billion to our 
economy.\4\ These benefits are within reach--but only if we act 
swiftly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Accenture Strategy, Accelerating Future Economic Value from the 
Wireless Industry, available at https://api.ctia.org/wp-content/
uploads/2018/07/Accenture-Strategy-Wireless-5G-Accelerating-Economic-
Value-POV-July-2018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delivering Mobile Broadband to More Americans
    I'm proud of our industry's commitment to building mobile service 
across America, driven by over $226 billion investment in our networks 
since 2010 alone, and over $25 billion just last year. In the past five 
years, we were able to connect for the first time 1.5 million 
additional rural consumers. Nevertheless, there are communities across 
the country that still do not have access to the benefits of wireless, 
and we need Congress's and the FCC's help to ensure these under-and 
unserved areas get connected. The AIRWAVES Act would provide key new 
low-band spectrum that offers great coverage and propagation 
characteristics that can help reach hard-to-serve areas. Further, the 
recently auctioned 600 MHz spectrum is rapidly being deployed as 
broadcasters vacate that spectrum. Both steps will help extend mobile 
coverage. Similarly, the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act and other 
siting reforms can help reduce the cost and complexity of deploying in 
rural America and on adjacent Federal lands, particularly in the West. 
And lower siting fees will free capital for more deployment.
    One of the most promising proposals for reaching more Americans is 
in Senators Gardner and Hassan's AIRWAVES Act. AIRWAVES not only 
provides us a roadmap to win the 5G race but will also help us shrink 
the digital divide through its ``rural dividend'' provision. That 
provision sets aside 10 percent of the proceeds from new spectrum 
auctions for deployment of wireless networks in rural America. If this 
provision had been in place during the last two spectrum auctions, the 
rural dividend would have made available an additional $6 billion to 
build out wireless in rural America and unserved communities. CTIA 
urges Congress to expeditiously pass this legislation and implement 
this program, which would drive greater rural investment without the 
need for taxpayer funding.
    This Committee has also placed renewed focus on the key role the 
FCC and Administration can play in expanding access to broadband 
services. The FCC's Mobility Fund will provide nearly $500 million in 
annual support, which will provide much-needed universal service 
funding dedicated to wireless coverage. And ensuring that broadband 
mapping is accurate will help better inform broadband infrastructure 
planning.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. Just as winning the 
race to 4G required smart government policies, winning the race to 5G 
will require swift action on repurposing spectrum as well as 
modernizing small cell siting rules. CTIA looks forward to working with 
you to win the 5G race and urges swift adoption of the core 5G 
legislative proposals discussed this morning to make that a reality.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Ms. Baker.
    Mr. Brenner.

      STATEMENT OF DEAN R. BRENNER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,

            SPECTRUM STRATEGY AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY,

                     QUALCOMM INCORPORATED

    Mr. Brenner. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and 
members of the Committee, my name is Dean Brenner, and I'm here 
today on behalf of Qualcomm, a company that's an American 
success story.
    Qualcomm was founded in a San Diego living room. It grew 
rapidly as cell phones began to take off. And today, working 
out of our larger headquarters, still in San Diego, Qualcomm is 
the world's leading supplier of chips for smartphones and other 
wireless devices, and the world's leading inventor and licensor 
of new wireless technologies. The technologies we develop, most 
especially 5G, and the chips we design all depend upon one key 
input controlled by the government: spectrum. As this committee 
has recognized most recently in the MOBILE NOW Act, enabling a 
steady stream of new spectrum across the board--low, mid, and 
high band, and licensed, unlicensed, and shared--is essential 
for the rapid broad rollout of 5G. We're working on 5G at a 
feverish pace to use each and every sliver of spectrum to 
deliver the kind of wireless connectivity you can only dream 
about today, speeds that are more than 100 times faster, 
latency as low as a millisecond, but it all comes back to that 
steady stream of new spectrum. So, let me thank this committee 
for leading the way to enact the MOBILE NOW Act and for taking 
spectrum policy a step further, in the AIRWAVES Act.
    Let me give all of you a status report on 5G, but I'll 
start with an update on 4G LTE.
    Our latest 4G chips deliver peak speeds of 2 gigabits per 
second. We achieve that speed not just because we support over 
1,000 different spectrum combinations and we use other LTE 
enhancements; in addition, we now use both licensed and 
unlicensed spectrum for 4G. In 2016, the FCC approved the first 
small cells with our chips, which use a new technology called 
License Assisted Access, or LAA. LAA uses 5 gigahertz 
unlicensed spectrum, when and where it's available, in addition 
to licensed spectrum. LAA enabled gigabit LTE and, later this 
year, will enable LTE to reach the 2 gigabit mark. Operators 
around the world and in the United States are all racing to 
deploy this great new technology. We see gigabit-plus LTE as 
the foundation for 5G.
    Likewise, 4G-based small cell deployments are occurring 
today around the country, even in advance of 5G. 4G and 5G 
small cell deployments will be broader and less expensive if 
regulations keep pace with technology. That's why we support 
the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act, introduced by 
Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz.
    Turning to 5G, we're on track to deliver chips that support 
5G in both sub-6 gigahertz and millimeter wave spectrum in time 
to enable 5G data-only devices to launch before the end of 2018 
and for the first 5G smartphones to launch in the first half of 
2019. That's a tremendous undertaking for Qualcomm and our 
partners working with these new technologies. Different 
operators in the United States and around the world will begin 
providing 5G using different spectrum bands, so it's very 
important that our chips and related components support as many 
bands as possible. In sub-6 gigahertz bands, 5G will have 
relatively wide coverage. In millimeter wave bands, 5G will 
cover smaller dense areas, but, using a larger amount of 
spectrum in our advanced antenna technologies, millimeter wave-
based 5G will deliver much faster connectivity than is possible 
in lower bands.
    We're excited by the recent FCC announcements establishing 
a schedule for this year and next for spectrum auctions in 
millimeter wave bands. We applaud the recent FCC and NTIA 
initiatives to free up more mid-band spectrum and bands that 
other countries and regions have targeted. We also hope the FCC 
will soon finish up its rules for the CBRS 3.5 gigahertz band. 
Enabling a steady stream of new spectrum for 5G requires 
progress on all of these fronts in parallel.
    Finally, we're developing versions of 5G built from the 
ground up for unlicensed and shared spectrum. One version will 
be a 5G-based LAA. Another version will use new spectrum-
sharing techniques to deliver a user experience that will be 
much better than is possible today in any unlicensed band, and 
will not require any licensed spectrum at all, enabling 5G for 
factories, warehouses, and many other industrial uses. These 
technologies are well suited for the 6 gigahertz band, which 
Chairman Thune urged FCC Chairman Pai to allocate, in a June 29 
letter.
    Executing on this 5G spectrum roadmap, working in 
conjunction with so many industry partners and with Congress, 
the administration, and the FCC, is crucial for American 
leadership. It requires close collaboration between all parts 
of the government and the wireless industry. 5G has the 
potential to transform every industry, driving productivity 
gains, jobs, and economic growth, and enabling 5G to be used 
for all the things that today require wired broadband. By 2035, 
we estimate that 5G could produce over $12 trillion worth of 
goods and services. With the stakes so high, spectrum policy 
has never been so important, which is why I'm so pleased to be 
here today and to work with all of you.
    Thank you. I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Brenner follows:]

Prepared Statement of Dean R. Brenner, Senior Vice President, Spectrum 
         Strategy and Technology Policy, Qualcomm Incorporated
    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and Members of the 
Committee, my name is Dean Brenner, and I'm here today on behalf of 
Qualcomm, a company that's an American success story. Qualcomm was 
founded in a San Diego living room. It grew rapidly as cell phones 
began to take off, and today, working out of our larger headquarters 
still in San Diego, Qualcomm is the world's leading supplier of chips 
for smartphones and other wireless devices and the world's leading 
inventor and licensor of new wireless technologies. The technologies we 
develop, most especially 5G, and the chips we design, all depend on one 
key input controlled by the government: spectrum.
    As this Committee has recognized most recently in the MOBILE NOW 
Act, enabling a steady stream of new spectrum across the board--low, 
mid, and high band; and, licensed, unlicensed, and shared--is essential 
for the rapid, broad roll-out of 5G. We're working on 5G at a feverish 
pace to use each sliver of spectrum to deliver the kind of wireless 
connectivity you can only dream about today--speeds that are more than 
a hundred times faster, latency as low as a millisecond--but it all 
comes back to that steady stream of new spectrum. So, let me thank this 
Committee for leading the way to enact the MOBILE NOW Act and for 
taking spectrum policy a step further in the AIRWAVES Act.
    Let me give a status report on 5G, but I'll start with an update on 
4G LTE. Our latest 4G chips deliver peak speeds of two gigabits per 
second. We achieve that speed not just because we support over 1,000 
different spectrum combinations, and we use other LTE enhancements. In 
addition, we now use both licensed and unlicensed spectrum for 4G. In 
2016, the FCC approved the first small cells with our chips which use a 
new technology called Licensed Assisted Access or LAA. LAA uses 5 GHz 
unlicensed spectrum, where and when it's available, in addition to 
licensed spectrum. LAA enabled Gigabit LTE and later this year will 
enable LTE to reach the two-gigabit mark. Operators in the U.S. and 
around the world are racing to deploy this great new technology. We see 
Gigabit-plus LTE as the foundation for 5G.
    Likewise, 4G-based small cell deployments are occurring today 
around the country even in advance of 5G. 4G and 5G small cell 
deployments will be broader and less expensive if regulations keep pace 
with technology. That's why we support the STREAMLINE Small Cell 
Deployment Act introduced by Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz.
    Turning to 5G, we're on track to deliver chips that support 5G in 
both sub-6 GHz and millimeter wave spectrum in time to enable 5G data-
only devices to launch before the end of 2018 and for the first 5G 
smartphones to launch in the first half of 2019. That's a tremendous 
undertaking for Qualcomm and our partners working with these new 
technologies. Different operators in the U.S. and around the world will 
begin providing 5G using different spectrum bands, so it's very 
important that our chips and related components support as many bands 
as possible. In sub-6 GHz bands, 5G will have relatively wide coverage. 
In millimeter wave bands, 5G will cover smaller, dense areas, but using 
a larger amount of spectrum and our advanced antenna technologies, 
millimeter wave-based 5G will deliver much faster connectivity than is 
possible in lower bands.
    We're excited by the recent FCC announcements establishing a 
schedule for this year and next for spectrum auctions in millimeter 
wave bands. We applaud the recent FCC and NTIA initiatives to free up 
more mid band spectrum in bands that other countries and regions have 
targeted. We also hope that that the FCC will soon finish up its rules 
for the CBRS, 3.5 GHz band. Enabling a steady stream of new spectrum 
for 5G requires progress on all these fronts in parallel.
    Finally, we're developing versions of 5G built from the ground up 
for unlicensed and shared spectrum. One version will be a 5G-based LAA. 
Another will use new spectrum sharing techniques to deliver a user 
experience that will be much better than is possible today in any 
unlicensed band and will not require any licensed spectrum at all, 
enabling 5G for factories, warehouses, and many other industrial uses. 
These technologies are well suited for the 6 GHz band which Chairman 
Thune urged FCC Chairman Pai to allocate in a June 29th letter.
    Executing on this 5G spectrum road map, working in conjunction with 
so many industry partners, and with Congress, the Administration, and 
the FCC, is crucial for American leadership. It requires close 
collaboration between all parts of the government and the wireless 
industry.
    5G has the potential to transform every industry, driving 
productivity gains and economic growth and enabling 5G to be used for 
all the things that today require wired broadband. By 2035, we estimate 
that 5G could produce over $12 trillion worth of goods and services. 
With the stakes so high, spectrum policy has never been so important, 
which is why I'm so pleased to be here today and to work with all of 
you.
    Thank you. I look forward to answering your questions.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Brenner.
    Mr. Cowden.

 STATEMENT OF CRAIG T. COWDEN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, WIRELESS 
               TECHNOLOGY, CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS

    Mr. Cowden. Good morning, Chairman Thune, Ranking Member 
Nelson, and members of the Committee. I am Craig Cowden, Senior 
Vice President of Wireless Technology at Charter 
Communications, which markets its products under the Spectrum 
brand. It's an honor to testify before you today.
    At Charter, I lead the team responsible for network 
architecture and engineering for all of our wireless 
initiatives. This includes Wi-Fi, mobility, and innovative 
fixed and mobile wireless technologies, including 5G.
    Charter is investing in a high-capacity, high-compute, low-
latency broadband infrastructure with the goal of providing 
ubiquitous wired and wireless connectivity to our customers, 
anywhere, on any device. We have invested more than $27 billion 
in technology and infrastructure since 2014, building out our 
network in communities across the country, in big cities, in 
small towns and rural areas that may never have had broadband 
before.
    Charter has invested billions of dollars in our network, in 
part, to offer the fastest broadband speeds in the market, but 
also, in part, to prepare for the bandwidth needs of 5G. With 
5G, wireless connectivity is transforming from a traditional 
macro network based on large towers and broad coverage to a 
network of at least hundreds of thousands of small cells 
required to achieve higher bandwidth and lower latency. 
Charter's pervasive network makes us well suited to meet small 
cell architecture requirements because it enables us to 
integrate Wi-Fi, 4G LTE, and 5G to provide consumers with 
wireless connectivity at great efficiency.
    Our Wi-Fi network currently serves more than 280 million 
wireless devices, many of which are smartphones provided by 
cellular companies. In fact, 80 percent of the data used on 
these devices in the home and office goes through our Wi-Fi 
network. Charter is currently deploying Wi-Fi devices that 
enable speeds approaching 1 gigabit, and we are now the first 
U.S.-based broadband provider to introduce routers featuring 
the next-generation Wi-Fi standard, called the 802.11ax.
    Technology has evolved to enable the combination of Wi-Fi 
with licensed cellular spectrum. Last month, we began offering 
spectrum mobile, a Wi-Fi first, MVNO, that incorporates our 
robust indoor and outdoor Wi-Fi infrastructure with Verizon's 
cellular network. The result is a high-quality mobile 
experience at great value.
    In addition, we are conducting tests using millimeter wave 
5G spectrum, the 28 gigahertz band, to explore how we can use 
this high-band 5G spectrum in conjunction with our broadband 
network to cost-effectively deliver 5G services to homes and 
businesses. We have also been testing fixed wireless 
technologies in the 3.5 gigahertz CBRS band across the country. 
Results have been truly promising. We believe this lower-
frequency spectrum could be used to extend the reach of our 
network and provide robust broadband to more rural areas.
    Given the focus of this hearing, I want to address a few 
specific spectrum issues that could positively impact our 
ability to deliver next generation of wireless broadband across 
the country, including in rural areas. Our experience in the 
wireless market have made clear that the success of 5G requires 
a full range of wired and wireless technologies and a complete 
toolkit of spectrum. We urge Congress and the FCC to ensure 
policies are neutral across wireline and wireless technologies, 
and to search for ways to make both unlicensed and licensed 
spectrum available for wireless broadband.
    First, opening the 5.9 gigahertz band for unlicensed use is 
one of the most immediately impactful steps policymakers can 
take to help the growing demand for Wi-Fi and other unlicensed 
technologies. This band has been unused for more than 20 years 
and lies right next to the most-used Wi-Fi band. Service 
providers could bring advanced Wi-Fi services to the market 
immediately without needing time to develop costly new 
equipment.
    Second, we appreciate the FCC's focus on the 3.5 gigahertz 
CBRS band. Quickly enabling the use of this spectrum will 
facilitate a significant increase in wireless broadband 
capacity and greatly improve mobile service for consumers. 
Perhaps more importantly, it holds tremendous potential for 
cost-effective rural broadband.
    Finally, the lower C-band should be considered for wireless 
broadband, as it provides the proper balance of capacity and 
coverage for 5G mobility. However, this band is currently used 
to deliver video services to millions of consumers. It's 
essential that they are protected in any potential 
reallocation.
    I'd like to end where I started. We are investing in high-
capacity, high-compute, low-latency broadband infrastructure. 
Whether that is expanding the reach of our wired network, 
enhancing Wi-Fi, or testing 5G technologies, Charter is working 
to deliver a leading wired and wireless connectivity 
experience.
    I thank the Committee for its time, and look forward to 
answering your questions.
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Cowden follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Craig Cowden, Senior Vice President of Wireless 
                   Technology, Charter Communications
Introduction
    Good morning, Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson and 
distinguished members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and 
Transportation.
    Thank you for inviting me this morning to discuss topics that are 
critical to our country's future: how we can harness the power of 
wireless technologies, why U.S. leadership is important, and what we 
need to do to keep driving innovations that will spur continued 
economic growth and help millions of people across the Nation connect 
to each other and to the world.
    I am Craig Cowden, Senior Vice President of Wireless Technology at 
Charter Communications, which markets its products throughout the 
country under the Spectrum brand. I lead the team responsible for the 
network architecture and engineering for all of our wireless 
initiatives. This includes WiFi, mobility, and innovative fixed and 
mobile technologies including 5G. Charter is investing in all of these 
elements along with innovating its advanced fiber and coax based 
network infrastructure, with the goal of providing customers access to 
any content, anywhere, on any supported device with a leading wired-
wireless connectivity experience.
    The future of connectivity is at hand, but can be hard to grasp. To 
put it simply, a variety of innovative wireless access technologies 
which includes 5G, 4G LTE, and enhanced WiFi will increase today's 
broadband speeds by as much as 1,000 times while reducing network 
latencies down to less than a millisecond. This connectivity will 
transform our daily lives; allowing us to connect billions of devices, 
communicate with the Internet of Things (IoT), make communities and 
government services ``smarter'' and more efficient, enable patients to 
receive real-time, comprehensive medical care, and create new forms of 
entertainment using augmented and virtual reality.
    This distinguished Committee is at the center of policy discussions 
that are critical not only to the future of communications but to the 
future of our country as a whole. Policies that ensure continued 
innovation and investment in our networks, while expanding broadband 
access to more communities, are essential to our country's continued 
economic growth and global competitiveness.
    We thank the Committee for its efforts to date, and look forward to 
continuing to work together to increase the availability of licensed 
and unlicensed spectrum and create forward-looking policies that 
promote competition and provide regulatory certainty, all of which will 
help ensure the United States retains its leadership in the 5G era.
Charter's Advanced Network
    Our goal at Charter is to deliver ubiquitous connectivity to all of 
our customers--those living in urban, suburban and rural communities. 
With more than 97,000 employees serving 41 states, Charter is making 
the investments needed to meet the connectivity needs of our customers 
today, tomorrow, and every day after that.
    Since 2014, we have invested more than $27 billion in technology 
and infrastructure. These investments have enabled us to significantly 
extend the reach of our network and enhance our service offerings. We 
are building out our broadband network in communities across the 
country; in big cities and small towns, in places that are underserved 
and in some cases unserved altogether. We now have 840,000 miles of 
fiber and coax-based network infrastructure passing 50 million homes 
and businesses. Last year alone, we expanded the reach of our network 
to an additional one million homes and small businesses.
Charter's Emerging Wireless Leadership
    Charter has invested these billions of dollars in fiber and 
densifying our networks in part to offer the fastest broadband speeds 
in the market, and in part to prepare for the bandwidth needs of 5G. 
The IoT and the advanced video and virtual reality applications that 
individuals and communities want depend on combining ultra-fast WiFi 
with innovative wireless technologies like 5G--all powered by a robust 
high capacity, high compute, low latency broadband infrastructure.
    While the term ``5G'' is used to describe a wide variety of 
technologies, 5G architecture is fundamentally different than all of 
the previous generations of wireless infrastructure (2G, 3G, 4G,) that 
have come before it. With 5G, wireless connectivity is transforming 
from a traditional macro network based on large towers with broad 
coverage to a network of at least hundreds of thousands of small cells 
strung closely together which, because of spectral re-use, produces 
significantly higher bandwidth at much lower latency. Cable companies 
like Charter, with fiber-based wireline networks covering all kinds of 
neighborhoods in cities and towns, suburban communities and rural 
areas, are well suited to meet future 5G small cell architecture 
requirements. With our pervasive networks, we can integrate multiple 
access technologies such as WiFi, 4G/LTE and 5G millimeter wave radios 
with great efficiency, enabling us to provide consumers with wireless 
connectivity at a good value.
1. Enhanced WiFi
    Charter has long been a ``wireless company'' by virtue of our 
robust WiFi network. Our WiFi network currently serves more than 280 
million wireless devices. Many of those wireless devices are smart 
phones provided by cellular companies yet 80 percent of the data used 
on those phones goes through our WiFi network.
    With the vast majority of our customers' wireless traffic running 
on our WiFi network, we need it to be the most robust it can be to 
ensure the best experience for them. We are currently deploying WiFi 
devices that enable speeds approaching 1 Gigabit, among the fastest in 
the country.
    We are also excited to announce this week that we are now the first 
WiFi provider to use the latest WiFi technology, called 802.11ax. 
Compared to previous WiFi standards, this is a game changer. It 
increases speeds, improves coverage, furthers the ability of many 
devices to run at the same time, further improves our already robust 
video streaming and provides better battery life.
    Our pervasive WiFi network therefore is the starting point for our 
mobile strategy. Charter's is an ``Inside-Out'' strategy, focusing 
first on wireless solutions inside the home and office, and then 
providing connectivity outside the home to meet growing customer demand 
for connectivity when they are on-the-go.
2. Mobile
    Technology has evolved to enable the combination of WiFi with 
licensed cellular spectrum. Last month we began offering Spectrum 
Mobile, bringing more competition to the wireless marketplace in the 41 
states we serve.
    Spectrum Mobile customers enjoy the same ubiquitous mobile coverage 
they get from traditional wireless companies, but their connections are 
through a WiFi-first MVNO that incorporates our robust indoor and 
outdoor WiFi network with Verizon's cellular network. The result is a 
high quality mobile experience at a great value. The data switchover 
from our WiFi to Verizon's network is seamless and not noticeable to 
customers, yet it can save them money.
    The next step in our mobile evolution will be to deploy LTE 
licensed small cells and then 4G LTE and 5G wireless access 
technologies and integrate them with our existing infrastructure. We 
are conducting extensive trials using small cells in Tampa, Florida and 
Charlotte, North Carolina, and will expand this testing to Los Angeles 
and New York City within the next few months. These trials will inform 
how we will leverage these innovative technologies to improve our 
wireless products.
3. Fixed Wireless
    We also have been exploring how 5G and other new wireless 
technologies can be used to deliver significantly improved broadband 
services to homes and businesses small and large.
    For over a year, Charter has been conducting tests around the 
country using millimeter-wave 5G spectrum, the 28 GHz band, in Orlando, 
Florida; Bakersfield and Los Angeles, California; Reno, Nevada; 
Clarksville, Tennessee; Columbus, Ohio; and Grand Rapids, Michigan. The 
results to date have been promising and we are continuing to test how 
we can use this high-band 5G spectrum in conjunction with our fiber 
network to cost-effectively deliver 5G services to homes and businesses 
for things like multiplayer AR/VR interactive gaming, multiple 
simultaneous 4K-quality video streaming, and ``Desktop-as-a-Service'' 
models that push compute functions to the network cloud but require 
large bandwidth and low latency.
    We have also been testing fixed wireless technologies in the 3.5 
GHz bands in locations near Lexington, Kentucky; Bakersfield, 
California; Tampa, Florida; Denver, Colorado and Coldwater, Michigan. 
We believe this lower-frequency spectrum could be used to extend the 
reach of our network and provide cost-effective, wireline-like 
connectivity to less densely populated areas. Results of these trials 
have been promising; we're seeing speeds that significantly exceed the 
FCC's definition of high speed broadband in most circumstances, 
allowing for video streaming and the use of multiple apps 
simultaneously. Charter plans to continue its investigation of fixed 
wireless solutions using 3.5 GHz to expand rural broadband.
The Wireless Future
    The success of 5G requires a full range of wired and wireless 
technologies and a full toolkit of spectrum that includes licensed and 
unlicensed, high-band, mid-band and low-band spectrum.
    We appreciate the attention of the Committee and the Federal 
Communications Commission to identify policies that promote the 
deployment of 5G and the continued expansion of broadband 
infrastructure. Adopting technology-neutral policies that promote 
competition and innovation is critical, as are efforts to make 
available additional unlicensed and licensed spectrum, both of which 
are necessary to support 5G.
1. 5.9 GHz
    Opening the 5.9 GHz band, which has been unused for more than 20 
years, for unlicensed use is one of the most immediately impactful 
steps policymakers can take to help meet the growing demand for WiFi 
and other unlicensed technologies. WiFi already securely powers home 
security systems, medical devices and services in and out of hospitals, 
hundreds of billions of dollars of financial transactions, essential 
education and workforce services, and critical machine communications. 
It also generates billions of dollars for the U.S. economy each year.
    The 5.9 GHz band lies right next to the most-used WiFi band in the 
country, making it the gateway to revolutionized WiFi speeds and 
innovation in Gigabit WiFi. Opening up this band for unlicensed use 
will unleash continued innovation and economic growth. Additionally, 
WiFi providers could bring advanced WiFi services to the market 
immediately, without needing time consuming and costly new equipment.
2. 3.5 GHz
    3.5 GHz is another spectrum band that offers tremendous potential 
for unlicensed use or General Authorized Access. We have encouraged the 
FCC to make the unlicensed part of the band available quickly and to 
adopt licensing rules that preserve an innovative approach to spectrum 
sharing in the band. This will encourage efficient use of that 
spectrum, lower barriers to entry for new competitors, and promote 
rural broadband deployment.
3. 3.7GHz-4.2GHz
    The lower C-band spectrum (3.7GHz--4.2GHz) also holds promise as it 
provides both meaningful bandwidth and RF propagation that could enable 
ubiquitous 5G mobility. At the same time, it is currently relied upon 
by C-Band satellite video providers to deliver video services to 
millions of consumers. Therefore it is essential that those customers 
and consumers they serve are protected and compensated for any costs 
associated with a reallocation to mobile.
Conclusion
    Whether it's testing 5G technologies, investing in broadband 
infrastructure or expanding the reach of our wired network, Charter is 
working to deliver the next generation of broadband. We appreciate this 
Committee's commitment to developing smart policies that will advance 
these efforts, and we look forward to continuing to work with you.
    I thank the Committee for its time and look forward to answering 
your questions.
    Thank You.

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Cowden.
    Mr. Stroup.

              STATEMENT OF TOM STROUP, PRESIDENT, 
                 SATELLITE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION

    Mr. Stroup. Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and 
distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for inviting 
me to testify before you today. I'm Tom Stroup, President of 
the Satellite Industry Association.
    Today, I would like to discuss the benefits, innovations, 
and related spectrum policies for enabling satellite broadband 
as part of the race for 5G and next-generation services under 
U.S. global spectrum leadership.
    The satellite industry has invested tens of billions of 
dollars to innovate and increase connectivity in the United 
States and across the globe. Today, users across the U.S. 
receive 25.3 megabits-per-second speeds, meeting the FCC's 
definition of broadband service. And this year, the industry 
has reached a new milestone, providing up to 100 megabits-per-
second download speeds. With satellites that are currently 
under construction, operators will have the ability to reach 
speeds of up to a gigabit per second and simultaneously process 
a terabit of data per second. These high-throughput 
geostationary satellites will provide orders-of-magnitude 
increases, ensuring they remain competitive with terrestrial 
offerings.
    At the same time, tens of thousands of new non-
geostationary satellites from multiple providers will soon be 
launching into low-Earth and medium-Earth orbit to provide low-
latency, high-speed broadband across the globe. These 
satellites not only have expanded capabilities, but are also 
designed to utilize spectrum efficiently. For example, high-
throughput satellites rely on frequency reuse and spot-beam 
technology to produce increased output factors upward of 100 
times that of traditional satellites. These satellite services 
deliver key attributes that are important to the innovation 
ecosystem. In addition to competition where service already 
exists, spectrum-enabled satellite services are extending the 
powerful benefits of broadband to the 24 million Americans who 
today lack broadband Internet access. The nature of satellites' 
wide coverage ensures that all communities within a satellite 
network footprint receive the same quality of service whether 
they are remote communities or big cities.
    When you fly, satellite mobility services are delivering 
high-speed Wi-Fi at 25 megabits-per-second speeds capable of 
streaming your favorite Netflix show right to your seat. And, 
unfortunately, when natural and manmade disasters can interrupt 
terrestrial broadband services that must rely on towers and 
ground systems, satellite broadband, however, can quickly 
restore communications in a disaster aftermath, or prevent the 
outage in the first place, due to the very limited amount of 
terrestrial infrastructure necessary to connect.
    Of course, all of the breakthroughs we've seen because of 
satellite broadband technologies should not be taken for 
granted. Satellite innovation depends on our industry's ability 
to reliably access spectrum. In order for our industry to 
continue to innovate and meet the need--the continuous demand 
for more and faster satellite broadband speeds, we need more 
spectrum. Therefore, the spectrum pipeline must include 
satellite spectrum. Satellite broadband networks need spectrum 
just as terrestrial wireless systems do. This can be done in a 
way that ensures the U.S. will benefit from the broadest range 
of technological opportunities. This means that satellites must 
also be able to depend on having certainty of access to 
existing spectrum resources.
    In addition, technology neutrality in spectrum policy is 
critical. The U.S. cannot win the race for broadband deployment 
with just one technology having exclusive spectrum access. In 
some cases, this may require exclusive spectrum allocations, 
and, in other cases, when needed and technically demonstrated, 
it involves adoption of coexistence and sharing arrangements.
    Finally, spectrum policy does not stop at national borders. 
It requires coordination with the rest of the world. While 
terrestrial 5G spectrum access is an important agenda item for 
the upcoming World Radio Conference, including proposals to add 
5G in longstanding satellite bands, there are also important 
satellite spectrum proposals to expand mobile satellite 
broadband and adjust spectrum coexistence and sharing 
environments for new non-geostationary satellite systems.
    Policymakers have within their reach an opportunity to 
ensure U.S. leadership in the 5G ecosystem by driving 
cooperation from all spectrum users to develop and enable 
technical solutions to meet future demands. For spectrum policy 
to work for satellites, however, because of their global reach, 
we need leadership at home and abroad. The FCC must continue to 
ensure satellite and 5G can advance their spectrum needs by 
providing leadership at the upcoming World Radio Conference 
that recognizes the global dimensions of satellite spectrum 
requirements.
    I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today, 
and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Stroup follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Tom Stroup, President, 
                     Satellite Industry Association
    Chairman Thune, Ranking Member Nelson, and distinguished Members of 
the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify before you today. I 
am Tom Stroup, President of the Satellite Industry Association (SIA). 
SIA is a U.S.-based trade association providing representation of the 
leading satellite operators, service providers, manufacturers, launch 
services providers, and ground equipment suppliers. 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.
    In an age when high speed broadband is quickly becoming the most 
transformative technology of our time, enabling pervasive reliable 
high-speed access everywhere has not only become an opportunity 
equalizer, learning enabler, and innovation accelerator, but an 
economic imperative. U.S. policymakers recognize the transformative 
satellite broadband opportunities on the horizon and the critically 
important role that informed spectrum policy plays in enabling it. FCC 
Chairman Ajit Pai recently explained: ``I've often said that in order 
to bring digital opportunity to all Americans, we need to use all of 
the tools in the toolbox. Satellite broadband service is one of those 
tools. Next-generation satellites are bringing new competition to the 
broadband marketplace and new opportunities for rural Americans who 
have had no access to high-speed Internet access for far too long.'' 
Whether it's NTIA Administrator Redl, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, 
or White House Space Council Executive Secretary Scott Pace, there is a 
growing recognition (as shown in Appendix A) that satellite 
technologies are driving transformative new benefits. To take advantage 
of future opportunities, we need to be thinking proactively about the 
vitality and availability of satellite spectrum resources.
    Today, I would like to discuss the benefits, innovations, digital 
inclusion, and related spectrum policies for enabling satellite 
broadband as part of the race for 5G and next generation services under 
U.S. global spectrum leadership.
I. Benefits of Satellite Broadband
    We can already see the enormous benefits that satellite broadband 
is delivering.
    Investment in Technology. The satellite industry has invested tens 
of billions of dollars to innovate and increase connectivity in the 
United States and across the globe and is continuing to make 
significant investments. As early as 2012, satellite downloads speeds 
reached 12 Mbps, above the national average at the time. But the 
industry did not stop there. New services are launching every year, and 
in the last several years began broadly providing users across the 
United States with lightning fast 25/3 Mbps service. This year the 
industry reached a new milestone, providing up to 100 Mbps download 
speeds. Across the country today, about 2 million fixed broadband 
customers and millions more flying on aircraft are already taking 
advantage of reliable satellite broadband services at reasonable rates 
and speeds that meet and surpass the FCC's definition of broadband 
service, with faster speeds and greater capacity on the horizon. The 
investments that enable satellite broadband speeds and services include 
U.S. manufacturers of spacecraft, antennas, and other satellite 
communications components, reflecting U.S. global leadership in the 
sector.
    Expanding Capabilities. Spectrum enabled satellite capabilities are 
continuously expanding and improving. Soon satellite broadband 
operators will be delivering fiber-like speeds using satellites that 
are under construction today, with the ability to reach speeds of up to 
a gigabit per second and simultaneously process a terabit of data per 
second. These high throughput geostationary satellites will provide 
orders of magnitude capacity increases and resulting consumer broadband 
benefits, remaining competitive with terrestrial offerings. At the same 
time tens of thousands of new non-geostationary satellites from 
multiple providers will soon be launching into Low-Earth and Medium-
Earth orbits to provide low-latency, high-speed broadband across the 
globe.
    Spectrum Efficiency. Satellite services are designed to utilize 
spectrum efficiently. Satellite service providers have shared the use 
of spectrum bands amongst themselves and other communications services 
for decades. Frequency re-use and spot beam technology are examples of 
efficiency innovations that increased output using the same amount of 
spectrum. For example, high throughput satellites rely on frequency re-
use and spot beam technology to produce increased output factors upward 
of 100 times that of traditional satellites. And these existing high 
throughput satellites currently support the delivery of 3G and 4G 
services, as well as enable global machine-to-machine communications. 
As we move into the future, satellite fleets will continue to be a part 
of a system architecture that delivers new 5G, IoT, and intelligent, 
connected transportation services to consumers everywhere.
    Ubiquity. The capabilities of satellite include extending digital 
opportunity to people wherever they may live, work or play, and helping 
transform businesses, which is one of the reasons that demand for 
satellite service is at an all-time high.
II. Satellite Broadband Innovation
    These satellite services deliver key attributes that are important 
to the innovation ecosystem:

    Competition. Just as the satellite industry already has with radio 
and television services, satellite broadband services are providing 
market-based competition to terrestrial broadband services. Satellite 
broadband brings additional package options, greater capacity for video 
downloads and streaming, competitive pricing per gigabit, and 
innovative services to consumers in the United States, often in areas 
with only a single or low number of terrestrial providers. Satellite 
broadband is also used by business and government enterprises, for both 
fixed and mobile purposes, using a range of spectral bands to deliver 
assured access to broadband communications. Further, satellites are 
providing critical backhaul Internet connectivity to local Internet 
Service Providers and community institutions in remote locations.
    Coverage. Spectrum enabled satellite services are extending the 
powerful benefits of broadband to the 24 million Americans who today 
lack broadband Internet access. High quality and cost-effective 
satellite broadband is playing an increasingly important role 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. The nature of 
satellite's wide coverage ensures that all communities within a 
satellite network's footprint receive the same quality of service, 
whether they are remote communities or big cities.
    Cost-efficiency. Importantly, satellite is reaching rural and 
remote communities with a geographically-independent cost structure, in 
many cases taking advantage of the same technologies and similar 
pricing as satellite subscribers in urban America. Because satellite 
systems have inherently wide-area coverage there are minimal additional 
costs to build out to rural and remote areas, aside from opportunity 
costs from not serving other markets. This is one reason why incentives 
made to encourage capacity redirection should be technology neutral.
    Mobility. Satellite broadband opportunity is literally taking off. 
When you fly, satellite services are delivering high speed WiFi at 25 
Mbps speeds capable of streaming your favorite Netflix show right to 
your seat. WiFi on aircraft has become so popular that there are often 
more connected devices than passengers on planes. It's extending urban 
quality broadband services to rural America, to the seat on your plane, 
and even war fighters and senior government leaders.
    Reliability. Natural and manmade disasters can interrupt 
terrestrial broadband services that must rely on towers and ground 
systems. Satellite broadband, however, can quickly come in and restore 
communications in a disaster aftermath, or prevent the outage in the 
first place due to the very limited amount of terrestrial 
infrastructure (i.e., antenna or dish) necessary to connect. The role 
of satellite in an emergency was recently witnessed in 2017 in the 
aftermath of the hurricanes where satellite broadband supported FEMA, 
other government agencies, businesses and residents, so that they could 
get back to normal.
    These technologies don't just have the potential to help connect 
the unconnected, extend new health, educational and societal 
opportunities throughout the country, but satellite broadband can help 
expand economic opportunity everywhere--on the ground, in the air, 
across the seas, and around the globe. As the country, and indeed the 
world, is blanketed with high speed broadband access, the opportunities 
become even more pervasive, the technologies more transformative, and 
the impacts even more profound.
    Soon the next big thing will be billions of little things connected 
to sensors that are embedded into everyday devices. As we connect our 
electric and other grids, our thermostats, our factories, our homes, 
cars, and cities to broadband, ubiquitous connectivity will transform 
whole sectors of our economy--from transportation to healthcare, 
manufacturing and energy. It extends how and where emergent 
technologies like the Internet of Things, Artificial Intelligence, big 
data and the cloud, can be used to help us unlock amazing new 
opportunities to solve problems in ways that we simply never could 
before or can't even imagine today.
III. Satellite Broadband for Digital Inclusion
    Satellite is a vital part of this innovation ecosystem and uniquely 
situated to solve the digital inclusion challenge:

    Farming. Satellite broadband is helping enable a whole new 
generation of precision agriculture opportunities on the horizon, 
driven by broadband that enables remote farms especially with livestock 
sensors, soil monitors, and autonomous farming equipment in rural 
America, far beyond where cell towers can reach or make economic sense. 
Autonomous farm equipment, already enabled by satellite positioning 
technology, often needs connectivity far beyond the line of sight of a 
cell tower.
    Education. At a time when 7 in 10 teachers assign homework that 
requires Internet access, 1 in 3 households across the country with 
school-aged children and incomes less than $50,000 still do not have 
broadband. Satellite is helping close this gap at home,and will soon 
enable school buses on long commutes to become WiFi-enabled mobile 
study halls.
    Healthcare. With too many Americans living in areas with only 
sporadic and even diminishing access to quality healthcare, satellite 
broadband technologies that span distance are extending connected care 
everywhere. No one should be forced to put their life at risk simply 
because they live too far from a doctor. Satellite technology is cost-
effectively overcoming a rural physician shortage, extending experts to 
where they are needed most, and delivering services regardless of where 
the doctor or patient are physically located. In addition, satellite 
broadband can help connect the elderly when they need it most.
    Mobility. The ubiquity of satellite coverage provides access to 
areas across the globe that are otherwise unreachable--keeping us 
connected in the air, on the move, and in the sea. These spectrum-
enabled capabilities are enabling our warfighters to protect us by 
land, sea or air, providing agencies with state-of-the-art technologies 
to protect our national security, and connecting our embassies and 
government leaders with secure communication options.
IV. Satellite Broadband Spectrum Policy
    Of course, all of the breakthroughs we've seen because of satellite 
broadband technologies should not be taken for granted. Satellite 
innovations depends on our industry's ability to reliably access 
spectrum. In order for our industry to continue to innovate and meet 
the continuous demand for more and faster satellite broadband speeds, 
and to power the mission critical solutions that require satellite 
technology, we need continuous access to more spectrum. The following 
principles are essential for good spectrum management.
    Spectrum Pipeline Must Include Satellite Spectrum. Satellite 
broadband networks need spectrum, just as terrestrial wireless systems 
do. This can be done in a way that ensures the United States will 
benefit from the broadest range of technological opportunities. This 
means that satellites must also be able depend on having certainty of 
access to existing spectrum resources, including the millimeter wave 
bands. Satellites may be good sharing partners in both Federal and non-
federal spectrum with compatible technologies and uses.
    Technology Neutrality in Spectrum Policy is Critical. The United 
States cannot win the race for broadband deployment with just one 
technology having exclusive access through regulation. Successful and 
innovative broadband services result from multiple technologies and all 
need more spectrum access. In some cases, this may require exclusive 
spectrum allocations, and in other cases, when needed and technically 
demonstrated, adoption of co-existence and sharing arrangements.
    We recognize that the Federal Communications Commission is actively 
seeking to identify additional bands for terrestrial 5G. As part of 
this process, it must carefully consider how to protect incumbent 
satellite operations and the critical services they provide. Space-to-
earth downlink spectrum is particularly susceptible to interference as 
these signals are relatively weak by the time they hit the ground. 
Satellite operators have invested billions of dollars in dozens of 
satellites serving the United States and currently provide important 
services to American consumers, either directly or indirectly, as well 
as to the USG. Sound spectrum policy will account for this reality and 
avoid allocations that disrupt this delicate infrastructure.
    ITU World Radio Conference (Fall 2019). Spectrum policy does not 
stop at national borders. It requires coordination with the rest of the 
world. While terrestrial 5G spectrum access is an important agenda item 
for the upcoming World Radio Conference, including proposals to add 5G 
in long-standing satellite bands, there are also important satellite 
spectrum proposals. Based on technical compatibility studies, the 
satellite proposals will expand mobile satellite broadband for 
aircraft, trains, cars, and ships. Still other technical proposals will 
address spectrum co-existence and sharing environments for new non-
geostationary satellite systems. In addition, because satellite 
capacity is critical for the deployment of 5G, satellite and satellite 
operators will need continued access to millimeter wave bands to meet 
the demand for broadband services.
    For satellite networks, there are two ground components--user 
terminals and gateways. User terminals, that connect the user to the 
satellite, require dedicated spectrum because they need to operate 
ubiquitously, either fixed or mobile. Gateways, or antennas that 
connect the satellite to fiber backhaul and the Internet, are fixed in 
place for a long time and can co-exist more easily with other spectrum 
services.
    The satellite industry has been sharing spectrum through technical 
rules and coordination of individual systems for decades. The FCC and 
the ITU international rules require close spacing of geostationary 
orbit satellites to permit frequency reuse at multiple orbital 
locations, so the satellite industry has been an industry leader in 
spectrum use and reuse. The satellite industry has also worked with 
regulators and others industry spectrum users to study how earth 
stations can operate with minimal impact in bands where spectrum is 
shared with other services.
    U.S. policymakers, including the Members of the Committee, the FCC, 
NTIA and others, have within their reach an opportunity to ensure the 
U.S. leadership in 5G ecosystem, to include satellite broadband 
operators and terrestrial wireless stakeholders, by driving seeking 
cooperation from all spectrum users to develop and enable technical 
solutions to meet future demands. When necessary, enabling policymakers 
should get all parties to work together or seek and implement solutions 
that will promote spectrum efficiency and opportunities for all. The 
ultimate winners will be the American public and broadband consumers.
    For the United States to ensure its continued global leadership in 
next generation satellite broadband, and to meet our national security 
communication needs, agency leaders are beginning the process of 
ensuring the protection and stewardship of spectrum to support 
commercial satellite activities. For spectrum policy to work for 
satellites, because of their global reach, we need leadership at home 
and abroad. The FCC must continue to ensure satellite and 5G can 
advance their spectrum needs by providing leadership at the upcoming 
World Radio Conference that recognizes the global dimensions of 
satellite spectrum requirements.
V. Conclusion
    With enormous opportunities on the horizon, policymakers need to 
think broadly about the entire innovation ecosystem. It takes pragmatic 
policies that:

   Foster win-win solutions enabled by equitable dedicated 
        spectrum and spectrum sharing where necessary with technical 
        solutions.

   Continue to advance technology neutral broadband policies 
        that let consumers and the market decide on technologies

   Ensure U.S. government agencies can take full advantage of 
        the latest spectrum enabled communications technologies. 
        Satellites offer resilient and ubiquitous communications that 
        keep America safe. Policymakers have an opportunity to maximize 
        the use of spectrum by using cutting-edge commercial satellite 
        communications technologies to grow their capacity while giving 
        taxpayers their greatest bang for their buck.

   And because these are global services, it's vital that our 
        policymakers provide spectrum leadership around the globe, 
        including for the upcoming World Radio Conference in 2019. We 
        encourage regulators to continue to allocate sufficient 
        spectrum for satellite use, both domestically and via United 
        States support at the upcoming World Radiocommunications 
        Conference.

    I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and I am happy to 
answer any questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                               Appendix A
Policy leaders are coming to recognize the vital role satellite plays 
        and the critical role that satellite spectrum plays in enabling 
        opportunity
NTIA Administrator David Redl
    ``There is no doubt that the United States needs a vibrant 
satellite sector. This industry creates tens of thousands of high-
paying jobs and enables millions more in the larger economy. In the 
next few years, a new era in satellite coverage will strengthen our 
Nation's broadband infrastructure and power advanced services that will 
improve people's lives . . . As the agency that is principally 
responsible for advising the President on telecommunications and 
information policy, NTIA can help create an environment that allows for 
continued global leadership in the market for satellite-based services 
and manufacturing. This includes the important role satellites will 
play in delivering 5G and ensuring that the United States stays on the 
cutting edge of wireless technology.''
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai
    ``I've often said that in order to bring digital opportunity to all 
Americans, we need to use all of the tools in the toolbox. Satellite 
broadband service is one of those tools. Next-generation satellites are 
bringing new competition to the broadband marketplace and new 
opportunities for rural Americans who have had no access to high-speed 
Internet access for far too long. . . . Breakthroughs are already 
happening. . . . Viasat began offering 100 Mbps broadband service in 
the United States with unlimited data. This was made possible by high-
throughput satellites that use spot-beam technology and frequency re-
use to dramatically increase capacity . . . it's so important for the 
Federal Government to set rules that encourage innovation in [the 
satellite] industry rather than regulatory roadblocks to progress.' '''
White House Space Council, Executive Secretary Scott Pace
    ``The United States has a strong and entrepreneurial satellite 
communications industry, available to engage in global competition. To 
ensure we retain the strategic advantages afforded by space services, 
the United States needs to continue to open and promote competitive 
markets and protect spectrum allocation for space services to compete. 
Since radio waves, as you know, don't stop at borders, unfettered 
terrestrial wireless network [like 5g) use in one country could 
certainly preclude the use of satellite services in neighboring 
countries. That would harm the global economy, and a global approach is 
necessary to protect U.S. space commerce.''. . . ``it's for these 
reasons the National Space Council is examining how the Department of 
State, Commerce and FCC can better coordinate to ensure the protection 
and stewardship of spectrum necessary for space commerce--and, again, 
not just for space purposes and it's unique uses, but also to make sure 
that we're competitive in terrestrial areas, as new technologies like 
5G come along.''
Director of the Office of Policy Planning at the Department of 
        Commerce, Earl Comstock
    ``[F]rom the secretary's point of view, and certainly from the fact 
that it's recognized in the recent Space Council documents, there is a 
concern within the administration that we need to make sure that, as we 
go forward, and we obviously want to facilitate 5G, we want to 
facilitate broadband, but we also want to keep an eye on the future of 
if we're going to have this expanding space market, we don't want to 
discover that we've basically stunted the growth of that market by 
denying the spectrum that might be needed for those transactions. So 
it's going to be a balancing act. It's going to be something that 
people have to take a hard look at. But we are very cognizant of the 
fact that when you're looking at the space regime, we are looking to 
the future. We're looking at an expansion of this. It's a very 
significant expansion. And so we want to move very carefully in terms 
of any changes that might end up shortchanging that ability to move 
forward in space.''

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Stroup.
    Senator Nelson. Mr. Chairman----
    The Chairman. Senator Nelson.
    Senator Nelson. --may I insert in the record a number of 
letters raising concerns on infrastructure, particularly from 
municipalities----
    The Chairman. Yes.
    Senator Nelson.--from mayors?
    The Chairman. Without objection.
    [The information referred to follows:]

                                League of California Cities
                                      Sacramento, CA, July 10, 2018

Senator Dianne Feinstein,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Senator Kamala Harris,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Sen. Feinstein and Sen. Harris,

RE: Opposition to S. 3157 (Thune & Schatz)--STREAMLINE ``Small Cells'' 
            Act

    On behalf of the League of California Cities, we urge your 
opposition to S. 3157 (Thune & Schatz), the STREAMLINE Act. The bill 
would force local governments to lease out publicly owned 
infrastructure, eliminate reasonable local environmental and design 
review, and eliminate the ability for local governments to negotiate 
fair leases or public benefits for the installation of ``small cell'' 
wireless equipment on taxpayer-funded property.
    Just last year, the wireless industry pursued similar failed 
legislation here in California that sought to achieve many of the 
elements present in this bill. The industry's effort here was met with 
overwhelming opposition from over 325 cities concerned about shifting 
authority away from our residents, businesses, and communities over to 
a for-profit industry whose shareholder returns potentially outweigh 
their considerations for the health, safety, aesthetic, and public 
benefits of the communities we serve.
    To be clear, cities across California share in the goal of ensuring 
all our residents have access to affordable, reliable high-speed 
broadband and eagerly welcome installation of wireless infrastructure 
in collaboration with local governments. However, this bill will not 
help in achieving these goals.
    Instead, this bill interferes with local governments' management of 
their own property and their ability to receive fair compensation for 
its use. Local governments actively manage the rights of way to protect 
their residents' safety, preserve the character of their communities, 
and maintain the availability of the rights of way for current and 
future uses. By stringently limiting those factors that local 
governments may consider in their own land use decisions, and 
restricting the compensation they receive to the ``actual costs'' they 
incur to process applications, this bill limits local governments' 
ability to adequately serve and protect residents.
    Furthermore, this bill would transfer public property to private 
companies with no public obligation. S. 3157 restricts the rental rates 
cities can charge for use of public property such as the right-of-way 
and municipally owned poles, in direct violation of the 5th and 10th 
Amendments of the U.S. Constitution while also limiting rental rates to 
``actual and direct costs'' which also violates the gift prohibition of 
many state constitutions. This forces taxpayers to subsidize private, 
commercial development, without any corresponding obligation on 
providers to serve communities in need or contribute to closing the 
digital divide in those markets.
    This bill can have lasting damaging impacts on the character of 
each individual city, while simultaneously creating an undue burden on 
taxpayers to subsidize the irresponsible deployment of wireless 
infrastructure for private corpor at ions. S. 3157 should be rejected 
and wireless providers should be instead encouraged to work in 
collaboration with their local government partners to deploy this 
critical infrastructure.
    For these reasons, the League of California Cities is OPPOSED to S. 
3157 (Thune & Schatz). If you have any questions or need any additional 
information, please contact me or the League's Washington advocate, 
Leslie Pollner (leslie.pollner
@hklaw.com) at 202.469.5149.
            Sincerely,
                                           Carolyn Coleman,
                                                Executive Director.
cc: California Congressional Delegation
                                 ______
                                 
                                 League of Minnesota Cities
                                        St. Paul, MN, July 11, 2018

Hon. Amy Klobuchar,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Klobuchar,

    The League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) respectfully requests you to 
oppose S. 3157 (Thune & Schatz), a bill referred to as the 
``Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-edge 
Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance'' (STREAMLINE) Small Cell 
Deployment Act.
    Simply stated, this bill is a direct attack on local decision-
making authority. S. 3157 would give the Federal Communications 
Commission (FCC) unfair power over local officials and Minnesota 
communities and would not grandfather in Minnesota's Right-of-Way 
Management (ROW) law that includes small cell wireless deployment 
provisions. Significant changes were enacted to Minnesota's ROW law 
following the 2017 legislative session. This followed intense and 
lengthy negotiations between LMC, other local government associations, 
wireless carriers, and cable providers. Dozens of cities have 
implemented or updated their ROW ordinances in accordance with the new 
law. Wireless providers and local governments are collaboratively 
working to deploy small cell wireless technology within the confines of 
statute, which has been confirmed by wireless industry representatives 
during a hearing this past legislative session and through informal 
conversations. Minnesota cities would be stifled by additional layers 
of preemptive legislation that would give the FCC jurisdiction over all 
public facilities in public rights-of-way.
    The bill, like recent rulemaking by the FCC, inhibits local 
decision-making by changing current Federal requirements for small cell 
siting by carving out a new category with new requirements, separate 
from existing wireless siting law. While the FCC's statutory authority 
to take these actions is debatable and could potentially be challenged 
in court, congressional action to limit local authority would be 
permanently damaging. New parameters in the bill eliminate the 
flexibility for cities to deny an application based on the general 
health, safety, and welfare of citizens. Protecting the health, safety, 
and welfare of the public is a core function of city government and the 
ability to do so must be preserved.
    Attached to this letter is a table providing a comparison between 
the bill and Minn. Stat. Sec. 237.162-163, Minnesota's 
telecommunications ROW law. We anticipate that the Senate Commerce 
Committee will hear this legislation this month. On behalf of our 833 
member cities, we ask you to oppose S. 3157. Please contact Laura 
Ziegler at [email protected] or 651-281-1267 with any questions you may 
have.
    Thank you for the work that you do on behalf of all Minnesotans.
            Sincerely,
                                              Heidi Omerza,
                                                         President,
                                            League of Minnesota Cities.
CC: Senator Tina Smith
Representative Timothy Walz
Representative Jason Lewis
Representative Erik Paulsen
Representative Betty McCollum
Representative Keith Ellison
Representative Tom Emmer
Representative Collin Peterson
Representative Rick Nolan

 Comparison Between ``STREAMLINE'' Act and Minnesota State Right-of-Way
                                   Law
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Issue                 S. 3157                Effect on MN Law
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wireless siting   It would limit local        Eliminates the flexibility
 in the public     consideration of ``small    for cities to deny an
 rights-of-way     personal wireless           application based on the
                   facilities'' to             general health, safety,
                   ``objective and             and welfare of citizens.
                   reasonable'' ``structural
                   engineering standards
                   based on generally
                   applicable codes; safety
                   requirements; or
                   aesthetic or concealment
                   requirements.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Shot clock''/   Modification of the         Shortens time frame for
 Time for local    application shot clock to   decisions on applications
 government to     60 days for collocations,   for collocations from 90
 issue a           and 90 days for new         days to 60 days. No
 decision          sites.                      impact on request for new
                                               wireless support
                                               structure decision.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice of         Cities are allowed ten      Shortens time frame from
 incomplete        days to notify applicants   30 days to ten days.
 application       in writing if their
                   application is
                   incomplete.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Special shot       90 days for        This is new and would
 clock carveouts   collocations if the         differ from state law, as
 for small         provider has filed 50 or    described under the
 cities, defined   fewer applications in a     ``shot clock'' issue.
 as fewer than     30-day period, or 120
 50,000            days if the provider has
 residents         filed more than 50
                   applications in 30 days
                   120 days for new
                   sites if the provider has
                   filed 50 or fewer
                   applications in a 30-day
                   period, or 150 days if
                   the provider has filed
                   more than 50 applications
                   in 30 days
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moratoria         Prohibits moratoria/        Same as state law.
 prohibition       tolling to lengthen these
                   shot clocks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One-time local    Allows local governments    This is new. No comparable
 government        to request a one-time 30-   language in state law.
 waiver            day waiver from the FCC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Automatic         Includes a deemed granted   Same as state law, but has
 approval          provision for               a shorter time frame to
                   applications not acted      act under Federal
                   upon by the local           regulations.
                   government in the stated
                   period.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fees--applicatio  Limits ``fees,'' which the  This would be a massive
 n, management,    bill defines as ``a fee     financial hit to cities
 rent              to consider an              to combine one fee for
                   application for the         all, and could result in
                   placement, construction,    a subsidy for the
                   or modification of a        wireless industry by
                   small personal wireless     cities. MN state law
                   facility, or to use a       allows cities to require
                   right-of-way or a           telecommunications ROW
                   facility in a right-of-     users to get a permit for
                   way owned or managed by     use of the ROW; however,
                   the State or local          it creates a separate
                   government for the          permitting structure for
                   placement, construction,    the siting of small
                   or modification of a        wireless facilities.
                   small personal wireless     Cities can recover their
                   facility.'' This would      ROW management costs and
                   include not only            charge rent for attaching
                   application fees, but       small cell facilities to
                   also recurring rents for    city-owned structures in
                   usage of public property.   the public rights-of-way.
                                               Rent is capped for
                                               collocation of small
                                               wireless facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rent              Fees must be                Conflicts with MN law as
                   ``competitively neutral,    outlined above.
                   technology neutral, and
                   nondiscriminatory;
                   publicly disclosed; and
                   based on actual and
                   direct costs.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions       The bill also defines       This is new. A ``small
                   ``small personally          wireless facility'' is
                   wireless service            defined as ``each antenna
                   facility,'' limits it to    is located inside an
                   ``a personal wireless       enclosure of no more than
                   service facility in which   six cubic feet in volume
                   each antenna is not more    or, in the case of an
                   than 3 cubic feet in        antenna that has exposed
                   volume; and does not        elements, the antenna and
                   include a wireline          all its exposed elements
                   backhaul facility.''        could fit within an
                                               enclosure of no more than
                                               six cubic feet; and all
                                               other wireless equipment
                                               associated with the small
                                               wireless facility,
                                               excluding electric
                                               meters, concealment
                                               elements,
                                               telecommunications
                                               demarcation boxes,
                                               battery backup power
                                               systems, grounding
                                               equipment, power transfer
                                               switches, cutoff
                                               switches, cable, conduit,
                                               vertical cable runs for
                                               the connection of power
                                               and other services, and
                                               any equipment concealed
                                               from public view within
                                               or behind an existing
                                               structure or concealment,
                                               is in aggregate no more
                                               than 28 cubic feet in
                                               volume.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal land       Orders a GAO study on       This is also new, but it
                   broadband deployment on     was an issue tabled by
                   tribal land                 the Broadband Deployment
                                               Advisory Committee,
                                               referred to as BDAC,
                                               early on.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 ______
                                 
                        New York State Conference of Mayors
                                          Albany, NY, July 13, 2018

Hon. Charles E. Schumer,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Schumer:

    On behalf of the cities and villages comprising the membership of 
the New York State Conference of Mayors, I write to express our strong 
opposition to the Streamlining the Rapid Evolution and Modernization of 
Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance (STREAMLINE) Small 
Cell Deployment Act (S. 3157). This legislation would severely restrict 
local governments' authority to regulate wireless facilities, grant 
wireless service providers unfettered rights of access to the municipal 
right-of-way (ROW) and mandate specific application procedures for 
wireless facilities installed in the ROW. While NYCOM supports 
universal high-speed Internet access for all, the means by which this 
legislation mandates the installation of wireless facilities and 
eliminates the ability of local governments to obtain a fair return for 
wireless equipment installed on taxpayer property is fatally flawed and 
not in the public interest.
    During 2018-2019 state budget negotiations, the wireless industry 
pursued a similar proposal here in New York that attempted to achieve 
many of the elements present in this bill. The industry's effort was 
met with overwhelming opposition from New York's municipalities 
dedicated to protecting the safety and welfare of New Yorkers and 
guarding against the misappropriation of taxpayer property. Local 
governments across New York State support the proliferation of 
broadband technology, especially in our underserved and rural 
communities. However, achieving meaningful Internet access throughout 
the state will not be advanced by this legislation.
    Maintaining the public ROW is an essential function of local 
governments and their capacity to protect the public's health, safety, 
and welfare and preserve the character of communities. The standard 
provided in this bill would fundamentally impinge on the ability and 
responsibility of local governments to make well reasoned decisions in 
the best interest of their residents. Specifically, this bill would 
usurp local government authority to address particularized public 
safety and aesthetic concerns related to the installment of such 
facilities by limiting the factors that a municipality may include when 
reviewing a wireless application, and reducing the amount of time a 
local government has to consider an application. Furthermore, under 
this legislation, the failure to issue a determination on an 
application would result in the application's automatic approval.
    This legislation also seeks to limit how much a municipality may 
charge a wireless provider when renting space on municipally owned 
structures. Compelling local governments to charge below-market rates 
for the use of public structures will foster the already inequitable 
deployment of broadband technologies. Additionally, limiting the fees 
that municipalities may charge a wireless applicant to the direct and 
actual costs of the installation will eliminate the ability of local 
governments to receive fair compensation for the use and maintenance of 
public property.
    Again, achieving broadband ubiquity is an important and necessary 
goal for all municipalities in New York State and across the country. 
However, forcing local governments to abdicate their authority to 
protect and maintain public rights-of-way and preventing cities and 
villages from receiving a fair return for rented space on municipally 
owned infrastructure is simply untenable. For the aforementioned 
reasons, NYCOM vigorously opposes this legislation and urges you to 
reject this proposal.
            Sincerely,
                                           Peter A. Baynes,
                                                Executive Director.
                                 ______
                                 
                     Florida Municipal Electric Association
                                     Tallahassee, FL, July 16, 2018

Hon. Bill Nelson,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Nelson:

Re: Concerns with S. 3157, the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act

    On behalf of the 34 community-owned, public power utilities in 
Florida, I am writing to express our serious concerns with a new 
legislative proposal , S. 3157, the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment 
Act. The bill is currently under consideration in the Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation Committee, and we understand that the 
Committee may hold a hearing on this bill soon.
    The bill in question, S. 3157, ostensibly is aimed at ushering in 
the next generation of wireless technology, including encouraging 
widespread broadband deployment. We support that effort, but not at the 
expense of state and locally owned electric utilities. The 
Communications Act of 1934, still the standard for today's 
telecommunications industry, is quite clear--Section 224 explicitly 
exempts public power utilities from Federal Communications Commission 
(FCC) pole attachment regulations. That section exempts municipally 
owned and rural electric cooperative utilities from pole attachment 
regulation because these entities are already subject to ``a decision-
making process based upon constituent needs and interests.'' Indeed, 
Congress has consistently upheld this long-standing tradition.
    But this legislative proposal puts the municipal exemption in 
jeopardy. Specifically, the bill would change section 332 of the 
Communications Act, which currently gives the FCC jurisdiction over 
mobile telecommunications services and gives nondiscriminatory access 
to state and local rights of way. S. 3157 would revise section 332 to 
require mandatory access to attachments to a ``facility in a right of 
way owned or managed by a State or local government.'' The bill would 
also allow the state or locality to charge fees for the ``placement, 
construction, or modification'' of a small wireless facility that is 
``in accordance with section 224.''
    Because utility pole attachments are the only type of facility 
covered under section 224, and because public power utility poles are 
the only types of poles ``owned or managed by a State or local 
government'' in the public right of way, this decision would give the 
FCC jurisdiction over all public power pole attachment decisions. All 
told, these provisions would effectively repeal the public power 
exemption from FCC regulation.
    The bill would also create conflicts among several provisions of 
the Communications Act, may run afoul of state constitutional 
provisions that prohibit political subdivisions from subsidizing 
private enterprise, and would create a one-size-fits-all approach to 
pole attachment decisions. Further, we have legitimate concerns about 
reliability, liability, and safety--critical issues when dealing with 
our public infrastructure. Safety is of utmost concern to us in 
Florida, especially given our susceptibility to hurricanes.
    As you know, Florida tackled this issue just last year. The Florida 
Legislature developed new law in this area (HB 687) when it passed the 
Advanced Wireless Infrastructure Deployment Act, which addresses 
broadband infrastructure in the public rights of way and provides local 
governments with an application timeframe. Critical to Florida's public 
power community, the Act exempts municipal electric utilities, as well 
as ALL electric utilities, from the new law. Perhaps this Florida model 
can be utilized in future Commerce Committee discussions.
    We appreciate your continued support of Florida' s public power 
communities and look forward to working with you on this important 
issue. Please contact me at (850) 224-3314, ext. 1, or 
[email protected] if you have any questions.
            Sincerely,
                                                Amy Zubaly,
                                                Executive Director.
                                 ______
                                 
                                             City of Tacoma
                                          Tacoma, WA, July 17, 2018

Hon. Maria Cantwell,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.

Dear Senator Cantwell:

    On behalf of the City of Tacoma, including the City's General 
Government and Tacoma Public Utilities, we write to express our 
concerns regarding S. 3157, the ``Streamlining the Rapid Evolution and 
Modernization of Leading-Edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance Small 
Cell Deployment Act,'' and respectfully request you oppose the 
legislation. Based on our experience and recent effo1is undertaken 
across the City of Tacoma, we believe this legislation would undercut 
the authority and responsibility of local government to manage and 
protect property in the responsive way our citizens expect.
    As you know, under current Federal law, municipal pole attachments 
and rights of way are already regulated at the state or local level. 
Local governments and their consumer-owned utilities charge fees and 
administer regulations responsive to the public interest and in 
accordance with state laws.
    In the City of Tacoma, we have worked with telecommunications 
providers to provide access to publicly-owned infrastructure and rights 
of way in ways that make sense for our community. More recently, we 
collaborated with telecommunications providers on revisions to our fee 
structure and land use regulations to accommodate new technologies, 
including small cell attachments. Those new fees and municipal code 
revisions were enacted in 2018 following extensive stakeholder outreach 
and public processes.
    If enacted, S. 3157 would amend that effective policy model and 
cede significant control of locally-owned assets to the policies of the 
Federal Communications Commission. There are many troubling provisions 
in the legislation, including:

   S. 3157 would ove1iurn the exemption for municipal utility 
        poles, light poles, traffic signals or other state or local 
        government facilities from FCC oversight--this exemption has 
        been in place for decades.

   S. 3157 gives the FCC jurisdiction over the ``right-of-way'' 
        or facilities ``in the right-of-way owned or managed by the 
        State or local government.''

   S. 3157 sets the stage for our taxpayers and utility 
        customers to subsidize for-profit telecommunications operations 
        by setting all fees at a rate ``calculated in accordance with 
        section 224'' for attachments to a ``pole, in a right-of-way, 
        or on any other facility that may be established under that 
        section.''

   S. 3157 restricts right-of-way and municipal pole attachment 
        compensation under both Secs. 332 & 253 to direct costs, in 
        direct violation of the 5th and 10th Amendments.

   Municipal governments and their consumer-owned utilities 
        would lose their ability to allow a use or not on publicly-
        owned facilities or in rights of way. The legislation provides 
        a hollow, ambiguous exemption for engineering, safety, and 
        aesthetic issues, but it would only allow utilities to 
        challenge the ``placement, construction, and modification'' of 
        the small cell devices.

   Sets strict application timeframes and applies burdensome 
        ``deemed-granted'' requirements on pole attachment 
        applications. Namely the legislation would shorten existing FCC 
        shot clocks (new towers, from 150 days to 90 days, and 
        collocations: from 90 days to 60 days). Failure to meet either 
        deadline results in a deemed granted penalty.

    The City of Tacoma has worked collaboratively to bring new 
technologies into our community for many years. Nationally there is not 
a record showing that communications companies are prohibited or unduly 
burdened when seeking to attach their wires and devices to municipally 
owned poles or in the municipal right-of-way. Based on our experience, 
S. 3157 does not solve any problems and disenfranchises local residents 
from decisions about the use of community assets that have been 
financed through their tax dollars or utility bills. For these reasons, 
we urge your opposition to S. 3157.
    Thank you for considering our input on this. Should you have any 
questions or would like to discuss these issues in greater detail, 
please contact Alisa O' Hanlon at 253-591-5310 or Clark Mather at 253-
441-4159.
            Sincerely,
                                         Victoria Woodards,
                                                   Mayor of Tacoma.
                                          Woodrow E. Jones,
                                       Chair, Public Utility Board.

c: Narda Jones, Office of Senator Maria Cantwell
Megan Thompson, Office of Senator Cantwell
Rosa McLeod, Office of Senator Maria Cantwell
                                 ______
                                 
                                                City of Rye
                                             Rye, NY, July 20, 2018
By U.S. Mail and E-mail
Senator Chuck Schumer,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.

Ms. Beatrice Pollard

[email protected]

Dear Senator:

    The City of Rye, NY (``Rye'') respectfully requests that you oppose 
S. 3157, the so-called ``Streamlining The Rapid Evolution and 
Modernization of . . . Small Cell Deployment Act'', a bill which was to 
be the subject of a Senate Committee on Science, Commerce and 
Transportation hearing on July 25, but now awaits later action. S. 3157 
(the ``Bill'') would virtually eliminate state and local regulatory 
jurisdiction over small cell siting in our rights of way and deprive 
local governments of the right to charge reasonable fees for access to 
local rights of way, something to which municipalities have been 
entitled for generations. The wireless industry seeks, by Federal 
legislative action, to convert public assets for private gain without 
paying reasonable compensation.
    Please note at the outset, the word ``small'' in the term ``small 
cell'' simply refers to the area served, not the size of the equipment. 
A small cell may not be seen as small when installed next to a typical 
house or business, especially in a suburban or rural setting. This 
issue of scale is compounded by already existing Federal regulations 
(under the ``Spectrum Act'') that permit aggregations of small cells in 
a single location (``collocation'') without meaningful municipal review 
once an initial small cell installation has been pem1itted in that 
location. (Under 47 PCR l.14001, a small cell site can grow beyond that 
originally municipally approved by an additional 10 feet in height and 
an additional six feet on each side without new municipal approval.)
    Rye has direct experience with the wireless industry's attempts to 
deny municipalities even the most minimal regulatory oversight over 
siting of telecommunications small cell infrastructure. Rye is 
presently being sued by Crown Castle, infrastructure builder for 
Verizon Wireless. That litigation has been brought in an attempt to 
deny Rye any meaningful review over Crown Castle's proposed siting of 
almost 70 so called ``DAS nodes'' throughout our City. Rye, like 
municipalities everywhere, should be able to review proposed 
installations to protect aesthetic resources, community character and 
neighborhood quiet (from noise emitting equipment), as well as to 
prevent damage to property values.
    The New York State Legislature this past session rejected industry-
sponsored legislation similar to the Bill that would have significantly 
impaired municipal jurisdiction, making clear that the New York 
position is that municipal jurisdiction over small cell siting and 
franchise fees is to be protected.
    The Bill would impair important state and local rights that have 
long been protected under the Telecommunications Act and would make the 
FCC, not the Federal Courts, the arbiter of disputes between wireless 
providers and local governments.
    The Bill would federalize jurisdiction over both small cell siting 
and franchise fees, giving an FCC that is hostile to local control the 
ability to pass regulations that would make local jurisdiction 
irrelevant. The Bill would impose unrealistic and arbitrary Federal 
deadlines on any surviving municipal review authority.
    The Bill's limitation on franchise fees would end an important 
source of local revenue. This deprivation of revenue would be 
especially damaging in New York against the backdrop of the harm 
already caused by the SALT deductibility limitation now in the Internal 
Revenue Code.
    The City of Rye urges your consideration of the following 
propositions responsive to typical wireless industry rationales for 
legislation of the Bill's type:

        --The purpose of the present wave of small cell installations 
        is to surround customers with sufficiently strong 4G LTE 
        (present technology) transmitters to make wireless a more 
        effective competitor with cable and fiber to the home 
        providers--to encourage cord cutting and ultimately place all 
        data access in the hands of the wireless industry.

        --The purpose is not installation of next generation, mobile 5G 
        equipment: 5G is in its infancy, its equipment is developmental 
        (and may well be different in positive respects from existing 
        small cell equipment) and 5G, in its likely long introductory 
        years, will not be in a form suitable for mobile use.

        --The purpose is not to bring broadband to underserved rural 
        areas: small cells are efficient only where there are 
        sufficient concentrations of customers to make short range 
        equipment effective, in other words, in towns and cities.

        --The purpose is not to bring the best communications 
        technology forward: the potential transmission capability of 
        fiber optic cable is far beyond the capability of wireless 
        devices--wireless devices are a limiting factor in data 
        transmission and wired fiber optic connections should continue 
        to have an important role, assuming fiber optic providers 
        survive wireless industry assault.

        --The recent end of net neutrality makes it ever more important 
        that the Federal Government not facilitate oligopolistic 
        control of data transmission by the wireless industry.

    The City of Rye is hopeful that you will strongly and effectively 
oppose S. 3159. We are grateful for your efforts.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Josh Cohn,
                                                             Mayor.
                                 ______
                                 
                                                     August 6, 2018

Chairman John Thune,
Senate Commerce Committee,
Washington, DC.

Ranking Member Bill Nelson,
Senate Commerce Committee,
Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Thune and Ranking Member Nelson:

    As mayors from across the country, we write to express our deep 
concerns about S. 3157, The STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act, which 
restricts traditionally-held local authority and will complicate, 
rather than simplify, national efforts to expedite infrastructure 
deployment. While we share Congress's goal of ensuring efficient, safe, 
and appropriate deployment of new broadband technology, this 
legislation is deeply problematic and will not achieve this goal. 
First, the legislation enables the Federal Government to essentially 
``take'' broad swaths of land owned or controlled by local governments. 
Second, there is no one-size-fits-all solution for states and cities. 
Differing jurisdictions have different public safety and infrastructure 
interests that will be negatively impacted. Moreover, local governments 
should have the time and flexibility to ensure that small cell wireless 
infrastructure is deployed, not just quickly, but safely and correctly 
in our communities.
    Cities across the country are working toward faster technology to 
improve our residents' lives. A Federal one-size-fits-all mandate will 
thwart efforts already underway to implement balanced regulations. By 
preempting local authority, S. 3157 will create inefficiency, confusion 
and further delays. Furthermore, cities have traditionally negotiated 
with providers on issues such as the location, appearance and size of 
wireless infrastructure. This bill severely limits the ability of 
cities to ensure that infrastructure suits the neighborhood around it, 
and that its own critical infrastructure is not compromised in any way
    S. 3157 also requires mandatory access for attachments to a 
facility in a right-of-way owned or managed by the state or a local 
government. And it severely restricts the rental rates cities can 
charge for the wireless industry's use of public property, such as the 
right-of-way and municipally-owned poles. Consequently, S. 3157 forces 
taxpayers to subsidize private, commercial development without any 
corresponding obligation on providers to serve communities in need or 
contribute to closing the digital divide. By failing to distinguish 
between locations on private property (where local government 
responsibility is limited to land use review of decisions made by 
private land owners) and locations on streets, sidewalks and other 
public property (where local governments are also the land owner), S. 
3157 is unrealistic and unenforceable. Furthermore, limiting rental 
rates to ``actual and direct costs'' violates the gift prohibition of 
many state constitutions.
    Finally, the bill imposes unreasonable ``shot clocks'' for small 
cell infrastructure, which are considerably shorter than those the 
Federal Government even applied to itself in the bipartisan MOBILE NOW 
Act. A small cell's reduced size per installation, compared to a 
traditional cell tower, does not translate to a reduced procedural 
burden on local governments. Cities must still review each site 
individually to ensure that it meets the jurisdiction's requirements. 
Further, the bill's limited extension of time for small jurisdictions 
and bulk applications does not address resource challenges for states 
and localities. These harsh timelines will limit the resources cities 
have for other public priorities, such as road maintenance and public 
safety. It also allows the Federal Government to dictate what roads and 
rights-of-way can be forced into construction and when the projects 
occur.
    S. 3157 attempts to make progress on deploying faster wireless 
technology in urban and rural areas, but the legislation is deeply 
flawed. Our cities are equally interested in having faster technology 
to improve our communities, but Congress must work with input from 
states and local governments to create better solutions.
    For these reasons, we oppose the bill in its current form and urge 
you to revise the legislation to ensure that faster wireless technology 
can be effectively deployed across the country.
            Sincerely,


The Honorable Jenny Durkan           The Honorable Victoria Woodards
Mayor of Seattle, WA                 Mayor of Tacoma, WA
 
The Honorable John Giles             The Honorable Bill de Blasio
Mayor of Mesa, AZ                    Mayor of New York, NY
 
The Honorable Eric Garcetti          The Honorable Lucy Vinis
Mayor of Los Angeles, CA             Mayor of Eugene, OR
 
The Honorable Michael B. Hancock     The Honorable Lyda Krewson
Mayor of Denver, CO                  City of St. Louis, MO
 
The Honorable Miguel Pulido          The Honorable Ted Wheeler
Mayor of Santa Ana, CA               Mayor of Portland, OR
 
The Honorable Buddy Dyer             The Honorable London Breed
Mayor of Orlando, FL                 Mayor of San Francisco, CA
 
The Honorable Jim Kenney             The Honorable Andrew Ginther
Mayor of Philadelphia, PA            Mayor of Columbus, OH
 
The Honorable James Brainard         The Honorable Sam Liccardo
Mayor of Carmel, IN                  Mayor of San Jose, CA
 
The Honorable Pauline Russo Cutter   The Honorable Ethan Berkowitz
Mayor of San Leandro, CA             Mayor of Anchorage, AK
 
The Honorable Paul Soglin            The Honorable Rahm Emanuel
Mayor of Madison, WI                 Mayor of Chicago, IL
 
The Honorable Keisha Lance Bottoms   The Honorable Lily Mei
Mayor of Atlanta, GA                 Mayor of Fremont, CA
 
The Honorable Greg Fischer           The Honorable Tom Barrett
Mayor of Louisville, KY              Mayor of Milwaukee, WI
 


    Senator Nelson. And, Mr. Chairman, if I may, I'd like to 
yield my time, when you get to me, to Senator Schatz, and he'll 
take over.
    The Chairman. OK, very good. Thank you, Senator Nelson.
    Thank you all for your testimony. Let's get into a few 
questions here.
    Ms. Baker, a number of parties have proposed a private-
sector approach to clearing spectrum in the 3.7 to 4.2 
gigahertz band, saying that such an approach would avoid the 
extensive delays that are associated with legal challenges and 
auction preparation. Apart from the foregone auction revenue 
for the Federal Government, which is an important 
consideration, are we correct to see the tradeoff of such an 
approach as one between maximizing the amount of spectrum made 
available for terrestrial 5G use and the speed with which that 
spectrum can be put into service?
    Ms. Baker. So, thank you for your question.
    The C-band, which is the 3.7 band that you're talking 
about, is a very important band because of its international 
harmonization. Mid-band is critical for 5G. And I'll reiterate 
that this is a race, and we're third because we are sixth in 
mid-band spectrum allocation. China has allocated 100 megahertz 
to each one of their carriers. South Korea just had a great big 
auction of mid-band. Mid-band, mid-band, mid-band, it's really 
important whether it's 3-4-5, 3-5, or 3-7. But, C-band is 
critical to this. You, in MOBILE NOW, told the FCC to study it. 
The FCC is studying it. I urge action. This is a race. We need 
action for it. We have a track record of being good partners 
when we move incumbents. There are some important incumbents 
there. I think--Senator Nelson mentioned government 
incumbents--I think some people would consider ESPN mission-
critical. We need to move them, but we need to move them--we 
have a good track record of doing that. So, we want to be good 
partners. We need to come up with a plan, and execute on it 
rapidly.
    The Chairman. OK. Do you see other bands where a private-
sector-led approach to spectrum clearing could be used, 
essentially granting property rights to incumbents in order to 
avoid a more drawn-out process?
    Ms. Baker. I think there are some critical government 
bands, and I think there are some critical--there are probably 
some other civilian uses, too. I think some of the ones that 
you were looking at, that I think we are all looking at, in 
addition to the ones that I named, are also low-band spectrum. 
Low-band has always been critical, particularly to rural areas. 
If we're going to bring more broadband to rural areas, low-band 
spectrum travels further. I think there are some terrific win-
win situations we can look at.
    The Chairman. OK.
    Mr. Cowden, and speaking of rural areas, you mentioned, in 
your opening statement, that Charter seeks to provide 
ubiquitous connectivity to all of your customers, including 
those in rural communities. What spectrum resources are most 
important to providing mobile wireless in rural areas?
    Mr. Cowden. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    So, we have been doing extensive testing, over the last 12 
months, with the 3.5 CBRS band, specific--really, two different 
use cases. One as a mobility small cell. That's not what I'm 
talking about for rural broadband. For rural broadband, a 
separate-use case using the same frequency spectrum in seven 
different markets around the country selected for their varying 
climate characteristics and foliage characteristics so that we 
can really test the consistency of using CBRS for rural 
broadband. We are very pleased with the results. We believe we 
can effectively offer cost-effective rural broadband at a 
minimum speed of 25-by-3 at the cell edge, meaning it would 
only be better within closer proximity to the cell base 
station. And so, we're bullish on that.
    We also look at 5 gigahertz as a capacity layer for rural 
broadband as an effective solution. And, to the point that was 
just made about lower C-band, we are interested in lower C-
band. We have concerns about the reallocation process. But, as 
the comments have been made, it is a very effective band for 
both coverage and capacity for 5G. And, to the extent that 
became available, we would certainly look to use that for rural 
broadband serviceability, as well.
    The Chairman. Yes.
    Mr. Stroup, you mentioned the role satellite broadband-
compliant precision agriculture beyond the role already played 
by satellite positioning technology. Could you describe the 
industry's efforts in that regard?
    Mr. Stroup. Thank you, Senator.
    Precision agriculture starts with GPS. So, certainly the 
capabilities of the satellite industry are crucial to being 
able to provide precision agriculture. In addition, satellites 
provide weather information and Earth imaging information for 
precision agriculture.
    In conjunction with developments in flat-screen antenna, 
which allows the ability to connect virtually every tractor, 
combine, et cetera, and the broadband capabilities that the 
industry is deploying, we have the ability to provide 
ubiquitous coverage. And ubiquitous coverage is one of the 
great advantages that the satellite industry provides. 
Certainly, having been in rural areas like yours, having 
participated in a wedding in Isabel, South Dakota--or just 
outside of Isabel, South Dakota--I know that it's highly 
unlikely that we're going to see the small cells deployed to be 
able to provide coverage for precision agriculture without 
utilization of satellite systems.
    The Chairman. Thanks.
    My time is expired.
    Senator Schatz.

                STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

    Senator Schatz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Cowden, licensed spectrum gets a lot of attention, but 
unlicensed spectrum is another critical input for access to the 
Internet. And, as you know, demand is growing. Can you talk 
about the importance of unlicensed spectrum for broadband 
access and 5G deployment?
    Mr. Cowden. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    It is--unlicensed spectrum is extremely important to us. 
The way we think about spectrum policy, we want it to be 
technology-neutral, in terms of treating both wireline and 
wireless policy initiatives fairly. And then, separately, we 
want a balance of both unlicensed and licensed spectrum. We use 
Wi-Fi in a significant way today. It's part of our Wi-Fi First 
MVNO, but we also support 280 million wireless devices on Wi-Fi 
today. The concern with Wi-Fi is that we are approaching 
exhaust. 2.4--the 2.4 band of Wi-Fi is already saturated, and 
the 5 gigahertz band that we currently have is approaching 
exhaust. It's one of the reasons----
    Senator Schatz. So, the----
    Mr. Cowden.--we're advocating for additional spectrum right 
adjacent to the upper band of 5 gigahertz, the 5.9 band. And we 
are also interested in exploring the 6 gigahertz band for long-
term increased unlicensed capacity --again, keeping in mind 
that we have to manage the--any potential interference in 
reallocation issues in that band.
    Senator Schatz. So, the Wi-Fi Alliance is saying we need 
about a--1 gigahertz more of new unlicensed spectrum by 2025. I 
guess what you're saying is, if we open up the 5.9 gigahertz 
band and do a couple of other things, we can meet the demand. 
If we don't, we won't?
    Mr. Cowden. That's exactly correct, Senator. I would say 
the 5.9 bands, just to be clear, we're talking about maximum of 
75 megahertz, so less than a tenth of the overall projection of 
the overall Wi-Fi capacity that we need, from the study that 
you're referencing. We certainly need to look at the 6 
gigahertz band, or other bands, for additional unlicensed 
capacity.
    Senator Schatz. And can you talk to me a little bit more 
about the CBRS band and the tests--the tests that you've done 
and the, I guess, encouraging information that you've gotten 
back? It's a little bit counterintuitive, because I think we 
still believe that, as it relates to 5G deployment, the 
economics are not going to necessarily be there for rural 
areas. What's different about your tech or your approach that 
makes this not pie in the sky?
    Mr. Cowden. I can only comment on the actual testing that 
we've done and the results we've concluded from those tests. 
Let me talk about both use cases.
    We've done pervasive CBRS testing as a small cell mobility 
layer, so literally attaching to our cable strand in more urban 
areas. We've done that in Tampa, Florida, and in Charlotte, 
North Carolina, and then we're about to do that in New York 
City and Los Angeles, and then also Denver, Colorado. That's a 
separate use case, more for mobility handoff.
    For rural broadband, though, the essence of your question, 
we've gone to seven different markets, and we've used 3.5 CBRS, 
in conjunction with 5 gigahertz unlicensed capacity, so we use 
5 gigahertz more of a capacity layer, because it doesn't have 
the same RF propagation characteristics of 3.5.
    Senator Schatz. I don't know what that--what is that?
    Mr. Cowden. I'm sorry.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Cowden. So, the distance, the----
    Senator Schatz. I may be the only one in the room that 
doesn't know----
    Mr. Brenner. You don't know what RF propagation is?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Cowden. I'm sorry. Radio frequency propagation.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you, OK.
    Mr. Cowden. The distance that a signal can reach.
    So, 5 gigahertz doesn't have the same distance 
characteristics that 3.5 does, but it is a good capacity layer, 
particularly in rural broadband, where you don't have a lot of 
congestion of unlicensed traffic. So, it's a useful solution. 
And then, 3.5 gigahertz CBRS, at maximum output power and at 
cell towers of 200 to 250 feet, we can get to cell edges as far 
as 5 miles and offer 25-by-3 megabit service, minimum speed, at 
that cell edge. And then, it can--if you talk about C-band, you 
can certainly add more capacity.
    Senator Schatz. So, this is sort of 5 miles from an urban 
area, right?
    Mr. Cowden. No. So, for rural broadband--it could be that, 
but, in our case, Charter has pervasive broadband 
infrastructure----
    Senator Schatz. I got it.
    Mr. Cowden.--all over. And so, we leverage that 
infrastructure----
    Senator Schatz. I got it.
    Mr. Cowden.--to build out.
    Senator Schatz. Thank you.
    Mr. Brenner, you're doing some interesting things, in terms 
of spectrum sharing. Can you talk a little bit about the 
importance of that? Is--and is it--I know it's important. I 
want to understand why. And I also want to understand whether 
there's a role for the legislative branch to play, or is this 
entirely a private-sector play?
    Mr. Brenner. Thanks so much for that question, Senator.
    So, from the--in 4G, as I mentioned in my testimony, we 
originally developed 4G for licensed spectrum, and then, as 
unlicensed spectrum became so important, we basically revert--
you know, we jerry-rigged 4G after-the-fact to add this 
unlicensed component, and the results have been tremendous. 
There were just speed tests that were--a million tests that 
were done around the world using our chips. And the increased 
speeds were 192 percent. So, for 4G, the use of licensed and 
unlicensed spectrum has been tremendous. So, for 5G, what we're 
doing is, from the beginning, from the ground up, we're saying, 
``OK, we're going to have the variant for licensed spectrum. 
What can we do for unlicensed spectrum?'' So, there's a very 
exciting aspect to that, which is--the way unlicensed spectrum 
is used today, whether it's Wi-Fi or cellular, if the four of 
us were unlicensed transmitters, we would each transmit one-
fourth of the time, and we would each have to be quiet three-
fourths of the time, when everyone in--when the one person was 
transmitting. What we're developing for 5G is the ability--
because with 5G, we have this very, very fast new radio, and we 
have many, many antennas that have very thin beams. So, what we 
can do is, if the four of us are each going in different 
directions, and----
    Senator Schatz. You can direct traffic, yes.
    Mr. Brenner.--and we can each talk to one another and sense 
where the other is going, we can all transmit at the same time.
    Senator Schatz. My time is up. I'm going to take the rest 
through the record, because I--now I understand a little bit 
better the technical aspect. I do want to understand whether 
there's anything for the legislative branch to do, other than 
stay out of the way.
    Thank you.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Schatz.
    Senator Fischer.

                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA

    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The DIGIT Act, which is bipartisan legislation on the 
Internet of Things, has passed the Senate, and I hope it's 
going to be enacted soon.
    Ms. Baker, you noted a number of sectors impacted by the 
growth of IoT, and that's agriculture, manufacturing, retail, 
healthcare, energy, transportation. And, given the many Federal 
agencies to be affected by IoT, do you think that the public/
private collaboration enabled by the DIGIT Act would help 
prevent barriers to IoT advancement, such as regulatory silos 
or overlap or, as Senator Schatz said, you know, keeping 
government out of the way?
    Ms. Baker. We appreciate your leadership on DIGIT Act, and 
we do think that the alphabet soup of Washington could prove to 
be some sort of--could prove a regulatory barrier to some of 
the Internet of Things. So, we think it's a good idea to bring 
all of the things that the Internet of Things, and all the 
money that it's going to save, and the conservation it's going 
to bring, and--I'm, personally, so excited about precision 
agriculture, and, you know, transportation is really big one 
for me, because I'm in the car all the time. I think, you know, 
it's 21,000 lives saved, but it's, you know, $450 billion a 
year. It--these numbers are huge, so--we're really going to be 
transformed. So, we appreciate your leadership on DIGIT.
    We're also very focused on making sure we have the platform 
for the Internet of Things to unroll. And so, we are also very 
supportive, again, of AIRWAVES and STREAMLINE, so we can build 
the platform so that the real Internet of Things can evolve.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you for mentioning precision 
agriculture. About a month ago, I had the opportunity to go to 
a community college in northeast Nebraska. They have a program 
there with precision agriculture. As I'm sure you're aware, 
agriculture is the third-largest user of the Internet of 
Things, and that's only going to grow once we're able to deploy 
broadband, especially in rural areas.
    In order for the IoT solutions to reach that full 
potential, though, I think we have to ensure that there is 
enough spectrum that's going to be available to deploy those 5G 
networks. And that's--is emphasized in the DIGIT Act. We have 
Senator Gardner, Senator Schatz, here, who are also involved 
with that. What further policies can we promote to make sure 
that there is enough spectrum to meet the growing demand that 
we see with the Internet of Things? If you would----
    Ms. Baker. OK, I'll go first, and everybody can--after.
    Certainly, we appreciate the leadership of AIRWAVES. We 
think that's critically important. We need to have a schedule 
so that our $275 billion that our carriers are going to invest, 
that they know when and what that spectrum is going to be, and 
when it's going to be auctioned. That's really critical.
    It's also--it's--there are two things. The other is 
streamlining. You know, as China rolls forward with millions of 
sites, we're going to need to do the same thing. We've had 
150,000 sites that we've put up in the last 30 years of this 
industry. In the next few years, we're going to have to roll 
out 800,000. That's a lot. So, we think that the Federal 
Government needs to put some guardrails, like they did in 1993, 
as to, kind of, where and how we site these. We think that 
STREAMLINE has stricken a very good balance--stricken?--has 
struck a very good balanced act on the localities and giving 
the operators some opportunity to site really small cells 
faster.
    Senator Fischer. OK, thank you.
    Mr. Stroup, what can Congress do to ensure that conditions 
exist that encourage rural 5G networks so that our farmers and 
ranchers can benefit from that advanced technology?
    Mr. Stroup. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    I think that the most important thing is ensuring that 
there is sufficient spectrum from growth in the satellite 
industry. As I noted before, in rural areas, it's hard to 
envision that there are going to be the small cells without 
connecting via satellite. And the other is to ensure that there 
is technology neutrality in policies that are adopted so that 
one industry is not advantaged over the other. So, I think that 
those are the two primary areas I would recommend.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you.
    Mr. Cowden, healthcare innovations such as remote 
monitoring and virtual access to specialists present, I think, 
exciting benefits, in rural areas especially. And 5G is needed 
to support it. What are the most important policy changes that 
we can make so that we can encourage those telehealth solutions 
for our seniors and for those who are living in rural areas?
    Mr. Cowden. So, I'm more of the engineer than the 
regulatory policy expert. However, I would say----
    Senator Fischer. Mr. Brenner's going to whisper in your 
ear.
    Mr. Brenner. I'm going to help, yes.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. This is one of my favorite areas.
    Senator Fischer. You can answer, as well.
    Mr. Brenner. Great.
    Mr. Cowden. But, I would say that we are focused on 
technology-neutral solutions, particularly between wireless and 
wireline, so that one doesn't get advantaged over the other--we 
have somewhat of a concern there--and that we continue to focus 
on a balance of both unlicensed and licensed spectrum to 
promote competition and innovation. We feel like, if those 
policy frameworks, in general, are followed, a lot of 
innovation will occur. And, in general, that will support rural 
broadband and 5G in rural broadband.
    One point I want to make about 5G. I think it's understood. 
5G is a technology standard. It's not millimeter wave. I know 
5G first rolled out in the millimeter wave space, and that's 
where the equipment currently exists. But, it's not exclusive 
to millimeter wave. And so, when we talk about 5G for rural 
broadband, it probably won't occur in millimeter wave, and not 
in a significant way, but it will likely occur in mid-band. 
Right? And so, that's where you can get the broadband speeds 
and the lower latencies that 5G can enable.
    Senator Fischer. Mr. Chairman, can the other witness 
answer?
    Thank you.
    Mr. Brenner. Thank you so much, Senator, for the question.
    The potential for--to both improve healthcare and 
dramatically reduce costs is gigantic with--happening today in 
4G, and it's going to happen even more in 5G. The number-one 
policy issue to spur these technologies forward is actually not 
a spectrum issue all. It relates to CMS and reimbursement. So, 
what Qualcomm is doing is, we've worked with the AMA to create 
codes. I've learned a lot. I thought I was spectrum person, but 
I've learned a lot about healthcare reimbursement. So, we need 
CMS to fund codes that the AMA has created, which will allow 
doctors and hospitals and healthcare providers to get 
reimbursed when they use connected devices to engage in remote 
monitoring. That's step one. And that's happening today with 4G 
with things like glucometers and many different devices that 
have the 3G or even 4G connectivity.
    But, for 5G, we have the potential to take this much, much 
further, with the ability to do everything wirelessly that we 
would do with a wire. So, that means we can have, actually, 
with ultra-low-latency, remote surgery, we can do monitoring of 
children with cerebral palsy for hip dislocation, remotely. So, 
there are many, many applications for 5G that we're very 
excited about in the healthcare area, but they really--it goes 
to dramatic change in the way the healthcare reimbursement 
system works.
    So, thank you.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you. I'm excited to work with you on 
that with our rural hospitals so we can keep rural America 
vibrant and growing.
    Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Brenner. You could see how eager I was to discuss it.
    The Chairman. Yes. That affects many of us on this panel.
    Thank you, Senator Fischer.
    Senator Gardner.

                STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thanks, to all the witnesses, for your time and 
testimony today.
    Mr. Cowden, a special welcome to you to the Committee from 
the great state of Colorado.
    I would just ask, Mr. Chairman--Mr. Cowden is probably 
going to have to leave in an hour and 10 minutes, as I am. 
Single-ticket Broncos tickets go on sale.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Gardner. Please excuse both of us as we do our 
Colorado duty.
    The Chairman. That special dispensation will be allowed----
    Senator Gardner. Thank you.
    The Chairman.--for that.
    Senator Gardner. Ms. Baker, thank you very much for your 
organization's strong support of the AIRWAVES Act. Senator 
Hassan and I introduced this bill last year. It's very crucial 
that we continue to have this life--this--the lifeline of 
spectrum, so to speak, this pipeline, in the future. And our 
work--our bill works to achieve just that, creating also an 
opportunity for investing billions of dollars in rural 
broadband buildout. So, thank you very much for your support. 
Thanks to Senator Hassan's partnership and the support of my 
colleagues, including Senator Johnson, Senator Cortez Masto, 
Senator Young, and Senator Tester. Thanks for being on the 
bill.
    Ms. Baker, the spectrum pipeline's going to be critical, as 
you laid out, to our competition in the future. Countries like 
China, preparing for frequencies, its help derail--to try to 
derail American leadership in wireless technology. Can you talk 
about opportunity costs if we were to fail in the 5G race, if 
we were to fall behind, lessons of the past--we talked a little 
bit about Japan--and what we learned from the 3G-to-5G race?
    Ms. Baker. Yes. Well, again, thank you, to all of you, for 
cosponsoring. This is very important, AIRWAVES Act. It's 
critical for our national policy, because it's not just 
wireless, it's everything else. It's the platform of which all 
the other exciting things in transportation and energy and 
education, healthcare. It's--platform of all that's going to 
happen.
    If you look at what happened in Europe and Japan, who led 
in 2G and 3G, they lost their lead to us in 4G, and they really 
haven't recovered. And our 4G lead has meant, you know, 
billions of dollars to our economy, millions of jobs, but it's 
also meant that our companies--United States companies are the 
ones that are leading the world. Take Qualcomm. Because of 4G 
lead of the United States, Qualcomm is leader. China wants to 
steal that lead, and they want Chinese companies to be the 
leader, and Chinese companies to be selling to us. I think that 
we want that to be United States companies. And that's why your 
lead in your bill is so important.
    Senator Gardner. Just to give the Committee an idea. You 
know, roughly speaking, and define it how you will, what could 
the rural dividend mean?
    Ms. Baker. OK. So, the rural dividend is--I just want to 
shout from the mountaintops--it's a great idea as to how we're 
going to bring broadband to rural areas. It's 10 percent of any 
of the future auctions, which, if we had had it in place for 
the last two auctions, would have been $6 billion to build out 
rural. That means the future low-band auctions, that would be 
another $6 billion that we could build out rural broadband. The 
Mobility Fund is important, but we all know, for these rural 
areas, to really build them out is going to take money, and the 
rural broadband is a really significant, thoughtful way to go 
about solving that.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Ms. Baker.
    Mr. Brenner, we've talked about U.S. participation in a 
number of world telecommunications forums, we've talked about 
ITU, World Radio Conferences, 3GPP standard make---- standard-
making meetings. How important is it for the U.S. that we 
remain engaged in these forums, global harmonization? What does 
that mean for the success of wireless connectivity?
    Mr. Brenner. Oh, it's absolutely crucial that the 
Americans--that America lead in all--and participate heavily in 
all these bodies that you mentioned. Qualcomm is --devotes 
substantial resources to this 3GPP, which is the worldwide 
global standards body, which creates the standard that governs 
much of the way that 5G, 4G, 3G all works. And we're very proud 
of the efforts that we make in 3GPP. But, the--our business is 
global. We're based in San Diego, but we have a global 
business. Everyone wants to work with us, and we want to work 
with everyone. But, much of what we do is driven by the 
standards. All the spectrum bands, the multiplicity of bands 
that I talked about in my testimony, those all go through 3GPP, 
they all go through a standards process, all these different 
combinations. So, the bodies you mentioned are crucial.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Brenner.
    Mr. Cowden, in some hour and 5 minutes----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Gardner.--unlicensed spectrum is a critical 
component of any wireless solution. And companies, like 
Charter, will play a major role in helping to offload traffic 
from licensed services and helping to power access to Wi-Fi and 
other technologies. As an engineer, I know you're familiar with 
particular characteristics of certain spectrum bands. And 
you've mentioned a few of those in your testimony this morning. 
But, one of the bands you didn't mention was the 6 gigahertz 
band. I have to be careful I don't end up in a ``Back to the 
Future'' flux-capacitor moment in gigawatts kind of thing.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Gardner. The 6 gigahertz band, do you believe there 
is any potential for unlicensed services in the 6 gigahertz 
band?
    Mr. Cowden. Thank you for your question, Senator.
    Yes, of course. We definitely look at the 6 gigahertz band 
as an important opportunity for unlicensed capacity. It is to 
be stated, we have--there are existing incumbent users in that 
band, and we have to carefully look at how they would be--how 
we'd address interference issues or reallocation issues. But, 
if you look at where our Wi-Fi capacity is today, there are 
essentially three bands. There's a 2.4 gigahertz band. It's 
completely saturated. And then we have two bands in the 5 
gigahertz, a lower and an upper. So, we talked about 5.9 as 
the--you know, just north of that upper band for some immediate 
relief, although that's not nearly enough. And so, we would 
look for 6 gigahertz as the next logical band, right adjacent 
to that, for a full-gigahertz potential to grow unlicensed Wi-
Fi service. It's critical that we look at solutions like that.
    Senator Gardner. Well, thank you. I'm glad to hear that, 
because--that focus--because one of the provisions that Senator 
Hassan and I have in the bill would require the FCC to issue a 
rulemaking on permitting non-interfering unlicensed use in the 
6 gigahertz band. And I hope that companies like Charter and 
others in the space will make sure that we've--that they are 
able to support the work we've done in AIRWAVES to unleash the 
positive opportunities that we have in the 6 gigahertz band.
    And, Mr. Stroup, I'm out of time, but I have some 
questions. We may follow up with you.
    Thank you very much, to all of you, for being here.
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
    Senator Tester.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

    Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This has been enlightening, a little bit like speaking in a 
foreign language.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Tester. But--so, let me start out--and I don't want 
to put words in anybody's mouth, because I'm a rookie here, but 
3.5, I get the impression that has the longest span, as far as 
distance goes?
    Mr. Cowden. Well, it depends which frequencies you're 
talking about. Compared to millimeter wave spectrum, which is 
much higher to enable----
    Senator Tester. Well, let me get right down to it. If we're 
using something in rural America, I'm hearing 3.5 is what you 
want to use. What's the span of 3.5? Can you tell me? And does 
the flatland versus mountains have an impact?
    Mr. Cowden. It does. Flatland/mountains, what--one of the 
biggest----
    Senator Tester. So, if we're on prairies, how far would it 
reach?
    Mr. Cowden. So, we've done testing in those different types 
of markets. And in prairies, where it actually is maximized, 
we----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Cowden.--we believe the cell edge between the tower and 
the edge of the cell, where----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Cowden.--so, where you can still get 25-by-3 megabit--
--
    Senator Tester. Yes, yes.
    Mr. Cowden.--coverage, it's 5 miles.
    Senator Tester. Five miles. OK. So, there are going to be a 
lot of boxes put up around. You guys have talked about it. What 
kind of money will it take, today's dollars, to make 5G a 
reality everywhere?
    Ms. Baker. So, our companies are prepared to invest $275 
billion----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Ms. Baker.--of their own money----
    Senator Tester. And that----
    Ms. Baker.--to build out 5G.
    Senator Tester.--does it all? That does the whole country?
    Ms. Baker. That's where we're going to start.
    Senator Tester. OK. So, I'm trying to get an idea on how 
much it costs to do the whole country. Because my guess is, 
you're going to start in New York City and Chicago and Miami 
and Houston and Phoenix and San Diego, and Big Sandy will not 
be on that list. OK? So, the question is, What's it going to 
cost to make sure Big Sandy is on that list?
    Ms. Baker. Well, so, Senator, I think there are two 
important goals that we have. And one is to connect all of 
America, and the other is to make sure that we win this race. 
And I think the good news is that AIRWAVES and STREAMLINE do 
that, because AIRWAVES has this----
    Senator Tester. I----
    Ms. Baker.--rural dividend----
    Senator Tester. I got you.
    Ms. Baker.--that gives----
    Senator Tester. You're right. And if----
    Ms. Baker.--10 percent to----
    Senator Tester.--we're going to----
    Ms. Baker.--rural areas----
    Senator Tester. If----
    Ms. Baker.--that will help build it out.
    Senator Tester. I got you. And I love you. You know that.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Tester. OK? But, the truth is, if we're going to 
win the race, I want to make sure that--where did you go to the 
wedding at in South Dakota?
    Mr. Stroup. Isabel.
    Senator Tester.--Isabel, South Dakota, is connected up, 
too. OK? Because the truth is, is if rural America--and, by the 
way, I get it. People's where the construction goes. If rural 
America isn't part of that equation, we don't win the race, in 
my town.
    Ms. Baker. I think it's important. I think the Mobility 
Fund at the FCC's important.
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Ms. Baker. I think the rural----
    Senator Tester. So----
    Ms. Baker. And I also, Senator, think that the low band 
that's in----
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Ms. Baker.--low band, not 3.5, is lower----
    Senator Tester. I got it. Is there----
    Ms. Baker.--it's also an----
    Senator Tester.--anybody on this panel that knows how much 
it would cost, in today's dollars, to have 5G everywhere in the 
country?
    Mr. Stroup. Senator, our member companies are already 
launching the satellites to----
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Mr. Stroup.--be able to do that.
    Senator Tester. All right. And is there any idea on how 
much of that total figure would be paid for by the taxpayers? 
Much like broadband that we're doing now, there's a fair amount 
of it's done private sector, there's a fair amount of it done 
by Congress. Is there any idea? Is it going to be a 50/50 split 
that we anticipate? Seventy-five Federal dollars, 25 private? 
Any idea?
    Mr. Stroup. This is all with private equity, private 
property.
    Senator Tester. It's all going to be private dollars. So, 
we're not going to have to set aside any dollars for 5G?
    Mr. Stroup. Not for satellite 5G.
    Senator Tester. OK. But, what about the others?
    Ms. Baker. The Mobility Fund is about $500 million a year 
over the next 10 years.
    Senator Tester. And that will get it done?
    Ms. Baker. That's why we think that the rural dividend will 
be a great additional boost to that.
    Senator Tester. OK. OK. But, the rural dividend is the 
opposite argument. That goes to rural America. How about 
everybody else? Is it--will it get it everywhere, is the point?
    Ms. Baker. Our----
    Senator Tester. What I'm trying to figure out is, is this, 
so you know, that, you know, it's going to cost some money to 
do this. Is it--what's the taxpayer's share going to be? And 
the taxpayer gets the benefit, by the way. So, what's the share 
going to be?
    Ms. Baker. Well, as we roll out these networks, we're--we 
want to roll them out as fast as we can, which is----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Ms. Baker.--one of the reasons why STREAMLINE is important, 
because the more----
    Senator Tester. Gotcha.
    Ms. Baker.--the longer it takes and the more it costs to 
roll out to the big cities, the longer it's going to take----
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Ms. Baker.--to get to the smaller cities.
    Senator Tester. OK. I've got a couple more questions. When 
did we start--first start implementing 4G? By--which, by the 
way, I still don't have where I live, but when did we first--
don't even have 3G--when did we first start implementing 4G? 
How many years ago was it?
    Ms. Baker. About 2010.
    Senator Tester. Yes, 2010, so 8 years ago. And when do you 
anticipate rolling out the 5G? Has it already started, or is it 
due to start?
    Ms. Baker. Ever----
    Mr. Brenner. It's underway.
    Senator Tester. It's underway right now. And how many years 
do you think that it will take to roll that out?
    Mr. Brenner. Well, one of the things, Senator--it's a 
constant process, so it's never, quote/unquote, ``finished.''
    Senator Tester. Yes, 4G isn't finished. Yes.
    Mr. Brenner. 4G isn't finished, either. That's why I 
talked, in my testimony, we're constantly developing----
    Senator Tester. OK.
    Mr. Brenner.--enhancements.
    Senator Tester. So, is there a 6G out there?
    Mr. Brenner. Not yet, but----
    Senator Tester. You anticipate there will be.
    Mr. Brenner. I'm sure there will be, yes.
    Senator Tester. OK.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. And----
    Senator Tester. All right.
    Mr. Brenner. And when we roll out----
    Senator Tester. It's OK.
    Mr. Brenner.--6G, we'll still be----
    Senator Tester. Yes.
    Mr. Brenner.--working on 4G to enhance it.
    Senator Tester. So--OK. So--that's good. So, I want to talk 
about precision ag just for a second. So, this is more for you, 
Mr. Stroup. It's operated by GPS right now, at least the 
precision ag that I am aware of, the one that sets the seed, 
from your previous round to the next round, 8 inches apart, or 
6 inches apart, or 3 inches apart. It's an amazing technology. 
We don't have 5G where I'm at. But, we've got that amazing 
technology. Why do we need 5G for precision ag?
    Mr. Stroup. The 5G capability is to provide connectivity 
for monitors, other types of sensors. So, in addition to the 
location capability, it will provide access to additional 
information.
    Senator Tester. So, at some point in time--there still 
needs to be an operator in the combine or the tractor now--at 
some point in time, we need 5G to go to a point where you can 
remotely operate that piece of equipment.
    Mr. Stroup. You have the opportunity remote--to remotely 
operate the equipment. You have the opportunity to use sensors 
to establish the right amount of----
    Senator Tester. Right.
    Mr. Stroup.--fertilizer, et cetera.
    Senator Tester. I will have about 380,000 questions for the 
record.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Tester. Thank you all very much.
    The Chairman. Sounds like the Senator from Montana's trying 
to lessen his tractor time.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I have next up Senator Capito.

            STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I'm actually pleased that I'm following my fellow Senator 
from Montana, in terms of him trying to simplify, a little bit, 
what the message is.
    So, I have three, kind of, basic questions. I'm going to go 
back to rural. I know we're beating this. This is very 
important to me. I created the Rural Broadband Caucus as my 
goal, and you've been very helpful, many of your organizations. 
So, thank you for that.
    The repeating thought is, it's too costly, there's not 
enough market for it, and there's no competition in a lot of 
areas in rural America. I'm from West Virginia. I did hear a 
little bit about a mountain, but I'm going to--I'll let that 
one go.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Capito. How will the development of 5G solve these 
three major issues in the rural areas? Will the--will there be 
more competition that will come to the rural area? Will the 
market be able to bear this? And is the cost going to be cost 
prohibitive to certain parts of rural America, which we know 
are, in some cases, more lower-economic areas? So, I'm just 
going to throw it open, maybe, to Ms. Baker.
    Ms. Baker. Sure. I do think that the goals are intertwined 
of connecting all America and winning the race to 5G. And I 
think that what this committee and its leadership has done is 
put forth two very important bills, one in AIRWAVES, because 
AIRWAVES also focuses on low band, which Senator Tester kind of 
got there, but 3.5 is mid-band. The lower the spectrum, the 
further it goes. So, it's very important in rural America----
    Senator Capito. OK, let me stop you there, from a technical 
standpoint. When you say ``lower band,'' you know, a 
nonscientific person in this, that implies to me slower, lower. 
Is that--am I seeing that wrong? It's the same speeds that can 
go through a lower band as through a----
    Mr. Brenner. Yes. What we're talking about is how far the 
signal can transmit----
    Senator Capito. OK.
    Mr. Brenner.--between towers. And----
    Senator Capito. OK.
    Mr. Brenner.[--if it's lower-band spectrum, the signal goes 
further.
    Senator Capito. But, it doesn't affect the service----
    Mr. Brenner. Has nothing to do with the----
    Senator Capito. OK.
    Mr. Brenner.--service
    Senator Capito. OK. OK.
    So, go ahead.
    Ms. Baker. Right. So, I think that AIRWAVES both has low-
band spectrum, which is important, and isn't also 
internationally harmonized, so it will be cheaper to roll it 
out, as well as this rural dividend, which I think is going to 
be very important to add money to the underserved areas.
    Senator Capito. Well, I mean, I think--I accept that, and--
I do think this is a--it's a repeating theme with a lot of us 
that we keep talking about it, and we're still not getting 
there. So, I'm a bit frustrated by that.
    When you talk about competition with other countries for 
5G, can you frame that in an economic--I know that the 
arguments that we've been able to deploy faster in 4G has 
increased our productivity in healthcare and all kinds of 
different economic--is that the concern, that the race to the 
economic benefits of 5G, if we don't get there sooner, we're 
not going to realize it and somebody else realizes it? Is that 
the main competition? Mr. Brenner, do you have a----
    Mr. Brenner. Yes, I agree with the way you just framed 
that. You know, I have to say, again, Qualcomm, we're a global 
company. We're based in San Diego, but our business is global. 
And so, we really do want to see 5G roll out broadly and 
rapidly everywhere, all around the world. And we think that's a 
good thing for the United States, if 5G is rolled out 
everywhere and the phones that are used for 5G have a chip 
that's designed in San Diego by people employed in the United 
States.
    Senator Capito. Right. OK.
    Ms. Baker. So----
    Senator Capito. Yes.
    Ms. Baker.--I would say, being first in 4G added $100 
billion to our economy. And that was jobs and--but, what it 
really did was, it unlocked the app industry. It unlocked the 
sharing economy, which is based here in the United States.
    Senator Capito. Right.
    Ms. Baker. When they designed 4G, they thought they were 
putting a dongle into a netbook. They thought that they were 
making a netbook go mobile. Instead, they unlocked all these 
industries that we'd never thought about. So, when we talk 
about 5G and we talk about the numbers--it's going to add $500 
billion to our economy--I think we kind of don't know, because 
we don't really know what it's going to unlock.
    Senator Capito. So, not getting there first, or at least 
close to first, it's not that--it doesn't mean that we won't 
get there. It means that we might be locked out of any other--
some economic expansions that maybe another country might be 
able to market better or get there faster. And that's what it 
means. It doesn't mean we're not going to get there.
    Ms. Baker. Global leadership and innovation.
    Senator Capito. Right.
    OK, last question is on the regulatory. We really haven't 
had much conversation on that. I, again, throw it open to the 
panel. I know you said anything regulatorily or legislatively 
needs to be neutral on the technology. Understood and agree 
with you there. Are there any other regulatory burdens that you 
see us facing, in the last 15 seconds that I have, as we're 
racing to 5G?
    Mr. Cowden, do you have anything?
    Mr. Cowden. You know, I would just repeat the theme of 
technology neutrality. It's--there's certainly a focus on 
wireless regulation. And that's important. But, it shouldn't be 
at the expense of not looking at some of the burdens on the 
wireline side. If you think about 5G, it really is about 
creation of small cells. But, think about what that means. 
There is wireline infrastructure that has to connect to those 
small cells. So, it's----
    Senator Capito. Well, I mean, coming from a mountainous 
state, I know wireless is not going to work in a lot of 
different areas. So----
    Mr. Cowden. That's right.
    Senator Capito.--I'm with you there.
    Mr. Cowden. Yep.
    Senator Capito. Thank you all very much.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Capito.
    Senator Klobuchar.

               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

    Senator Klobuchar. All right. Thank you very much, 
Chairman. And thank you, to Senator Schatz and everyone else 
that's focused on this issue.
    Minnesota is--actually was just ranked as the number-one 
state for wireless speed. Senator Blumenthal asked me if that 
was by the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Klobuchar. It was not. It was ranked by a national 
ranking entity. And also, Minneapolis and Saint Paul were 
ranked as the number-one and -two cities in America for 
wireless speed. And I think you know, Ms. Baker, that this 
makes a difference for people wanting to move to our state, do 
business. And, in fact, in advance of this past Super Bowl, 
which was in Minnesota, carriers made significant investments 
to increase capacity; in some cases, an increase of more than 
220 percent LTE capacity. Can you talk about Minnesota's 
experience and how it can be used to--as a example to improve 
wireless service around the country?
    Ms. Baker. I agree with you, Minnesota and Minneapolis have 
both moved quickly to capitalize on small cells, and been 
carrier friendly. And the carriers have come. And, for that 
reason, as you say, they have 500 times--500 percent more 
capacity, and they have 230 small cells, because they were one 
of the first to actually embrace the--all the good things that 
are going to come from these new networks. And so, we hope 
other states and other cities--Indianapolis has been one that 
has moved very rapidly, as well. And in--but, you know, we want 
people to see this as, ``You're going to save in energy 
consumption. You're going to save on your light bill,'' as 
opposed to, ``Let's make more money off of siting on a tower.'' 
So, we've worked very hard in states to get small-cell builds. 
We've gotten 20 over the last 2 years. If we go at that rate, 
we're going to--5G's going to be over by the time we get 50 
states builds. So, we hope that everyone will look at 
Minnesota, Minneapolis, as an example they want to emanate.
    Senator Klobuchar. And Saint Paul. Thank you.
    And you don't have to have a Super Bowl to do this. Is that 
correct? OK.
    The rural areas, of course, it's the hardest to reach, 
oftentimes. And Senator Fischer and I introduced the Rural 
Spectrum Accessability Act, and it was signed into law as part 
of the MOBILE NOW Act, thanks to the leadership on this 
committee. And it would require the FCC to explore ways to 
provide incentives for wireless carriers to lease unused 
spectrum to rural or smaller carriers.
    Ms. Baker, how--could you talk about how that leasing could 
help improve service in rural areas?
    Ms. Baker. We embrace all areas of using spectrum more 
efficiently. And leasing, certainly in smaller--like private-
sector leasing certainly seems one that's a good idea and one 
that we support. And we've supported you in that.
    Senator Klobuchar. Yep.
    Mr. Cowden, the Dig Once was--a version of it, was included 
in MOBILE NOW. Could you talk about how physical 
infrastructure, including fiber conduit, play in enabling 5G? 
Just this idea that we're going to have to install things, and 
we try to do it at once, ought to make it easier and less 
expensive.
    Mr. Cowden. Sure. So--thank you for the question. As we 
talk about 5G and small cell deployment that enables high 
bandwidth and low latency, it's critical that we have wireline 
regulation that is streamlined, as well. As you think about 
connectivity to all those small cells, it needs a wired 
connection. So, if you think the overall call path of a 
wireless signal, it's more and more a wireline connectivity to 
get to that small cell. And so, it's crucial, when we talk 
about 5G, that we don't just think in wireless terms, but the 
wireline infrastructure required to actually connect all of 
those small cells. It all needs fiber to take traffic back from 
that, from that wireless small cell back to the network.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Last, I see Senator Lee over there, 
and he and I run the Antitrust Subcommittee of Judiciary. We 
just had a hearing with T-Mobile and Sprint about their 
proposed merger, and they've claimed that the combination of 
their spectrum assets would enable them to introduce nationwide 
5G services more quickly. They claim their network would be 
superior in breadth and depth to anything that Verizon and AT&T 
could offer if they combined, and that their merger is 
necessary to enable the U.S. to win the global race to 5G. I'm 
not going to ask you to comment about this merger, but what I 
would like to know, if anyone wants to take this, is if further 
consolidation of wireless carriers, is that necessary to make 
deployment of 5G networks economically feasible?
    No one wants to answer.
    [Laughter.]
    Ms. Baker. I'm happy to say that--I leave judgment on the 
merger up to you all and your expertise, and those in the 
government. What I am very heartened to see is all these 
different players here at the table talking about 5G, and 
everyone joining in the race to 5G.
    Mr. Brenner. And what I would just add is, the goal for the 
government, in every action that it is taking in the wireless 
area, I think should be to accelerate the rapid broad rollout 
of 5G. And that should be the measuring stick.
    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Very good. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar.
    Senator Moran.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

    Senator Moran. Chairman, thank you.
    Thank you all for your presence here, and your testimony.
    Mr. Cowden, let me start with you. We've advocated for 
unlicensed spectrum. And, in my view, it has been very 
successful in bringing new technologies, new devices to lots of 
consumers across the country. I'm of the belief that we can--
must continue to pursue spectrum policy that includes both 
unlicensed and licensed. I would ask you, just briefly, if you 
agree with those comments? But, my real question is, What role 
will unlicensed spectrum play in the deployment of 5G or--if 
any?
    Mr. Cowden. Thank you for your question, Senator.
    I unequivocally agree with that comment. Unlicensed 
spectrum, by any objective standard--unlicensed spectrum, in 
general, and Wi-Fi, in particular--has been the most successful 
policy in the history of the United States, from a spectrum 
policy standpoint, in terms of total tonnage of traffic, in 
terms of the efficient utilization of the spectrum, and in 
terms of the economic impact that Wi-Fi has brought to the 
economy. So, there's no question that we need to continue to 
advocate for unlicensed growth. We are approaching exhaust with 
Wi-Fi. And that is a critical concern that we should address.
    As far as unlicensed spectrum for 5G, it's critical. It's 
definitely part of the equation. So, when we talk about 5G, 
there is a technology standard body that was referenced, 3GPP, 
that talks about 5G standards. There also is another body, 
IEEE--and I won't get too wonkish here, but--that guides Wi-Fi 
technology standards. So, Wi-Fi has its own technology roadmap, 
right? And one of those roadmaps is different technology 
variants, 802.11ad and -ay--won't get any more in that--that 
really talks about providing services in the 60 gigahertz 
layer, or millimeter wave spectrum, using Wi-Fi. Right? And so, 
Wi-Fi will be critical, in terms of the future growth of 5G-
like services. It'll just be on unlicensed spectrum instead of 
licensed spectrum.
    Senator Moran. This is a question for all. I serve in the 
role as the Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman for the group 
of entities at the Department of Commerce that includes NTIA, 
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. 
So, I'm going to ask a couple of questions about NTIA. And I 
would start with--the President's budget that--the 2019 budget 
proposed authorization for NTIA to, quote, ``negotiate leases 
with private entities that would expand their access to Federal 
spectrum.'' What kind of impact is this proposal expected to 
have on traditional licensing arrangements? And what are the 
barriers to effectively administering leases?
    Mr. Brenner. I could take that.
    Senator Moran. Mr. Brenner, thank you.
    Mr. Brenner. Senator, in the private sector, spectrum 
leasing is extraordinarily common. There are applications filed 
every day, where different private-sector companies lease 
spectrum from one another. The issue arises because the Federal 
Government has certain spectrum that they may not use 24/7 or 
they may not use coast-to-coast, so they have either in-time or 
in-location or even a part of a band, as opposed to a whole 
band that they could make available. And in the private sector, 
it would be done with a lease. And in the--with the Federal 
Government, there isn't actually a way--an easy way to do that. 
And I think the proposal is to create a way to do that. And 
that will only provide better connectivity wherever the 
spectrum happens to be available.
    We--what we don't want to do is--if spectrum isn't 
available nationwide, and it isn't available 24/7, but it could 
be made available in pockets of time or geography, we ought to 
take advantage of that instead of just throwing up our hands 
and saying, ``Sorry, the Federal Government can't lease 
spectrum.''
    Senator Moran. So, this has potential. The issue is how to 
get the Federal Government to behave the way that the private 
sector already does.
    Mr. Brenner. To allow the Federal Government to behave that 
way, right.
    Ms. Baker. I think we've looked for innovative ways for 
both--for the government to use their spectrum more 
efficiently. And this is an idea. I will say that we led the 
world in 4G because of licensed. And I think this work that 
you've done on the Spectrum Relocation Fund deserves a lot of 
credit. And we appreciate that. Sometimes relocation just may 
be a better option, as in the FAA, for instance. They could get 
their sensor rater, and we could get the spectrum, and it's a 
win-win opportunity.
    Senator Moran. Thank you. Thanks for mentioning the 
Spectrum Relocation Fund Act. In that regard, in the 20 seconds 
I have left, NTIA was directed by the MOBILE Act NOW to report 
to Congress with recommendations to incentivize Federal 
agencies to relinquish and share Federal spectrum for 
commercial wireless broadband. Does CTIA have suggestions, Ms. 
Baker, for this committee and NTIA in what additional 
incentives might look like?
    Ms. Baker. We're working closely with NTIA. I think that 
one reason that the AIRWAVES Act is so important is because 
they establish a schedule, and sometimes we all operate better 
when we have a deadline.
    Senator Moran. My deadline has expired----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Moran.--16 seconds ago.
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Moran.
    Senator Peters.

                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, to our witnesses here today. I appreciate your 
testimony on a very important topic. Actually, Chairman Thune 
and I are working a great deal on self-driving cars, and 
there's going to be a tremendous amount of data that needs to 
be processed as a result of that, so getting to a 5G network is 
critical to the--realizing the full potential of these 
automobiles, issue that the two of us have been working a great 
deal on.
    But, my question is about how we deal with the incumbent 
users that are with this technology, which is related to AV, as 
well. There are a number of open proceedings at the FCC 
targeting now low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum that could be 
made available, obviously for increased commercial licensed as 
well as unlicensed use. But, the common issue is--as 
policymakers, I think, is, How are we going to deal with the 
concerns of incumbent users? This committee has often heard me 
discuss the matter in the context of the 5.9 gigahertz band, 
which is currently allocated for intelligent transportation-
system use. And in--and they are relying on this allocation. 
Automotive and tech companies have made investments in 
connected vehicle and infrastructure technologies. State and 
local transportation departments have begun to build out 
complementary roadside hardware, as well. And, in the case of 
5.9, these countries and State and local Department of 
Transportations are the incumbents who are now being asked to 
share, much like the education broadband service entities in 
the 2.5 band and the satellite companies and broadcasters in 
the 3.7 to 4.2 band. And, as policymakers, we need to, I 
believe, ensure that their needs are met.
    So, my question to the panel is, How can we increase the 
utilization of valuable spectrum while also protecting the 
interest of these numerous incumbents?
    Ms. Baker.
    Ms. Baker. I would say--I'd take it--take us back one more 
step, to reiterate the fact that we are in a global race to 5G, 
and that China and South Korea are doing everything that they 
can to beat us, and we need to take action. And I would say, as 
far as incumbents go, we have a track record of being really 
good partners, and these incumbent activities are mission-
critical, both to civilians and to government, and we need to 
take care of them. But, we can do that. We just need to have a 
plan and get on this action, because it's important that we win 
this global race. I think, you know, whether it's AWS-3 or--I 
mean, we have a--or the broadcast incentive auction that just 
took place, all of those, we just need to make a plan, have a 
budget, and stick to it, stick to the schedule. And I think we 
can do that.
    Mr. Brenner. I'd like to add, Senator Peters. So, you put 
your finger on crucial issues, spectrum policy across the 
board, but specifically with respect to 5.9. I've worked on the 
5.9 band since 2013, and there are really now two game-changers 
with respect to that band, because the whole issue is, Can we 
protect incumbent users? Because the band is supposed to be 
used to enhance highway safety----
    Senator Peters. Right.
    Mr. Brenner.--which has dramatic potential to save lives. 
The two game-changers are, first, we've got new technology, 
called ``CV to X,'' using cellular, using, first, 4G and, 
ultimately, 5G to enable cars to communicate with cars with 
much better coverage, which--much lower latency, with a greater 
degree of reliability. So, that new technology has dramatic 
potential for a different use of the band than was envisioned 
back in 1999, when the band was allocated.
    And then, the second is--which has been a--kind of alluded 
to here earlier, is--so, while the debate has gone on--and 
actually, in 2013, when spectrum-sharing in 5.9 was first 
proposed, the idea was, ``Let's not have a long, long debate 
about it, because the upper 35 megahertz of the band can never 
be used by Wi-Fi.'' So, we're only talking about 40. I 
understand what Mr. Cowden is saying, that it's kind of a 
strategically located 40, but, at the same time, the game-
changer is, now we can look at the 6 gigahertz band. Qualcomm 
and other companies have done a lot of work. And in the 6 
gigahertz band, there's 40 times the spectrum than--there's 
1200 megahertz compared to this little, strategically placed, I 
agree, sliver of 40.
    So, I think--I'm hopeful that those two game-changers will 
cause a revisiting of the current debate over 5.9, and that we 
can move forward with something that doesn't endanger incumbent 
uses, and that allows highway safety to be enhanced with great 
new technology.
    Senator Peters. Thank you.
    Mr. Cowden. Senator, if I may add.
    Senator Peters. Yes.
    Mr. Cowden. Having run a company that developed sensing-
based spectrum-sharing technology, a recommendation that I 
would make is for the new entrants to design their system to be 
able to share with the incumbents. It is far easier to be able 
to develop the technology for sharing with known incumbents 
than vice versa. So, as a policy matter, that is a 
recommendation that I'd make.
    Senator Peters. Right.
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Peters.
    Up next, I have Senator Baldwin.

               STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I'm going to start out by saying, every question that I 
prepared has already been asked----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Baldwin.--in various form. And my--a lot of the 
thrust of those questions has been about those who don't have 
access to high-speed broadband right now, and how we reconcile 
this global race that we want to win and lead with that access. 
And I think most of you are arguing, we have to do both.
    I want to just share a little bit about what I hear at home 
when I travel to those areas that are still left behind, and 
then give each of you a real quick opportunity to make your 
case again.
    I think about far northern Wisconsin, tourism-dependent 
Eagle River, where they did a study of their summer residents 
and found that, if there was some access to high-speed 
broadband, they would stay an additional 2 weeks every year. 
That would be a huge economic boon to the region. I think of 
far southern Wisconsin, in a rural community where homeowners--
prospective homeowners are turned away because they want to be 
able to live out in the rural area, work at a high-tech place, 
and, if there's not high-speed Internet at home, they're not 
interested in this chance to live in God's country. You know, 
if there's not high-speed Internet, it's not going to work. 
Parents who drive their children to libraries for high-speed 
Internet access to do homework every night. Entrepreneurs who 
would be hiring people in rural America if they had access to 
high-speed Internet. And I can give you some great examples of 
folks who have made it a success, but, if they go 1 mile home, 
they can't work from home. You know, boy, I have so many 
stories, I would just love--but, I actually want to hear from 
all of you.
    There are 700,000 Wisconsinites, mostly in rural areas, who 
do not have access to high-speed broadband. How should we 
allocate our resources between those twin goals of connecting 
all America and winning the 5G race? I know we can walk and 
chew gum at the same time, but make your case.
    Start with you.
    Ms. Baker. OK. I'll start.
    Again, I do think connecting America is critically 
important, and I think the people at this table have different 
ways of going about that, as our carriers have different bands 
of spectrum, and they are going to bring 5G in different ways. 
Some are going about it in a fixed mobile, some are going about 
it in a--I'm sorry--some are going about it in fixed wireless, 
some are going about it in mobile wireless. Fiber's important. 
Satellite's important. All of--unlicensed is important. All of 
this is important in bringing every America connected to what 
is important for--as we call, lifeblood broadband.
    But, I also think that, as we win the race to 5G, something 
like STREAMLINE is increasingly important, because 5G is 
admittedly going to start in more urban areas, bigger cities, 
but the faster we can make those big cities connected, the more 
we're going to get to less populated areas, smaller 
communities. So, I think the more we can speed larger cities, 
the faster we can get to more rural areas.
    So, I do think that the two goals of connecting all 
America, even though that's going to take all kinds of 
technologies, and it's not just going to be 5G, and winning the 
race to 5G, are inter--they are both interwoven.
    Mr. Brenner. Here's my case, Senator Baldwin. My company's 
whole existence is based on having as many people as possible 
connected with as many devices as possible that produce the 
greatest user experience, the highest-speed broadband. And, as 
I was saying to Senator Tester, we never give up. We're still 
working on enhancements to 4G at the same time that we're 
rolling out 5G. So, it's absolutely crucial for--from 
Qualcomm's point of view, that the rollout of 5G be as broad 
and as fast as possible.
    And then one last point is, we spend a fortune, not just at 
the high end of the most expensive devices, but we spend a 
fortune to actually streamline our chip sets to have low-tier, 
mid-tier devices that people can afford. Not--in the history of 
the world, I've never heard of anyone who said, ``I don't want 
a 4G phone anymore. Give me a 3G phone.'' Everyone wants 
better, faster broadband.
    Senator Baldwin. Mr. Cowden?
    Mr. Cowden. Real quickly.
    I do think there is leadership and momentum for 5G 
technology. I do think, in general, that'll start in urban 
areas. We are very focused, at Charter, on the rural broadband 
issue. We are attacking this issue. We've gone to seven 
different markets all around the country to test what we think 
we can do right now--right?--with CBRS. And then, as we would 
get mid-band spectrum in 5G, the lower C-band, that would only 
add to the capabilities that we can produce in rural broadband. 
But, it's not something that we're waiting on, it's not 
something that we're saying, ``Well, we can't solve this 
problem.'' We're attacking it right now. We don't have exact 
answers yet. We've learned a lot, and we are encouraged by the 
results. And so, we are really going after rural broadband, 
because we think there's a case there to be made.
    Senator Baldwin. Yes.
    Mr. Stroup. Last year, in the FCC's 706 report to Congress, 
they included satellite broadband, and I--it's as a result of 
the recent launch of capability--satellites with 25.3 
capabilities. And I noted, in my testimony, the ever-increasing 
speeds and capabilities of the industry. So, in many ways, ours 
is a challenge of awareness, making the consumer aware--your 
constituents--as well as continuing to have access to spectrum 
to be able to grow to meet those needs.
    Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Baldwin.
    Senator Wicker.

              STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

    Senator Wicker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This hearing has been going on an hour and a half now. 
Maybe it's time to sort of summarize what we've learned so far.
    I'll start with you, Ms. Baker. We are behind in 5G. Are we 
in second place or third place? And how far behind are we? And 
how big of a problem is that?
    I don't think Senator Schatz has elicited an answer yet 
about our SPECTRUM NOW Act, which he and I have introduced with 
Udall and Moran. So, maybe some of you have an opinion about 
whether that's a valuable thing for Congress to do.
    What else is the role of Congress in getting us where we 
need to be on mid-band? And what's the role of the FCC, 
specifically? Do they need to act more quickly in addressing 
the mid-band spectrum, such as the proceeding on the C-band?
    So, we'll start down here and see if we can bring this 
hearing up to date.
    Ms. Baker. Thank you for your question. That's a big one.
    I would say we are behind. We announced that we were number 
three in the global race, behind China and South Korea. We were 
number one in industry readiness. We were number six in mid-
band. That averaged out to number three. Since we announced 
that, this committee and its leadership, as well as the FCC, 
has stepped up, so we are making progress. We have a plan. We 
now have a plan on spectrum, which is AIRWAVES, and we have a 
plan on siting new--the new small cells, with STREAMLINE. So, 
we are making----
    Senator Wicker. Who's ``we''?
    Ms. Baker. We, as in this Committee and the FCC and the 
country as a whole, to win the race to 5G. We can still win, 
but we have to act. And so, I think it's very important, both 
for our economy--because of--we were leaders in 4G, it enabled 
the innovation of the app industry, the innovation of the 
sharing economy to be here in the United States. And we want 
the same thing for 5G. We don't know exactly what 5G is going 
to unlock, except for, we know it's going to be remote surgery, 
we know that, at 100-times faster in--you know, and virtually 
no lag time, we know it's going to unlock all kinds of things 
in transportation, in energy, in education. We want all of that 
to happen here so that we can export our innovation instead of 
taking the Chinese innovation here.
    Senator Wicker. Anyone else? Yes.
    Mr. Brenner. Yes, Senator Wicker. Thank you so much for 
that question.
    I want to clarify two important points. First, when Ms. 
Baker says the United States is behind, no one--no one--is 
ahead of Qualcomm in making the chips for 5G.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. OK? That is--and that work is being done in 
the United States of America. Just this week, we announced 
something that no one in the wireless industry thought was 
possible. When 5G was first conceived, no one thought it was 
going to go into a phone, because, for these millimeter wave 
bands, you have many, many antennas, and the ability to have 
many antennas--you know, there's no place in one of these 
phones to put more antennas. What we announced this week is a 
module that's half the size of a paperclip, that has--supports 
four to eight antenna elements. And there will be three of 
these going in the first 5G smartphones. So, in terms of the 
technology, I mean, we're ahead. Qualcomm's ahead. And we're 
America.
    Senator Wicker. Well, let me just interject, though. With 
regard to our SPECTRUM NOW Act, which we still don't have any 
testimony on, it's intended to make spectrum available by 
providing support for users to research new and innovative ways 
to increase spectrum efficiency. Is this a bill any of you have 
looked at?
    My goodness.
    Ms. Baker. Absolutely. And we support it.
    Senator Wicker. Senator Schatz----
    Ms. Baker. Absolutely.
    Senator Wicker. OK. I see.
    Ms. Baker. Absolutely. I apologize. It was a big question, 
and I didn't get to all of it.
    Senator Wicker. That's right.
    Ms. Baker. We support it.
    Mr. Brenner. And then the other thing I wanted to clarify 
on mid-band is, there is something the--the FCC just announced 
this 3.7 to 4.2 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, thick document, 
asking a lot of questions. That just happened. But, what they--
so, they're going to have to wait for the private-sector 
companies to make their comments, and they're going to have a 
series of issues that they have to grapple with. But, what the 
FCC could do--and both Mr. Cowden and I have alluded to it--for 
more mid-band spectrum today is, the FCC's had this proceeding 
going on about the rules for the CBRS band, which is 3.5 to 3.7 
gigahertz. That's 150 megahertz, which could be used for 5G. 
But, there's an FCC proceeding that they haven't finished up. 
It would be fantastic, and it would help us on the scorecard 
that Ms. Baker keeps, if we could finish the--if the FCC could 
finish that proceeding quickly.
    Senator Wicker. In 10 seconds.
    Mr. Cowden. You know, real quickly, I would say, while 
there are some issues, in terms of technology, leadership, and 
ranking us in the world with 5G development, one of the 
critical issues with 5G, regardless, that many infrastructure 
providers are already doing anyway, is building out expansive 
wireline connectivity. Because when you go to 5G, you're going 
from these macro towers to small cells. Those small cells need 
wireline connectivity. And so, we're not stopping or waiting to 
build out that wireline infrastructure. And that really is the 
long pole in the tent, so to speak. And so, I want to be clear. 
While there are some technology issues to deal with, 
infrastructure providers are building out the wireline capacity 
to enable 5G when that equipment becomes available.
    Senator Wicker. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Wicker.
    Senator Markey.

               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

    Senator Markey. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
    Federal agencies love to hoard spectrum. I mean, it's an 
absolute rule, right? Just the power of stasis. And that was 
the case back in 1992 and 1993, where the Defense Department 
had all this surplus spectrum after the Berlin Wall came down, 
but they were going to hold on, no matter what. And so, there 
was a three-star general there. I had the hearing. ``We can't 
give it up. Absolutely impossible.'' So, we had to pass a law 
that actually took 200 megahertz away from them. At that time, 
this was the--that was the kind of a--cellphone people are 
walking around with, right? And then, we licensed it for the 
third, fourth, fifth, and sixth cellphone license, so that's 
where this came from, right? And then, out of that comes Steve 
Jobs, saying, ``Hey, I've got an even better idea.'' And out of 
that comes this, right? But, you've got to keep moving the 
spectrum if you want to keep the lead, right? You want to keep 
going.
    So, Senator Cruz and I were looking at, you know, the issue 
of Federal agencies holding on to too much spectrum. And how do 
we get it out of their hands and move it over into the public 
sector? And, Secretary Baker, we--you and I, we worked on this 
issue, back in the day. So, what would you think about an 
incentive plan that they can keep part of the revenues--that 
is, the individual agency--if they give up some of their 
spectrum so that we can move it over into the private sector in 
order to get some of the benefits?
    Ms. Baker. Senator Markey, I feel like you're feeding me 
baby food, because you know I support that.
    Senator Markey. I know you do.
    Ms. Baker. And we have been--we have been looking--with 
your leadership, we've been looking at spectrum efficiency for 
the government uses while maintaining mission-critical 
government activities for my almost entire government career. I 
think that it's really important. I think it's a great idea. I 
think any innovative ideas on how we can help the Federal 
Government continue their mission-critical use of it, but--use 
of spectrum, but----
    Senator Markey. What would you think of----
    Ms. Baker.--use it more efficiency----
    Senator Markey. What would you think of an incentive 
auction as a concept?
    Ms. Baker. Really good idea.
    Senator Markey. OK, good. Thank you.
    Mr. Brenner----
    Mr. Brenner. Yes.
    Senator Markey.--really good idea or just a really great 
idea?
    Mr. Brenner. No, that's a really great idea.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. Just as having you at--cellular penetration of 
200 percent.
    Senator Markey. Good. Thank you.
    Mr. Cowden.
    Mr. Cowden. You know, one argument I would make, separating 
from incentive auctions, is the value of shared spectrum 
regimes. So, CBRS, we just talked about Citizens Broadband 
Radio Service, that 150 megahertz is an example of that, where 
there was the incumbent tier of the Department of Defense and 
the U.S. Navy, still is, and then there are two tiers 
underneath that, a licensed tier that hasn't happened yet, and 
then an unlicensed tier. But, that will drive the efficient 
utilization of that spectrum while still allowing incumbents, 
including, in this case, U.S. Government, to have access to 
that spectrum whenever they need it. I think we need to look at 
those types----
    Senator Markey. Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, we need to find ways of 
incentivizing----
    Mr. Cowden. Yes.
    Senator Markey.--movement in that direction. That's ----
    Mr. Cowden. Yes.
    Senator Markey.--where the innovation is. The cable 
industry likes that idea.
    Mr. Cowden. Yes.
    Senator Markey. Others like the idea. So, I think that's 
right on the money. And again, just a continuation of this 
incredible development, which we've been able to see over the 
years.
    The E-rate program. In order to make sure it's there and it 
continues to be funded, and especially in terms of the 
expansion of Wi-Fi networks, just seeing this revolution 
continue. And then you just have an inability to really know 
what's going to happen, but, because you've incentivized the 
right area----
    So, Mr. Brenner, what do you think about that, ensuring 
that we protect the E-rate?
    Mr. Brenner. Well, the--I have a very strong interest in 
the E-rate program, Senator Markey, because of the fact that 
the E-rate program doesn't support cellular, it only provides 
connectivity at the school, and non-cellular connectivity. And 
I would like to see the E-rate program--back in the--earlier in 
this decade, there were----
    Senator Markey. Yes.
    Mr. Brenner.--pilot programs which showed dramatic 
improvement when students are able to use connectivity through 
the E-rate program at home, away from school, by having 
cellular.
    Senator Markey. OK. Would you be concerned if the FCC 
decreased the amount of E-rate funding in the deployment of Wi-
Fi for schools?
    Mr. Brenner. Sure. But, again, I would actually go the--in 
the other direction. I think----
    Senator Markey. I'm agreeing with you.
    Mr. Brenner.--they should expand.
    Senator Markey. OK? But----
    Mr. Brenner. Yes.
    Senator Markey. Yes.
    Mr. Cowden, what do you think?
    Mr. Cowden. I'm not the regulatory policy person at 
Charter. However, in some of my prior roles, I'm very familiar 
with the E-rate program, in general, in terms of deploying 
capacity to----
    Senator Markey. Yes.
    Mr. Cowden.--to schools and to education institutions. I'm 
a firm believer in E-rate as a general concept. I don't know 
all the particulars of the dynamics between the policy of why 
they want to decrease it or increase it. So, I really can't 
comment on that.
    Senator Markey. Yes. No, I got you.
    Well, the FCC, in 2014, wisely expanded the E-rate program 
to cover schools and libraries. And we know that that's the 
future.
    Mr. Cowden. Right.
    Senator Markey. And ultimately, you know, it empowers 
companies, actually, to be able to then provide those services 
for the schools and libraries in a much more effective way, and 
in a way that, again, keeps us at the cutting edge of how we 
not just help companies, but then help our people as we compete 
against China, as we compete against South Korea, in the 
future. You want to make sure that information is at the 
fingertips of every child, every citizen in our country.
    So, we thank you all for your testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Markey.
    Senator Hassan.

               STATEMENT OF HON. MAGGIE HASSAN, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE

    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want to 
thank you and the Ranking Member for this very important 
hearing today.
    Also, without objection, I'd like to enter this letter from 
16 different industry groups and associations, including CTIA, 
the American Library Association, and Public Knowledge, among 
others, supporting the AIRWAVES Act.
    The Chairman. Without objection.
    [The information referred to follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    Senator Hassan. Thank you.
    A lot of my questions have also been asked, but I wanted to 
start, Mr. Stroup, just to give you an opportunity to expand a 
little bit on your testimony. You mention, in your testimony, 
that it's important for the United States to take a technology-
neutral approach to spectrum policy. I agree that an all-of-
the-above approach is the best way to ensure digital 
opportunity and broadband connectivity among our most hard-to-
reach populations. Can you discuss the role of satellite 
communications in connecting rural areas, including really 
tough terrain like that in my home state of New Hampshire?
    Mr. Stroup. Certainly.
    Because of the ubiquitous coverage capability of the 
industry, and the increased capacity, the industry is taking on 
a greater role in providing those coverage--coverage to rural 
America. And I think that the point that you make, in terms of 
areas with difficult terrain, will be best served by the LEO 
and MEO systems. The geostationary satellites sometimes can 
have blockage as a result of a mountain range, perhaps.
    Senator Hassan. Yes.
    Mr. Stroup. So, the LEO and MEO systems are in continuous 
orbit so that there will be multiple satellites that provide 
connectivity to devices or buildings. So, I think that, in 
terms of the difficult-terrain issue, it is the--the systems 
that are currently being launched, the LEO systems that I 
talked about that have communications capabilities are going 
through the testing of their first satellites and expect, 
within the next 2 years, to start launching the constellations.
    Senator Hassan. Great. Well, thank you.
    I wanted just to finish, first of all, by thanking, Ms. 
Baker, your organization in particular, but all the folks who 
have written in to support the AIRWAVES Act, and to thank 
Senator Gardner for his partnership as we move forward with it. 
And a lot of our colleagues have joined us on the Act. So, I'm 
very grateful for the support, and I agree with everything that 
has been said here about our need to win 5G, our need to keep 
moving, our need to be flexible and discover new ways of doing 
this, and the really important relationship between the private 
sector and the public sector in moving this forward.
    But, I also just want to highlight for constituents what 
this technology will mean for everyday people in my state and 
throughout the country. So, can you all speak a little bit, 
what 5G will mean for our efforts in telemedicine, in public 
safety? How will it work to improve the lives of people who 
experience disabilities? And maybe as you comment on that, how 
will the AIRWAVES Act help spur these benefits to consumers?
    So, we'll start with you, Ms. Baker.
    Ms. Baker. Sure. Well, I just want to, first, thank you for 
your leadership and thank Chairman Thune again for holding this 
hearing to make sure that this is a national priority, because 
it should be, and it is, thanks to you.
    One of the reasons that your all-of-the-above approach in 
AIRWAVES is so good is because it does have high-, medium-, and 
low-band spectrum in there in--which is going to all be 
utilized for our 5G leadership. And I think one of the things 
that it does is lay the schedule and give deadlines. And I 
think that's very important, because I really do think what 5G 
is going to bring to us is going to change every one of our 
days, the way that we live, work, and play.
    Senator Hassan. Right.
    Ms. Baker. And I think, whether--I mean, pick a subject--
whether it's health and it's the $305 billion in savings 
annually, but it's not so much the money, it's what it means to 
my father to have the freedom to be able to check in at the 
doctor from his house or from his, you know, car. I mean----
    Senator Hassan. Right. And I think--and I'm going to 
quickly go down the line, because my time's almost up, but I 
just--I think one of the things I'd like you all to address 
is--we talk about winning the race to 5G, and that's very 
important, but, increasingly, Americans are feeling like there 
are winners and there are losers. We want everybody to be a 
part of this win, right? And so, this is really about how we 
partner together, you all doing what you do so well, and us all 
saying, ``So, let's make sure every American gets this 
technology sooner rather than later.''
    So, Mr. Brenner--I didn't mean to cut you off, Ms. Baker, 
but we'll just go down the line and----
    Mr. Brenner. So----
    Senator Hassan.--have you all comment.
    Mr. Brenner.--I totally agree with everything that you 
said. And you actually hit a few topics that are of passionate 
interest to me, tomorrow being the 28th anniversary of the 
Americans With Disabilities----
    Senator Hassan. Yes.
    Mr. Brenner.--Act. So, disability groups are very excited 
about the potential of 5G for people who are blind or have low 
vision. There's a company called IRA, just to pick one----
    Senator Hassan. Yes.
    Mr. Brenner.--that has connected goggles that connects to 
remote agent who can then help the person see, in effect, where 
he or she wants to go, and to interact. For people with 
disabilities, autonomous vehicles, which are going to be an 
important part of 5G, are, you know, completely a game-changer. 
And then, in terms of connected medicine, the ability for 
people to have their doctors remotely monitor their condition, 
to do screenings, to do all the things today that you either 
would have to be in person or in a place that has wired high-
speed access. So, it's very exciting for people--for those 
verticals.
    Senator Hassan. Well, thank you.
    And I see that I'm over time, Mr. Chair, so perhaps the 
other two witnesses can submit an answer in writing.
    Thank you very much.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hassan.
    Senator Blumenthal.

             STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

    Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And 
I join in thanking you and the Ranking Member for having this 
hearing.
    I know that Senator Klobuchar asked you about the T-Mobile 
and Sprint merger. When they came before the Judiciary 
Antitrust Committee last month to defend their merger plans, 
they both cited a lack of spectrum for 5G as one of the primary 
reasons for the combination. Of course, we heard similar 
arguments regarding 4G from T-Mobile and AT&T in 2011. That 
deal was rejected. Both companies launched successful 4G 
networks. And, in fact, before the Sprint/T-Mobile merger was 
made public in late April, T-Mobile's CEO said, in January, 
that his company already had, ``massively bigger plans for a 
truly transformative 5G experience on your smartphone 
nationwide by 2019.'' Sprint's then-CEO, Marcelo Claure, 
promised just as much this past February, saying it would, 
``launch mobile 5G services,'' on its present spectrum 
holdings, ``on a nationwide basis in the first half of 2019.''
    So, my question to you is--and maybe I'll begin with Ms. 
Baker--Doesn't each company presently have sufficient spectrum 
to launch 5G? If you believe their representations earlier this 
year, the answer is yes. But, I would like your independent 
assessments.
    Ms. Baker. I'm going to leave the merger questions up to 
the experts, like you and those in the administration and the 
FCC. I would comment on your spectrum, and I would say, over 
the last 4 years, we have had a quadruple in data usage. And as 
we look toward 5G--that is when we've just connected everyone--
and when we look to connect everything, the data usage is going 
to go crazy. We are using spectrum bands, particularly the high 
bands, 24, 28, 39, 37, that we never thought we could use. And 
companies like Qualcomm have spent millions of dollars in 
research and development and being able to use more high bands. 
But, however you look at it, a bill like AIRWAVES is 
particularly important, because we're going to need more 
spectrum for 5G.
    Senator Blumenthal. I think we can agree that we need more 
spectrum. The question is, Do they need to merge in order to 
have that spectrum?
    Ms. Baker. Again, I'll leave merger questions up to the 
experts.
    Senator Blumenthal. Do they presently have sufficient 
spectrum to do 5G, each of them? That's not a question about 
the merger. They could still merge. My question is about the 
adequacy of their present spectrum.
    Ms. Baker. I'm not intimately enough familiar with the 
rollout plans of 5G to be able to make a comment.
    Senator Blumenthal. Anyone else have a comment? That's a 
pretty clear question, right? Do they have spectrum, each of 
them, presently, as they promised they did earlier this year? 
Were they lying then? Or--I don't want to say ``Are they lying 
now?'' but----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Blumenthal.--do they need to combine in order to 
have sufficient spectrum?
    Mr. Brenner. Yes, I'm going to say the same thing, Senator 
Blumenthal, that I said to Senator Klobuchar. Mindful, by the 
way, of the fact that I represent a vendor, right? So, you 
know, the yardstick--I don't have a comment on the merger. I 
don't have a comment on their 5G rollout plans before or after 
the merger. My only comment would be, through the regulatory 
process on that transaction, on every other single thing that 
the Federal Government does in the wireless area, the measuring 
stick should be, Is it going to cause the 5G rollout to be 
broader, more--occur more rapidly, and is it going to be a net 
positive for 5G in this country? And I think you and the folks 
at the FCC and the people at the Justice Department will all 
have to weigh that.
    Mr. Cowden. You know, I would just say I can't comment on 
the specifics of their spectrum plans and what they would have 
also been planning to do independently that they may not now do 
together. So, I just don't know that.
    I would say, in general--and I've mentioned this before--if 
we have technology-neutral policies that do not emphasize 
wireless or wireline, one over the other, and we position 
spectrum policy for both unlicensed and licensed so that we 
have competitive and innovative policies, that's the framework 
that Charter feels very comfortable with, in terms of competing 
against anybody, whether they're combined, or not.
    Senator Blumenthal. You know, if you don't want to answer 
specifically, I'm not going to put you on the spot. And my time 
has expired, anyway. So----
    Mr. Stroup. It's not the satellite industry's position to 
look at the spectrum holdings of----
    Senator Blumenthal. And I don't want to be unfair to the 
two companies by the characterization of lying then or lying 
now. That is a vast oversimplification, I recognize. But, I 
thought it might be helpful to get a clear answer.
    Thank you all.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
    Senator Lee.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE, 
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH

    Senator Lee. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks, to each of you, for being with us today.
    It's clear to me that the United States economy has 
benefited tremendously from the fact that we have been more or 
less on the cutting edge of technology in this area. There is a 
big opportunity for us that awaits us with the possible rollout 
of 5G, but we've got to do it right. It's clear that the status 
quo in the United States with regard to 5G spectrum allocation 
is going to have to change if the United States is going to 
maintain its edge in this area and if it's going to be in a 
good position for global leadership in wireless innovation.
    It's imperative that we free up more spectrum for licensed 
used--licensed use and for unlicensed use, particularly in the 
3-gigahertz to 6-gigahertz band. But, when we're looking at 
available frequencies, it becomes increasingly clear that 
spectrum-sharing agreements will need to function as a commonly 
used alternative to current methods, to the traditional 
exclusive-use kinds of arrangements that have come to define 
our market in many instances. We're going to have to find more 
efficient ways to allow for the balance of market interests 
between incumbents, between Federal users, and between non-
Federal, non-incumbent users.
    So, Mr. Brenner, we'll start with you. In light of the need 
for more spectrum-sharing that we see coming in the very near 
future if we're going to do this, and do it right, do you agree 
that it'll be far easier for newer entrants into wireless--for 
new entrants to develop wireless systems that are built to 
minimize interference with incumbents than for incumbents to go 
back and retrofit their systems for sharing arrangements?
    Mr. Brenner. Absolutely. And that's why, when we are 
designing 5G, Senator Lee, from the very beginning, we're 
designing versions of 5G that can operate in shared--in a 
shared-spectrum mode.
    Senator Lee. Can you describe the current state of play 
with regard to advancements in interference mitigation 
technology?
    Mr. Brenner. Yes. So, I think I explained this a little bit 
in a prior answer. The way spectrum-sharing works today, if the 
four of us were sharing a band--and it almost doesn't matter 
what technology we were using--we would do it on time. We would 
each get the spectrum one-fourth of the time. But, what that 
means is, when Ms. Baker is transmitting, Mr. Stroup, Mr. 
Cowden, and I have to be silent. So, the spectrum is used by 
one person, one-fourth of the time. It's--while--seriatim. What 
we're designing in--and we call that ``listen before talk.'' 
You have to be quiet until it's your turn. What we're 
designing, though, with 5G, we now have this vast new radio, 
and we have many, many antennas in the base station and in the 
devices that are transmitting in very thin beams, very highly 
directional. So, if all four of us know in what direction we're 
each going to transmit, we can each use the spectrum, all four 
of us could use the spectrum simultaneously, and thereby have 
much more capacity, have a much better user experience.
    Senator Lee. That's good to know, and certainly gives a lot 
of us hope for the future, and hope for how this is all going 
to work.
    With regard to the 6 gigahertz band, can you expound a 
little bit of--on what you see as the--some of the potential 
for device innovation, for Wi-Fi evolution, for the development 
of gigabit LTE with license-assisted access, if the FCC were to 
open up this band for unlicensed use?
    Mr. Brenner. Yes, Senator Lee.
    We're very excited about the potential of opening that 
band, because there's 1200 megahertz. So, it's a very wide 
band. Now, there are incumbent systems all over the place in 
that spectrum, but what's good about it is, they're all fixed. 
We know where they are. And so, we can work around them, 
because we--these incumbents are not moving around. So, the 
technology that I just described, which uses what we call 
``look before talk'' instead of ``listen before talk,'' this 
idea that the four--that multiple transmitters can all use the 
spectrum at once, would be perfect for some part of the 6 
gigahertz band, because it's a brand-new technology. Everyone 
who's using that--the spectrum needs to have this--that 
technology. So, that's one reason we're excited about it.
    Another reason is, Mr. Cowden's company, he described in 
his testimony, is--just announced they're launching next-
generation Wi-Fi. We call it 802.11ax. And that's a whole----
    Senator Lee. It's a really catchy name.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Brenner. Yes, exactly. Exactly.
    Senator Lee. Sounds kind of like a bill that I would name--
--
    Mr. Brenner. Exactly.
    Mr. Cowden. You can call it ``ax'' if you want to sound 
cool.
    Mr. Brenner. Yes. Yes. And----
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Lee. Ax.
    Mr. Brenner. And ``ax'' would be perfect for the 6 
gigahertz band. And then the third technology that you spoke 
about, called LAA, which is being rolled out all over the 
country now, and it is why Minneapolis, that Senator Klobuchar 
said is the number one in the United States in wireless speeds, 
because they have LAA rolled out with small cells--that could 
also go in the 6 gigahertz band.
    So, we have the technologies. There obviously is a lot of 
work that has to be done with the FCC technical team. But, 
we're very optimistic that a large swath of unlicensed spectrum 
could become available and would be great for all these 
technologies.
    Senator Lee. So, if they get this part right at the FCC----
    Mr. Brenner. Exactly.
    Senator Lee.--big difference.
    Mr. Brenner. Exactly.
    Senator Lee. I see my time's expired.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lee.
    Senator Udall.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

    Senator Udall. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for 
focusing on this very important issue.
    You know, once again we're talking about 5G when too many 
of my constituents are living in rural New Mexico and our 
tribal land, and still don't have access to Internet. As major 
wireless companies talk about catching up with China in this 
race for 5G, we must not leave those behind in rural and tribal 
parts of our country. These communities must be included in the 
economic growth that faster connections give us. In my state, 
too many students are unable to complete homework because they 
do not have reliable Internet connections at home. And that is 
why Senator Gardner and I have introduced a bill requiring the 
Federal Communications Commission to make Wi-Fi access on 
schoolbuses eligible for E-rate support. That means students 
who don't have Internet at home can complete their homework on 
the bus. So many of these kids ride the bus 45 minutes, or 
sometimes an hour and a half, each day, to and from school, and 
they're on the bus for hours, traveling for sports. This is one 
change that can make all the difference in whether students 
finish their homework on a daily basis and succeed in school.
    While we see some expansion of broadband carriers in rural 
New Mexico, we must do much more to connect everyone. And I 
want to know how we can incentivize carriers to partner with 
other entities to provide wireless coverage?
    Ms. Baker, many of the rural areas of New Mexico that 
currently have connectivity are served by small carriers. These 
carriers do not have the financing to buy spectrum in large 
geographic areas. One way to help the smaller carriers is for 
the Federal Communications Commission to publish an inventory 
of the owners of the spectrum in certain areas. How can the FCC 
incentivize your members to participate in spectrum inventory 
so that smaller carriers can reach out to the appropriate 
owners?
    Ms. Baker. Well, first of all, I want to share your concern 
that all Americans need to be connected, and how important it 
is. And regarding the Universal Service subsidies, mobile is 
not actually allowed to participate in many of the subsidies. 
And I think that that probably needs to be looked at, because 
mobile is a very important on-ramp for many low-income to be 
able to become part of the broadband world, which I think is 
very important.
    I think you are entirely correct that a lot of the smaller 
carriers do lease from the larger carriers, or have agreements. 
And I think it is important for the FCC to help enable that 
secondary market.
    Senator Udall. Yes. And how can the FCC incentivize your 
members to lease spectrum in rural areas to entities who will 
develop that spectrum to serve those who are currently 
unserved?
    Ms. Baker. Well, we have many small members at CTIA, and 
most--and they all have partnerships with the larger carriers 
so that they can have nationwide coverage. That's part of being 
a small carrier in this--today's reality.
    Senator Udall. Mr. Cowden, too often major wireless 
providers have come to me claiming they will serve rural areas 
and devote money to build infrastructure in unserved areas if 
they can just get better conditions for building. Yet, time and 
again, I've been disappointed, because we still see no service. 
What technology do you believe can bring robust broadband to 
rural and hard-to-serve areas?
    Mr. Cowden. Thanks for the question, Senator.
    We are looking at that problem right now, and attacking it 
aggressively. We've done rural broadband proof-of-concept 
studies in seven different markets around the country, all with 
different characteristics with climate and foliage density to 
test the performance. We believe we can deploy a cost-effective 
rural broadband solution to significantly increase 
serviceability for rural broadband, and we would use a 
combination of the 3.5 CBRS band for extended coverage, and 
then also 5 gigahertz, which is unlimited band--or unlicensed 
band, but we can use that in combination with 3.5 as more of a 
capacity layer. The whole point of that is, we think we can 
extend--in any given cell tower, we can extend out to 5 miles, 
to the very edge of that cell, with the service that can offer 
at least 25-by-3 megabit to really extend and expand rural 
broadband. It's something we're aggressively looking at right 
now. We intend to do that, going forward.
    Senator Udall. Great. Thank you very much.
    And I have a couple of more questions for the record, but 
I'm out of time, so I'll just put them in the record.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Udall.
    Senator Cruz.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Good afternoon. Welcome. Thank you for your testimony. 
Thank you for being here.
    Ms. Baker, according to Accenture, the U.S. wireless 
industry is poised to invest roughly $300 billion in deploying 
5G networks, which could create 3 million new jobs and boost 
GDP by $500 billion. Personally, I'm excited that we're seeing 
some of that investment in Texas already moving forward, with 
at least three of our cities slated to be among the very first 
in the country to get 5G. AT&T previously announced that Waco 
and Dallas will see 5G services this year. And, just yesterday, 
Verizon announced that Houston, my hometown, will be getting 
5G, as well, including five traditionally under-resourced 
neighborhoods. How important, in your judgment, is having a 
predictable supply of spectrum and a long-term schedule of 
auctions to deploying the spectrum and to rolling out 5G?
    Ms. Baker. Thank you for your question, Senator.
    I absolutely think it is incredibly important. I think 
that's why AIRWAVES, as a bill, is so important, to give us a 
schedule and a--timelines for us to see this. If we're going to 
invest $275 billion of our own money, then we need to know when 
and how the spectrum is going to roll out. So, we really 
appreciate this committee's leadership with AIRWAVES. And I 
thought I was excited about Chip and Joanna in Waco until my 
hometown, also of Houston, was going to get 5G. So, I share 
your excitement about it all. And I hope everyone gets it soon.
    Senator Cruz. Me, too.
    As you know, the United States is in a global race against 
China and other countries to be the global leader in deploying 
next-generation 5G mobile broadband networks. A European 
commission spokesman for the Digital Economy and Society said, 
``In the mobile equipment industry, we had 80 percent of the 
market in 2008, and, because we were not ready for 4G mass 
deployment, the EU industry lost almost the entire market share 
for mobile phones.'' What would be the consequences for the 
United States if we lose the global 5G race to China or to 
another nation?
    Ms. Baker. I think, Senator, that's a great question.
    I think the same thing happened to Japan. So, we need to 
learn the lessons from the leadership that Europe and Japan had 
in 2G and 3G, and not lose our leadership in 4G. It will mean 
that--particularly if China wins, that Chinese companies will 
be leading the race, they'll be leading innovation, they'll be 
pushing their products to us instead of America and the United 
States pushing our products to the world.
    Senator Cruz. As you know, last January, a memo was leaked 
from the National Security Council, which called for 
nationalizing 5G mobile broadband networks. And, since then, 
there has not been a clear denunciation of that policy of plans 
to nationalize the networks from the administration. That's 
why, this week, Senator Cortez Masto and I introduced the E-
Frontier Act, which will prohibit the Federal Government from 
nationalizing our Nation's telecommunications network without 
explicit authorization from Congress.
    Let me ask each of the witnesses here. What would it mean 
if the Federal Government were to nationalize our Nation's 5G 
networks?
    Ms. Baker. I'll start, I suppose.
    We appreciate your leadership in this bill. We think that 
nationalization is a wrong approach. We think our carriers are 
already announcing plans to roll out 5G this year, and building 
upon that. I--part of the reason we're the envy of the world is 
the competitive market here. We compete on investment, we 
compete on coverage, we compete on speed, you know, prices. 
It's one of the few areas where prices are dropping and data is 
increasing. So, it really--you know, I think I noted earlier 
that we've had data increase four times since 2014, and our 
networks are covering it by speeding up 40 percent in the last 
2 years. And meanwhile, the prices are down 13 percent over the 
2 years. I'm not sure why we would nationalize it. It's the 
wrong direction.
    Mr. Brenner. I totally agree with that, Senator Cruz. We're 
working, as I said in my testimony, at a feverish pace from our 
headquarters in San Diego, to roll out the chips for 5G. We've 
accelerated our plans. We originally brought the deadlines in 
by a year. Just on Monday, we had tremendous announcement about 
these new antenna modules that solve a problem for 5G 
smartphones that no one in the industry thought could be 
solved. So, we would like to just keep on doing what we're 
doing and get 5G out there absolutely as quickly as possible.
    Mr. Cowden. Yes, I would just say I'm not exactly familiar 
yet with the Frontier legislation, but, in general, I never 
think it's a good idea to have government-owned networks. I do 
think it disincentivizes financial investment from private-
sector carriers. And so, we would not support that.
    I think one of the goals of the perceived nationalization 
was that--to improve network security. I think there are many 
other ways to do that with private-sector coordination. That 
would be much more effective. I do think, if it was 
nationalized, it would absolutely slow down the rollout of 5G. 
It would be counterproductive to what we're trying to achieve.
    Senator Cruz. Mr. Stroup.
    Mr. Stroup. The satellite industry is deploying multiple 
satellites from several different operators to play a role in 
5G. It's hard to envision how that could be nationalized where 
the government would be providing the comparable kinds of 
services. And we also take security very, very seriously. So, 
we think that there are better ways to address that issue.
    Senator Cruz. Well, thank you. And I look forward to 
working with each of you--continuing to work with each of you 
on this important issue.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cruz.
    I think we--we don't have anybody else coming back, do we, 
that we know of? OK.
    I've got one last question I'd just ask. I think it's maybe 
one that hasn't been. Pretty much everything's been asked, I 
think, today, but----
    Ms. Baker, with the completion of the broadcast incentive 
auction last year, it appears that there are few options left 
for low-band spectrum. And a recent study commissioned by CTIA 
found that spectrum at 1.3 and 1.78 gigahertz could be an 
extraordinary resource for 5G, especially given our experience 
with the AWS-3. One estimate puts the value of this spectrum at 
more than $50 billion after paying to relocate incumbents. Is 
this spectrum Congress ought to be considering for next-
generation wireless?
    Ms. Baker. I really appreciate the question.
    It's prime low-band spectrum that's internationally 
harmonized. As you mentioned, the value of it is big for the 
Federal Government. If you take that rural dividend from 
AIRWAVES there, you've got another $6 billion. I think we have 
the experience of protecting mission-critical and working with 
the Federal Government in AWS-3 and with the non-Federal 
Government in the broadcast incentives, to where we can create 
win-win situations. So, this is important spectrum that we know 
that we've been working with the Federal Government on, but we 
could certainly use some help.
    The Chairman. OK.
    Senator Schatz, anything else? You're the order? OK, good.
    Well, thank you all very much. Been a great hearing, a lot 
of good questions and responses. Thank you for your insights. 
We will look to you as we try, in the future, to move 
legislation. As has been mentioned earlier, there are some 
that's already passed, some that we're hoping to get done this 
year, that we'll continue to open the door to more spectrum 
being made available for commercial use. And if we're going to 
win the 5G race, it just flat has to happen. So, if you have 
insights--further insights about things that we can be doing, 
please convey those to us, and we'll continue to work on 
refining our legislation, in hopes that we can get that across 
the finish line this year, as well.
    I would say, to all of our panelists, that Members will 
have questions for the record, as you heard some of them 
suggest earlier, and that, if you could, get your responses 
back to those questions as quickly as possible. We'll keep the 
hearing record open for a couple of weeks.
    Thanks again for your testimony and for your responses.
    With that, this hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

                                Washington State University
                                   Portland, OR, September 20, 2017
Governor Jerry Brown,
Sacramento, CA.

Re: Please VETO SB 649

Dear Governor Brown:

    I am Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic 
Medical Sciences at Washington State University. I am a published and 
widely cited scientist on the biological effects of electromagnetic 
fields (EMFs) and speak internationally on this topic. I am 
particularly expert in how wireless radiation impacts the electrical 
systems in our bodies. I have published 7 studies showing there exists 
exquisite sensitivity to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in the voltage 
sensors in each cell, such that the force impacting our cells at the 
voltage sensor has massive impact on the biology in the cells of our 
bodies [1-7]. These papers are discussed in over 360,000 websites, 
which can be easily found by Googling (Martin Pall electromagnetic). I 
received my PhD at Caltech, one of the top scientific institutions in 
the world.
    I am writing to recommend you veto SB.649.
    EMFs act by activating channels in the membrane that surrounds each 
of our cells, called voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs). The EMFs 
put forces on the voltage sensor that controls the VGCCs of about 7.2 
million times greater than the forces on other charged groups in our 
cells [4,6,7]. This is why weak EMFs have such large biological effects 
on the cells of our bodies. EMFs work this way not only on human and 
diverse animal cells [1-7] but also in plant cells [7] so that this is 
a universal or near universal mechanism of action.
    Thousands of published studies show biological and health effects 
from electromagnetic fields. We now know the mechanism that can explain 
these effects. The mechanism is a function of the electromagnetics of 
each cell--not solely about heating effects from the radiation (on 
which present FCC guidelines are based).
    This new understanding [1-7] means we can debunk the claims of the 
wireless industry that there cannot be a mechanism for effects produced 
by these weak EMFs. The 20 years plus of industry propaganda claims are 
false. Rather the thousands of studies showing diverse health impacts 
of these EMFs can be explained. We now have a mechanism, one that is 
supported by both the biology and the physics, both of which are 
pointing in exactly the same direction. I am sending as a separate 
document a list of 142 reviews, each of which provides from 12 to over 
a thousand individual citations showing health impacts of low intensity 
EMFs, EMFs that the telecommunications industry claims cannot have such 
effects. These 142 reviews and thousands of primary scientific papers 
they cite show that the industry propaganda has no scientific support 
whatsoever.
    The consensus among independent scientists on this is further 
confirmed by the 2015 (and later) appeal made to the United Nations and 
member states, stating that the current EMF safety guidelines are 
inadequate because they do not take into consideration non-thermal 
effects. This was signed by 225 scientists from 41 countries, each of 
whom had published peer reviewed studies on EMF health effects--a total 
of 2,000 papers published in this area by the signers, a substantial 
fraction of the total publications in this area.
    According to industry, the forces electromagnetic fields place on 
electrically-charged groups in the cell are too weak to produce 
biological effects. However, the unique structural properties of the 
voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) protein can, it turns out, explain 
why the force on a cell's voltage sensor from low-intensity EMFs are 
millions of times stronger than are the forces on singly-charged groups 
elsewhere in the cell.
    It would be a disaster for the health of Californians to be exposed 
to the antennas envisioned in SB 649. The State of California would be 
making a grave mistake to proceed with supporting the commercial 
interests of the wireless industry with this legislation. You would 
best veto this bill, Governor Brown, and pause to understand the 
gravity of the biological effects, and the ramifications for physical 
and mental health, as well as consequences from continual damage to 
human DNA, and learn the facts from scientists who are independent of 
the wireless industry, not from the industry lobbyists who have a 
gigantic conflict of interest.
    VGCC activation in cells produced by low intensity EMFs can explain 
long-reported findings that electromagnetic fields cause a wide range 
of biological changes and health effects. The first 6 of these (see 
below) were well documented 46 years ago in the U.S. Office of Naval 
Medical Research report, published in 1971 [8]. The others that follow 
have been extensively documented subsequently in the peer-reviewed 
scientific literature:

    (1) Various neurological/neuropsychiatric effects, including 
changes in brain structure and function, changes in various types of 
psychological responses and changes in behavior. (2) At least eight 
different endocrine (hormonal) effects. (3) Cardiac effects influencing 
the electrical control of the heart, including changes in ECGs, 
producing arrhythmias, changes that can be life threatening. (4) 
Chromosome breaks and other changes in chromosome structure. (5) 
Histological changes in the testes. (6) Cell death (what is now called 
apoptosis, a process important in neurodegenerative diseases).
    Since 1971 many other effects of such EMFs must be added to that 
list: (7) Lowered male fertility including lowered sperm quality and 
function and also lowered female fertility (less studied). (8) 
Oxidative stress. (9) Changes in calcium fluxes and calcium signaling. 
(10) Cellular DNA damage including single strand breaks and double 
strand breaks in cellular DNA and also 8-OHdG in cellular DNA. (11) 
Cancer which is likely to involve these DNA changes but also increased 
rates of tumor promotion-like events. (12) Therapeutic effects 
including stimulation of bone growth. (13) Cataract formation 
(previously thought to be thermal, now known not to be). (14) Breakdown 
of the blood-brain barrier. (15) Melatonin depletion and sleep 
disruption.
    They may be low intensity but with regard to the VGCCs, 
electromagnetic fields can have a tremendously powerful impact on the 
cells of our bodies. Furthermore, published studies showing that 
calcium channel blocker drugs block or greatly lower biological effects 
from electromagnetic fields confirm there is a VGCC activation 
mechanism that is causing various effects. Higher frequency 
electromagnetic fields from 5G technologies on the horizon pose even 
greater biological concern than those to which we are exposed today. We 
should be moving, instead, to wired technologies at every opportunity, 
based on what we know in science today, not expanding and supporting 
the proliferation of wireless.
    I want to make several additional points very clear:

    The Physics and the Biology are both pointing in the same 
direction. Both show that EMFs act primarily via activating the VGCCs 
in the cells of our bodies.
    DNA damage known to be produced by these EMFs occur in human sperm 
and may also occur in human eggs, leading to large increases in 
mutation in any children born. It is thought that an increase in 
mutation frequency of 2.5 to 3-fold will lead to extinction because of 
accumulation of large numbers of damaging mutations. We may already be 
over this level, and if so, simply continuing our current exposures 
will lead to eventual extinction. Further increases in exposures will 
be more rapidly self-destructive.
    Pulsed EMFs are, in most cases, more biologically active and 
therefore more dangerous than are non-pulsed (continuous wave) EMFs. 
All cordless communication devices communicate via pulsations, because 
it is the pulsations that carry the information communicated. All the 
industry claims of safety are based on a theory (only thermal effects) 
that was known to be wrong back in 1971 [8]--and that was before many 
thousands of additional studies were published providing massive 
confirmation that industry claims are false.
    The industry is trying to move to much higher frequencies with 5G 
because these much higher frequencies allow much higher pulsations and 
therefore much faster transmission of information. However, these 
higher pulsation rates make these ultra-high devices vastly more 
dangerous. This is part of the reason why it is so important to vote 
down SB 649.
    None of our wireless communication devices are ever tested 
biologically for safety--not cell phone towers, not cell phones, not 
Wi-Fi, not cordless phones, not smart meters and certainly not 5G 
phones, or radar units in cars--before they are put out to irradiate an 
unsuspecting public.
    The telecommunications industry has corrupted the agencies that are 
supposed to be regulating them. The best example of this is that the 
FCC which regulates EMFs in the U.S. is a ``captured agency'', captured 
by the industry it is supposed to regulate, according to an 8-chapter 
document published by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard 
University [9]. Is it any wonder, therefore, that the industry keeps 
touting that their devices are within the safety guidelines set by the 
FCC?
    We know how the EMFs work in the body and that the industry 
propaganda has no science behind it. But what can we say about the 5G 
EMFs and what effects it will have on our bodies? 5G will be much more 
active in activating the VGCCs and producing health impacts because of 
its rapid absorption by materials in the body, because of its very 
rapid pulsations and because of the huge number antennae they are 
planning to put up, at least 200 times the number of antennae from all 
current cell phone towers. What this means is that the impacts on the 
outer one to two inches of our bodies will be massive.
    Because of this we can expect humans to suffer from:

  1.  Very large increases in blindness from each of the four major 
        causes of blindness: cataracts, macular degeneration, glaucoma 
        and retinal detachment. Each of these involves excessive 
        calcium levels in different parts of the eye and 3 of them also 
        involve excessive voltage-gated calcium activity. I conclude 
        that each of them is likely to be massively elevated by 5G.

  2.  Large increases in hearing loss and tinnitus, leading in many 
        cases to deafness.

  3.  Very large increases in male infertility, as well as universal 
        drops in sperm count.

  4.  Very substantial numbers of melanoma skin cancer and leukemia and 
        possibly other types of cancer. EMFs appear to be particularly 
        active in causing cancer in children and consequently children 
        are at special risk from 5G.

  5.  Impacts on the peripheral nervous system leading to near 
        universal neuropathic pain and peripheral neuropathy.

  6.  Large increases in thyroid dysfunction, because of the location 
        of the thyroid gland near the surface of the body.

  7.  Impacts on the immune system cells, possibly leading to 
        autoimmune diseases and other deficiencies.

  8.  Impacts on the erythrocytes (red blood cells), leading to 
        stacking of the erythrocytes into rouleaux (long chains) and 
        also cell lysis, leading to very low oxygen in the tissues and 
        lowered nutrients transport to the tissues.

    Because plants and animals are affected much as we are, but they 
have much larger parts of them are highly exposed to the 5G radiation, 
the impacts on insects (including bees and other pollinators), birds, 
small mammals and almost all plants will be much more severe than the 
effects of humans. Even large trees have their leaves and reproductive 
organs highly exposed to 5G radiation. It is quite possible that the 
attempts by industry to put 5G in rural areas of California will have 
tremendous impact on California's unique agriculture. It is hard to 
imagine the chaos that will be generated on thousands of different 
species. To put 5G out with no biological safety testing is, in my 
view, a travesty.
    I urge you to do the right thing on behalf of the health of 
Californians and future generations: Please VETO SB 649. Please let me 
know if I can provide further information, or if you'd like to meet in 
person to learn more, feel free to contact me at (503) 232-3883.
            Respectfully,
                                     Martin L. Pall, Ph.D.,
                                                Professor Emeritus,
                                 Biochemistry & Basic Medical Sciences,
                                           Washington State University.
Citations:
    1. Pall ML. 2013 Electromagnetic fields act via activation of 
voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse 
effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965.
    2. Pall ML. 2014 Electromagnetic field activation of voltage-gated 
calcium channels: role in therapeutic effects. Electromagn Biol Med. 
2014 Apr 8.
    3. Pall ML. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and 
assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-
gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-
thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower 
frequency electromagnetic field action. Rev Environ Health 30:99-116.
    4. Pall ML. 2015 Elektromagnetische Felder wirken ber die 
Aktivierung spannungsabh ngiger Calciumkan le, um g nstige oder ung 
nstige Wirkungen zu erzeugen. Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellshaft 28: 22-31.
    5. Pall ML. 2015 How to approach the challenge of minimizing non-
thermal health effects of microwave radiation from electrical devices. 
International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering & 
Management (IJIREM) ISSN: 2350-0557, Volume-2, Issue -5, September 
2015; 71-76.
    6. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) 
produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J 
Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001. 
Epub 2015 Aug 21.
    7. Pall ML. 2016 Electromagnetic fields act similarly in plants as 
in animals: Probable activation of calcium channels via their voltage 
sensor. Curr Chem Biol 10: 74-82.
    8. Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. 
Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena (``Effects'') and 
Clinical Manifestations, Revised, ZR Glaser.
    9. Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is 
Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates, by Norm Alster. 
Published by Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University. An 
e-book under the Creative Commons 4.0 License: https:/
creativecommons.org/licences/by/4
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Thune to 
                      Hon. Meredith Attwell Baker
    Question. The administration has proposed spectrum leasing as a 
means of making more spectrum available, if only for a limited time.

   What are your thoughts on that proposal?

   Are you concerned that leasing could supplant traditional 
        spectrum licensing?

   How long would lease terms need to be in order for carriers 
        to recoup their investment in the infrastructure and other 
        costs associated with providing service in a particular 
        spectrum band?

   Would it be advisable to have a pilot program to test 
        spectrum leasing before proceeding with any other leasing 
        activities?

    Answer. We commend your leadership in MOBILE NOW and the 
Committee's efforts to ensure the wireless industry has access to the 
cleared licensed spectrum we will need to compete globally. It is 
critical that the Federal Government continue to make additional 
cleared spectrum available to mobile broadband providers so that the 
United States can win the race to deploy 5G networks and services.
    Licensing of exclusive use spectrum provides carriers with the 
certainty they need to develop and execute on their business plans, 
which in turn generates billions of dollars in investment. Other 
countries are releasing hundreds of megahertz of new cleared spectrum 
to promote 5G because they recognize that spectrum is key to winning 
the 5G race and unlocking the corresponding economic and societal 
benefits.
    Although licensing of exclusive use spectrum remains the gold 
standard of spectrum policy, CTIA does support consideration of 
alternative approaches in the limited circumstances where cleared 
spectrum is not possible. To that end, we would support exploration of 
Federal spectrum leasing opportunities.
    We agree that a pilot program would be an appropriate and necessary 
preliminary step, and it would be advisable to limit such a pilot to a 
single band where there is a single agency with spectrum allocations to 
avoid the complexity of inter-agency coordination and balancing 
different objectives and requirements. We would also need to ensure the 
agency has the resources and requisite expertise to participate in a 
more commercial market-style transaction.
    As you note, the lease terms would be critically important. 
Wireless carriers would need long-term certainty to justify the 
significant expenses of building out new spectrum bands across the 
country and incorporating those bands in its device portfolio. Today, 
the FCC typically sets a 10-year term on wireless carrier license, as 
well as a renewal expectancy. Replicating that approach in the context 
of spectrum leases would be appropriate to incentivize wireless 
investment.
    We would be happy to engage with the Committee, the Administration, 
and the FCC to consider the challenges that would need to be addressed 
prior to pursuing a new Federal spectrum leasing strategy.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                      Hon. Meredith Attwell Baker
    Question 1. It is clear that rapid deployment of a nationwide 5G 
wireless network means more than just improved technical broadband 
capacity and speeds that this technology provides. According to 
studies, the deployment of this technology is expected to contribute 
$275 billion in new investment, $500 billion in economic growth, and up 
to 3 million new jobs to the U.S economy. These projected benefits 
highlight why the U.S. needs to keep pace and surpass our foreign 
competitors like China and South Korea. What exactly does ``winning the 
race'' to 5G mean for our Nation's economy and telecommunications 
capabilities, especially for our rural communities like those in 
Kansas?
    Answer. We know what U.S. 4G leadership meant to our country. By 
deploying first, we saw $100 billion added to our economy and an 84 
percent increase in wireless-related jobs, according to Recon 
Analytics. Moreover, 4G was the platform that unlocked the apps and 
sharing economy that allowed companies like Uber to start up and 
flourish.
    The nation that leads in 5G will capture millions of new jobs and 
billions in economic growth, as you note in your question. Every 
industry, including farming, healthcare, energy, transportation, law 
enforcement, e-commerce, logistics, and education will be positively 
impacted by winning the race to 5G. In Kansas, the wireless industry 
contributes over $7 billion to the state's economy and drives over 
63,000 wireless-related jobs resulting in $2.9 billion in pay and 
benefits, according to Accenture. That will grow significantly with 5G.
    In order to win the race to 5G, we must get spectrum and 
infrastructure policies right to enable the industry to deploy those 
networks to more communities, including rural communities, faster. 
Congress can help by incentivizing industry investment and providing 
new support to commercial providers to bring wireless to areas that are 
challenging to serve.
    That's why CTIA strongly supports the AIRWAVES Act ``rural 
dividend,'' which would allocate 10 percent of auction proceeds to 
wireless deployment in unserved and underserved areas. In addition, as 
you are well aware, state and local rules for wireless infrastructure 
have not kept pace with innovative new technologies and network 
architecture. By streamlining these rules, policymakers can drive down 
the cost of deployment, helping speed deployment and enable more 
deployments in more areas. CTIA stands ready to work with you to push 
forward common-sense policies to expedite and expand the deployment of 
5G wireless networks to Americans everywhere.

    Question 2. While I have supported legislation like the RAPID Act 
and the MOBILE NOW Act to streamline overly-cumbersome regulations, 
what else can Congress be doing to increase U.S. competitiveness in 5G 
deployment?
    Answer. Thank you for your leadership in introducing the RAPID Act. 
Modernizing siting rules that were put in place to govern 200-foot 
macro towers is critical to speed 5G deployment. In addition to 
modernizing the Federal review process as contemplated in your RAPID 
Act, Congress and the FCC also need to prioritize the efficient 
deployment of wireless infrastructure and set nationwide guidelines for 
how localities treat siting requests.
    CTIA commends the FCC for taking steps to stop states and 
localities from imposing siting moratoria, and Congress and the FCC 
should continue to modernize the approval process for 5G networks and 
equipment, including enactment of the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment 
Act and the SPEED Act.
    Spectrum is also critical to 5G deployment. Congress should pass 
the AIRWAVES Act, a bipartisan bill that provides a clear, robust 
pipeline of spectrum necessary to deploy 5G, and would help with rural 
deployment as well (as noted above). The AIRWAVES Act will enhance 
existing wireless service and unleash next-generation broadband in 
communities across America by creating a schedule of future spectrum 
auctions, and reallocating underused spectrum for future mobile 
broadband use.

    Question 3. Of the spectrum sharing regimes under consideration, 
the prioritization and coordination of operations within the band are 
facilitated through the use of Spectrum Access Systems. Will you please 
describe to this committee how these automated systems optimize 
efficient use of available spectrum for all while protecting the 
higher-tier users from interference from others?
    Answer. In 2015, the FCC approved a three-tiered, experimental 
sharing framework to make up to 150 megahertz in the 3.5 GHz band 
available for wireless use. Initially proposed over five years ago, 
this sharing regime represents an important technical and policy 
experiment, and CTIA has been committed to exploring this new approach 
to spectrum management.
    In this three-tiered sharing framework, existing government users 
like the U.S. Navy would occupy Tier 1, license holders (to be 
determined by auction) would occupy Tier 2, and those seeking 
opportunistic use--similar to unlicensed bands--would occupy Tier 3.
    These tiers will operate through Spectrum Access System (SAS) 
databases, which will contain information about use of the 3.5 GHz 
spectrum, including by incumbent operators. The SAS Administrator will 
authorize use of the airwaves, playing a role in protecting higher-tier 
users from interference. More specifically, SAS Administrators will 
coordinate frequency assignments based on channel requests from users 
by using sensing technology to detect if higher-tier users, like Navy 
radar systems, are present.
    The 3.5 GHz regime is an experiment and we commit to working with 
the Administration, Congress and other stakeholders to evaluate how 
this novel sharing mechanism works as well as if, and where, it would 
be appropriate to use again for other spectrum bands where clearing 
spectrum is particularly challenging. Key to ensuring a successful 
experiment are rules changes the FCC is considering right now to ensure 
that Tier 2 auction winners have the certainty and rights they will 
need to invest in the band.

    Question 4. The MOBILE NOW Act directed NTIA to study the mid-band 
spectrum of 3100-3550 megahertz to assess the feasibility for allowing 
commercial wireless services in that spectrum. In February, NTIA 
identified 100 megahertz of spectrum currently used by DOD (for 
military radar systems) that could potentially be repurposed for 
commercial use. Could you please describe the utility that this 
spectrum could provide mobile wireless broadband providers in improving 
their services for customers?
    Answer. MOBILE NOW helped jump-start our Nation's focus on mid-and 
high-band spectrum, which is critical to the deployment of 5G services. 
As you indicate, NTIA has undertaken a study of the 3450-3550 MHz band, 
which is currently allocated to the Defense Department. This band, 
adjacent to spectrum at 3.5 GHz and 3.7 GHz that is being considered 
for 5G services, could be combined with those airwaves to offer a wide 
swath of mid-band spectrum that offers economies of scale and 
beneficial technical characteristics for next-generation wireless 
broadband.
    CTIA strongly supports NTIA's efforts so that the U.S. can keep 
pace with countries around the world that are taking steps to allocate 
mid-band spectrum for mobile broadband. Overall, the U.S. ranks 6th 
globally in terms of mid-band spectrum availability, and expedited 
review of the 3450-3550 MHz band could enhance our Nation's competitive 
position and provide access to much-needed 5G spectrum.
    Historically, it can take 10 years or more from the time a spectrum 
band is identified as a candidate for commercial reallocation to the 
time commercial deployments begin in the band. Accordingly, we have 
encouraged NTIA to complete its study expeditiously, so that all 
stakeholders--including NTIA, DoD, the FCC, and industry--can move on 
to the next steps necessary to realize the benefits of commercial 
reallocation of this band while ensuring critical national security 
objectives remain protected.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to 
                      Hon. Meredith Attwell Baker
    Question 1. We're here today because of the excitement and 
anticipation of the rollout of 5G networks. In these conversations, I 
always make the joke that in my state, we are still trying to get to 2G 
in far too many communities. Jokes aside, it's a very important 
conversation to have, and just because many places in the United States 
have a lot of progress to make before they can realistically look 
forward to the consumer experience that 5G would bring, doesn't mean we 
shouldn't enthusiastically support its deployment. As we draft policy 
in the Senate to encourage 5G, what advice can you provide regarding 
how to ensure rural does not get left behind? Also, what benefits could 
rural see from the deployment of 5G?
    Answer. Alaska presents unique challenges for broadband 
deployment--including sparse populations over expansive areas that 
contain extremely difficult topography and conditions. I agree we need 
to both expand coverage to those areas unserved today while we also 
move forward to compete globally for 5G service.
    I'm proud of our industry's efforts to reach more and more 
Americans. According to government data, we connect over 99 percent of 
Americans, but we have more work to do in Alaska and other rural areas 
around the country. The good news is Congress has proposals before it 
that would address both challenges.
    First, the U.S. needs a long-term spectrum plan to provide the 
certainty companies need to invest in 5G services. A growing bipartisan 
consensus has emerged in Congress in support of the AIRWAVES Act--
legislation that provides a five-year schedule for future spectrum 
auctions as well as a rural dividend to fund deployment in unserved and 
underserved areas (as discussed below).
    Second, we need the FCC and Congress to update its nationwide 
guidelines for how localities treat siting requests. State and local 
rules for wireless infrastructure have not kept pace with innovative 
new technologies and network architecture. Chairman Thune and Senator 
Schatz's STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act is the right approach. By 
modernizing these rules, policymakers can drive down the cost of 
deployment, helping enable more deployments in more areas.
    5G will be faster, have more capacity, be more responsive, and will 
connect more rural Americans to friends and family, to healthcare and 
transportation services, as well as job opportunities and educational 
resources. In addition, every industry, including farming, healthcare, 
energy, transportation, law enforcement, e-commerce, logistics, and 
education will be positively impacted by the deployment of 5G 
infrastructure and products. As wireless unlocks new services in other 
industries, we can help bring these benefits to more of rural America. 
For example, wireless connectivity helps enable remote access and 
telemedicine, reducing unnecessary costs and ensuring that time and 
distance are not barriers to early interventions and preventative care 
for Alaskans and all rural Americans.

    Question 2. I am very interested in the AIRWAVES Act's direction to 
the FCC to allocate 10 percent of the auction proceeds to create a fund 
supporting wireless infrastructure in unserved or underserved areas. 
Can you share any details about how the funds would be disseminated, 
and in the absence of clarity in the bill currently, share your 
recommendations on how that rural funding mechanism should be allocated 
and dispersed?
    Answer. CTIA supports the AIRWAVES Act, and believes the rural 
dividend is one of the most innovative solutions to expand rural 
broadband. The AIRWAVES Act will help bridge the digital divide and 
connect more rural communities across our country by providing more 
financial support for areas that are challenging to serve. If the 
dividend was in place for the last two auctions--the incentive auction 
and the AWS-3 auction--over $6 billion would be newly available for 
wireless deployment in these areas. That's more than the entire FCC 
Mobility Fund will make available over the next ten years.
    The rural dividend provisions in the AIRWAVES Act currently 
contemplate that the FCC would determine how to allocate the funds and 
what constitutes ``underserved'' and ``unserved'' areas. Such funds 
could not be combined with monies from other funding mechanisms, 
including the FCC's programs administered pursuant to Section 254 of 
the Communications Act. CTIA would welcome further clarity from 
Congress regarding how the funds distributed pursuant to the AIRWAVES 
Act would be allocated and dispersed and believes that available funds 
should go first to areas where there is limited service today, such as 
rural and remote Alaska.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                     to Hon. Meredith Attwell Baker
Urban Cellular Coverage Gaps
    There was a recent article in the Las Vegas Review Journal that 
featured a map of where cellular coverage is still, in 2018, weak or 
nonexistent in the Las Vegas Valley. In this committee, we have talked 
a lot about access to broadband in rural areas, which is incredibly 
important for ensuring opportunity for all citizens, but having these 
coverage gaps in a major metropolitan area is unacceptable. As we know, 
because 5G will rely on millimeter waves, it will have a harder time 
penetrating obstacles like trees, walls, and windows.

    Question 1. In the near to medium term, can we expect that 5G will 
mostly be available in heavily trafficked ``hot spots?''
    Answer. You are correct that 5G will use millimeter wave 
technology, which can help provide much faster speeds and better 
connectivity in high-traffic areas. That said, 5G will be deployed over 
low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum that will bring faster speeds and 
lower latency to consumers in both urban and rural areas.
    Stepping back, when the wireless carriers began discussing 5G 
rollouts, the talk had been about rollouts of 5G networks in the 2020-
plus timeframe. Because of the urgency of being first both nationally 
and globally, wireless carriers will be turning on these networks in 
2018. Wireless carriers have announced cities nationwide that will have 
5G networks this year, including Las Vegas, New York, Indianapolis, and 
Dallas, but also many mid-size cities, such as Raleigh, Oklahoma City, 
and Waco.

    Question 2. In the longer term, how do we ensure that this 
technology is reaching all parts of a community and how is this 
challenge different from the current issues with 4G?
    Answer. I'm proud of our industry's efforts to reach more and more 
Americans. According to government data, we connect over 99 percent of 
Americans, but there is more work to be done. The good news is Congress 
has proposals before it that will help address these challenges.
    First, the U.S. needs a long-term spectrum plan to provide the 
certainty companies need to invest in 5G services. I am grateful for 
the Committee's engagement on spectrum policy and your co-sponsorship 
of the AIRWAVES Act. This legislation provides a five-year schedule for 
future spectrum auctions, and a rural dividend from auction revenues to 
fund deployment in rural areas (an amount that would have been in the 
billions if this provision had been in place during previous auctions).
    Second, we need the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and 
Congress to update guidelines for siting requests. The SPEED Act is a 
great step to ensure duplicative reviews do not slow down and add 
unnecessary costs to wireless infrastructure deployment. But state and 
local rules for wireless infrastructure have not kept pace with 
innovative new technologies and network architecture. The rules for 
200-foot macro towers should not govern the installation of small 
cells. Chairman Thune and Senator Schatz have proposed a sensible 
approach to this problem in the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act. 
By modernizing siting rules, policymakers can speed the installation of 
necessary equipment and drive down the cost of deployment, helping 
enable broader deployments in more areas. The FCC also plays a critical 
role in expediting the deployment of wireless infrastructure and has 
taken significant steps to streamline the siting process. A recent 
study by Corning showed that siting reform efforts could lead to more 
than $2.5 billion in additional investment in rural and suburban areas.
    Third, we need to continue to support Universal Service Fund (USF) 
programs such as the Mobility Fund to reach unserved communities. There 
are areas in the U.S. where it is not currently economic to serve with 
private capital alone and in these cases, there should be appropriate 
government support.
Rural Spectrum/Nevada
    In Nevada we have two main metropolitan areas and the rest of the 
population lives in small towns and rural areas often separated by 
hundreds of miles. Many Senators on this committee know well the 
challenges of getting Internet services to these areas and we have 
worked in a bipartisan way to help address these challenges. But unlike 
a lot of states Nevada is covered in mountains, and pretty much every 
rural town is separated by at least one large mountain range which 
presents a large obstacle that may not exist in many other places 
around the country.

    Question 3. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. CTIA's member companies currently offer fixed wireless as a 
way to bring broadband to more consumers, and we recognize the value of 
having a mix of technologies in providing solutions to consumers' 
broadband needs. Recently, U.S. Cellular announced it would be offering 
a fixed wireless broadband product to rural customers where a wired 
connection may not exist. I expect wireless broadband providers will 
continue to invest in and leverage wireless connectivity to reach rural 
and other areas that have proved difficult to serve via wired 
connections.
    Having a robust mix of low-, mid-, and high-band spectrum is 
essential to meeting the connectivity demands of consumers. One of the 
benefits of low-band spectrum is that it can cover vast areas, and can 
make it more cost effective to serve geography where there are fewer 
consumers. While mid-band spectrum does not travel as far as low-band, 
it does allow for faster speeds, creating a beneficial blend of 
coverage and increased speeds.
    More spectrum, low-, mid- and high-bands, will need to be 
reallocated to commercial broadband usage to meet the growing needs of 
consumers. As we saw with the broadcast incentive and AWS-3 auctions, 
there is high demand for these bands, as these licenses brought 
billions of dollars. Like their urban counterparts, rural consumers are 
using more data. We need to find new opportunities to allocate spectrum 
resources that are best suited to meet this burgeoning demand.
    Particularly with regard to mid-band spectrum, we need to get 
moving. The U.S. currently ranks 6th globally in terms of mid-band 
spectrum availability. We are pleased that NTIA is studying the 3450-
3550 MHz band, and hope for an expeditious review. We are also 
encouraging the FCC to finalize its rules for the 3.5 GHz band, and are 
pleased that the agency has opened a proceeding considering the 3.7 GHz 
band for 5G services. Swift action in these areas will mean better 
coverage and faster speeds for more Americans.

    Question 4. What would you recommend Congress do to free up some of 
this spectrum specifically?
    Answer. CTIA is a strong supporter of the AIRWAVES Act--legislation 
that will help bridge the digital divide and connect more rural 
communities across our country by directing the auction of specific 
spectrum bands over the next five years for wireless broadband. 
Additionally, the AIRWAVES Act would provide financial support for 
areas that are more challenging to serve by devoting 10 percent of 
auction revenues to building wireless in rural areas. If the dividend 
was in place for the last two auctions--the incentive auction and the 
AWS-3 auction--over $6 billion would have been available for wireless 
deployment. That is more than the entire FCC Mobility Fund will make 
available for rural broadband over the next ten years. Thank you for 
your co-sponsorship of this critical legislation.

    Question 5. What are the challenges posed by areas with large 
obstacles, such as mountain ranges?
    Answer. Mountains and other difficult topography present challenges 
to broadband deployment--especially when there are sparse populations 
over expansive areas. To serve these areas, it is critical that 
appropriate spectrum, particularly low-band spectrum, be reallocated to 
bring greater coverage to these areas. Low-band spectrum's propagation 
characteristics are ideal to serve large areas with difficult 
topography. Second, reducing the costs to serve these areas will mean 
providers have the ability to cover more Americans. As detailed above, 
legislation such as the SPEED Act and STREAMLINE Small Cells Act will 
reduce duplicative or non-related fees, which can unnecessarily drive 
up the cost of deploying service. I would further point out that these 
are the exact types of areas that can be uneconomic to serve with 
private capital alone. The Mobility Fund plays a crucial role in 
building wireless networks in these areas, and we should continue to 
look at new funding models, such as the rural dividend as envisioned in 
the AIRWAVES Act.
Spectrum Leasing
    In the MOBILE NOW Act, Congress is requiring the FCC, in 
coordination with the NTIA, to conduct a study on ``bidirectional'' 
spectrum sharing. The idea behind bidirectional sharing is that Federal 
agencies are able to share spectrum with commercial users without 
limiting access for themselves because it is done with bands that are 
able to be used in geographically separate locations or are otherwise 
compatible with the commercial user's needs.

    Question 6. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Please see the answer above regarding fixed wireless.

    Question 7. What are some of the challenges, and what can Congress 
do, to advance this concept and ensure it works for both Federal 
agencies and the commercial sector?
    Answer. It is important to stress that the wireless services we 
enjoy today are built on the foundation of licensed, exclusive use 
spectrum. As consumers increasingly live mobile-first lives and with 5G 
being rolled out now, we need to continue to focus on that approach. 
That said, we recognize that sharing regimes can play an important 
limited role in meeting the needs of the wireless industry and Federal 
agencies alike. Wireless carriers are open to exploring further ways to 
allow Federal users to leverage commercial spectrum and networks to 
help serve mission-critical functions.
    The FCC's current sharing experiment in providing commercial access 
to government spectrum at 3.5 GHz may provide valuable lessons. We 
would encourage policymakers await an evaluation of that sharing 
experience before exploring additional new and novel spectrum 
approaches.
    With respect to 3.5 GHz, in 2015, the FCC approved a three-tiered, 
experimental sharing framework to make up to 150 megahertz in the 3.5 
GHz band available for wireless use. Initially proposed over five years 
ago, this sharing regime represents an important technical and policy 
experiment, and CTIA has been committed to exploring this new approach 
to spectrum management.
    In this three-tiered sharing framework, existing government users 
like the U.S. Navy would occupy Tier 1, license holders (to be 
determined by auction) would occupy Tier 2, and those seeking 
opportunistic use--similar to unlicensed bands--would occupy Tier 3.
    These tiers will operate through Spectrum Access System (SAS) 
databases, which will contain information about use of the 3.5 GHz 
spectrum, including by incumbent operators. The SAS Administrator will 
authorize use of the airwaves, playing a role in protecting higher-tier 
users from interference. More specifically, SAS Administrators will 
coordinate frequency assignments based on channel requests from users 
by using sensing technology to detect if higher-tier users, like Navy 
radar systems, are present.
    The 3.5 GHz regime is an experiment and we commit to working with 
the Administration, Congress, and other stakeholders to evaluate how 
this novel sharing mechanism works, as well as if, and where, it would 
be appropriate to use again for other spectrum bands where clearing 
spectrum is particularly challenging. Key to ensuring a successful 
experiment are rules changes the FCC is considering right now to ensure 
that Tier 2 auction winners have the certainty and rights they will 
need to invest in the band.
Workforce Development
    According to a recent report by Accenture, speeding up the timeline 
for 5G could add up to $100 billion to the U.S. economy. 5G will enable 
countless new innovations in things such as unmanned aerial vehicles 
and smart communities, in both urban and rural areas, and I've been 
proud to introduce bipartisan legislation to reduce regulatory barriers 
for 5G and encourage the growth of these technologies. At the same 
time, it is crucial that, as we work to ensure the United States is the 
global leader in 5G, the workforce is prepared for these new jobs and 
that opportunity is available to people from every zip code.

    Question 8. What challenges do you face when hiring workers?
    Answer. An educated workforce is essential for the United States' 
continued leadership in all areas of the economy, and that is true for 
the wireless industry as well. The varying skillsets needed to power 
the wireless industry, from erecting towers, to network engineering, to 
customer service, and software development, are all critical to 
providing world class networks. As an example, AT&T earlier this year 
began a $1 billion reskilling program to retrain half of its workforce. 
They are not alone. Many of CTIA's member companies have educational 
programs aimed at today's students to ensure they are developing the 
skills that will be needed not just in the wireless industry, but 
throughout the broader economy.

    Question 9. What are the primary areas/qualifications/skill sets 
that Congress should focus on as we prepare our workforce for 5G?
    Answer. One area in particular Congress could continue to focus on 
is Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education. 
The skillsets developed through STEM will help prepare Americans for 
careers in telecommunications and technology, ensuring that the next 
generation of innovators thrives here in the U.S.
5G Cybersecurity
    With the huge increase in connected devices that is projected to 
occur as we transition to 5G, it is critical that we keep cybersecurity 
in mind as a key feature of America's leadership on this technology. As 
you know, 2G rogue base stations, which are fake base stations designed 
to lure a phone into connecting are able to access sensitive 
information. If a bad actor is able to use technology like a jammer to 
downgrade a mobile device connection to 2G, it can still be vulnerable 
even though 3G and up have better security standards.

    Question 10. What challenges are there with 5G that we should be 
aware of given the massive increase in connected devices?
    Answer. The wireless industry continually works to enhance the 
security of its networks and improve security capabilities with every 
generation of technology. 5G builds upon the capabilities of previous 
generations of wireless technologies and will add additional security 
features such as enhanced privacy protections, the ability to leverage 
5G home-network wireless security to extend to Wi-Fi and when roaming, 
and device-specific security updates.
    5G is up to 100 times faster, five times more responsive, and able 
to support 100 times more devices--thereby accommodating the massive 
increase in connected devices. In preparation for this growth in the 
Internet of Things (IoT), CTIA and the wireless industry recently 
announced an IoT Cybersecurity Certification program for connected 
devices as a complement to the many security features built into the 
wireless networks of today and tomorrow.
    The IoT Cybersecurity Certification program is the first of its 
kind to be developed in collaboration with the nationwide wireless 
providers and builds upon IoT security recommendations from the 
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). By offering 
certification for IoT devices built from the ground up with 
cybersecurity in mind, the program will protect consumers and wireless 
infrastructure, while creating a more secure foundation for smart 
cities, connected cars, mHealth and other IoT applications.

    Question 11. Recognizing the 2G is still a standard for some rural 
areas, how can Congress balance the need to promote connectivity in 
these regions with ensuring that these more vulnerable networks are put 
out of commission?
    Answer. Rural carriers have already upgraded 2G networks or are in 
the process of upgrading to 3G and 4G, and the industry has provided 
tools on mobile devices for consumers to manage and limit 2G 
connectivity. Ovum data indicates the share of 2G in the U.S. at 0.3 
percent and quickly declining. As 5G continues to gain momentum, global 
economies-of-scale will further drive and accelerate the 
decommissioning of 2G technology.
    I would like to reemphasize the importance of both the Mobility 
Fund and the rural dividend in the AIRWAVES Act in achieving this 
connectivity. The Mobility Fund will provide support for areas that 
lack 4G coverage. This means that an area that has only 2G service 
would be eligible for support to transition to a modernized network. 
Additionally, the rural dividend would also play a meaningful role in 
connecting rural Americans with fast, secure networks.
Private Industry
    As you are aware, the Trump administration has suggested that 
nationalizing the 5G network could be necessary for national security. 
Senator Cruz and I have introduced the E-FRONTIER Act, which protects 
private networks from nationalization unless specifically authorized by 
Congress.

    Question 12. What are the benefits for consumers of private 
industry operating the national 5G network?
    Answer. Today, the wireless industry supports 4.7 million jobs and 
contributes $475 billion each year. That accounts for 2.6 percent of 
America's GDP, making the U.S. wireless industry the 24th largest 
economy in the world. Every wireless job creates an additional 7.7 jobs 
throughout the broader economy, making the industry's contribution 
bigger than full-service restaurants and hardware manufacturing. 
Wireless jobs also pay about fifty percent more than the average 
American job.
    The wireless industry has not been content to rest on past success 
and leadership. Instead, the industry works relentlessly to improve our 
networks with faster speeds and innovative services for consumers, and 
5G will be no different.
    Simply put, the United States leads the world in wireless and 
leadership from commercial providers has delivered significant benefits 
to the larger economy. That success is based on supporting commercial 
networks and private deployments. And right now, carriers are rapidly 
deploying 5G networks in cities across the country--networks that will 
add 3 million additional jobs and $500 billion in economic growth. As 
the industry is poised to invest $275 billion more as we move to 5G 
networks, I am confident that consumers will be the ultimate winners.
    I also want to thank you for your leadership in introducing the E-
Frontier Act. This is an important measure to ensure we do not 
jeopardize these consumer benefits by unnecessarily nationalizing 
wireless networks. The Federal Government has wisely created policies 
that put spectrum in the hands of the private sector companies that are 
building 5G right now. I want to stress that since the introduction of 
the E-Frontier Act, we have seen significant deployment and important 
announcements showing the private sector is more than up to the task to 
build globally competitive 5G networks.
    Efforts now to divert much needed spectrum or other resources to 
government-run systems or experimental approaches would only serve to 
slow down the growth of the wireless sector, and ultimately the 
substantial 5G benefits to consumers. Congress can ensure that the key 
5G spectrum bands are auctioned to the commercial users building 5G as 
soon as practicable. Thank you for recognizing that the most dynamic 
innovation develops through the private sector, and protecting industry 
investment in the networks that make this innovation possible.

    Question 13. What are the benefits for rural and marginalized 
communities?
    Answer. The ability to connect to friends and family, to healthcare 
and transportation services, to job opportunities and educational 
resources, is vital for all Americans. 5G will bring more of these 
opportunities to even more Americans. I'm proud of our industry's 
efforts to reach more and more Americans. I also recognize more needs 
to be done. That's why it is so important we get the spectrum and 
siting policies right so that every American community has access to 
the connectivity and power of wireless networks. I also would encourage 
the government to continue policies that help fund connectivity to 
these communities. The FCC's Universal Service programs, such as the 
Mobility Fund and Lifeline, are designed to reach these communities. 
Coupled with new mechanisms such as the AIRWAVES Act's rural dividend, 
these policies will help ensure all Americans can reap the benefits of 
wireless connectivity.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. John Thune to 
                            Dean R. Brenner
    Question 1. You mentioned that Qualcomm is developing versions of 
5G that will use new spectrum sharing techniques better than possible 
today in any unlicensed band. Can you explain what that will look like?
    Answer. As I explained at the hearing, Qualcomm is developing two 
versions of 5G that will be optimized for deployment in shared spectrum 
bands. The first version is a 5G-based evolution of the spectrum 
sharing techniques used in 4G known as Licensed Assisted Access or LAA. 
4G-based LAA has been deployed in the U.S. and around the world, and it 
is significantly improving 4G mobile broadband for consumers.
    The second version uses revolutionary new spectrum sharing 
techniques that will in fact substantially improve the user experience 
in shared spectrum over what is possible today. Let me explain this. 
LAA, Wi-Fi and other existing technologies all enable spectrum sharing 
based on time. Under this existing technique, each user on a shared 
channel uses a shared channel for its proportionate share of the time, 
but each user must be silent when awaiting its turn to use the channel. 
So, if there are ten users on a shared channel, each user uses the 
spectrum for one-tenth of the time and is silent for nine-tenths of the 
time.
    The new 5G spectrum sharing techniques that Qualcomm is developing 
are spatial-based--spectrum is shared by enabling users to use a shared 
channel in different directions so that each user can use the shared 
channel simultaneously. 5G uses a very fast new radio, and each 5G base 
station and device has many antennas that transmit and receive in very 
narrow, highly directional beams. The new spectrum sharing technique 
takes advantage of these attributes. So, under this new technique that 
Qualcomm is developing, if there are ten users on a shared channel all 
using this new technique, each user can use the spectrum for 100 
percent of the time and will not interfere with one another by 
transmitting in different directions, instead of being able to use the 
channel for only one-tenth of the time as is the case today. This 
technique substantially increases the overall capacity of a shared 
channel for all users, increases the efficiency and utilization of 
spectrum, and enables a vastly better mobile broadband experience for 
each user.
    More information about our work on this new spectrum sharing 
technique is available on this website: https://www.qualcomm.com/
invention/5g/spectrum-sharing.

    Question 2. A July 1, 2018, Politico article, ``Telcogeopolitics: 
West vs. China in 5G Race,'' reported that ``Over the last two years, 
Huawei, ZTE and other Chinese players have increased their share of 
patents underpinning the global standards--the higher the amount of 
intellectual property a company holds in the overall global telecoms 
rulebook, the greater control it can exert on how the mobile technology 
will be used.'' The article also stated that ``Qualcomm alone accounts 
for more than 15 percent of current 5G patents,'' while Nokia--a Finish 
company--accounts for 11 percent and Ericsson--a Swedish company--holds 
roughly 8 percent of 5G patents. Is that report accurate? Can you 
describe how Qualcomm is engaging in the 5G standards-setting process 
and what the U.S. needs to do to maintain our leadership in the race to 
develop and commercialize 5G technology?
    Answer. Qualcomm is exercising leadership in the development and 
standardization of 5G, just as it has for prior generations of wireless 
technology. Here is some additional information on the 5G standards 
process and Qualcomm's role.
    5G, which is formally known as 5G New Radio or 5G NR, is being 
developed in a global industry standardization group called 3GPP. 
Cellular communications are based on standards. Therefore, many of the 
innovations in cellular technology go through a standardization process 
in 3GPP. Virtually all companies involved in cellular communications 
around the world participate in 3GPP. This includes U.S. companies such 
as Qualcomm, all of the U.S. cellular carriers, and other U.S. tech 
companies, and it also includes participants from diverse areas such as 
automotive, public safety and first responders, broadcasting and more. 
As noted, 3GPP is truly a global group with participants from all over 
the world. Several Chinese companies are also active members of 3GPP, a 
reflection of the growing penetration of smartphones and of cellular 
communication in China.
    Qualcomm has been part of 3GPP from its inception and has been a 
very active participant for quite a long time. Qualcomm is a major 
contributor to 3GPP's work, and a large number of the advancements in 
cellular communications over the years standardized in 3GPP originate 
from Qualcomm. The same has been true during the 5G standardization 
process. A significant number of Qualcomm's innovations in key aspects 
of 5G technology, including air interface design, protocol design, 
security and system architecture, have successfully gone through the 
3GPP standardization process and have eventually been incorporated into 
the 5G standard. Thus, the 5G standard already includes many important 
innovations developed by Qualcomm.
    Moreover, Qualcomm's technical work in developing additional 
important aspects of 5G--such as the technologies referred to in my 
answer to Question 1 above--and our leadership in standardizing them in 
3GPP is ongoing.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                           to Dean R. Brenner
Urban Cellular Coverage Gaps
    There was a recent article in the Las Vegas Review Journal that 
featured a map of where cellular coverage is still, in 2018, weak or 
nonexistent in the Las Vegas Valley. In this committee, we have talked 
a lot about access to broadband in rural areas, which is incredibly 
important for ensuring opportunity for all citizens, but having these 
coverage gaps in a major metropolitan area is unacceptable. As we know, 
because 5G will rely on millimeter waves, it will have a harder time 
penetrating obstacles like trees, walls, and windows.

    Question 1. In the near to medium term, can we expect that 5G will 
mostly be available in heavily trafficked ``hot spots?''
    Answer. Qualcomm is the world's leading developer of chips for 
smartphones and other wireless devices and the world's leading inventor 
and licensor of new wireless technologies. Our inventions are deployed 
throughout the wireless ecosystem by wireless operators, infrastructure 
vendors and handset manufacturers. Our focus for the last several years 
has been on ensuring that 5G will be available as soon as possible and 
as widely as possible. For example, under our leadership, 3GPP, which 
is the international standards body involved in developing the 5G 
standard, a decision was reached to advance the date for finalizing the 
initial 5G standard, known as ``Release 15,'' by one year. We did this 
to enable consumers to benefit from the promising new features of 5G as 
soon as possible. 5G will take advantage of all types of spectrum--low, 
mid and high band, (including millimeter wave)--and all regulatory 
paradigms, including licensed, unlicensed and shared. Each type of 
spectrum has both advantages and disadvantages. While signals 
travelling over millimeter wave spectrum have harder time penetrating 
obstacles, the millimeter wave bands do allow for wider swaths of 
spectrum and therefore higher capacity and higher speeds. Low band 
spectrum allows for signals to travel farther and therefore can enable 
network operators to deploy new technology at lower cost. Low band 
spectrum is especially well-suited for rural areas where the economic 
case for technology upgrades is more challenging. Qualcomm is not 
actually involved in deciding where 5G will be deployed, but our 
efforts in making 5G available as soon as possible and as widely as 
possible will benefit both rural and urban areas.

    Question 2. In the longer term, how do we ensure that this 
technology is reaching all parts of a community and how is this 
challenge different from the current issues with 4G?
    Answer. Making as much spectrum available as possible as soon as 
possible is critical to ensure that 5G technology reaches the most 
people. In addition, it's essential that regulations regarding small 
cell deployments keep pace with technology. Today 4G-based small cell 
deployments are occurring around the country, and this process will 
need to continue and accelerate for 5G to be successful. Congress 
should enact the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act to ensure that 5G 
infrastructure build-out is not impeded by outdated regulations.
Rural Spectrum/Nevada
    In Nevada we have two main metropolitan areas and the rest of the 
population lives in small towns and rural areas often separated by 
hundreds of miles. Many Senators on this committee know well the 
challenges of getting Internet services to these areas and we have 
worked in a bipartisan way to help address these challenges. But unlike 
a lot of states Nevada is covered in mountains, and pretty much every 
rural town is separated by at least one large mountain range which 
presents a large obstacle that may not exist in many other places 
around the country.

    Question 3. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. Low and mid band spectrum is the key to improving rural 
broadband, not just with fixed wireless, but also with mobile 
broadband, including Gigabit LTE and soon, 5G. A challenge with low and 
mid band spectrum has been making the transition from older uses, such 
as television broadcasting, to mobile broadband uses, such as video 
streaming, and eventually the many new use cases that 5G will enable, 
such as autonomous driving and the massive Internet of things.

    Question 4. What would you recommend Congress do to free up some of 
this spectrum specifically?
    Answer. Congress did the right thing in the Middle Class Tax Relief 
Act of 2012 by requiring the FCC to conduct an auction to repurpose the 
600 MHz spectrum from television broadcast use to commercial mobile 
broadband, which will include 5G. In 2017, the FCC completed the 
auction, which was the world's first voluntary incentive auction, 
repurposing 84 megahertz of spectrum--70 megahertz for licensed use and 
another 14 megahertz for wireless microphones and unlicensed use. The 
auction yielded $19.8 billion, including $10.05 billion for broadcast 
bidders and more than $7 billion for deficit reduction.
    With the auction completed, it's essential that Congress conduct 
regular oversight of the clearing process to ensure that television 
broadcasters currently occupying the 600 MHz band meet the 39-month 
deadline that the FCC established for clearing. In some cases, 
broadcasters have already vacated the spectrum, and it is being used 
today for 4G LTE, including Gigabit LTE, which provides a foundation 
for 5G. These locations will be ready to upgrade quickly to 5G as soon 
as it becomes available. In other cases, broadcasters continue to use 
the spectrum. It's imperative that Congress continue to monitor the 
process to ensure no slippage in the deadline.
    In addition, Congress should enact the Spectrum NOW Act (S. 3010/
H.R. 6017), which will help spectrum sharing, in particular mid-band 
spectrum. This spectrum is also very well-suited for improving rural 
broadband. More about the Spectrum NOW Act and Qualcomm's work on 5G 
and spectrum sharing can be found in this blog post.

    Question 5. What are the challenges posed by areas with large 
obstacles, such as mountain ranges?
    Answer. Areas with large obstacles, such as mountain ranges, pose 
unique challenges for wireless networks. Signals need to travel farther 
in rural areas, but if communities are separated by mountains, it can 
be challenging for wireless signals to get through. Ensuring a steady 
stream of low band and mid band spectrum is the key to improving rural 
broadband because signals can travel further in these frequencies.
Spectrum Leasing
    In the MOBILE NOW Act, Congress is requiring the FCC, in 
coordination with the NTIA, to conduct a study on ``bidirectional'' 
spectrum sharing. The idea behind bidirectional sharing is that Federal 
agencies are able to share spectrum with commercial users without 
limiting access for themselves because it is done with bands that are 
able to be used in geographically separate locations or are otherwise 
compatible with the commercial user's needs.

    Question 1. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. Please see response to this question above.

    Question 6. What are some of the challenges, and what can Congress 
do, to advance this concept and ensure it works for both Federal 
agencies and the commercial sector?
    Answer. Spectrum leasing holds great promise to expand access to 
spectrum without hindering the Federal Government's use of the 
spectrum. Spectrum leasing occurs frequently in the private sector and 
is very successful. In some cases, the Federal Government has exclusive 
access to spectrum, but only makes use of it at certain times or in 
certain locations. Therefore, spectrum leasing could provide an 
economic incentive for Federal agencies to make portions of spectrum 
available to commercial entities in geographic locations or at times 
when they are not in use.
Workforce Development
    According to a recent report by Accenture, speeding up the timeline 
for 5G could add up to $100 billion to the U.S. economy. 5G will enable 
countless new innovations in things such as unmanned aerial vehicles 
and smart communities, in both urban and rural areas, and I've been 
proud to introduce bipartisan legislation to reduce regulatory barriers 
for 5G and encourage the growth of these technologies. At the same 
time, it is crucial that, as we work to ensure the United States is the 
global leader in 5G, the workforce is prepared for these new jobs and 
that opportunity is available to people from every zip code.

    Question 7. What challenges do you face when hiring workers?
    Answer. At Qualcomm the greatest investment we can make as a 
company is in our employees. We believe strongly in the need for 
increasing access to STEM education through programs that reach and 
inspire students at all levels and from all backgrounds. More 
information about our work in this area is available here.

    Question 8. What are the primary areas/qualifications/skill sets 
that Congress should focus on as we prepare our workforce for 5G?
    Answer. We rely on software engineers, hardware engineers, and 
systems engineers to help us advance all facets of wireless technology, 
including 5G.
5G Cybersecurity
    With the huge increase in connected devices that is projected to 
occur as we transition to 5G, it is critical that we keep cybersecurity 
in mind as a key feature of America's leadership on this technology. As 
you know, 2G rogue base stations, which are fake base stations designed 
to lure a phone into connecting are able to access sensitive 
information. If a bad actor is able to use technology like a jammer to 
downgrade a mobile device connection to 2G, it can still be vulnerable 
even though 3G and up have better security standards.

    Question 9. What challenges are there with 5G that we should be 
aware of given the massive increase in connected devices?
    Answer. There is no question that in the future there will be a 
massive increase in the number of connected devices and things and that 
5G will enable this incredible growth in connectivity. In addition, so 
many industries will be impacted by that connectivity including in 
sensitive areas such as banking and health care. At Qualcomm, we are 
working on new ways to improve the security of devices, including 
robust authentication. Our Qualcomm Mobile Security platform is 
designed to provide three layers of security at the chip, device, and 
system levels. It's engineered to use hardware protections to more 
securely authenticate the user, validate a device's location, and 
confirm that the device isn't compromised. With this foundation, 
effective cybersecurity is achievable.

    Question 10. Recognizing the 2G is still a standard for some rural 
areas, how can Congress balance the need to promote connectivity in 
these regions with ensuring that these more vulnerable networks are put 
out of commission?
    Answer. Congress should focus on enacting the AIRWAVES Act, the 
STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act, and the Spectrum NOW Act. 
Together, these bills will ensure a steady stream of low, mid and high 
band spectrum, and will modernize regulations that govern wireless 
infrastructure and will help advance 5G as soon as possible and as 
widely as possible. Advancing 5G is the best way to improve the 
security of the wireless ecosystem.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. John Thune to 
                            Craig T. Cowden
    Question. How will the launch of Spectrum Mobile change the 
competitive landscape in mobile wireless?
    Answer. Charter is excited about the recent launch of our mobile 
wireless service in our regional footprint. Spectrum Mobile will 
combine Charter's robust indoor-outdoor WiFi network and Verizon's 
cellular network (a Mobile Virtual Network Operator -MVNO), to provide 
a high quality mobile service at a great value. The next step in our 
mobile evolution will be to deploy LTE licensed small cells and then 4G 
LTE and 5G wireless access technologies and integrate them with our 
existing infrastructure.
    That said, providing mobile service through Charter's MVNO resale 
arrangement with Verizon is materially different from providing service 
as a nationwide or even regional facilities-based mobile carrier. The 
contractual and technical limitations of the MVNO agreement limit the 
competitiveness of Charter's mobile service.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                            Craig T. Cowden
    Question. I understand that there is support from both licensed and 
unlicensed spectrum-use communities for making mid-band spectrum 
available in wider blocks to maximize the usefulness of spectrum. From 
the perspectives of each of your respected companies and organizations, 
could you please describe your stance on widening the spectrum blocks 
for commercial use? If supportive, please describe a target size if 
able.
    Answer. Charter is actively exploring the use of mid-band and high-
band spectrum to deliver fixed and mobile wireless service to its 
customers. We're conducting 5G and 4G LTE trials using the 3.5 GHz band 
that is immediately adjacent to the 3.7-4.2 GHz band. Generally 
speaking, mid-band spectrum will be a critical part of the 5G story, 
because it allows more bandwidth than low-band spectrum, but also 
greater coverage than high-band spectrum. While we support the use of 
mid-band spectrum for 5G, it needs to be done carefully. Charter and 
other cable operators currently provide critical video services to over 
50 million cable customers using this band. It's important for policy 
makers to ensure that consumers will not be harmed by reallocation and 
that existing users are fully compensated for costs incurred by changes 
in that band.
    To that end, we believe that the 6 GHz spectrum band has long-term 
potential for unlicensed use and support the FCC examining this option 
later this year, although there are similar issues to address with the 
interference or reallocation management of existing incumbent users of 
the band. The 5.9 GHz band however is more of a near-term priority as 
it offers the opportunity for almost immediate enhancement of WiFi 
capacity without a need for costly new equipment or interference 
management, due to its location adjacent to the most-used WiFi band in 
the country. That said, the 5.9 GHz band offers a maximum of 75 MHz of 
spectrum, less than a 1/10th of the spectrum needed to meet the 
forecasted demand of future Wifi growth in 2025, as published in a 
recent study from the Wifi Alliance. So Charter is also interested in 
exploring the potential use of the 6 GHz band for long-term capacity 
growth of unlicensed spectrum.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                           to Craig T. Cowden
Urban Cellular Coverage Gaps
    There was a recent article in the Las Vegas Review Journal that 
featured a map of where cellular coverage is still, in 2018, weak or 
nonexistent in the Las Vegas Valley. In this committee, we have talked 
a lot about access to broadband in rural areas, which is incredibly 
important for ensuring opportunity for all citizens, but having these 
coverage gaps in a major metropolitan area is unacceptable. As we know, 
because 5G will rely on millimeter waves, it will have a harder time 
penetrating obstacles like trees, walls, and windows.

    Question 1. In the near to medium term, can we expect that 5G will 
mostly be available in heavily trafficked ``hot spots?''
    Answer. Yes, which is why it is important to support policies that 
promote investment in all areas. To that end, Charter is investing in 
network infrastructure and actively conducting trials of innovative 
wireless access technologies to enable us to deliver next-generation 
wireline and wireless technologies to our customers in cities, suburban 
and rural areas. With additional unlicensed and licensed spectrum and 
technology neutral policies to spur competition and continued 
investment, I am optimistic consumer needs will continue to drive 
innovation in the years ahead.

    Question 2. In the longer term, how do we ensure that this 
technology is reaching all parts of a community and how is this 
challenge different from the current issues with 4G?
    Answer. Charter's experiences in the wireless market have made 
clear that the success of 5G requires a full range of wired and 
wireless technologies and a complete toolkit of unlicensed and licensed 
spectrum. We urge Congress and the FCC to ensure policies are 
technology-neutral and to search for ways to make both unlicensed and 
licensed spectrum available for wireless broadband.
Rural Spectrum/Nevada
    In Nevada we have two main metropolitan areas and the rest of the 
population lives in small towns and rural areas often separated by 
hundreds of miles. Many Senators on this committee know well the 
challenges of getting Internet services to these areas and we have 
worked in a bipartisan way to help address these challenges. But unlike 
a lot of states Nevada is covered in mountains, and pretty much every 
rural town is separated by at least one large mountain range which 
presents a large obstacle that may not exist in many other places 
around the country.

    Question 3. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. Charter is actively testing to understand how different 
types of spectrum can be used to extend our existing wireline network 
and bring broadband services efficiently to more consumers, including 
those in rural areas. We have conducted extensive fixed wireless 
testing using 3.5 GHz spectrum and are encouraged by the results--we're 
seeing speeds that exceed the FCC's definition of high speed broadband, 
allowing for video streaming and the use of multiple apps 
simultaneously. We also recently submitted an application, granted just 
recently by the FCC, to conduct fixed wireless experiments in the 3.7-
3.8 GHz band. We believe this mid-band spectrum could be used to extend 
the reach of our network and provide cost-effective, wireline-like 
connectivity to less densely populated areas.

    Question 4. What would you recommend Congress do to free up some of 
this spectrum specifically?
    Answer. Congress should pursue a balanced spectrum policy that 
promotes technological neutrality and makes more licensed and 
unlicensed spectrum available to spur greater innovation and 
competitiveness.

    Question 5. What are the challenges posed by areas with large 
obstacles, such as mountain ranges?
    Answer. Bringing broadband to rural and remote areas is expensive 
and complex, and requires multiple solutions. In some instances, it is 
not commercially viable to build wireline infrastructure over 
mountainous terrain and the reliability of wireless signals can be 
limited. 5G itself requires a network of small cells that transmits 
large amounts of data over short distances, which is probably not well 
suited to deliver broadband in very rural and mountainous areas. 
Charter continues to explore a range of wireline and wireless 
technologies to extend broadband services into less densely populated 
areas.
Spectrum Leasing
    In the MOBILE NOW Act, Congress is requiring the FCC, in 
coordination with the NTIA, to conduct a study on ``bidirectional'' 
spectrum sharing. The idea behind bidirectional sharing is that Federal 
agencies are able to share spectrum with commercial users without 
limiting access for themselves because it is done with bands that are 
able to be used in geographically separate locations or are otherwise 
compatible with the commercial user's needs.

    Question 6. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. Charter is actively testing to understand how different 
types of spectrum can be used to extend our existing wireline network 
and bring broadband services efficiently to more consumers, including 
those in rural areas. We have conducted extensive fixed wireless 
testing using 3.5 GHz spectrum and are encouraged by the results--we're 
seeing speeds that exceed the FCC's definition of high speed broadband, 
allowing for video streaming and the use of multiple apps 
simultaneously. We also have filed an application, granted just 
recently by the FCC, to conduct fixed wireless testing in the 3.7-3.8 
GHz band. We believe that this testing will advance our understanding 
of 5G technology and the potential of mid-band spectrum, which will 
help to advance the potential deployment of 5G fixed and mobile 
services.

    Question 7. What are some of the challenges, and what can Congress 
do, to advance this concept and ensure it works for both Federal 
agencies and the commercial sector?
    Answer. Congress should support policies that promote the 
innovative and efficient use of spectrum that is shared between 
government and the private sector. This can be done by making 
additional licensed and unlicensed spectrum available for commercial 
use, which will allow existing, as well as future, technologies, to 
continue to proliferate at the same time.
Workforce Development
    According to a recent report by Accenture, speeding up the timeline 
for 5G could add up to $100 billion to the U.S. economy. 5G will enable 
countless new innovations in things such as unmanned aerial vehicles 
and smart communities, in both urban and rural areas, and I've been 
proud to introduce bipartisan legislation to reduce regulatory barriers 
for 5G and encourage the growth of these technologies. At the same 
time, it is crucial that, as we work to ensure the United States is the 
global leader in 5G, the workforce is prepared for these new jobs and 
that opportunity is available to people from every zip code.

    Question 8. What challenges do you face when hiring workers?
    Answer. Charter's workforce is the key to the success of our 
company. We are proud to employ 97,000 diverse employees in 41 states, 
having added over 20,000 American workers since 2012. However, like any 
increasing number of companies, we face challenges in attracting and 
retaining qualified technical workers, which is why we are committed to 
investing in our workforce. We ensure that every employee receives a 
minimum wage of $15 per hour, provide comprehensive medical and 
retirement benefits and opportunities for career advancement. We have 
found apprenticeships, with a particular emphasis on veterans, to be an 
effective means of recruiting, training and retaining the talent we 
need to service our customers. Earlier this year, Charter became one of 
the first companies to take advantage of the VALOR Act and approval of 
our U.S. Department of Labor registered broadband technician 
apprenticeship program to receive national approval for GI Bill 
benefits through the Department of Veterans Affairs. Charter also sees 
opportunities to expand the apprenticeship model to other key areas of 
our business.

    Question 9. What are the primary areas/qualifications/skill sets 
that Congress should focus on as we prepare our workforce for 5G?
    Answer. Charter heavily invests in employee training to ensure we 
have a 21st century workforce, which is why we recently expanded our 
Spectrum Broadband Technician Apprenticeship program to all 41 states 
in our footprint. We believe policies in this area should support 
private sector training programs that prepare Americans for the jobs of 
the 21st Century.
5G Cybersecurity
    With the huge increase in connected devices that is projected to 
occur as we transition to 5G, it is critical that we keep cybersecurity 
in mind as a key feature of America's leadership on this technology. As 
you know, 2G rogue base stations, which are fake base stations designed 
to lure a phone into connecting are able to access sensitive 
information. If a bad actor is able to use technology like a jammer to 
downgrade a mobile device connection to 2G, it can still be vulnerable 
even though 3G and up have better security standards.

    Question 10. What challenges are there with 5G that we should be 
aware of given the massive increase in connected devices?
    Answer. With the explosion of devices, applications and use cases 
enabled by 5G, a continued focus on security is important. 4G/LTE 
security features offer a good baseline as well as a benchmark for 5G 
security. This is particularly true with respect to mobile broadband 
use cases. However, 5G must also be able to adopt more robust and 
flexible security concepts to support the additional uses cases 
envisioned for 5G besides mobile broadband, such as autonomous driving, 
industrial automation and IoT (Internet of Things).

    Question 11. Recognizing the 2G is still a standard for some rural 
areas, how can Congress balance the need to promote connectivity in 
these regions with ensuring that these more vulnerable networks are put 
out of commission?
    Answer. It is important that continued investment in 4G and 5G 
infrastructure occurs in all geographic areas, including rural America. 
The pace of this investment will allow for the eventual de-
commissioning of 2G networks, which are more vulnerable to security 
attacks. In both 4G and 5G standards, security measures have been 
identified to protect the identity of the real mobile user, and to 
provide more robust authentication mechanisms. With these mechanisms in 
place, it is more difficult for rogue actors to steal the identify 
information of real users.
                                 ______
                                 
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Catherine Cortez Masto 
                             to Tom Stroup
Spectrum Leasing
    In the MOBILE NOW Act, Congress is requiring the FCC, in 
coordination with the NTIA, to conduct a study on ``bidirectional'' 
spectrum sharing. The idea behind bidirectional sharing is that Federal 
agencies are able to share spectrum with commercial users without 
limiting access for themselves because it is done with bands that are 
able to be used in geographically separate locations or are otherwise 
compatible with the commercial user's needs.

    Question 1. What is being done with spectrum to bring fixed 
wireless to rural areas and what challenges remain with some of this 
low and mid band spectrum?
    Answer. While not considered traditional ``fixed wireless'' 
service, satellite communications services are positioned to be the 
keystone for bringing 21st century broadband capabilities to the 
entirety of the U.S. These services are capable of providing broadband 
to rural and remote areas of the country where it remains uneconomical 
for terrestrial services to deploy, and provide both speeds and prices 
comparable to terrestrial alternatives. These services are available 
directly to the consumer today, covering all 50 states and delivering 
broadband offerings up to 100 megabits per second (Mbps). Satellite 
broadband is also used by business and government enterprises, for both 
fixed and mobile purposes, using a range of spectral bands to deliver 
assured access to broadband communications. Further, satellites are 
providing critical backhaul Internet connectivity to local Internet 
Service Providers and community institutions in remote locations.
    Satellite service providers are always striving to improve and 
expand service so that all Americans can take advantage of its 
capabilities. Approximately 2 million customers nationwide are enjoying 
high-quality satellite broadband services at reasonable rates, and at 
speeds that meet and exceed the FCC's definition of broadband service. 
Commercial satellite operators, that have already invested billions of 
dollars in the construction and deployment of high throughput 
satellites, offer service to those consumers today, no matter where 
they are located.
    The satellite industry is today investing tens of billions of 
dollars to innovate and increase broadband connectivity in the United 
States and across the globe. 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. 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); today's satellites have capacities of up to 
260 Gbps, a number expected to increase to 1000 Gbps by the end of the 
decade. These terabit capacity geostationary satellites will provide 
orders of magnitude capacity increases and resulting consumer broadband 
benefits, remaining competitive with terrestrial offerings.
    In another highly-anticipated advancement in the industry, 
thousands of new high throughput (non-geostationary) satellites will 
soon join existing operators in Low-Earth and Medium-Earth orbits to 
provide additional high-speed broadband at low latency levels; 
prototypes of these satellites have already begun to launch. Existing 
high throughput satellites currently support the delivery of 3G and 4G 
services, as well as enable global machine-to-machine communications. 
Future satellite fleets will be a part of a system architecture that 
delivers new 5G, IoT, and intelligent, connected transportation 
services to consumers.

    Question 2. What are some of the challenges, and what can Congress 
do, to advance this concept and ensure it works for both Federal 
agencies and the commercial sector?
    Answer. Because of the many different types of services that use 
spectrum, each band and sharing scenario may offer different challenges 
and opportunities. Generally, Congress can help ensure minimal 
disruption and interference to incumbent operations by requiring that 
new entrants into any frequency band design its system to share with 
the incumbents since that is more efficient than requiring existing 
operators in a band to retrofit or otherwise modify its system. In some 
cases, sharing may not be possible and Congress should reflect this in 
its legislation and views.
Workforce Development
    According to a recent report by Accenture, speeding up the timeline 
for 5G could add up to $100 billion to the U.S. economy. 5G will enable 
countless new innovations in things such as unmanned aerial vehicles 
and smart communities, in both urban and rural areas, and I've been 
proud to introduce bipartisan legislation to reduce regulatory barriers 
for 5G and encourage the growth of these technologies. At the same 
time, it is crucial that, as we work to ensure the United States is the 
global leader in 5G, the workforce is prepared for these new jobs and 
that opportunity is available to people from every zip code.

    Question 3. What challenges do you face when hiring workers?
    Answer. Like most technology industries, the satellite industry 
needs employees with STEM backgrounds. Policies that encourage STEM 
education at an early age will be beneficial to our industry's ability 
to grow.

    Question 4. What are the primary areas/qualifications/skill sets 
that Congress should focus on as we prepare our workforce for 5G?
    Answer. As noted above, STEM skill sets are important to employees 
within the satellite industry.

                                  [all]