[Senate Hearing 116-573]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 116-573
INDUSTRIES OF THE FUTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JANUARY 15, 2020
__________
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
52-611 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
ROY BLUNT, Missouri Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
CORY GARDNER, Colorado TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee GARY PETERS, Michigan
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MIKE LEE, Utah TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin JON TESTER, Montana
TODD YOUNG, Indiana KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona
RICK SCOTT, Florida JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
John Keast, Staff Director
Crystal Tully, Deputy Staff Director
Steven Wall, 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 January 15, 2020................................. 1
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 2
Statement of Senator Blackburn................................... 43
Statement of Senator Blumenthal.................................. 45
Statement of Senator Peters...................................... 47
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 49
Statement of Senator Young....................................... 51
Statement of Senator Rosen....................................... 53
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 55
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................ 60
Witnesses
Hon. Michael Kratsios, Chief Technology Officer of the United
States, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan, Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards
and Technology and Director, National Institute of Standards
and Technology................................................. 11
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Hon. Dr. France Cordova, Director, National Science Foundation... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Hon. Michael O'Rielly, Commissioner, Federal Communications
Commission..................................................... 31
Prepared statement........................................... 33
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Commissioner, Federal Communications
Commission..................................................... 36
Prepared statement........................................... 37
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Michael Kratsios
by:
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 65
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 66
Hon. Mike Lee................................................ 67
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 68
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
by:
Hon. Roy Blunt............................................... 69
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 70
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 72
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 73
Hon. Tammy Duckworth......................................... 74
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Dr. France
Cordova by:
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 75
Hon. Maria Cantwell.......................................... 77
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 80
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Michael O'Rielly
by:
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 81
Hon. Mike Lee................................................ 81
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Jessica
Rosenworcel by:
Hon. Jerry Moran............................................. 82
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 83
INDUSTRIES OF THE FUTURE
----------
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 2020
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:28 a.m. in
room SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Roger Wicker,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Wicker, Blunt, Cruz, Gardner, Blackburn,
Young, Scott, Cantwell, Blumenthal, Udall, Peters, Baldwin,
Tester, and Rosen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
The Chairman. As our witnesses come up to the table, let me
convene this hearing with my colleague, Senator Cantwell. And I
want to thank Senator Cantwell and her team for agreeing to
this as the first hearing of the new year because I think it is
such a forward-thinking topic to talk about, Industries of the
Future, and that future is upon us.
We have with us today Mr. Michael Kratsios, Chief
Technology Officer of the United States, Office of Science and
Technology Policy; Dr. Walter Copan, Under Secretary of
Commerce for Standards and Technology, National Institute of
Standards and Technology; Dr. France Cordova, Director,
National Science Foundation; Mr. Michael O'Rielly,
Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission; and Ms.
Jessica Rosenworcel also of the FCC.
The focus of this hearing is on the Federal Government's
role in promoting the advancement of emerging technologies that
will revolutionize the global economy such as driver-less cars,
real-time language translation, and personalized medicine.
Artificial intelligence, AI, quantum information science,
advanced manufacturing, and the next generation of wireless
communications technology all promise to fuel American
prosperity, improve quality of life, promote national security,
and create jobs.
Innovations in AI are changing the way we access
information, diagnose and treat illnesses, grow our food, power
our homes, travel, and manufacture and deliver new products.
American leadership in AI is critical to maintaining our
economic and national security. Creating global standards to
ensure AI systems are reliable, safe, fair, and accurate
presents an ongoing challenge that our witnesses should
discuss.
Advances in new production methods enable the United States
to retain and create jobs. Last year, this committee reported
S. 1427, the Global Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing Act of
2019, which became law.
I hope our witnesses, at least some of them, will address
the implementation of this law and other ongoing and expected
administration efforts to promote advanced manufacturing.
The prospects for quantum computing are exciting.
Advancements in quantum science have significant implications
for the U.S. economy and national defense, including
biotechnology, next generation military applications, and
cybersecurity systems.
The Committee would also benefit from an update on the
implementation of the National Quantum Initiative Act and to
hearing what more needs to be done on this issue.
Establishing a strong, reliable, and secure communications
network to support these industries of the future is essential
to realizing the economic and social promise of next generation
technologies. 5G, the fifth generation of wireless
communications technology, is expected to usher in a new era of
connectivity that will support significantly faster broadband
speeds and higher data capacity. 5G will be fundamental to
advancing developments in AI, quantum computing, and other
groundbreaking innovations. I expect our witnesses from the FCC
will want to address those and other issues regarding the role
of 5G networks in facilitating these applications.
The NSF turns 70 years old this year, and I am not far
behind. Investments in basic and applied research,
infrastructure, and education have made the United States the
global leader in science and technology. Those investments have
driven economic growth and competitiveness in the United States
for decades.
This Committee is also dedicated to promoting American
leadership in emerging science and technology. This week, along
with Senators Baldwin, Gardner, and Peters, I introduced
legislation directing the administration to develop a plan to
double the baseline investment in Federal Government industries
of the future programs by 2022 and to increase civilian
spending on industries of the future to $10 billion by 2025.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on what we can
do to ensure the United States remains a world leader in
science and technology and how that will drive future advances
for our citizens and the economy.
Senator Cantwell.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
for holding this important hearing.
I want to begin by recognizing Dr. Cordova, who after 6
years will soon be stepping down as the head of the National
Science Foundation. Dr. Cordova, thank you for your service and
your leadership in science. Under your tenure, NSF has
increased transparency and improved communications so the
public can better understand our investments in basic research,
which is so critical to our economy, public health, and
security. So thank you.
Today's hearing is about the industries of the future. In
my state, I feel like more advances in these key areas are
happening every single day. Having seen the advancements in our
state on very important issues, all of which the Chairman just
mentioned, everything from AI to quantum to 5G to advanced
manufacturing and many other issues, particularly in the energy
area, I could not speak more highly of the need for us to
continue our investment.
The United States has traditionally funded research and
development in cutting-edge technologies, which results in U.S.
researchers and companies leading the way in these particular
areas. However, other nations, particularly China, are
investing billions of dollars in these areas, so we must step
up the challenge and focus on some of the issues that we face.
The Chairman mentioned 5G, for example. To me the most
important issue for 5G right now would be uniting the global
community around the fact that no technology platform should
become the standard platform if it allows for a government back
door. We have to communicate the technology of the future must
also protect us from the threats of cybersecurity and from
invasion. And so the United States has a very loud voice here
that should be listened to.
If the United States does not commit to robust investments
in technology research and development, we will fall behind.
And we all know, as I just mentioned, the grave consequences
from that on a security level. And at the same time, we need to
balance the R&D portfolio in order to fuel the innovation and
discovery of the next generation of game-changing technologies.
That is why it is so important, I believe, in making sure
that AI and the important issue of combating deep fake photos
and videos is such an issue. The University of Washington, in
partnership with Washington State University, is studying how
technology will impact elections and society and how these
threats magnify our challenges and importance to Federal
agencies like our intelligence agencies, law enforcement, and
our ability to detect these deep fakes.
I say that this is important because I feel like this era
is already upon us and we need to make sure that we are going
to continue our leadership. So I am proud that the University
of Washington, along with a coalition of people who are
supporting stabilizing the free media in the United States of
America, are taking on this issue in an unprecedented way.
A study done by the University of Oxford found that AI
continues to advance. Approximately 47 percent of the jobs in
the United States could be at risk of automation. That does not
mean that is all related to AI, but a 2016 study by the White
House Council suggests that there would be some increases in
AI-related jobs. There are still going to be impacts. So my
colleague, Senator Young, and I have introduced in the past
legislation to try to analyze what the impacts of that are and
better prepare the U.S. Government to respond. I thank Senator
Young for his leadership with me on that issue.
So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing and discussing
the many important issues from the witnesses today, and thank
you for your leadership in getting this hearing underway.
The Chairman. And thank you, Senator Cantwell.
We will begin down at this end of the table and just work
our way down. Mr. Kratsios.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL KRATSIOS,
CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER OF THE UNITED STATES,
WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
Mr. Kratsios. Good morning. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Cantwell, members of the Committee, it is a privilege to be
here with you today to discuss U.S. leadership in the
industries of the future, an administration priority since
inauguration.
Key emerging technologies, including artificial
intelligence, quantum information science, 5G, biotech, and
advanced manufacturing will shape the U.S. workforce, sustain
our nation?s prosperity, strengthen our national security, and
make all Americans safer, healthier, and better off.
When the U.S. leads in the industries of the future, all
Americans can reap the benefits of these emerging technologies.
Our leadership means that the United States will continue to
set the standard for how these technologies are developed on
the global stage. American values of civil liberties, privacy,
human rights, and free market innovation must be at the
foundation of these industries of the future.
I am pleased to see the Industries of the Future Act,
introduced by Senators Wicker, Gardner, Baldwin, and Peters
yesterday. Importantly, the bill recognizes that the industries
of the future are interconnected and builds upon work already
underway.
Over the past 3 years, the Trump administration has drafted
and executed national strategies, released Presidential
actions, signed into law bipartisan legislation, and spoken out
internationally to secure America's future global leadership in
the industries of the future. It is critical that we continue
to coordinate Federal efforts, and I very much welcome
legislation that helps drive our whole-of-government approach.
Additionally, in order to ensure American leadership in
industries of the future, we need significant, sustained R&D
investment. I look forward to working with Congress in the
coming months to increase R&D funding in these critical
technologies.
Our goal is simple. We want to support American innovation
built by American workers and shaped by American values for the
health, prosperity, and security of the American people.
We have leveraged the United States' unparalleled
innovation ecosystem comprised of industry, academia, and the
Federal Government. Every step of the way, we ask the same
basic question. How can the Federal Government contribute most
effectively to supercharge the innovation ecosystem and ensure
America's technological dominance?
To this end, we have identified four key pillars that
underpin our efforts across all of the industries of the
future: fundamental research and development, workforce
development, light-touch regulation, and international
engagement.
The Federal Government has a central role in supporting R&D
in areas where there is little or no commercial incentive. My
colleagues here today, Dr. Cordova and Dr. Copan, are integral
to U.S. R&D efforts and have done incredible work on behalf of
the American people, making sure taxpayer dollars are used as
wisely as possible to improve R&D in the areas that need it
most.
Thanks to the bipartisan efforts of this committee, in
December 2018 President Trump signed the National Quantum
Initiative Act, which authorized robust funding for QIS
research and development activities across the Federal
Government. This includes investing in quantum consortia,
research centers where industry, government, and academia can
come together to advance QIS.
Further, in February 2019, the President launched the
American AI Initiative, the U.S. national strategy for
artificial intelligence, which includes research and
development as its first area of emphasis.
To build and prepare the American workforce of the future,
the Trump administration has placed important emphasis of STEM
education, Pell Grant reform, apprenticeships, and reskilling
and upskilling opportunities. Through the National Council for
the American Worker, we have partnered with private sector
leaders to support the 21st century workforce, and the Pledge
to America's Workers has secured over 14 million career and
training opportunities since its inception in 2018.
For American innovation to flourish, the Federal Government
must remove barriers, streamline processes, and be careful not
to impose overly burdensome or preemptive regulation. That is
why the President has taken action to eliminate hurdles to 5G
and rural broadband deployment and create opportunities to
enable new types of commercial drone operations so that they
can legally develop, test, and deploy their innovations here in
the United States. As part of the American AI Initiative, the
White House proposed regulatory guidance principles for AI
technologies, which reflect our values of freedom, human
rights, and civil liberties. The initiative also created a plan
for Federal engagement in the development of AI technical
standards.
On the international stage, we have worked with our global
partners to advance R&D innovation underpinned by our shared
values. Demonstrating our commitment, the U.S. joined our
global partners in the OECD to reach consensus on international
principles supporting the trustworthy development of AI. And
just last month, the United States joined the Government of
Japan in signing a cooperative research agreement to advance
quantum information science.
I am thrilled to discuss with you all the administration's
proud record of achievement in advancing emerging technologies
and answering your questions.
As the future takes shape, our work is never complete. The
priorities I have outlined today are bipartisan. We look
forward to continuing to work with this committee to accomplish
our shared goals for U.S. leadership in industries of the
future.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kratsios follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael Kratsios, Chief Technology Officer
of the United States, White House Office of Science and Technology
Policy
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
Committee, it is a privilege to be here with you today to discuss U.S.
leadership in the Industries of the Future.
From the earliest days of the Trump Administration, the White House
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) has recognized the
profound importance of what we call Industries of the Future. Key
emerging technologies including artificial intelligence (AI), quantum
information science (QIS), 5G, biotechnology, and advanced
manufacturing will shape the U.S. workforce, sustain our Nation's
prosperity, strengthen our national security, and make all Americans
safer, healthier, and better off.
In the summer of 2017, the White House held its first event on
American Leadership in Emerging Technologies, gathering our Nation's
brightest academic minds and top industry leaders to discuss
opportunities and challenges to advancing innovation. This kicked off
an effort that has spanned the nearly three years since and resulted in
the development and execution of bipartisan legislation, national
strategies, and presidential actions and initiatives.
When the U.S. leads in the Industries of the Future, all Americans
can reap the benefits of these emerging technologies. And as we look at
the international landscape, American leadership in technologies like
AI, QIS, and 5G have never been more of an imperative.
Our work leverages the United States' unparalleled innovation
ecosystem comprised of industry, academia, non-profit research
institutions and science philanthropies, and the Federal Government.
And every step of the way, we have asked the same basic question: How
can the Federal Government contribute most effectively to supercharge
the innovation ecosystem and ensure America's technological dominance?
To this end, we identified four key pillars that underpin our
efforts across AI, 5G, QIS, biotechnology, and advanced manufacturing--
fundamental research and development (R&D), workforce development,
light-touch regulation, and international engagement.
The Federal Government has a central role in supporting research
and development in areas where there is little or no commercial
incentive. My colleagues here today representing the National Science
Foundation (NSF) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) are integral to U.S. R&D efforts and have done incredible work
on behalf of the American people--making sure taxpayer dollars are used
as effectively as possible to improve R&D in the areas that need it the
most.
Thanks to the bipartisan efforts of this Committee, in December
2018 the President signed the National Quantum Initiative Act, which
established a National Quantum Coordination Office and authorized
robust funding for QIS R&D activities across the Federal Government.
This includes investing in quantum consortia--research centers where
industry, government, non-profits, and academia can come together to
advance QIS.
Further, in February of 2019, the President launched the American
AI Initiative--the U.S. national strategy for AI--which includes R&D as
its first area of emphasis.
To build and prepare the American workforce of the future, the
Trump Administration has placed important emphases on STEM education,
Pell Grant reform, apprenticeships, and reskilling and upskilling
opportunities. Through the National Council for the American Worker,
we've partnered with private sector leaders to support the 21st century
workforce.
For American innovation to flourish, the Federal Government must
remove barriers, streamline processes, and be careful to not impose
burdensome or preemptive regulation. That's why the President has taken
action to eliminate hurdles to 5G deployment and create opportunities
to enable new types of commercial drone operations so that they can
legally develop, test and deploy their innovations in America. As part
of the American AI Initiative, the White House recently proposed
regulatory guidance principles for AI technologies which reflect our
values of freedom, human rights, and civil liberties, and created a
plan for Federal engagement in the development of AI technical
standards.
On the international stage we have worked with our global partners
to advance R&D and innovation underpinned by shared values.
Demonstrating our commitment, the United States joined our global
partners in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD) to reach consensus on international principles supporting the
trustworthy development of AI. And just last month, the United States
joined the Government of Japan in signing a cooperative research
agreement to advance QIS and technology for economic, societal, and
security benefits.
I am thrilled to discuss with you the Administration's proud record
of achievement in advancing emerging technologies that underpin the
Industries of the Future.
###
Artificial Intelligence
Over the past several decades, AI has advanced tremendously and
today promises better, more accurate healthcare; enhanced national
security; improved transportation; and more effective education, to
name just a few benefits.
To ensure America's continued global leadership in AI, nearly a
year ago the White House unveiled the American AI Initiative--our
Nation's AI strategy--which has resulted in significant progress over
the past year. First, the Initiative prioritizes investments in AI R&D,
as demonstrated in the President's FY2020 Budget request that included
nearly $1 billion in non-defense AI R&D. A detailed agency-by-agency
breakdown of these AI investments was provided in the Networking and
Information Technology Research and Development Program (NITRD)
Supplement to the President's FY 2020 Budget--the first ever such
reporting of non-defense AI R&D investments. This reporting process
provides an important mechanism and baseline for tracking U.S. AI R&D
spending moving forward. The 2016-2019 Progress Report on Advancing AI
R&D shows the breadth and depth of Federal investments in AI that are
transforming the state of the field. These investments are focused on
key areas of strategic priority, as outlined in the Administration's
June 2019 National AI R&D Strategic Plan.
Examples of impactful R&D investments include the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) $2 billion AI Next Campaign
(September 2018); NSF's launching of the National AI Research
Institutes Program in collaboration with the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Veterans
Affairs, and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (October
2019); the release of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration's AI Strategy (November 2019); the National Institutes
of Health's Strategic Plan for Data Science (June 2018); and
establishment of the Department of Defense (DOD) Joint AI Center (June
2018). To ensure strong coordination of these Federal activities in AI
R&D, the White House chartered the Select Committee on AI (May 2018),
which meets regularly to oversee and prioritize Federal R&D activities
in AI.
Second, the AI Initiative is unleashing Federal resources for AI
R&D, including improved public access to high quality Federal data that
can drive even more AI research and testing. To gather public input on
this process, the White House issued a request for information on
Federal data and models for AI R&D and testing (July 2019). This
feedback is now being used to pursue opportunities for increased access
and use of Federal data and models, while also protecting safety,
security, privacy, and confidentiality.
Third, the Initiative is removing barriers to AI innovation. On
January 13, 2020, the White House issued a request for public comment
on proposed guidance to Federal agencies on regulatory and non-
regulatory policies to govern the development and use of AI in the
private sector. When finalized, the guidance will ensure that agencies
consider ways to reduce barriers to the development and adoption of AI
before regulating technologies and industrial sectors that are
empowered or enabled by AI. The White House's draft guidance also sets
out these policy principles for the stewardship of AI applications that
support American innovation while appropriately protecting privacy,
civil liberties, and American values and while allowing for sector-and
application-specific approaches. The principles promote the development
of trustworthy AI, and require regulators to consider fairness,
transparency, safety, and security when considering any action related
to AI.
Additionally, the American AI Initiative led to the release by NIST
of the Plan for Federal Engagement in Developing Technical Standards
and Related Tools (August 2019), which focuses on the development of
technical standards that are necessary for achieving trustworthy AI.
Fourth, the Initiative focuses on the importance of the American
worker by directing Federal agencies to prioritize AI in their grants
and their fellowships. The Administration is also helping Americans
gain AI relevant skills through apprenticeships, workforce training,
STEM education, and other learning opportunities. The AI workforce
development efforts support and leverage other Presidential workforce
initiatives, especially the National Council for the American Worker
and the Pledge to America's Workers, which are preparing America's
workforce for the jobs of today and the future.
Finally, the AI Initiative promotes an international environment
supportive of American AI innovation. In May 2019, the Trump
Administration joined together with democracies of the world that share
common values by signing an international consensus document on AI
Principles at the OECD in Paris. The U.S. joined with other G20
countries to adopt similar principles (June 2019), and collaborates
with the G7 nations to support increasing trust in and adoption of AI.
The Administration continues to advocate for the development of new AI
technologies in a way that advances innovation, promotes public trust,
protects civil liberties, and remains consistent with American values.
Quantum Information Science
QIS offers a foundation for new technologies that will have broad
applications, including quantum computing, quantum networking, and
quantum sensing. Each uses quantum effects to enable new and often more
efficient applications across national security, health care,
communications, manufacturing, and more.
In December 2018, President Trump signed the National Quantum
Initiative Act (NQIA) into law. This landmark bipartisan legislation,
which originated in this committee, supercharges U.S. quantum R&D and
advances our leadership in this critical Industry of the Future. Over
the past year since it was signed, OSTP has been charged with its
implementation.
In response to the NQIA, the Administration launched the National
Quantum Coordination Office, which serves to coordinate Federal R&D
efforts across government. The legislation also authorized significant
R&D funding and called for the creation of quantum consortia. Last
month marked important progress, with the inclusion of funding for
quantum R&D and the research centers included in the Fiscal Year 2020
appropriation package the President signed into law in December 2019.
NSF and the Department of Energy (DOE) are working now to set up
the QIS Centers called for in the NQIA. NSF is currently reviewing full
proposals for Quantum Leap Challenge Institutes, while the DOE has just
released a Funding Opportunity Announcement for larger QIS Centers. NSF
and DOE, through a formal agreement, are working to ensure a
coordinated review and implementation of these new QIS Centers to
promote American leadership in QIS and quantum technologies.
NIST has convened a quantum consortium through its Other
Transaction Authority (OTA) from the NQIA. This Quantum Economic
Development Consortium (QED-C) is identifying the critical needs of the
growing QIS industry. Over 80 companies have signed letters of intent
and are participating in the ongoing QED-C activities, including a
recent workshop on cryogenics. This represents the first of several
industry-driven efforts to ensure American leadership in quantum
technologies. The Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) has also become heavily
involved in the QED-C as part of its QIS-based efforts.
We've also made important QIS progress internationally. In December
2019, the United States and the Government of Japan announced the Tokyo
Statement on Quantum Cooperation in support of continued collaboration
in research and development between the two nations. The statement
encourages increased engagement in quantum through international
conferences and events; supports cooperative efforts to prepare the
next generation of scientists and engineers; and promotes the sharing
of research methodologies, infrastructure, and data.
5G and Advanced Communications
To keep America's edge, we must accelerate our development and
deployment of 5G and beyond--the next generations of wireless networks
that can move massive amounts of data at exponentially faster speeds
than existing 4G LTE networks. The United States is investing in state-
of-the-art means and methods to use spectrum efficiently and reap the
benefits of the advanced technologies that 5G and future generations of
wireless technologies will support: automated vehicles, telemedicine,
emergency communications, and untold next-generation technologies that
will result from increased data capacity and connectivity.
The Trump Administration is committed to making sure America wins
the global race to 5G and future generations of wireless technologies,
and is coordinating all related efforts through an interagency group
led by Larry Kudlow, Director of the National Economic Council. In
October 2018, President Trump directed the development of a National
Spectrum Strategy to establish a balanced, forward-looking, flexible,
and sustainable approach to spectrum management. As part of that
initiative, OSTP issued the R&D Priorities for American Leadership in
Wireless Communications and the Emerging Technologies and Their
Expected Impact on Non-Federal Spectrum Demand to address how the
United States can lead the world in sharing Federal spectrum with
commercial users. Applying AI to spectrum sharing, DARPA awarded prizes
to the top performers in the Spectrum Collaboration Challenge. In its
second year, the NSF Platforms for Advanced Wireless Research (PAWR)
program launched the POWDER-RENEW mid-band 5G wireless test bed in Salt
Lake City, UT; supported construction on the COSMOS high-band 5G
wireless test bed in New York, NY; and started construction on the
AERPAW aerial 5G wireless test bed to accelerate the integration of
unmanned aerial vehicles into the national air-space. NSF also took
delivery of the Colosseum test bed from the above-mentioned DARPA
challenge, making it a national resource for 5G wireless research and
beyond.
The Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and
Information Administration continues to collaborate with the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) to make spectrum available for 5G and
other advanced wireless services. The FCC concluded two high-band
spectrum auctions and is in the midst of a third, so far receiving
close to $10 billion in bids in these three auctions. As a result, the
U.S. currently leads the world in allocation and use of high-band
spectrum, with nearly 5 GHz of spectrum awarded or in the process of
being auctioned. This spectrum provides incredibly fast speeds, low
latency, and device density. The U.S. is also on par with the rest of
world in the total allocation and use of spectrum in low-and mid-bands
for 5G.
Additionally, working through the American Broadband Initiative,
the White House continues to coordinate the efforts of our Federal
agencies working to lower barriers to broadband deployment to ensure
that broadband, including 5G networks, can be stretched more
effectively across rural America. While America strives to be a leader
in 5G and advanced communications, the Administration is also committed
to a more prosperous rural America. Underpinning that mission is access
to reliable, secure, high speed internet. With that in mind, in January
2018 President Trump directed the General Services Administration (GSA)
to examine the effectiveness of the form used to locate communications
facilities on Federal property. GSA collected feedback and is currently
working with the USDA/U.S. Forest Service as well as OMB, to make
improvements to the form. In addition, the Department of Interior was
tasked with developing a plan to increase access to tower facilities to
facilitate broadband deployment. The White House continues to build on
these two Executive actions through the American Broadband Initiative,
and collectively the Administration is making significant progress in
removing barriers to broadband deployment and making it easier to build
networks in rural communities. Finally, NSF is now collaborating with
USDA on the aforementioned PAWR program to support a fourth advanced
wireless test bed focused on affordable, high-speed, rural broadband
connectivity.
Along with future wireless technology comes a more complex
technical environment that presents a critical challenge to the
security of America's communications networks. In order to meet this
challenge head on, last year President Trump signed the Securing the
Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain
Executive Order and signed the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 into law. President Trump has
kept his promise to do what it takes to keep America safe--we will no
longer use Federal funding to pay for insecure and untrusted network
equipment. In November, 2019, the FCC adopted rules to prevent taxpayer
dollars from being used to purchase equipment or services from
companies that pose a national security threat to the integrity of
American communications networks or the communications supply chain.
Modern communications networks are highly interconnected and global
in scope. Earlier in 2019 the United States, along with like-minded
partners, met to develop a set of proposals to govern safety, security,
and freedom, to create what is known as the Prague Proposals. The
Administration welcomes and fully supports these proposals, such as
following the rule of law, respecting individual rights, and supporting
innovation. Thanks to the work of this Committee and the
Administration, we are taking action to address wireless security.
Biotechnology
The Administration recognizes the potential of biotechnology
innovation to drive economic growth and improve lives in the United
States. Biotechnology outputs are incredibly diverse, and future
applications are limitless in both potential and value, including new
ways to treat cancer; manufacture products that are safer, more
sustainable, and novel; create pest and disease resistant crops; and
support DNA-based information systems. Advances realized over the past
two decades have resulted from the unique U.S. innovation ecosystem and
the convergence between biology and other disciplines and sectors, such
as nanotechnology and computer science.
By identifying R&D in the biological sciences and biotechnology as
a top priority for Federal investment in the Administration's FY 2021
R&D Budget Priorities Memo, the Trump Administration has taken
seriously the rapid advances in the life sciences and the technical
applications that are transforming the way we solve problems for the
American public.
Take, for example, CAR-T--an amazing new way that we are able to
treat cancer. Traditionally, the only way to battle cancer was surgery,
chemotherapy, and radiation. With CAR-T, we can develop a biologically
engineered and individually tailored treatment from the patient's own
immune cells. Under the Trump Administration, the Food and Drug
Administration approved for the first time CAR-T cells to help treat
children with acute leukemia and adults with advanced lymphomas. We
still have a long way to go, but this therapy is brimming with
potential and bringing hope to patients.
Likewise, DOD has identified biotechnology as one of its
modernization priorities in support of the National Defense Strategy;
is partnering with industry under the BioFabUSA to make practical the
large-scale manufacturing of engineered tissues and tissue-related
technologies for our warfighters; is working to establish a Synthetic
Biology Manufacturing Innovation Institute (SynBio MII) in support of
the U.S. biomanufacturing ecosystem; and DARPA's ``Living Foundries:
1000 Molecules'' program has demonstrated a biologically-based way to
grow a manufacturing pipeline and deliver versatile molecules and
materials that could secure joints on airplanes through novel adhesives
that previously would have required welding, improve optics for
machinery, provide high-efficiency fuel sources, enable flexible
electronics, and even deliver cells for use as medicines.
Additionally, DOE has announced the Innovation XLab for
Biomanufacturing aimed at showcasing how U.S. industry can leverage
world-leading national laboratory bioscience capabilities, like Agile
BioFoundry, to bridge the gap between research and commercialization
and pave the way for a stronger bioeconomy. USDA Biotechnology Risk
Assessment Research Grants (BRAG) will help to prioritize opportunities
for direct dialogue between regulators and the agricultural innovative
community to advance regulatory science for biotechnology products.
Last year, President Trump signed an Executive Order to streamline
the regulatory process and promote innovation biotechnology in
agriculture. The White House also hosted a summit bringing together the
Nation's foremost biotechnology leaders across industry, academia, and
government to discuss U.S. bioeconomy leadership challenges and
opportunities. The Administration updated the Coordinated Framework for
the Regulation of Biotechnology (2017), delivered the National
Biodefense Strategy (2018) to strengthen our Nation's defense, and
produced the Executive Order to Modernize Influenza Vaccines in The
United States to Promote National Security and Public Health (2019).
American leadership in biotechnology rests on our ability to
maintain science-and risk-based review and regulation of biotechnology
products, promote and safeguard critical biotechnology infrastructure
and data, and prepare the next generation of biotechnology scientists,
engineers, and innovators. We look forward to continued efforts across
the Federal Government, the private sector, and the academic community
in partnership with Congress to inform our policies on biotechnology
leadership and advancement for the American people.
Advanced Manufacturing
Advanced Manufacturing is an engine of America's economic power and
a pillar of its national security. Advances in manufacturing enable the
economy to continuously improve as new technologies and innovations
increase productivity, enable new products, and create entirely new
industries. Manufacturing is among the highest paying sectors of the
economy, and has a broad impact on jobs in other sectors. Advances in
manufacturing--and America's ability to translate those advances into
products, processes, and services--make R&D a key element of the
Administration's overall manufacturing strategy.
In the face of intense global competition, President Trump unveiled
a Strategy for American Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing (October
2018) that focuses on defending the economy, expanding manufacturing
employment, and ensuring a strong manufacturing and defense industrial
base and a resilient supply chain. Federal investments are focused on
key areas of strategic priority, including smart and digital
manufacturing and advanced industrial robotics, especially systems
enabled by the industrial Internet of things, machine learning, and Al.
The Federal network of Manufacturing USA institutes brings together
industry, academia and Federal partners within a network of advanced
manufacturing institutes to increase U.S. manufacturing competitiveness
and promote a robust and sustainable national manufacturing R&D
infrastructure. The most recent Manufacturing USA annual report details
some of the institutes' successes in developing world-changing
manufacturing technology and equipping the U.S. manufacturing workforce
with the high-value skills needed to make tomorrow's products. In
Fiscal Year 2018 alone, the institutes engaged more than 1,937 member
organizations, sponsored more than 475 R&D projects, and helped more
than 200,000 workers, students, and educators through institute
workforce efforts.
The Administration recognizes the irreplaceable value of the
American worker, and has acted to address the workforce changes caused
by advanced manufacturing and other Industries of the Future. Since the
advancement of new manufacturing technologies requires new skill sets
for the U.S. workforce, Presidential workforce initiatives, such as the
National Council for the American Worker and the Pledge to America's
Workers, seeks to expand programs that educate, train, and reskill
American workers from high-school age to near-retirement. By ensuring
skills-based training, advancing opportunities for lifelong learning,
and promoting multiple pathways to family-sustaining careers, all
Americans can benefit from the Nation's historic economic boom and
record low unemployment rates.
###
The priorities I've outlined today are bipartisan. We look forward
to continuing to work with this committee to accomplish our shared
goals for U.S. leadership in the Industries of the Future.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for your support
of this initiative. I will be pleased to answer any questions you may
have.
The Chairman. And you yielded back 2 seconds. Very good,
Mr. Kratsios.
It goes without saying that the entire statements will be
placed in the record at this point. And thank you for limiting
your remarks to 5 minutes.
Dr. Copan, you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. DR. WALTER COPAN,
UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS
AND TECHNOLOGY AND DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE
OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
Dr. Copan. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today on NIST's role to support the Industries of the
Future. Over the past years, NIST has prioritized the work of
its IOTF-related programs, and I would like to express my
thanks to this committee for your work on behalf of NIST, its
people, programs, and facilities. Also thank the Chair and
Ranking Member of our Appropriations Subcommittee, Senators
Moran and Shaheen, for their support of funding in the Fiscal
Year 2020 appropriations bill for NIST's part in the Industries
of the Future.
Since its founding more than a century ago, NIST has solved
the most pressing measurement and technical challenges the
Nation has faced. NIST must continue to reinforce its core
competencies and grow new capabilities over the next decade,
advancing technology transfer and U.S. innovation. The
Industries of the Future have been defined as technological
domains that will transform U.S. manufacturing, communications,
health care, transportation, and much more.
I would like to highlight NIST's plans and accomplishments
in each of these technology domains, and I would refer you to
more detail in my written testimony.
NIST is a recognized world leader in the field of quantum
science and technology, as was recognized in the National
Quantum Initiative already mentioned. The expertise of NIST
scientists and the unique capabilities of our facilities are
leveraged closely with partners in academia through NIST's
network of joint institutes in Colorado and Maryland.
Last year, NIST established the Quantum Economic
Development Consortium, the QEDC, in partnership with SRI
International, which brings together industry to expand U.S.
leadership in global quantum R&D and the emerging quantum
industry in computing, communications, and sensing.
An important goal for NIST is to develop the foundations
for confidence and trust in artificial intelligence toward new
research outcomes and an expanded commercial marketplace. Today
NIST's efforts in AI are focused along three primary areas of
effort. First, NIST is addressing fundamental questions about
the use of AI to ensure that it is trustworthy and explainable.
Second, NIST is broadly engaging in using AI across its
research portfolio in areas including biometrics, imaging,
advanced materials, smart manufacturing, design, and
characterization of engineered biological systems.
And finally, we are working with industry, government, and
academia to establish the governing principles, standards,
tools, and best practices for the design, construction, and use
of AI systems.
NIST's programs in advanced communications and 5G support
secure, reliable, high speed wireless, as well as wireline
communications critical to U.S. economic competitiveness, as
well as safety and security.
NIST's measurement science research and our support for the
development of standards accelerates the deployment of next
generation communications technologies, including 5G. We are
committed to solving the measurement and deployment challenges
that we face in this fast-moving field to help the U.S. achieve
and maintain global leadership in these areas, and to help U.S.
industry to establish manufacturing capabilities needed for
domestic market supply.
Our broad portfolio in advanced communications includes the
National Advanced Spectrum and Communication Test Network, as
well as the Public Safety Communications Research program,
supported by spectrum auction funds.
NIST's measurement research and manufacturing processes in
advanced materials provides the foundation that helps the
nation's manufacturers to invent, innovate, and to create new
processes, products, and services more rapidly and more
efficiently than their global competitors.
The NIST laboratory programs invest heavily in support of
advanced manufacturing domains. Manufacturing USA and its
recent reauthorization helps U.S. industry develop and
implement new technologies making them more competitive in the
global economy.
To support the bio-economy, NIST is building next
generation, measurement science capabilities and engineering
biology labs to accelerate biotech innovation. Along with basic
R&D, NIST facilitates the translation of technologies to scale
through global standardization, industry partnerships, and
technology transfer. The Manufacturing USA Institutes and their
participants benefit directly from all of this work.
We have launched the NIST Living Measurement Systems
Foundry to advance U.S. synthetic and engineering biology
efforts. The Genome in a Bottle Consortium, Gene Editing
Consortium, and support for the regenerative medicine industry
are examples of our important collaborative work.
I trust that the examples that I have shared here today and
in my written testimony will highlight both the importance of
the Industries of the Future to the economic and national
security of the U.S., as well as the critical roles that NIST
is playing to help American innovation and competitiveness.
I am happy to answer any questions the Committee may have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Copan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dr. Walter Copan, Under Secretary of
Commerce for Standards and Technology; and Director, National
Institute of Standards and Technology
Introduction
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the
Committee thank you for the opportunity to testify today before the
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on the role
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in
promoting U.S. leadership in the ``Industries of the Future.'' NIST's
core mission is to promote
U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness. We constantly
target our research programs towards the emerging technologies that
will have the greatest impact in advancing the competitive position of
the United States. As such, over the past years NIST has prioritized
the work of its programs in Quantum Information Science, Artificial
Intelligence, 5G, Advanced Manufacturing, and Biotechnology, the areas
that today are collectively referred to as the Industries of the
Future. Today, I look forward to highlighting the unique mission and
role that NIST plays in all of these areas to meet our Nation's
measurement and technology needs of the future. As I begin, I would
also express my thanks to this Committee for your work on behalf of
NIST, its people, programs, and facilities.
Preparing for the Future
Since its founding more than a century ago, NIST has solved the
most pressing measurement and technical challenges the Nation has
faced. From helping standardization of methods and materials for mass
production techniques introduced during World War I to the invention of
the world's first atomic clock to studying the collapse of the World
Trade Centers on 9/11, NIST has advanced U.S. industry and security.
Today, NIST is providing measurement tools and standards to strengthen
our Nation's competitiveness and security in areas that affect
Americans' daily lives.
To continue to be a bedrock of innovation, NIST must continue to
reinforce its core competencies and grow new capabilities over the next
decade. In planning for the capabilities that NIST will need to best
support the Nation over the next 10-15 years, we have examined a number
of societal trends and potential emerging technological disruptions
that could impact the competitiveness of the U.S. What systems will
emerge that will require expanded cybersecurity and privacy
capabilities? What technologies are likely to change the way
cryptography works? What novel products will U.S. manufacturers make,
and what new technologies must they use to be competitive? What
technological advances will NIST be able to capitalize on to transform
and enhance its mission delivery? These questions have shaped NIST's
planning and programmatic investments for the future.
NIST worked with stakeholders across government, industry, and
academia to find opportunities for greatest impact. The Industries of
the Future (specifically Quantum Information Science, Artificial
Intelligence, 5G, Advanced Manufacturing, and Biotechnology) were all
identified as technological domains that have the potential to
transform U.S. manufacturing, communications, health care,
transportation, and beyond. These areas will also present NIST new
challenges and opportunities to develop new measurement capabilities
and other methods to secure and protect the Nation's economic and
national security. In addition, NIST is leading a national initiative,
in coordination with all Federal science and technology agencies,
toward modernizing how we transfer technologies arising from federally
funded research at this Nation's research institutes and universities.
In this era of global competition, it is imperative that the U.S. must
create even greater impacts for our citizens and the American economy
from the Nation's research enterprise.
This work on the NIST Return on Investment Initiative is summarized
in our Green Paper issued in April 2019. I am grateful to this
Committee for your support to ensure the U.S. ultimately leads in the
Industries of the Future. Today, I look forward to highlighting NIST's
plans and accomplishments in each of the critical technology domains:
Quantum Information Science
Advances in quantum technologies, including quantum information
science, have the potential to transform and revolutionize computing,
medicine, manufacturing, artificial intelligence, communications,
national defense, and more. Capturing these economic and national
security opportunities will require continued sustained investment and
improved technology transfer efficiency to ensure U.S. leadership,
especially given that other nations have stepped up their quantum-
focused programs and investments as well. NIST plays a central role in
this critical race for quantum leadership.
NIST is a recognized world leader in the field of quantum science
and technology, including four Nobel Prizes awarded to NIST scientists
for their discoveries in this field. NIST has been a strong contributor
in the National Quantum Initiative. Our expertise in quantum draws
directly from our mission to make the most precise and accurate
physical measurements possible. Over the last quarter century, NIST has
shaped an entire generation of quantum science. A significant portion
of today's quantum scientists have trained in NIST laboratories. NIST's
research to develop a measurement infrastructure has enabled quantum
information science to advance to where we are today. Consider just a
few recent NIST achievements:
development of a quantum logic clock;
demonstration of near quantum-limited amplification of weak
signals;
creation of new measurement and error protocols for
characterizing quantum many-body systems; and
pioneering work in quantum simulation.
This past summer--for the first time in history--NIST scientists
teleported a computer circuit instruction between two separated ions.
This foundational work opens the door to quantum computer programs that
can carry out tasks in future large-scale quantum networks.
The expertise of NIST scientists and the unique capabilities of our
facilities are leveraged closely with partners in academia through
NIST's network of joint institutes--with JILA, our joint institute at
the University of Colorado Boulder, as well as the Joint Quantum
Institute (JQI) and the Joint Center for Quantum Information and
Computer Science (QuICS) with the University of Maryland. These
institutes have driven numerous breakthroughs in fundamental quantum
research and have helped trained the next generation of researchers in
this emerging field. Together these capabilities make NIST a true hub
of quantum-based innovation.
As the U.S. research enterprise works to realize the potential
breakthroughs of quantum information science, opportunities for new
quantum technologies are emerging that take advantage of the unusual
rules that govern the behavior of the fundamental components of matter.
NIST is developing robust quantum engineering capabilities for
researchers to rapidly create, test, and validate the performance of
quantum technology platforms. Building on our expertise in quantum
science, nanoscale fabrication, and semiconductor characterization,
NIST is focused on creating these measurement capabilities to serve as
the building blocks and the basis of standards for future quantum
technologies that the U.S. requires to achieve and to lead the world in
``quantum supremacy.''
Building out this quantum engineering infrastructure will require
close partnership and collaboration with industry. To further these
efforts, last year NIST established the Quantum Economic Development
Consortium (QEDC) in partnership with SRI International, headquartered
in Menlo Park, CA. The QEDC brings together players from across
industry with the goal to expand U.S. leadership in global quantum R&D
and the emerging quantum industry in computing, communications, and
sensing.
With funding from both the government and private-sector member
organizations, the QEDC will:
determine workforce needs essential to the development of
quantum technologies;
provide efficient public-private sector coordination;
identify technology solutions for filling gaps in research
or infrastructure;
highlight use cases and grand challenges to accelerate
development efforts; and
foster access to intellectual property, efficient supply
chains, technology forecasting, quantum literacy and workforce
development.
Looking forward, over the coming years NIST will focus a portion of
its quantum research portfolio on the grand challenge of quantum
networking. Serving as the basis for secure and highly efficient
quantum information transmission that links together multiple quantum
devices and sensors, quantum networks will be a key element in the
long-term evolution of quantum technologies.
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has long been a strategic priority for
NIST, also representing a toolkit to remarkably enhance productivity
across all areas of our research and development, as well as toward
advanced manufacturing applications. An important goal for NIST is to
develop the foundation for confidence and trust in AI that results in
new research outcomes and an expanded commercial marketplace.
International investment in AI is also exploding, and companies,
governments and policy makers around the globe are seeking answers that
can provide greater confidence in AI technologies. NIST's study and
deployment of AI methods, tools, and standards can provide the basis
for confidence and trust that is essential for adoption of these
technologies.
NIST has made significant contributions to the fields of machine
learning (ML) and AI over the years. For example, the MNIST database, a
dataset of handwritten digits, is among the most widely used
standardized datasets in the U.S. and around the world for training and
testing AI systems. NIST scientists worked with the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency to develop and deploy smartphone-based systems
that enabled U.S. marines to seamlessly converse with native Pashto
speaking Afghans. These technology developments have also facilitated
rapid commercialization of phone-based voice translation systems such
as Microsoft Bing and Google Translate.
Today, NIST's efforts in AI are focused along three primary areas
of effort:
First, NIST is addressing fundamental questions about the use of
AI. NIST has launched an effort to convene the community around key
concepts of trustworthy AI, seeking to develop ways to measure, define,
and characterize concepts around the accuracy, reliability, privacy,
robustness, and explainability of AI systems. Some examples of NIST
work in this space include:
In November, the NIST National Cybersecurity Center of
Excellence (NCCoE) issued a draft NIST Internal Report, ``A
Taxonomy and Terminology of Adversarial Machine Learning.''
In December, NIST issued a report on the performance of face
recognition software tools in identifying people of varied sex,
age and racial backgrounds: ``Face Recognition Vendor Test
(FRVT) Part 3: Demographic Effects'' (NISTIR 8280). Such data
is intended to provide valuable insights to policymakers,
developers and end users about the limitations and appropriate
uses of currently available AI tools.
NIST and its NCCoE are planning to launch a testbed to
evaluate AI vulnerabilities.
Later in January, NIST intends to release a set of draft
``Principles of Explainable AI'' for public comment.
NIST is organizing a workshop to convene stakeholders to
explore issues of bias in machine-learning based face and
speech recognition algorithms.
Secondly, NIST is heavily engaged in using AI across its research
portfolio in a host of areas including biometrics, advanced materials
discovery, smart manufacturing systems, and the design and
characterization of engineered biological systems as just a few
examples. Additionally, the outputs of NIST research in general,
especially in the terms of well-characterized data sets, as well as our
work in advanced microelectronic systems, will help advance the field
of AI. These tools will enable researchers to better train and
understand AI systems, including the design and manufacture of next-
generation hardware required to reliably and safely run AI systems.
Some recent examples of NIST effort in this space include:
NIST researchers are working on ways to utilize AI to
automate vulnerability assessments for digital infrastructure
and to produce vulnerability ratings using the industry-
standard Common Vulnerability Scoring System.
In advanced materials discovery, NIST has created a high-
fidelity database, Joint Automated Repository for Various
Integrated Simulations, density functional theory (JARVIS-DFT),
with more than 30,000 materials and 500,000 properties to be
used as training data that will help accelerate the development
of new materials.
In wireless spectrum analysis, NIST is creating a curated
radio frequency (RF) signal database to aid in the development
of machine learning models for signal detection and
classification. These datasets, which include radar signals
similar to those planned for the 3.5 GHz band and include noise
and interference, can be used to train and evaluate AI
detectors to enable federal-commercial spectrum sharing.
In manufacturing, NIST is applying AI in its study of
agility performance of robotic systems in manufacturing
environments so that robots can ``learn'' behaviors to operate
effectively in today's factories. Later this month, NIST will
launch our fourth annual Agile Robotics for Industrial
Automation Competition, offering cash prizes to the teams whose
robots perform the best in a simulated environment.
Finally, standards engagement is a key element of NIST's mission,
and we are deeply involved in multiple standards development bodies
around the world. We are working with industry, government, and
academia to establish governing principles and develop standards and
identify best practices for the design, construction, and use of AI
systems. It is vitally important for the U.S. to have a strong,
persuasive, and consistent voice with the relevant standards
organizations around the world.
In August 2019, NIST released the report ``U.S. Leadership
in AI: A Plan for Federal Engagement in Developing Technical
Standards and Related Tools'' in response to the Executive
Order (EO) 13859 directing NIST to issue a plan for Federal
engagement in the development of technical standards and
related tools in support of reliable, robust, and trustworthy
systems that use AI technologies. The plan identifies nine
areas of focus for AI standards and urges that the Federal
Government commit to deeper, consistent, long-term engagement
in AI standards development.
Twelve NIST experts are currently involved in the joint
International Standards Organization (ISO)/International
Electrotechnical Committee (IEC) Joint Technical Committee JTC
1, Subcommittee (SC) 42 on Artificial Intelligence, and NIST is
the convener for the Big Data work effort in SC 42. NIST works
with many companies (including Google, Intel, Microsoft, and
Oracle), other Federal agencies, and academia to develop U.S.
consensus positions on the U.S. Technical Advisory Group for SC
42, supported by the International Committee for Information
Technology Standards.
NIST staff are participating in over a dozen other AI
standards activities in various standards development
organizations, including the American Society for Mechanical
Engineers (ASME), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE), and ISO/IEC. These activities cover topics
such as computational modeling for advanced manufacturing,
ontologies for robotics and automation, personal data privacy,
and algorithmic bias.
NIST's capabilities, ranging from fundamental research to the
delivery of the technical foundations of emerging technologies, make it
a valuable asset in establishing and maintaining U.S. leadership in AI
technologies.
5G and Advanced Communication
Advanced communications are enabling dramatic changes in how
consumers, manufacturers, governments and others provide and consume
information, transact business, provide and use essential services, and
shop, among other tasks. Gartner, a leading research an analytics
company forecasted that there will be over 20 billion connected devices
by 2020, and other forecasts have projected continued growth with
numbers ranging from 60 to75 billion connected devices by 2025. This
insatiable societal demand for connectivity will require significant
advancements in communication technologies.
The Administration's multifaceted 5G efforts are being led by
Director Larry Kudlow of the National Economic Council, and within that
framework, NIST is playing a vital role. NIST's programs in advanced
communications support secure, reliable, high-speed wireless, and
wireline communications critical to U.S. economic competitiveness,
safety, and security. NIST measurement science research and support for
the development of standards accelerates the deployment of next-
generation communication technologies that promise to be faster and
more reliable, including fifth-generation wireless networks. These
technologies will support self-driving cars, Internet of things (IoT)
applications, drones, and future AI systems. NIST is committed to
solving the measurement and deployment challenges of this fast-moving
field to help the U.S. achieve and maintain global leadership in these
areas, and also to help U.S. industry establish manufacturing
capabilities needed for domestic market supply. The NIST portfolio of
activities focused on advanced communications includes:
the National Advanced Spectrum and Communications Test
Network (NASCTN), which is a national network of federal,
academic and commercial test facilities that provides the
testing, modeling and analyses needed to develop and deploy
spectrum-sharing facilities;
the Public Safety Communications Research (PSCR) program,
which is leading the development of standards and performing
the associated research, development and testing to provide the
public safety community access to a dedicated, nationwide LTE
broadband network (FirstNet);
developing and improving the measurement tools and
technologies to improve spectrum utilization, and novel
spectrum sharing techniques to address the current spectrum
crunch; and
providing the measurements and data needed for the
development of the next generation of wireless communications
systems and improved optical communications technologies.
Some examples of how NIST is driving strengthened national
capabilities in the areas of 5G and other advanced communications
technologies include:
Industry consortia, like the 5G Millimeter-Wave Channel
Model Alliance. This is a NIST-sponsored international research
consortium working to advance breakthrough measurement,
calibration and channel modeling approaches for millimeter and
submillimeter wave frequencies. Effective use of this
wavelength spectrum represents a key enabler for applications
related to IoT, virtual reality, autonomous vehicles, and
ubiquitous small cell connectivity, a key element of 5G
deployment. Launched in 2015 the Alliance has since grown to
include nearly 80 organizations.
NIST experts are participating in 5G standards development
activities in multiple fora including IEEE and the Third
Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) where they are working on
issues of security and radio access.
Unique NIST facilities like the Large Antenna Positioning
System. This facility provides measurement capabilities to
pioneer new antenna measurement methods for future 5G wireless
communications systems. These systems will operate at higher
frequencies and offer more than 100 times the data-carrying
capacity of today's cellphones, while connecting billions of
mobile broadband users in complex, crowded signal environments.
However, their higher frequency signals are more easily
distorted and more likely to be affected by physical barriers
such as walls or buildings. The unique measurement capabilities
developed by NIST will be important in helping industry develop
technical solutions such as steerable beam antenna arrays and
performance optimizations through artificial intelligence.
NIST continues to make a significant impact in driving
forward innovation in public safety communications
technologies. Through PSCR, NIST has engaged numerous groups
from both the private and public sectors to address technology
challenges faced by the public safety community. These efforts
have helped drive advances in everything from the development
of security standards for 5G devices and reliable mission
critical voice technologies to enabling first responders to
take advantage of new performance and safety enhancing
technologies like haptics. A key example of the output of this
work was on display at the 2019 Boston Marathon. The SiFi
router developed by Spectronn, as a result of funding and
participation in the NIST Public Safety Innovation Accelerator
Program, provided public safety with critical communication and
computing capabilities without access to the internet, enabling
first responders to always have a backup line of communication
and computing if their local network failed either partially or
completely.
Advanced Manufacturing
A strong U.S. manufacturing sector is essential to our economic
security and national security. As the Trump Administration's National
Security Strategy \1\ states, ``Support for a vibrant domestic
manufacturing sector, a solid defense industrial base, and resilient
supply chains is a national priority.'' American manufacturers
contributed $2.18 trillion to the U.S. economy in 2016. Manufacturing
plays an outsized role in our economy because of its high economic
multiplier effect: U.S. manufacturing supports trillions of dollars of
production in other parts of the economy by purchasing from and selling
to over 80 other industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Security Strategy published December 2017 https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-
0905.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A partner to the U.S. manufacturing sector for more than a century,
NIST has a proven track record in delivering useful tools and technical
assistance that both existing manufacturers and aspiring start-ups
value. NIST's measurement research in manufacturing processes and
advanced materials provides a foundation that helps the Nation's
manufacturers to invent, innovate and create new products and services
more rapidly and more efficiently than their competitors around the
world. Through targeted research across a broad portfolio of
technologies impacting manufacturing from advanced materials to smart
manufacturing systems, NIST helps ensure that the U.S. remains a
competitive force in advanced manufacturing to ensure our economic and
national security. Our partnerships with large and small manufacturers,
Federal agencies, and academic institutions help us anticipate and meet
the needs of rapidly evolving manufacturing industries.
The NIST laboratory programs in support of advanced manufacturing,
ranging from work on materials design and discovery to the use of
collaborative robots in factories, to biomanufacturing and standards
for data exchange and processing information. Examples of some of
NIST's work include:
NIST develops standards and test methods to help industry
take advantage of the latest manufacturing robotics
technologies. This work includes technical standards for
exoskeletons that can dramatically improve the performance of
workers on manufacturing floors, warfighters, and the mobility-
impaired.
NIST partners with the pharmaceutical industry to develop
widely available reference materials and measurement methods.
For example, NIST's monoclonal antibody reference material
provides a benchmark for companies to ensure quality
measurements of their biological drugs and to spur
biopharmaceutical innovations.
NIST supports large-scale manufacturing needs by developing
laser-based measurement techniques to ensure large objects such
as aircraft wings are the right size for proper assembly and
function.
NIST is developing approaches to overcoming technical
barriers to the adoption of additive manufacturing (also known
as 3D printing), such as surface quality, part accuracy,
material properties, real-time monitoring, and process
modeling.
In addition to the output of NIST's research programs, NIST's
extramural programs, which include Manufacturing USA help U.S. industry
develop and implement new technology, develop robust supply chains, and
refine their systems for efficiency and effectiveness, all while making
them more competitive in the global economy.
Manufacturing USA is a network of 14 manufacturing
innovation institutes located across the country where
companies, universities, community colleges, and entrepreneurs
develop new manufacturing technologies with broad applications.
The primary goal of the network, which is planned to expand to
17 institutes over the next year, is to ensure that American
innovations and inventions currently going offshore for
production in competitor nations are scaled up from lab
experiments to products and processes that can be used by U.S.
manufacturers. Manufacturing USA institutes collectively
represent two-thirds of Fortune 50 U.S. manufacturers, over 500
small manufacturers, and eight of the 10 top-ranked research
and engineering universities. Nonfederal funding matches
Federal funding at a 2 to 1 ratio, exceeding the original 1 to
1 goal and demonstrating the value of the network to industry,
academia, and the states. Manufacturing USA education and
workforce training programs have reached nearly 200,000
individuals and include programs focused on training veterans
in advanced manufacturing skills.
As a whole, this suite of programs and investments across our
laboratory research and extramural programs is an essential set of
resources for the Nation's advanced manufacturing enterprise.
Biotechnology
In August 2019, the President named the bioeconomy as one of the
three R&D priorities for FY2021 under the main priority of American
Heath & Bioeconomic Innovation.
A key factor in unleashing the full potential of the bioeconomy
will be the ability to harness the power of complex biological systems
(primarily cells) in a predictable and safe way for the manufacture of
advanced therapeutics, sustainable fuels, chemical feedstocks, and
advanced materials. Remarkable progress has been made in this field
throughout the last decade, particularly with respect to genome read,
write, and edit technologies, but there is still a widely recognized
need for measurements and standards to enable better predictive
engineering, and to support reliable and safe translation of engineered
biological systems into products and other use cases.
To support the U.S. bioeconomy, NIST is building next-generation
measurement science (biometrology) capabilities and engineering biology
laboratories for accelerating responsible biotechnology innovations.
Along with supporting basic technology research and development, NIST
helps facilitate the translation of technologies to scale through
global standardization efforts and partnerships with industry. As
metrology is central and essential to all engineering biology research,
NIST also plays a significant role in convening stakeholders to discuss
challenges and solutions as the field moves forward. NIST plays a key
role in developing techniques, standards and reference materials used
as benchmarks for manufacturing process control and product quality
assurance, in order to facilitate commerce for the bioeconomy. The
National Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals
(NIIMBL), the Manufacturing USA institute sponsored by NIST with the
University of Delaware, and its participants benefit directly from this
work. Recent highlights of NIST work in this field include:
The launch of the NIST Living Measurement Systems Foundry to
advance U.S. synthetic and engineering biology efforts. The
foundry enables the engineering of cells for reliable and safe
use in dynamic and unpredictable environments for applications
such as living therapeutics, environmental sensing, and
structured materials fabrication. An automated facility for
high throughput testing and measuring of engineering microbes,
the foundry provides a mechanism for partnership with other
organizations developing measurement approaches.
The production of world-leading measurements, standards,
technologies, and data needed to drive advances in biosciences
and biotechnology.
The NIST Genome in a Bottle Consortium brings together
over 100 industry and academic partners to develop
reference standards, methods, and data to enable the
translation of whole human genome sequencing to clinical
practice. NIST human genome reference standards have helped
the Food and Drug Administration approval of diagnostics,
provided confidence to enable rapid response of global
health issues, accelerated the development of next-gen
measurement capabilities, and provided high confidence data
underpinning global biological research related to
sequencing.
The NIST Gene Editing Consortium brings together 32
leading industry, academic, and government partners to
identify pre-competitive standards and measurements to meet
the needs of the gene-editing field. NIST leads the
Measurement Working Group of this consortium and our
researchers are actively developing new capabilities for
assessing genome editing outcomes based on the inputs of
this group. Working with its partners, NIST recently
released a list of lexicons as a unified standard set of
terms and definitions serving the needs of the genome
editing community. This will provide critical support to
various scientific and policy discussions.
NIST is assisting the growing regenerative medicine
industry to meet their measurement assurance and other
challenges. NIST has been working with companies and other
Federal agencies to develop measurement assurance
strategies for quantitative measurement of living systems
needed for translation and commercialization of advanced
therapies, including cell therapy, gene therapy, and tissue
engineered products.
NIST is developing key microbiome measurements needed
to accelerate the availability of microbiome diagnostics
and to enable manufacturing of microbiome therapeutics.
Researchers are also developing measurements and standards
for pathogen detection in biodefense and infectious disease
diagnostics.
With increased support NIST can continue to provide the necessary
measurement and standards capabilities and infrastructure that will be
required to unlock the full potential of the U.S. bioeconomy.
Summary
I trust that the examples I have shared today clearly highlight
both the importance of the Industries of the Future to our economic and
national security, as well as the critical roles that NIST is playing
to enable U.S. competitiveness. NIST must continue to play these roles
effectively in partnership with industry, academia, and Federal
Government agencies to help ensure that the U.S. is best positioned to
take full advantage of the transformational potential represented by
Quantum Information Science, Artificial Intelligence, 5G, Advanced
Manufacturing, and Biotechnology. With NIST's dedicated technical
staff, one-of-a-kind facilities, and non-regulatory role, we are well
positioned to have an outsized impact in each of these critical areas
that promise significant benefit to the U.S. economy, our quality of
life, and national security. With the continued support of this
Committee, NIST will continue to thrive in its important mission to
promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness. Thank you and I
would be happy to answer any questions the Committee Members may have.
______
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Walter G. Copan
Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology
and NIST Director
EDUCATION
B.S./B.A. degrees in chemistry and music from Case Western Reserve
University, 1975
Ph.D. in physical chemistry from Case Western Reserve University, 1982
Dr. Walter G. Copan was confirmed by Congress as Under Secretary of
Commerce for Standards and Technology and NIST Director on October 5,
2017.
As NIST Director, Dr. Copan provides high-level oversight and
direction for NIST.
He has had a distinguished and diverse career as a science and
technology executive in large and small corporations, U.S. government,
nonprofit and other public-sector settings.
Dr. Copan formerly served as president and CEO of the IP
Engineering Group Corporation, providing services in intellectual
property strategy, technology commercialization and innovation. Until
June 2017, he was founding CEO and chairman of Impact Engineered Wood
Corporation, an advanced materials technology company. He also is a
founding board member of Rocky Mountain Innovation Partners, where he
led technology transfer programs and innovation services on behalf of
the U.S. Air Force Academy, U.S. Federal labs and academic institutions
and helped foster entrepreneurial businesses in the Rocky Mountain
West. He also served with the National Advisory Council to the Federal
Laboratory Consortium for more than 5 years, providing industry inputs
to advance the U.S. economic impacts of the Federal laboratory system.
From 2010-2013, Dr. Copan served as managing director of Technology
Commercialization and Partnerships at DOE's Brookhaven National
Laboratory (BNL). Among his accomplishments were leading the creation
and implementation of the new DOE technology transfer mechanism,
``Agreement for Commercializing Technology'' (ACT), to facilitate
collaborations between the Federal labs and U.S. corporations. He led
the ``Startup America'' initiative on behalf of DOE for entrepreneurial
business creation, and he initiated the DOE's new Small Business
Innovation Research--Technology Transfer (SBIR-TT) program, which built
upon the experiences of NIST. He served as founding partner and board
member of the ``Accelerate Long Island'' alliance for innovation,
economic development and early stage investment.
From 2005-2010, Dr. Copan was executive vice president and chief
technology officer at Clean Diesel Technologies, Inc., an international
technology development and licensing firm. He spearheaded the company's
transformation, growth and listing on NASDAQ (CDTI), as well as the
company's subsequent merger. Prior to joining CDTI, Dr. Copan served at
the DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) as Principal
Licensing Executive, Technology Transfer. There, he led organizational
changes that strengthened relationships with industry and the
investment community and led to the more productive commercialization
of energy-related technologies.
After earning dual B.S./B.A. degrees in chemistry and music from
Case Western Reserve University in 1975, Dr. Copan began his career in
chemicals and materials research at the Lubrizol Corporation (now part
of the Berkshire Hathaway Group). He earned a Ph.D. in physical
chemistry from Case Western in 1982, and subsequently held leadership
positions at Lubrizol in research and development, strategy, business
unit management, venture capital, and mergers, acquisitions and
strategic alliances in the U.S. and abroad. As managing director,
Technology Transfer and Licensing, from 1999-2003, he was responsible
for Lubrizol's corporate venturing and open innovation, technology
strategy, business development, intellectual assets and the technology
licensing business.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Dr. Cordova.
STATEMENT OF HON. DR. FRANCE CORDOVA, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Dr. Cordova. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and
members of the Committee, thank you for your strong support of
the National Science Foundation and the U.S. science and
engineering enterprise. From the American Innovation and
Competitiveness Act to the National Quantum Initiative to the
Building Blocks of STEM to the Industries of Future Act, your
work is essential to the U.S.'s global leadership and
innovation.
Today the National Science Board and NSF are releasing the
2020 Science and Engineering Indicators, which speak to the
global investment in research and development. This report
reconfirms the U.S.'s leading position in research and
development and its position as the largest R&D performer in
the world. Yet, it also reports that other nations are
increasing their investments and catching up. This underscores
the importance of the Federal investment in basic research,
which is the fountainhead of technology and innovation and
leads to the industries of the future.
As noted by Chairman Wicker, this is NSF's 70th
anniversary. As we celebrate, it is important to acknowledge
the foresight and wisdom of those who intentionally shaped NSF
to foster basic research. NSF's mission is unique. It is the
only Federal agency charged with supporting basic research
across all areas of science, engineering, and STEM education.
Over the past 70 years, that focus has allowed the Nation to
harness ingenuity, foster innovation, grow STEM talent, improve
health, strengthen security, and reap economic growth. Every
day Americans benefit from NSF-funded advances, from the
technology that powers and connects our smartphones to improved
weather forecasts to medical devices. Some of the most
innovative and well-known companies of today like Google and
Qualcomm have received startup support from NSF.
But what about the companies of tomorrow? The
administration's emphasis on AI, quantum information science,
advanced manufacturing, advanced wireless, and biotechnology is
critical to ensuring continued American scientific leadership
and is central to our long-term economic and national security.
NSF has been working closely with OSTP to coordinate our
efforts across the government. Additional details are included
in my written testimony. Here I would like to highlight just a
few key initiatives.
NSF recently announced an effort to establish national
artificial intelligence research institutes. These institutes
will serve as hubs to advance AI research and workforce
development. With coordination from the White House, we have
identified key sectors at the intersection of AI and the
economy and have partnered with the Departments of Agriculture,
Transportation, Homeland Security, and Veterans Affairs. NSF is
also making significant investments through partnerships across
the government and with industry to understand how AI will
impact workers and how to address potential risks such as
algorithmic biases and job loss.
NSF will also establish quantum leap challenge institutes,
an investment aligned with the National Quantum Initiative.
These institutes will be large-scale, interdisciplinary centers
that will foster scientific, technological, and educational
workforce development goals across all areas of quantum
information science.
NSF's investments are also integrating data science, AI,
robotics, and cybersecurity into modern manufacturing systems,
creating partnerships between academia, government, and
industry to study dynamic spectrum allocation and sharing, and
supporting work on future bio-based microelectronics to foster
completely new technologies and bio-based manufacturing.
Perhaps most importantly, NSF is investing in the workforce
of the future. The industries of the future will not thrive
without a workforce ready to tackle them. NSF invests in
research to support students of all ages from pre-K through
adult retraining and places a heavy emphasis on broadening
participation in STEM fields. Our future depends on our
investment in teachers and students in STEM.
By setting the strategic framework for investing in
science, as we have done with the 10 Big Ideas for Future NSF
Investments and by supporting the most talented researchers and
their promising work, NSF lays the foundation for tomorrow?s
industries of the future.
For instance, the opportunity before us to advanced quantum
technologies draws from decades of NSF-supported research that
has been recognized through more than 40 Nobel prizes for
quantum alone. Likewise, the 2018 Turing Award, often referred
to as the Nobel prize for computing, was awarded to three
researchers who have been funded by NSF for pioneering
breakthroughs in deep learning, which is powering much of
today's AI revolution.
In the pages of this notebook, I have examples of how
scientists in every state represented by this committee are
using their curiosity and ingenuity to expand the base of human
knowledge in the industries of the future. In doing so, they
move us all one-step closer to the next great breakthrough.
Again, I would like to thank you for your strong support of
NSF and your work in these critical areas of research. It will
take all of us working together to realize the full potential
of these advancements and what they hold for the American
people. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Cordova follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Dr. France Cordova, Director,
National Science Foundation
Introduction
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
Committee, it is a privilege to be before you today to discuss the
Industries of the Future and how basic research supported by the
National Science Foundation (NSF) has not only fostered their
development but will ensure American leadership into the future.
Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L.
81-507), NSF is an independent Federal agency whose mission is ``to
promote the progress of science; to advance the national health,
prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other
purposes.'' NSF is unique in carrying out its mission by supporting
fundamental research across all fields of science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and all levels of STEM education.
NSF is also committed to the development of a future-focused science
and engineering workforce that draws on the talents of all Americans.
NSF accounts for approximately 25 percent of the total Federal budget
for basic research conducted at U.S. colleges and universities and has
been vital to many discoveries that impact our daily lives and drive
the economy.
A vibrant scientific workforce and breakthrough discoveries enabled
by NSF investments sustain, accelerate, and transform America's
globally preeminent innovation ecosystem. A long-term vision, belief in
the promise of fundamental research, and commitment to pursuing risky,
yet potentially extraordinary discoveries are the hallmarks of NSF.
NSF's investments empower discoverers to ask the questions and develop
the technologies that lead to the next big breakthroughs. Since its
creation in 1950, NSF has supported 242 Nobel Laureates at some point
in their careers.
This year, NSF celebrates its 70th Anniversary. In doing so, we
will also celebrate the wisdom and foresight of Vannevar Bush and his
colleagues, and all those in Congress and the Executive Branch who made
the creation of NSF a national priority and a reality. Over the past 70
years, NSF has allowed the Nation to harness ingenuity, foster
innovation, and reap the benefits of the economic growth and progress
that come with doing so. In fact, many of today's industries are rooted
in basic research, with companies such as Google and Qualcomm having
received start-up funding from NSF. Every day, the American people
benefit directly from NSF-funded advances, from the technology that
powers our smartphones and the capabilities that connect them, to
improved weather forecasts, to medical devices for diagnosis and
rehabilitation.
Fundamental research supported by NSF and other Federal agencies
builds the foundation for progress. Often, this occurs over decades,
where the achievements of a generation are built upon by the next.
Occasionally, breakthroughs allow it to happen more rapidly.
Ultimately, progress is driven by curious minds pushing the boundaries
of knowledge and stretching the canvas of discovery. The United States'
leadership in scientific research and development is built upon a
uniquely American system where sustained investment in fundamental
research is paired with a strong partnership among government,
academia, and industry. This public-private partnership has allowed the
United States to be the world leader in discovery and innovation for
decades and will propel American leadership into the future. Fields
such as artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum information science
(QIS) hold the promise of unparalleled job growth, continued
prosperity, and strengthened homeland and national security. A strong
and sustained commitment to this American system of innovation through
basic research will be crucial as we compete for preeminence in these
and other fields.
NSF and the Industries of the Future
Since its creation, NSF has been the foundation for tomorrow's
industries of the future. NSF's mission is to stay at the forefront of
science--to fund the high-risk, high-reward research that has the
potential to bring the world new discoveries. NSF funds thousands of
researchers each year to build the base of human knowledge and in doing
so, their work results in innovations in all aspects of our daily
lives. They have revolutionized our wireless networks, developed life-
saving medical diagnostics, ushered in the age of autonomous vehicles
and 3D printing, and brought digital agriculture to our farmers. To
catalyze research around some of the most challenging and promising
areas of scientific research, NSF has established a set of Big Ideas
that range from predicting how an organism will develop observable
characteristics to understanding the origins of the universe. The Big
Ideas will play significant roles in not only advancing AI, QIS, and
other potential industries of the future, but in identifying the yet
unknown transformative technologies that will emanate from today's
investments in basic research.
The Administration's emphasis on AI, QIS, advanced manufacturing,
advanced wireless, and biotechnology as today's Industries of the
Future is not only critical to ensuing American scientific leadership
in the decades to come, it is also central to our long-term economic
success and national security. NSF and our fellow agencies, including
the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the Department of Energy
have been working closely with the Office of Science and Technology
Policy (OSTP) in the White House to coordinate our efforts and
collaborate extensively in each of these areas of research and
development.
Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence is advancing rapidly and holds the
potential to vastly transform our lives. NSF invests nearly $500
million annually in AI research--the largest non-defense Federal
investment--supporting exploration in machine learning, natural
language processing, knowledge representation and reasoning, and
computer vision, along with the safety, security, robustness, and
explainability of AI systems. In addition to foundational research in
these areas, a key to harnessing the promise of AI is translational
research that links AI and economic sectors such as agriculture,
manufacturing, transportation, and personalized medicine. Equally
important is the investment in education and learning, including
growing the human capital and institutional capacity needed to nurture
the next generation of AI researchers and practitioners.
NSF has a long and rich history of supporting transformative
research in AI and machine learning, along with the closely related
areas of robotics and data science. Through collaboration and
coordination with OSTP, NSF leadership is helping to drive and
coordinate AI research and development efforts across the Federal
Government. As NSF Director, I co-chair the National Science and
Technology Council's (NSTC) Select Committee on AI, which advises the
White House on interagency AI research and development priorities and
establishes structures to improve government planning and coordination.
NSF's ability to bring together numerous fields of scientific
inquiry--from computer information science to engineering and
economics--uniquely positions the agency to lead the Nation in
expanding the frontiers of AI. That is why NSF has embarked upon an
effort to establish National Artificial Intelligence Research
Institutes. With NSTC coordination, NSF is partnering with four other
Federal agencies representing key sectors at the intersection of AI and
our Nation's economy. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's National
Institute of Food and Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Homeland
Security's Science & Technology Directorate, the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Federal Highway Administration, and the U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs have all joined NSF in this important
initiative. NSF anticipates an investment of approximately $200 million
over the next six years in these AI Institutes. We are launching this
effort this Fiscal Year and plan to support up to six
multidisciplinary, multi-institutional research institutes that will
serve as national hubs for universities, Federal agencies, industry,
and nonprofits to advance AI research and workforce development in key
areas while addressing grand challenges. While this year's effort is a
collaboration among Federal agencies, NSF anticipates engaging other
stakeholders in the future, including via private-public partnerships
and expanding the topic areas supported.
AI technologies also pose potential challenges, such as the
possibility of jobs lost to automation, new security threats, and the
potential for algorithmic biases. NSF's Big Idea on The Future of Work
at the Human-Technology Frontier (FW-HTF) is one mechanism by which NSF
is responding to these challenges while enhancing opportunities for the
future of jobs and work. Specifically, the FW-HTF Big Idea will advance
our understanding of how technology and people interact, distribute
tasks, cooperate, and complement each other in different specific work
contexts. We have also developed initiatives with industry to address
potential biases in AI systems with the goal of contributing to
trustworthy AI systems that are readily accepted and deployed to tackle
grand challenges facing society.
The possibilities for implementing AI and improving lives are
boundless. For example, NSF-funded researchers at Mississippi State
University and Indiana University are working with patients and
clinicians in the design of a socially assistive robot to aid in the
treatment of depression. NSF-funded researchers at the University of
Colorado are examining how augmented reality and AI can enable more
efficient, safe, and high-quality construction, which accounts for a
significant portion of the U.S. economy. Finally, a large, multi-
institutional team of researchers funded by NSF and led by Cornell
University is using AI algorithms to devise sustainable solutions to
environmental, societal, and economic challenges, from creating new
materials for solar panels and fuel cells to designing farm irrigation
strategies that simultaneously increase yields, reduce water use, and
benefit migrating waterfowl.
Quantum Information Science
Research in QIS examines uniquely quantum phenomena that can be
harnessed to advance information processing, transmission, measurement,
and fundamental understanding in ways that classical approaches can
only do much less efficiently, or not at all. NSF-supported quantum
projects are opening new opportunities in the QIS arena, such as new
materials, circuits, and algorithms that enable powerful computers,
incredibly precise sensors and detectors, and secure digital
communications.
As with AI, NSF has a long history of investment in QIS research,
with NSF-funded researchers paving the way for modern-day technologies
and positioning the country for major breakthroughs. This was most
recently highlighted in October 2019, when Google announced that a
quantum computer had accomplished a task not yet possible on a
classical device. When verified, this may prove to be a milestone
moment, one that builds on more than three decades of continuous NSF
investment in the fundamental physics, computer science, materials
science, and engineering that underlies many of today's quantum
computing developments--and NSF has supported the researchers behind
them, including five of the co-authors who helped create Google's
system.
NSF's Quantum Leap (QL) Big Idea builds upon and extends our
existing knowledge of the quantum world to observe, manipulate, and
control the behavior of particles at atomic and subatomic scales. The
Quantum Leap will enable discoveries in both naturally-occurring and
engineered quantum systems and will develop next-generation quantum
technologies and devices for sensing, information processing,
communications, and computing. NSF's investment in the QL Big Idea is
strongly aligned with Administration priorities and the National
Quantum Initiative Act and will consolidate and expand the United
States' world-leading position in fundamental quantum research while
delivering proof-of-concept devices, applications, tools, and systems
with a demonstrable advantage over their classical counterparts.
Under the umbrella of the QL Big Idea, NSF has several programs
focused on harnessing the intellectual power of the United States to
unleash the potential of the Nation's quantum-based scientific
enterprise and to enhance the Nation's well-being, economy, and
security. For example, The Quantum Idea Incubator for Transformational
Advances in Quantum Systems (QII-TAQS) program supports
interdisciplinary teams exploring innovative, original ideas in quantum
science and engineering. These projects cover a broad spectrum of
scientific and engineering approaches and have the potential to deliver
new concepts, new platforms, and/or new approaches that will accelerate
the development and application of quantum technologies. In FY 2019,
NSF made nineteen QII-TAQS awards. These pioneering projects focus on
quantum functionality and aim to make transformative advances towards
quantum systems through experimental demonstrations and proof-of-
concept validations. For example, a transdisciplinary team of
researchers from the University of Massachusetts are designing and
fabricating new quantum systems where the quantum states are resilient
to changes in the local environments, advancing us closer to the
reality of a quantum computer. As with this award, our Quantum Idea
Incubator program aims to facilitate the process of translating such
ideas into reality, fostering breakthroughs in quantum sensing, quantum
communications, quantum simulations, and quantum computing systems.
NSF is also embarking on center-scale research in QIS. In 2019, NSF
awarded the first grants towards establishing Quantum Leap Challenge
Institutes (QLCI). The first phase was a call for proposals to support
the formation of broadly convergent research teams with each developing
a compelling and comprehensive vision for a Challenge Institute. A
total of 18 such awards were made. The second phase of this process,
the submission of full Institute proposals, is ongoing, with the first
anticipated awards in FY 2020. These Institutes will be large-scale
interdisciplinary research projects that aim to advance the frontiers
of quantum information science and engineering. Research at these
Institutes will span the focus areas of quantum computation, quantum
communication, quantum simulation and/or quantum sensing. The
Institutes are expected to foster multidisciplinary approaches to
specific scientific, technological, and educational workforce
development goals in these fields.
Advanced Wireless
Working with other Federal partners, including the Federal
Communications Commission and NIST, and in collaboration with industry
partners, NSF supports fundamental research on advanced wireless
technology and is engaged in the overall 5G effort led by Director
Larry Kudlow of the National Economic Council. NSF has a proven track
record of investment in fundamental research on wireless technologies.
For example, today's fifth-generation (``5G'') wireless networks have
been enabled by NSF's seminal investments in ground-breaking
millimeter-wave research dating back to 2004. Looking forward, NSF-
supported research will innovate in areas critical to future
generations of wireless networks, such as wireless devices, circuits,
protocols, and systems; mobile edge computing; distributed machine
learning and inference on mobile devices; and dynamic spectrum
allocation and sharing. This work will offer new insights capable of
making wireless communication faster, smarter, more responsive, and
more robust--with profound implications for science and society. NSF's
leadership in wireless research has three intertwined components:
Supporting fundamental research enabling advanced wireless
technologies;
Establishing advanced wireless research testing platforms,
in collaboration with industry, to experiment with new
approaches at scale; and
Catalyzing academic, industry, and community leaders to work
together to prototype innovative wireless approaches to address
societal challenges.
An example of this convergent approach to advanced wireless
research is NSF's Platforms for Advanced Wireless Research (PAWR)
program, a $100 million public-private partnership comprising $50
million of NSF investment paired with $50 million in cash and in-kind
contributions from a wireless consortium of more than 30 companies and
associations. PAWR platforms in Salt Lake City, New York City, and
North Carolina's Research Triangle are helping to build core wireless
capabilities through creative university partnerships, attracting
government and corporate research funding as well as local wireless
jobs, and utilizing advanced wireless capabilities to enhance city
services and economic development. For example, in North Carolina, the
NSF-funded PAWR platform will enable research on how to accelerate the
integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national air-space,
as well as how to enable new advanced wireless features such as flying
base stations for hot spot wireless connectivity.
NSF also recognizes that access to spectrum is crucial to the
continued development of wireless systems that can meet the
requirements of future technologies and applications in a secure
manner. In October, NSF launched a new program on Machine Learning for
Wireless Networking Systems (MLWiNS) in partnership with Intel
Corporation to accelerate fundamental, broad-based research on
wireless-specific machine learning techniques. This program will
support new wireless system and architecture designs that can
dynamically access shared spectrum, efficiently operate with limited
radio and network resources, and scale to address the diverse and
stringent quality-of-service requirements of future wireless
applications. For example, MLWiNS projects may pursue novel methods to
support coexistence between commercial (e.g., cellular, Wi-Fi), Federal
(e.g., U.S. Navy radar), and astronomical (e.g., passive radio
astronomy observations) users of spectrum. In addition, earlier this
month, NSF released a new solicitation for Spectrum and Wireless
Innovation enabled by Future Technologies (SWIFT). The SWIFT program
focuses on effective spectrum utilization and coexistence technologies,
which will become more critical as the demands of advanced wireless
techniques on a finite spectrum continue to increase.
Just as today's wireless systems have made significant advances
possible, research in advanced wireless promises to do the same. For
the sciences, advanced wireless can improve the flow and latency of
data and create new possibilities for conducting research. Advanced
wireless also holds the promise of continuing the economic growth we
have seen in the mobile, e-commerce, digital agriculture, and other
sectors of the economy. The ability to communicate is central to human
society, and NSF-supported researchers are at the forefront of bringing
even greater advances to the American people.
Biotechnology
Over billions of years, life has evolved a vast diversity of
innovations--solutions to overcome environmental challenges. Until
recently, our ability to understand and exploit these innovations has
been limited. But new capabilities to read and edit genomes, new means
of sensing biological processes at multiple scales, and new
computational and AI approaches in bioinformatics and modeling have
vastly improved our ability to understand life's deepest mysteries. NSF
investments in genomics, cellular, organismal, and developmental
biology, and in bioinformatics spur advances in synthetic biology and
enhance biotechnology beyond the current state-of-the-art. The
accelerating power of this biotechnology promises to sustain U.S.
economic growth and innovation across multiple sectors that together
constitute the bioeconomy.
Biotechnology and synthetic biology are producing extremely fast
economic growth and hold immense potential for transformative change
across many commercial sectors. Advances in these fields are leading to
novel bio-materials; transforming the food, agriculture, and
pharmaceutical industries; enabling new capabilities for information
storage and renewable energy; and creating new kinds of targeted
medical therapies. These bio-industries are driven by fundamental
science in biology, which aims to understand and predict the function
of living systems, design complex biological systems for useful
function, and achieve convergence of insight from engineering, biology,
chemistry, physics, and ethics.
To sustain and expand the bioeconomy, we must invest in fundamental
research to reveal the underlying basis for the diversity of life's
innovations. For example, while we have the capability to sequence the
genome of any organism, we do not understand the function of 80 percent
of that sequence for even the best studied species. Advancing our
understanding of this unknown code is likely key to predicting genome
regulation, which is necessary if we are to open up new opportunities
in bio-manufacturing, medicine and agriculture. Further, we have
explored the genomic basis for key innovations in only a tiny fraction
of species. There is an incredible wealth of biological innovation yet
to be discovered and tapped for applications. Finally, a key to rapid
discovery is facilitating open and efficient access to bio-data and the
bioinformatic tools and cyberinfrastructure necessary to retrieve and
analyze big data sets.
NSF has current initiatives to address scientific challenges and
foster new applications that will accelerate the U.S. bioeconomy. With
a new suite of investments within the Understanding the Rules of Life
Big Idea, NSF-funded research seeks to develop a predictive
understanding of biological systems at all scales. This knowledge is
what drives advances in understanding the human body and improving
health, and will permit sustainable, efficient food production.
Likewise, biological principles and biomaterials can drive next-
generation information storage technologies that will be the basis for
future devices and systems in AI, QIS, Advanced Manufacturing, and
Advanced Wireless. NSF's Semiconductor Synthetic Biology for
Information Storage and Retrieval (SemiSynBio) program is supporting
work on future bio-based microelectronics. These and other NSF
investments will enable us to harness biological systems and
construction of synthetic living systems to foster completely new
technologies and bio-based manufacturing.
In addition, to accelerate the adoption biotechnology products and
ensure their socially responsible use, NSF supports research on ethical
questions and impacts arising from innovative new technologies and
their integration into society. For example, NSF's Science and
Technology Studies program and Ethical and Responsible Research program
fund workshops and studies investing in a range of topics, from
societal and social justice issues in synthetic biology to ethics and
responsible innovation in genome engineering. NSF is also investing in
predictive modeling that is critical to measuring environmental risks
related to genomic manipulation of organisms and to aspects of
biosecurity.
Advanced Manufacturing
NSF has played a leading role in fostering the development of
advanced manufacturing and making revolutionary processes like 3D
printing a reality. NSF's Advanced Manufacturing program continues to
support the fundamental research needed to revitalize American
manufacturing to grow the economy and the workforce, and to reshape our
strategic industries. NSF research accelerates advances in
manufacturing technologies with an emphasis on multidisciplinary
research that fundamentally alters and transforms manufacturing
capabilities, methods, and practices.
We are currently entering the 4th industrial revolution, where
computing and networking are integrated into factory floor operations
to improve productivity and quality while reducing cost. NSF-funded
research on model-based smart manufacturing is transforming static
manufacturing systems into adaptive, ``smart'' systems, powered by
artificial intelligence, that can sense and adapt to changing
environments, and optimize performance. These smart systems can
schedule required maintenance of machines in a predictive fashion,
reducing downtime due to unexpected failures, and react to changing
plans when new products are introduced into the factory.
NSF's investments touch on numerous aspects of advanced
manufacturing. Cyber-manufacturing advances will enable small-scale
producers to cooperate with large-volume factories, leveraging high-
throughput and high-quality production lines. Novel sensing systems
such as laser scanners and computer vision can be integrated into
factory floors to improve production quality, detecting potential
failures in-line and thereby reducing scrap. Advanced semiconductor,
quantum, and optical device design, fabrication and processing will be
used for applications in biomedical, alternative energy,
communications, computing, and sensing systems.
Through our Engineering Research Centers (ERC), NSF supports
collaboration among researchers in different scientific disciplines and
partnerships between industry and universities. These collaborations
produce both technological innovations that strengthen the competitive
position of industry and engineering graduates who will be creative
innovators in a global economy. For example, the Cell Manufacturing
Technologies ERC at the Georgia Institute of Technology (in partnership
with the University of Georgia, the University of Wisconsin-Madison,
and the University of Puerto Rico) enables robust, scalable, low-cost
biomanufacturing of high-quality therapeutic cells to bring affordable,
curative therapies for incurable chronic diseases. And the
Nanomanufacturing Systems for Mobile Computing and Mobile Energy
Technologies ERC at the University of Texas at Austin (in partnership
with the University of New Mexico and the University of California,
Berkeley) is exploring manufacturing processes to revolutionize future-
generation mobile computing and energy devices.
The Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers (IUCRC)
program also enables university researchers to collaborate with
industry partners to conduct use-inspired research. For example, the
Center for Advanced Design and Manufacturing of Integrated
Microfluidics (CADMIM), which is currently composed of sites at the
University of California, Irvine and the University of Illinois at
Chicago is developing low-power, automated, self-contained, mass-
produced microdevices capable of multi-step biochemical assessments.
CADMIM's research will support the development of diagnostics
critically needed for the environment, food supply, and medical
situations enabling these diagnostics to be done inexpensively,
quickly, and accurately on the spot.
The U.S. government has also made significant investments in the
Manufacturing USA institutes. NSF participates in all these institutes,
inviting our researchers to propose projects that could result in
industrial implementation. All these institutes also have significant
investments in workforce development, which complements NSF's program
in Advanced Technological Education (ATE). The ATE Center for Advanced
Automotive Technology in Macomb, Michigan, which helps train workers
for the auto industry, is a prime example of how coupling industries
with local workforce development benefits communities, industry, and
the Nation.
NSF's investments in advanced manufacturing, including the
integration of data science, AI, robotics, and cybersecurity into
modern manufacturing systems, will increase the efficiency and
sustainability of the production of the next generation of products and
services across nearly every sector of the economy. These developments
will yield advantages such as reduced time to market, new performance
attributes, improved small-batch production, cost savings, energy
savings, and reduced environmental impact.
Training the Next Generation Workforce
For the United States to continue global leadership in these and
other areas, we must also develop the next generation of the STEM
workforce. Our future depends on our investment in inclusion, in
diversity, in training of STEM teachers, and in inspiring the next
generations through formal and informal learning. Continued global
leadership also requires investment in the next generation of
scientists trained to pursue questions beyond the traditional
scientific disciplines. NSF is investing in education research across
all levels of learning--from preK-12 through graduate education and
beyond--which then informs education and training programs to better
develop skill sets in cutting-edge technologies, promote highly
collaborative team science, and foster greater diversity in the
workforce. Programs such as Computer Science for All (CSforAll),
Discovery Research K-12, and Research Assistantships for High School
Students (RAHSS) train the next generation of researchers to be nimble,
multifaceted scientists with the ability to harness the tools of
innovation across multiple fields.
NSF prepares K-12 students for the industries of the future through
its education research and development programs such as Innovative
Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST). Early,
positive engagement in STEM is very important for students to pursue
fields such as computer science and ultimately be prepared for
technological jobs. Through the ITEST program, researchers at the
University of Washington are examining how stereotypes influence 8-12-
year-old girls' motivation to study computer science. These researchers
are comparing interest stereotypes--stereotypes about whether girls or
boys like computer science more--to ability stereotypes--stereotypes
about whether girls or boys have higher aptitudes in computer science.
The results of their research will lay the groundwork for future
interventions that directly target interest stereotypes to boost girls'
motivation to pursue computer science education and technological jobs
that will be in high demand.
Broadening participation in STEM fields to ensure a diverse pool of
future STEM degree holders is a major priority for NSF. The INCLUDES
(Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of
Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science) Big Idea is a
comprehensive national initiative designed to catalyze the STEM
enterprise to collaboratively work for inclusive change, resulting in a
STEM workforce that reflects the population of the Nation. In doing so,
we will enhance U.S. leadership in STEM discoveries and innovations by
drawing youth from every part of the country into the STEM fields.
Conclusion
The Industries of the Future are cross-cutting, convergent, and
interdependent fields of research that collectively offer enormous
economic potential and are critical to the Nation's long-term economic
and national security. We cannot focus on dominance in only one area,
as advances across the spectrum of the science and engineering
disciplines are needed to harness the potential of these promising
fields. Just as our ability to advance machine learning across sectors
of the economy will be improved by advances in quantum computing, the
biotechnology economy will be buoyed by breakthroughs in advanced
manufacturing. Advanced wireless capabilities hold the potential to
improve how we collect, transmit, and analyze data across all fields of
science, and how we integrate new technologies and advances across
industries and throughout our communities. Finally, we must also ensure
that we support the socio-economic research needed to understand how
humans interact with and are impacted by these advanced systems.
NSF has also put an emphasis on supporting researchers as
entrepreneurs, and to take their ideas to the marketplace. NSF's I-
Corps program provides entrepreneurial education that equips scientists
with the tools needed to transform research and discoveries into
innovative technologies. The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
program helps startups develop their ideas and bring them to market.
From 2007 to 2016, NSF's SBIR program funded roughly 400 companies each
year. Any one of these companies could be the next groundbreaker to
usher in a new era of advancement.
Just as the convergence of the NSF-funded page-rank algorithm,
wireless devices, touchscreen interfaces, and other innovations
catalyzed unanticipated industries and U.S. dominance in mobility and
e-commerce, there is similar opportunity for advances at the
intersection of Al, QIS, Advanced Wireless, Advanced Manufacturing, and
Biotechnologies to lead to revolutionary new industries of the future.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. With the
support of this Committee and the Congress, NSF will continue to invest
in the fundamental research and the talented people who improve our
daily lives and transform our future.
______
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
France A. Cordova
Biography
The Honorable France A. Cordova is an astrophysicist and the 14th
director of the National Science Foundation (NSF). Cordova was
nominated to this position by the President of the United States in
2013 and subsequently confirmed by the U.S. Senate. NSF is a $8.3B
independent Federal agency; it is the only government agency charged
with advancing all fields of scientific discovery, technological
innovation, STEM education, and STEM workforce development.
Cordova has been a leader in science, engineering and education for
more than three decades. She has a distinguished career in both higher
education and government; her contributions in multi-spectrum research
on x-ray and gamma ray sources and space-borne instrumentation have
made her an internationally recognized astrophysicist.
She is the only woman to serve as president of Purdue University,
where she led the university to record levels of research funding,
reputational rankings, and student retention and graduation rates. She
focused her tenure on launching tomorrow's leaders, translating
research to application and meeting global challenges. She established
a new College of Health and Human Sciences at Purdue, as well as a new
Global Research Policy Institute, and participated in state-wide
initiatives to boost public-private research collaborations.
Cordova is also chancellor emerita of the University of California,
Riverside, where she was a distinguished professor of physics and
astronomy. There she laid the foundation for a new medical school,
California's first public medical school in over 40 years, and focused
on student diversity and inclusion. At the University of California,
Santa Barbara, where Cordova was vice chancellor for research and
professor of physics, she led a campus-wide effort to support
convergence in blue-sky research areas.
Previously, Cordova served as NASA's chief scientist, representing
NASA to the larger scientific community and infusing the activities of
the agency--including the International Space Station, then under
construction--with the scientific goals of the broader community. She
was the youngest person and first woman to serve as NASA's chief
scientist and was awarded the agency's highest honor, the Distinguished
Service Medal.
Prior to joining NASA, she was on the faculty of the Pennsylvania
State University where she headed the department of astronomy and
astrophysics. Cordova was also deputy group leader in the Earth and
space sciences division at Los Alamos National Laboratory. She received
her Bachelor of Arts degree from Stanford University and her doctorate
in physics from the California Institute of Technology.
More recently, Cordova served as chair of the Board of Regents of
the Smithsonian Institution and on the board of trustees of Mayo
Clinic. She also served as a member of the National Science Board
(NSB), where she chaired the Committee on Strategy and Budget. As NSF
director, she is an ex officio member of the NSB.
Cordova's scientific contributions have been in the areas of
observational and experimental astrophysics, multi-spectral research on
x-ray and gamma ray sources and space-borne instrumentation. She has
published more than 150 scientific papers. She was co-principal
investigator for a telescope experiment that is currently flying on the
satellite XMM-Newton, a cornerstone mission of the European Space
Agency.
For her scientific contributions, Cordova has been awarded several
honorary doctorates, including ones from Purdue, Duke and Dartmouth
Universities. She was honored as a Kilby Laureate, recognized for
``significant contributions to society through science, technology,
innovation, invention and education.'' Cordova was elected to the
American Academy of Arts and Sciences and is a National Associate of
the National Academies and an Honorary Member of the Royal Irish
Academy. She is also a fellow of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the Association for Women in Science
(AWIS).
Cordova is married to Christian J. Foster, a science educator, and
they have two adult children and a grandchild.
The Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Cordova, and thank you for
your entire career and we very much appreciate that.
Mr. O'Rielly.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL O'RIELLY, COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Mr. O'Rielly. Good morning. Chairman Wicker and Ranking
Member Cantwell, thank you for inviting me to join this
important hearing.
I will focus my comments on next generation wireless
services, unlicensed wireless opportunities, infrastructure,
and a few other related issues.
Sound FCC policy in these areas will provide a solid
foundation; enable additional platforms for many other non-FCC-
regulated technologies and industries to flourish. I truly
believe that 5G has the opportunity to revolutionize wireless
communications and, for that matter, the entire communications
landscape. Rather than being one among many consumer purchases,
future wireless services have the potential to be ingrained
within almost every aspect of American life.
In terms of functionality, it is estimated that wireless
speeds will improve by 5 to 20 times over 4G; capacity will
increase by 100-fold; and average latency will drop from 40 to
50 milliseconds to 1.
Moreover, these advancements will have far-reaching
economic impact. A recent Qualcomm-initiated study estimated
that 5G would generate $13.2 trillion in economic benefits in
2035, support 22.3 million jobs, and produce economic global
growth of $2.1 trillion, an amount equivalent to Italy's
current economy.
To ensure U.S. wireless providers and potential new
entrants have sufficient wireless spectrum to offer 5G, the
Commission has been aggressive in identifying, allocating, and
licensing for this purpose.
Some critics have asserted that the Commission has failed
to make mid-band spectrum available. As someone who has been
actively and aggressively working to make these frequencies
available, I strongly disagree with this assessment. To
facilitate an effective 5G mid-band play, the Commission does
have work ahead of it to complete the CBRS priority access,
license auction, the reallocation of a good portion of the C-
band, and convert a portion of the 3.1 to 3.55 gigahertz band
for commercial services. At the same time, we will need a
concerted effort to bypass attempts by rogue, local, and state
governments to extract untenable monies from new technology
users or drag out siting reviews due to ineptitude or attempts
to preserve power. In many suburban and rural markets, 5G
offerings will rely on equipment attached to macro towers, and
the Commission will need to be aggressive to ensure that that
siting process is not impeded.
Equally important, the Commission needs to address the
critical need for more unlicensed spectrum. Over the last many
years, unlicensed technologies have experienced a vast amount
of innovation, leading to amazing new consumer products and
immeasurable economic benefits. Yet, the current unlicensed
spectrum workhorses, 2.5 and 5 gigahertz, are facing
saturation.
I firmly believe that the Commission needs to move forward
expeditiously to open 5.9 and 6-gigahertz bands for unlicensed
use. In both instances, incumbent provider services can be
properly protected or accommodated as needed to prevent harmful
interference while allowing these benefits of unlicensed
technologies to flourish.
The deployment and maintenance of infrastructure used to
provide 5G services will require huge numbers of American
workers with the requisite skill sets. Industry is likely to
require a systemic plan of action potentially leveraging the
assistance of the Federal Government than in past technological
evolutions. I would humbly suggest that this endeavor is not
necessarily within the expertise of the FCC but better suited
to other agencies and departments, and we stand ready to assist
them in any way possible.
In terms of a relatively new innovation issue, I believe
that wireless power may be vital for the success of future
connectivity and productivity. Specifically, with billions upon
billions and perhaps trillions of additional wireless devices
expected to be deployed over the next few years, the race will
be on to produce and deploy wireless power technology with
multiple players already in the market and I am sure more to
come.
On the international front, I suggest the recently
concluded WRC-19 was a mixed result, and its future as a valued
conference is questionable. In particular, it was very evident
that certain foreign delegations were sent with clear
directions to oppose the United States and other forward-
thinking nations. The U.S. is not without options if certain
member nations of the ITU continue to disrupt existing
processes and slow progress toward the next generation wireless
world.
In conclusion, innovation and thus the industries of
tomorrow will only happen if there is a right environment for
it to develop. This hearing is a positive step for the purpose.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have on
this issue or any others. And I thank the chair.
[The prepared statement of Mr. O'Rielly follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael O'Rielly, Commissioner,
Federal Communications Commission
Good morning. Let me start by extending my deep appreciation to
Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Cantwell for inviting me to join
this important hearing on the future of innovation.
While I hold views on many of the technology advancements likely to
be discussed by my fellow panelists, I intend to focus my comments
today on the development and deployment of those within the
jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In this
case, key topics include next-generation wireless services (more
commonly referred to as 5G), unlicensed wireless opportunities,
spectrum policy in general, and other related issues. Sound FCC policy
in these areas will provide a solid foundation and enable additional
platforms for many other non-FCC regulated technologies to flourish.
Moreover, past and future FCC decisions will have considerable positive
impact on the U.S. economy and workforce. I would be pleased to answer
any questions you may have on these matters or any others.
5G Wireless
From my previous positions as Congressional staff to my current
perch at the FCC, I have witnessed multiple migrations from one
wireless generation to the next. I truly believe that 5G has the
opportunity to revolutionize wireless communications and, for that
matter, the entire communications landscape. While I try not to
overhype the technology and believe we must have realistic expectations
regarding deployment and adoption timelines, its potential to transform
not only consumer products but also the industrial sector is clear.
Rather than being one among many consumer purchases, future wireless
services have the potential to be ingrained within almost every aspect
of American life.
In terms of functionality, 5G is expected to far exceed current
wireless metrics. Specifically, it is estimated that speed will improve
by 5 to 20 times over 4G; capacity will increase by 100-fold; and
average latency will drop from 40 to 50 milliseconds to one. This will
open the door to fully operational wireless platforms that are on par
with current fiber network offerings, erasing the need for many legacy
regulations and policies. While many American consumers already
substitute wireless broadband experiences for wired ones, 5G will bring
about the realization of what many, including myself, have referred to
as ``wireless fiber.''
Moreover, these advancements will have far-reaching economic
impact. A recent Qualcomm-initiated study estimated that 5G would
generate $13.2 trillion in economic benefit by 2035, support 22.3
million jobs, and produce economic global growth of $2.1 trillion--an
amount equivalent to Italy's current economy.\1\ Similarly, a 2018 CTIA
report suggests the U.S. impact alone to be $275 billion in investment,
leading to $500 billion in economic growth and three million new
American jobs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/files/ihs-5g-economic-
impact-study-2019.pdf
\2\ https://api.ctia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Race-to-5G-
Report.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is important to note that the network architecture for 5G is
different from that of prior generations. Whereas past technologies
were designed to eventually replace earlier versions, 5G is intended to
work in partnership with existing 4G wireless networks. That means, 5G
can be deployed more incrementally without the dramatic effect of
completely leaving consumers behind the curve.
Spectrum Resources & Agenda
To ensure U.S. wireless providers and potential new entrants have
sufficient wireless spectrum to offer 5G, the Commission has been
aggressive in identifying, allocating, and licensing for this purpose.
But, the spectrum allocation process requires long lead times and
extensive preparations. Consider that the Commission started working on
many of the high-bands targeted for 5G services (e.g., 37 and 39 GHz)
around the time I arrived at the Commission in 2013,\3\ and, yet, we
are just getting to the auctions now. There are multiple reasons for
the time lag, but none involve political influence or lack of interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Spectrum Frontiers Notice of Inquiry, https://docs.fcc.gov/
public/attachments/FCC-14-154A1.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some critics have asserted that the Commission has failed to make
mid-band spectrum available for advanced wireless services, including
5G. As someone who has been actively and aggressively working to make
these frequencies available, I strongly disagree with this assessment.
My efforts on the 3.5 GHz band, or CBRS, along with those of the
Chairman and his team, demonstrate that our high-band efforts did not
divert attention from the mid bands. The past administration had
focused on the millimeter-wave bands, so these efforts were further
along. Moreover, our work to reform the 3.5 GHz band market sizes and
other previously misaligned decisions did not delay the availability of
this spectrum. Instead, ensuring the functionality of the protection
mechanisms (e.g., SASs and ESCs), enabling spectrum sharing with U.S.
Navy radar systems, took longer than expected, and the software needed
to provide a fair and transparent auction for a greater number of
licenses required considerable time to develop.
Additionally, for almost four years, I have served as a lead
champion to reallocate the C-Band for new commercial wireless services.
Such efforts have required considerable work to convince the current
satellite users to shrink their spectrum footprint for the betterment
of our spectrum policy objectives. This also required extensive
consideration into how to accommodate and protect existing services and
users, as well as working through the different mechanisms and
components needed to execute a fair and transparent auction process.
While I certainly wish this process could have concluded earlier, the
most important thing now is getting it done.
Along with C-Band and CBRS, the other immediate mid-band priority
is the 3.1 to 3.55 GHz Band. Congress has been clear in enacted
legislation that it expects the appropriate Federal Government agencies
to conduct an honest and fair assessment of sharing this specific band
with commercial wireless providers for new advanced wireless services.
Yet, it is my understanding that the applicable agencies are only
looking at one portion, 3.45 to 3.55 GHz, for this purpose, rather than
the entire band. Given its location and the need for more mid-band
spectrum, I suggest that the proper course of action should be to free
the top 100 megahertz for exclusive, commercial use and open a
considerable amount of the remaining 350 MHz for sharing. Even if you
disagree with this approach, allowing Federal agencies to ignore the
law and spectrum realities should not be tolerated.
Macro Towers
Facilitating 5G deployment requires more than just sound spectrum
policy. It will need a concerted effort to bypass attempts by rogue
local and state governments to extract untenable riches from new
technology users or drag out siting reviews due to ineptitude or
attempts to preserve power. This is not a new phenomenon, and it is why
legislation on the topic, like the Thune-Schatz bill, would be so
helpful.
While considerable attention is paid to small cell design and
installation, in many suburban and rural markets, 5G offerings will
rely on equipment attached to macro towers. The Commission will need to
be aggressive to ensure the siting process is not impeded, and I am
hopeful we will take new action on macros in the very near future.
Unlicensed Spectrum Opportunities
While considerable work has been done to open new bands for
licensed services, it is equally important to address the critical need
for more unlicensed spectrum. Over the last many years, unlicensed
technologies have experienced a vast amount of innovation, leading to
amazing new consumer products and immeasurable economic benefits. Yet,
the current unlicensed spectrum workhorses, 2.4 and 5 GHz, are facing
saturation, meaning that congestion is preventing optimal performance
and the deployment of new services. Thus, unlicensed users are seeking
a mid-band allocation to enable their next-generation standard that
calls for wider channels, allowing far greater speeds, capacity, and
functionality.
To accomplish this and realize further unlicensed innovation, the
Commission must allocate additional bands for unlicensed use, which is
something Commissioner Rosenworcel and I have pursued for quite a
while. Debate will likely continue in the coming weeks and months over
how best to accomplish this, but I firmly believe that the Commission
needs to move forward expeditiously to open 5.9 and 6 GHz for
unlicensed use. In both instances, incumbent provider services can be
properly protected or accommodated, as needed, to prevent harmful
interference while allowing the benefits of unlicensed technologies to
flourish.
Communications Workforce
The deployment and maintenance of infrastructure used to provide 5G
services will require a plethora of American workers with the requisite
skill sets. While much attention has rightfully been paid to the need
for more tower installation crews, job growth in additional fields,
including radio frequency management, communications engineering, and
other related skills, is similarly needed. While some of these
positions can be filled in the regular course and with on-the-job
training, others will require more extensive efforts. In other words,
industry is likely to require a more systemic plan of action,
potentially leveraging the assistance of the Federal Government, than
in past technological evolutions. I would humbly suggest that this
endeavor is not necessarily within the expertise of the FCC, but better
suited to other agencies and departments. In particular, the Department
of Labor, given its vast resources, may be better positioned to exert
some leadership in this area, and I understand it has announced new
grant monies for apprenticeship programs that include
telecommunications and broadband services.
Wireless Power
In terms of a relatively new innovation issue, I believe that
wireless power may be vital for the success of future connectivity and
productivity. Specifically, with billions upon billions--and perhaps
trillions--of additional wireless devices expected to be deployed over
the next few years, be it smartphones, IoT sensors, automated equipment
and the like, providing sustainable and reliable power will be a
challenge. I suggest to you that power is likely to be delivered
differently in the future, as outlets with plugs and disposable
batteries are likely to be replaced by wireless power. This is not only
because of the nightmare of trying to provide electrical service to
such a mass of devices and equipment, but also simply a matter of
reducing weight and improving functionality.
Specifically, obtaining sufficient components to manufacture enough
wiring and long-lasting batteries to meet overall demand will be
difficult, if not impossible. And, this is without even taking into
account the shortage of rare earth elements and the geopolitical fight
developing in that area. So, the race will be on to produce and deploy
wireless power technology, with multiple players already in the market
and I'm sure more to come.
Undoubtably, we are fairly early in the process, but we'd better
figure out all of the regulatory complications and barriers before the
device explosion occurs. The Commission may be the right entity to
guide, design, or manage the transition to wireless power.
World Radiocommunication Conference
On the international front, the WRC is a roughly month-long event
held every three to four years by the International Telecommunication
Union (ITU), a specialized agency of the United Nations, for the
primary purpose of harmonizing spectrum use among the member nations.
After my participation at WRC-19 in Egypt, I suggest that its outcome
was mixed, and its future is questionable. While the conference
achieved some objectives in various, muddied forms, the process was
severely lacking.
Despite meeting some of our goals to a certain extent, WRC-19, like
WRC-15, raised some fundamental concerns that ultimately call into
question the continued value of future conferences. In particular, it
was very evident that certain foreign delegations were sent with clear
directions to oppose the United States and other forward-thinking
nations. This appeared, from my viewpoint, motivated by larger geo-
political purposes and to protect domestic industries from competition
from U.S.-based companies. Such conduct went far beyond normal
negotiation strategy, serving to further sour many other participants'
perspectives regarding the value of WRC and, more fundamentally, the
ITU itself.
The U.S. is not without options if certain member nations of the
ITU continue to disrupt existing processes and slow progress towards a
next-generation wireless world. Ultimately, we should not let ourselves
be obstructed by rogue nations that have little interest in global
wireless development or are willing to undermine progress for purposes
of a larger self-interested agenda. This is one reason I think the U.S.
should explore the formation of a G7-like organization or loose
coalition of leading wireless nations, as an alternative to the ITU.
Near-global harmonization could be achieved through agreement of the
largest, leading wireless nations of the world. To some degree, this is
why the private standard-setting organizations--i.e., those outside the
ITU--have become more prominent and why I have also spent considerable
time ensuring these entities are not sidelined by certain nations'
political agendas.
* * *
In the end, innovation--and thus the industries of tomorrow--will
only happen if there is the right environment for it to develop. This
hearing is a positive step for that purpose.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. O'Rielly.
Commissioner Rosenworcel.
STATEMENT OF HON. JESSICA ROSENWORCEL, COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Wicker,
Ranking Member Cantwell, members of the Committee.
I believe the future belongs to the connected. No matter
who you are or where you live, you need access to modern
communications to have a fair shot at 21st century success.
That is because we live in what Thomas Friedman calls the
Age of Acceleration thanks to the exponential improvements in
software, storage, processing, and networking all around us.
But if you want an object lesson in just how fast
communications technology is changing, consider what life was
like back at the start of the last decade. The smart phone
revolution was just getting underway. Voice assistants like
Siri were still the stuff of science fiction. Humans could
reliably beat computers in Jeopardy, and watching what you
wanted meant loading a silvery disc into a big, rectangular
device.
We have come a long way. Over the past 10 years, we have
witnessed a 25-fold increase in the amount of digital data, a
100-fold increase in wireless speeds, and a billion-fold
increase in computing power. These are the forces behind so
much that is changing industries like manufacturing,
agriculture, transportation, health care, and more. And they
are not stopping. So we need to harness this energy and plan
for the future, and here are three ideas to do just that.
First, we need a plan to deploy 5G technology to everyone
everywhere in the United States. 5G networks are going to
kickstart the next big digital transformation, drive the future
of industry, and expand the potential for artificial
intelligence.
But in the United States, we have made a series of choices
that have put us behind when it comes to freeing key airwaves
for 5G. We have aggressively focused our early efforts on
bringing only high-band spectrum to market. We have yet to
auction a single megahertz of mid-band spectrum, and this is a
mistake. That is because while these high-band airwaves have
substantial capacity, their signals do not travel far. As a
result, commercializing them is expensive, and the sheer volume
of antenna facilities required to make the service viable will
limit deployment to urban areas. That is only going to deepen
the digital divide we already have. And that is not right.
Meanwhile, at least 16 other countries have already
auctioned mid-band spectrum and have a head start. But do not
take my word for it. Last year, the Defense Innovation Board
found that the country that owns 5G will own innovation, and
that country is not likely to be the United States. Why is
that? As the board suggested, the early release of high-band
airwaves over mid-band airwaves is a fundamentally flawed
focus. I agree.
So the FCC needs to change course, make it a priority to
auction mid-band spectrum, and develop a national plan for 5G
service. The bipartisan leadership of four Senate committees
wrote the White House late last year expressing concern that we
do not have a coordinated national strategy in place for 5G and
we need one. They are right.
Second, we need a plan to invest in training for the jobs
of the future. In the near term, in the United States we are
going to have to train another 20,000 tower climbers to help
install 5G. But the Department of Labor currently does not list
5G jobs as a priority in its apprenticeship programs. We need
to fix this.
In the longer term, we are going to need to encourage more
investment in our workers, and I think the right way to do this
is to explore a human capital tax credit to offset a portion of
new training activities to support the future of work.
Third, we need a plan for both device and network security.
Our 5G future will feature billions of connected devices in the
Internet of Things. They are going to make us more efficient
and more effective, but they are also going to expand our
vulnerability to cyber-attack.
So here is what the FCC can do. Every device that emits
radio frequency at some point passes through the agency before
it is marketed or imported in the United States. And this
routine authorization process--it takes place totally behind
the scenes. But if the FCC were to revisit it, it could explore
how it could be used to encourage device manufacturers to build
security in new products. And to do this, we could build on the
NIST draft set of security recommendations for devices in the
Internet of Things. But the most important thing is that we get
started right now.
At the same time, we are going to have to focus on the
security of our networks themselves. So far, our efforts have
been centered around improving 5G supply chain security through
discouraging the use of insecure Chinese network equipment. We
are going to have to expand that effort and improve security by
working on unlocking radio access networks through software
virtualization. That is called O-RAN, and the FCC can help
expedite the deployment of O-RAN by expanding its work with 5G
testbeds in New York and Salt Lake City to include this new
technology.
Thank you for this opportunity to offer my views, and I
look forward to any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Rosenworcel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, Commissioner,
Federal Communications Commission
Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members
of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today.
I believe the future belongs to the connected. No matter who you
are or where you live, you need access to modern communications to have
a fair shot at 21st century success. Communications technology is
changing at a breakneck pace and this has extraordinary consequences--
for individuals, communities, and nations.
In fact, we live in what Thomas Friedman calls the ``Age of
Acceleration'' thanks to the exponential improvements in software,
storage, processing, and networking all around us. But if you want an
object lesson in just how fast communications technology is changing,
consider what life was like at the start of the last decade, just ten
years ago. The smartphone revolution was just getting underway. Voice
assistants like Siri were still the stuff of science fiction. Humans
could reliably beat computers in Jeopardy. And watching what you wanted
meant loading a silvery disc into a big, rectangular device. Plus,
space technology was out of reach for everyone but the world's
superpowers. Only about one-third of the world was online.
We've come a long way. Over the past ten years, we've witnessed a
25-fold increase in the amount of digital data on the planet, a 100-
fold increase in wireless speeds, and a billion-fold increase in
computational power. These developments are like currents that are
supercharging our economy and the field of artificial intelligence.
They are the forces behind so much that is changing in industries like
manufacturing, agriculture, transportation, healthcare and more. And
they are not stopping. So we need to harness this energy and plan for
this future--and here are three ideas to do just that.
First, we need a plan to deploy 5G technology to everyone,
everywhere in the United States. Right now, we don't have one. As a
result, we risk falling behind our global peers in the next generation
of wireless leadership.
The stakes are high. With speeds as much as 100 times faster than
present networks and much lower latency, these networks will kickstart
the next big digital transformation. They will connect more things in
more places, fostering all kinds of new economic activity. This in
turn, will drive the future of industry and expand the potential for
machine learning and the possibilities of artificial intelligence.
Connecting the physical world around us will not only change industry,
it will change the way we work, and even what work entails.
But to lead in this next generation of connectivity, we need
smarter spectrum policy. The truth is we have made a series of choices
that have put us behind when it comes to freeing key airwaves we need
for 5G. That's because to date the United States has aggressively
focused its early efforts to support 5G wireless service by bringing
only high-band spectrum to market. We have yet to auction a single
megahertz of mid-band spectrum.
This is a mistake. The rest of the world does not have this
singular focus on high-band, millimeter wave frequencies. At least
sixteen countries have auctioned mid-band spectrum specifically for 5G,
starting as far back as two years ago. That means they have a head
start on developing a 5G ecosystem in mid-band airwaves.
Meanwhile, our focus on millimeter wave spectrum is threatening to
create 5G haves and have-nots in the United States. That's because
while these airwaves have substantial capacity, their signals do not
travel far. As a result, commercializing them is costly--especially in
rural areas. The sheer volume of antenna facilities required to make
this service viable will limit deployment to the most populated urban
areas. This will deepen the digital divide that already plagues too
many rural communities nationwide. That's not right.
But don't take my word for it. Last year the Defense Innovation
Board--the United States military's premier advisory board of academic
researchers and private sector technologists--surveyed the state of
next-generation 5G networks and issued a sober warning. They found that
``the country that owns 5G will own innovation and set the standards
for the rest of the world'' and ``that country currently is not likely
to be the United States.'' Why? As the experts on the board suggested,
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is prioritizing the early
release of high-band airwaves over mid-band airwaves and this is a
``fundamentally flawed focus.'' I agree.
So the FCC needs to change course, make it a priority to auction
mid-band spectrum, and also develop a national plan for 5G service. The
bipartisan leadership of four Senate Committees--Intelligence, Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs, Foreign Affairs, and Armed
Services--wrote the White House late last year expressing their concern
that we don't have a coordinated, national strategy in place for 5G--
and we need one. They're right.
As part of this effort, we also need a plan to grow the unlicensed
spectrum, or Wi-Fi. Today Wi-Fi contributes hundreds of billions to our
economy each year. But going forward we will need Wi-Fi that can keep
up with faster 5G speeds--because up to 70 percent of 5G traffic may be
offloaded to Wi-Fi. That means the FCC must move faster to secure
multiple wide channels for next generation Wi-Fi that will help us
realize gigabit-plus speeds in homes, offices, and factories.
Second, we need a plan to invest in training for the jobs of the
future. Across the board, we need to do more to prepare our workforce
for digital change. We can start with developing the workforce we need
to build 5G networks. In the near term, the United States will have to
train another 20,000 tower climbers to help install 5G equipment. In
the longer term, we will need many other workers for every layer of the
5G ecosystem. But the Department of Labor currently does not list 5G
jobs as a priority for its registered apprenticeship programs. This is
a problem--and we should fix it.
At a broader level we need to think about how we can introduce more
pathways to upward mobility across industries and across the country.
The skills necessary to secure and keep a job are changing fast, but
data suggests a steady decline in the amount employers are investing in
their workforce. To remedy this, we need to encourage more investment
in our workers. It's time to explore a human capital tax credit to
offset a portion of new training activities to support the future of
work. This could help upgrade our workforce, ensure access to in-demand
skills, and create more job security for American workers nationwide.
Third, we need a plan for both device and network security. Our 5G
future will feature billions and billions of connected devices in the
Internet of things. These connections will increase our effectiveness
and efficiency. They will inform our choices about how to deploy
capital and scarce resources in everything from manufacturing on the
factory floor to predicting crop yields on the family farm.
But before we embrace this future, we need to ask hard questions
about security. That's because when we multiply the number of things
that are connected, we also expand our vulnerabilities to cyberattack.
After all, the equipment that connects to our networks can matter as
much for security as the equipment that goes into our networks.
So here's what the FCC can do to ensure the Internet of things
becomes the Internet of secure things. Every device that emits
radiofrequency at some point passes through the FCC. If you want proof,
pull out your smartphone or take a look at the back of any computer or
television. You'll see an identification number from the FCC. It's a
stamp of approval. It means the device complies with FCC rules and
policy objectives before it is marketed or imported into the United
States. This routine authorization process takes place behind the
scenes. But the FCC needs to revisit this process and explore how it
can be used to encourage device manufacturers to build security into
new products. To do this, we could build on the National Institute of
Standards and Technology draft set of security recommendations for
devices in the Internet of things. These efforts specify cybersecurity
features to include in network-capable devices, whether designed for
homes, hospitals, or industrial settings. They cover everything from
device identification, device configuration, data protection, access to
interfaces, to critical software updates. In other words, they are a
great place to start--and we should do it now.
At the same time, we need to focus on the security of our networks
themselves. So far our efforts have been limited to improving 5G supply
chain security through discouraging the use of insecure Chinese network
equipment. But this alone is shortsighted. It's time to expand our
approach and improve security by working on unlocking radio access
networks through virtualization. This software-centric approach is
known as open radio access networks (O-RAN) and it can support a more
diverse and more competitive market for secure network equipment. The
FCC can help get this started now by building opportunities to test O-
RAN in our ongoing effort to authorize city-wide 5G testbeds in New
York and Salt Lake City.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer my views on what we need to
do to create opportunities for all in the industries of the future. I
look forward to answering any questions you may have.
The Chairman. Well, wow, what great testimony from all five
of you.
Let us start with 5G, and we will start down here with the
FCC commissioners.
We are in a race. Commissioner Rosenworcel feels that we
are not winning that race right now. When will we know who
wins? Who is ahead right now? And is the Commission unified on
the way we do that mid-band auction? And is timeliness your
main concern there? We will start with Ms. Rosenworcel.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thank you, Senator. A lot of questions
there.
First, I am going to say the hype machine is in full force
when it comes to 5G. I want to discount that right now and say
what is important is that we all recognize this is the
infrastructure of the future, and I think that is true on a
bipartisan basis.
The Chairman. And let me interject. There is a company on
TV right now advertising that they are already leading the
industry in 5G.
Ms. Rosenworcel. You know we do see some deployments in the
United States. That is really exciting. They are chiefly in
urban areas. It has not reached rural America. But overall, we
are finding that there are more commercial deployments in
countries like Switzerland and far more 5G infrastructure has
been deployed in China. Most of the rest of the world saw our
leadership in 4G technology and they said I want to do that in
the next generation of technology. So we are facing well
financed efforts to make sure that other nations try to get
ahead of us. We are going to have to work on developing plans
to make sure 5G reaches this country early and that it reaches
everywhere.
The Chairman. The auction.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. With respect to C-band or all
auctions?
The Chairman. With mid-band.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Mid-band spectrum. The United States is
alone in the world in making high-band spectrum the early focus
of 5G deployment. That is only good for urban America. It is
not going to work for rural America. So we have to pivot to
mid-band spectrum just as you suggest.
The Chairman. Is the FCC unanimous on the way we proceed to
this option?
Ms. Rosenworcel. OK. Well, I do not want to speak for my
colleague, but what I would say is I think that when it comes
to the C-band and mid-band spectrum, the agency would be well
served by having this committee develop legislation that could
help articulate the best way forward. Because if you do that,
we will decrease the likelihood that this winds up in
litigation, and we will increase the likelihood that the
spectrum is deployed.
The Chairman. I think we will certainly want to be heard on
where the money goes.
Mr. O'Rielly, we would like advice from the Commission on
the quickest way to get this done because I think you agree
with Commissioner Rosenworcel that it needs to be done quickly.
Mr. O'Rielly. Absolutely. I have made that one of my
strongest tenets is pushing for this for almost 4 years now.
And speed has to be the priority. We are on that active race
that you talked about with other nations, and I agree with some
of the points my colleague made in terms of other investments
by certainly China and other places. That does not mean the
United States is behind. It means it is an active race, and we
will not be able to declare a winner for quite a while. But it
means we have to invest and be very smart about our activities.
In terms of the C-band auction, speed is of importance, and
that means I am willing and have been willing to trade some of
the other ideals that people would have liked otherwise to
incorporate for that speed. So things that I think are
necessary--there has to be an incentive to the satellite
providers to be able to expedite that auction. Otherwise, we
are going to have protracted litigation. That is a reality-
based situation. They use that spectrum today for commercial
services that Americans benefit and enjoy. And so trying to
take that from them will be aggressive action by the
Commission. We have a very bad history of taking spectrum from
the most egregious users much less someone who is using it for
a beneficial purpose. So I think I am willing to trade some of
those things for the enormous benefit that 5G presents.
The Chairman. What about that point, Commissioner
Rosenworcel?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, I think there are two things we are
going to need from any piece of legislation.
The first is you are going to have to clarify our practice
for reclaiming this band of spectrum. You can spend a lot of
time with section 309(j) of the Communications Act, and I will
not see a clear pathway in there for dealing with this
circumstance.
And the second thing we have to recognize is this will
raise billions of dollars. So you have an opportunity to say
these public airwaves should be put--their revenue should be
put to public purpose.
The Chairman. I think Congress has noticed that there is a
great deal of money involved.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
The Chairman. What about the litigation delays that Mr.
O'Rielly mentioned?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, that is why I believe Congress
setting forward a clear pathway would reduce the likelihood
that we face that kind of litigation.
Mr. O'Rielly. I would always support legislation on this
issue or any issue that would govern the FCC. So I welcome the
Committee's action.
Absent that, though, I think it is important the Commission
move forward. There is a lot of things happening in Congress
and perhaps legislation does not make it through. So I am
willing to move forward and know that we have to act in that
race that you talked about and address the issues.
The Chairman. Commissioner O'Rielly, would you say the
legislation needs to be signed into law sooner rather than
later? Early this year?
Mr. O'Rielly. Oh, yes, absolutely. If it is to be done, it
has to be done very quickly.
Ms. Rosenworcel. I think it is more important you get it
right because this spectrum is important for our future and if
we are going to move forward in a way that is going to wind up
in litigation, we are going to all do ourselves a disservice.
The Chairman. I think we are fortunate to have both of you.
Senator Cantwell.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I hope this hearing is not going to turn into a proxy
discussion of how much we should pay foreign satellite
companies, because I think the law is clear. They do not own
the spectrum. They have licensed the spectrum. And so I am with
you, Ms. Rosenworcel, let us get it right. We have time to do
that and we should all work very diligently on getting it
right.
What I am more concerned about--I guess I would shift my
focus to the other three panelists here, which are the larger
issues that we face on cybersecurity, deep fakes, AI, and how
we are being challenged on an international basis. Getting this
right and making sure that the United States is not allowing
the deployment of technology that has a back door or is going
to be promulgated by deep fakes that even AI cannot detect. AI
might be an enabler of the fact. This is what I am hearing from
some of our people at the University of Washington: right now
you can detect deep fakes but AI might make the technologies so
proficient that at some point you won't be able to detect deep
fakes.
So I look at this issue and say we want the advancement of
technology, particularly AI that is going to help us in
cybersecurity. There are some great applications there. But how
do we get this other part right where the United States is a
very loud voice for the issues of no government back doors, no
deep fakes? How do we do that, Dr. Copan or Dr. Cordova or Mr.
Kratsios?
Dr. Copan. Let me begin. I think that one of the important
areas that we need is to have the principles of AI used
correctly. I believe that we are on an important journey there
with our international partners.
Having tools and standards to support artificial
intelligence and to ensure its appropriate use, as well as the
application of appropriate tools to understand the deep fake
threat that you have mentioned. NIST has come out with several
reports relating to that including reports on adversarial
machine learning applications that have been utilized in deep
fake development; and part of the programmatic investment being
made, including our FarSAIT program, is focused on the
development of the technologies for early assessment, and then
to take the appropriate action.
Senator Cantwell. Dr. Cordova.
Dr. Cordova. I will add that NSF is making significant
interdisciplinary investments in furthering our understanding
about biass and misinformation and algorithms, including deep
fakes. These investments are largely through our Secure and
Trustworthy Cyberspace and our Robust Intelligence programs. We
expect that information assurance and deep fakes will continue
to be called out in future solicitations. So our approach is
really investing in the research that will help us assure what
Dr. Copan is talking about, is that we have unbiased, fair,
transparent, open, and ethical AI that can deal with this.
Mr. Kratsios. From the White House perspective, we think of
it in two categories.
I think first is our focus on the research and development
that is going to underpin the important decisions that
lawmakers and regulators can make. Without the technology
behind being able to identify deep fakes or being able to
identify bias or discrimination in these algorithms or even
produce reports around explainability of algorithms, we are a
little bit hamstringed. So being able to focus our efforts at
places like the NSF, at NIST and DARPA to continue this very
important research is critical.
The second piece is for the United States to continue to
partner with our allies around the world. I am like my partners
on stressing the importance of safe, trustworthy, and robust
artificial intelligence. We did that at the OECD last May when
the U.S. led an effort that brought together the OECD countries
to agree to a set of AI principles that discuss a lot of the
issues that you mentioned. And going forward, we want to
continue to push and encourage our allies to be aligned with us
on promulgating their own domestic rules and regulations around
ensuring the safe and secure deployment of AI.
Senator Cantwell. Well, does this not take some leadership?
I mean, in the 5G example, we hear a lot from our colleagues on
the Intelligence Committee about what they hear and see and do,
and we have certainly been on CODELs where we have been to
countries where 5G has been deployed. We have tried to explain
to them that we all should be focused on the principles and
advocating for these principles. So I do not know, Dr. Copan,
if you worry that we are already at the point, particularly on
deep fakes, where we might have some international event based
on misinformation that is promulgated without people really
understanding whether it is true or accurate?
Dr. Copan. It is so important for us to have the
underpinning of data to be able to guide the right kinds of
policy decisions, the right kinds of conversations around the
world that are guided by the principles such as those that Mr.
Kratsios had mentioned. It is part of the mission of NIST to
provide the underpinning tools and standards and data, the
measurement insights to inform these types of dialogues to be
most productive globally.
Dr. Cordova. I would like to add that we are also working
with companies on these problems to do with fairness and ethics
in artificial intelligence. We have a program with Amazon right
now where we each contribute $10 million for each of the next 3
years to fund proposals that come to us from anywhere about how
to increase fairness in artificial intelligence.
And we have a collaboration between our Computer and
Information Science and Engineering directorate and our Social,
Behavioral and Economic Sciences directorates that is in
partnership with an organization of 50 industries called the
Partnership on AI, where we are funding proposals to do with
ethics and transparency and openness, deep fakes, technology
biases in artificial intelligence. So we have really increased
the investments, and we are doing that as a public-private
partnership in this country.
Senator Cantwell. Well, I know my time is expired, Mr.
Chairman. I just worry about this issue as it relates to
international events or things that could trigger international
events because we do not have the right information. We can see
how it could happen with the rapid deployment of information.
Again, a long time ago, it would not have been this way, but
now with the rapid spread of information, things can get very
invigorated over false information. So we need to get this
right.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
Senator Blackburn.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you
for the hearing today and for each of you being here.
I want to stay right with where Senator Cantwell was. And,
Dr. Cordova, I want to talk with you. You just were talking
about trying to reinvigorate some of the R&D. And as we were
looking at this hearing and Senator Rosen and I were working on
legislation we filed yesterday, the Advanced Manufacturing Act,
and looking at the education component of this, it was not lost
on me that with 20th century R&D, the U.S. was the driver. We
basically drove 69 percent of the R&D landscape globally. And
now, with great power competition, with China with the way they
are coming in, it makes it very difficult for us to be
competitive on this. And you are talking about EVs, AVs, AI,
and jobs of the future. And this is why Senator Rosen and our
staffs have worked so hard to get this legislation moving
forward because we think that it is vitally important.
And, Mr. Kratsios, I think for you all at the White House,
it is important for you to look at this, and I would like to
hear more from you with how you all create the right
environment. We do not want you to pick winners and losers. We
want you to develop a level playing field in the right
environment so that innovation can take place so that we can
begin to leapfrog some things. And if you would submit an
answer on that in writing.
I want to come to our two FCC commissioners. And I always
appreciate having them in front of us and always appreciate the
robust debate that they bring to discussions.
Let us talk a little bit about spectrum. We have been
working trying to recapture some of this mid-band spectrum and
move forward with 5G deployment because we need that.
And as you all know, I have done a lot of work on DOD and
how we are going to utilize that spectrum and make good use and
value with having private partners in here. It is going to be
imperative that we work to utilize 5G and to maximize it. As we
close the digital divide--and I think many of our states are
like us in Tennessee. We are doing a great job closing that
digital divide. It is a priority because you cannot have 21st
century economic development, health care, education, or law
enforcement without it. So we are putting a focus on this.
But I would like to hear from each of you, as we look at
this issue with our military and utilization of spectrum, how
do we enable private innovation and also address DOD with their
needs for spectrum and for innovation. And, Ms. Rosenworcel, if
you want to go first and then we will go to Commissioner
O'Rielly.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. Thank you, Senator. Those are good
questions.
I think there are two things that come to mind.
First, I think we need a national spectrum incentive
policy. Right now, huge portions of the airwaves below 6
gigahertz are used for important Federal purposes like defense,
aviation, and some others. Reclaiming them from those old uses
and putting them to use for new commercial purposes is
extremely difficult.
Senator Blackburn. Would you pack them into the lower band?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, what I would do is try to
incentivize them so they could assess their authorizations on
their own terms and then see the possibility of gain from their
reallocation. I think we have to revisit how we are doing this;
otherwise, we get into knockdown, drag-out fights with the
military, with aviation interests, with transportation
interests over spectrum policy. And I think we have to
incentivize them to be more efficient on their own.
The second thing is I think it is really important that we
continue the work that the National Science Foundation is doing
on dynamic spectrum sharing so we can all occupy these airwaves
together more efficiently, more effectively, and more
abundantly.
Mr. O'Rielly. So I appreciate my colleague's points, but I
will say that incentives already exist in the statute and the
military has been relatively ignorant or does not want to move.
We are going to need more sticks. I have advocated that we are
going to need new legislation on this front. I know members of
this committee are looking at that, that we require spectrum be
part of their Federal budget. They would have the value of
spectrum. We do not let them have holdings for land or other
uses that are not incorporated into their budget, and we need
to do that for their overall spectrum holdings. They do not
need any new spectrum. The DOD and the military has enough
spectrum. Moving them and preventing the squatting you talked
about is incredibly difficult, and it is going to require drag-
out fights.
And I will give you an example of the 3.1 to 3.55 band that
I talked about as a prime third piece, a third leg of the stool
for mid-band spectrum. And that is where DOD is. They talked
about and we worked with them on the 3.45 to 3.55----
Senator Blackburn. How about the 4.9?
Mr. O'Rielly. 4.9 is absolutely something that is public
safety versus the military. But, yes, we need to do that. That
is definitely part of the conversation on T-band, and I think
that has to be something that should come back for commercial
purposes.
Senator Blackburn. Appreciate it. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blackburn.
Senator Blumenthal.
STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for having
this very important hearing.
Commissioner Rosenworcel, I am very interested in the idea
of the human capital tax credit. How is it different from the
tax credits that we have right now that are administered
through the Labor Department?
Ms. Rosenworcel. You know, we did some studying and we
found that over time there has actually been a real decline in
workforce training. And the White House has done work on this
by developing the Pledge to America's Workers so that 400 of
the biggest companies have committed to doing more in the
workforce.
But I think we need something that is broader-based, that
touches more people, more employers, and more workers and more
places. So if we patterned a tax credit for human capital and
training off of what we do today with the popular R&D tax
credit, we might see the opportunity to have more training for
the jobs of the future. And there is work in Connecticut,
Georgia, Kentucky, and a few other states just on this subject,
and I think it is something we should explore nationally as
well.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, I would be very interested in
exploring it because in my view there is no more important
challenge in this country today for our national security, our
national defense, technology across the board than training
people for the jobs of the present and the future. And you make
the point that we need people to climb poles to install 5G.
What are the kinds of skills that are necessary? I imagine
to climb a pole, you need to be trained in how to climb a pole.
But what are the skills that need to be trained for that kind
of work?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Well, obviously, you cannot have a fear of
heights, but what is important is that we need more people
doing this and doing it fast. And that is why we were struck
when we looked at the apprenticeship programs at the Department
of Labor that this is not a priority. If we want to have a
national 5G plan, we have to make the training of these
individuals a priority, and I hope we can do that.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you.
Let me ask you, Mr. Kratsios. I was frankly disappointed
recently in the so-called guidance issued by the Department of
the Transportation with respect to autonomous vehicle safety.
Guidance rather than standards seem to me no substitute for
real rules.
Would you please give me your view as to whether or not
there ought to be more rigorous and more vigorously enforced
rules and standards for autonomous vehicles than what we have
seen just now from the Department of Transportation?
Mr. Kratsios. Our efforts on autonomous vehicles over the
past 3 years have really focused on this idea that the
oversight or coordination of efforts around autonomous vehicles
more broadly is not something that is solely in the domain of
the Department of Transportation. And at the beginning of our
administration, the first set of autonomous vehicle guidance
was specific to vehicles. The second set of guidance, AV 3.0,
was around the idea that it is a multimodal issue. And AV 4.0,
which was the effort that we undertook and spent the last year
working on, was the recognition that autonomous vehicles touch
multiple agencies. There is work being done at NASA. There is
work being done at NSF. There is working being done at NIST,
and the list goes on. And in order for the United States to
ensure leadership in this particular domain, it is critical
that we as a Federal Government remain coordinated, an effort
that the White House undertook.
With regard to specific rules of the Department of
Transportation, I will defer to my colleagues there. I do
believe that it is important that any regulations going into
place around vehicles are ones that can instill trust in this
particular technology for the American people. Whether you are
dealing with autonomous vehicles or artificial intelligence or
any other emerging technology, it is critical that the American
people trust the technology that they are using.
Senator Blumenthal. You would agree that under the guidance
released last week, manufacturers are not required. They are
just encouraged or recommended to submit additional technical
or safety information.
Mr. Kratsios. That is correct.
Senator Blumenthal. Do you not think they ought to be
required?
Mr. Kratsios. I think that is a decision that the policy
process at DOD should pursue to undertake, but I think it is
critical we have a good relationship with all of our
manufacturers and that we share as much information as possible
to drive safety outcomes.
Senator Blumenthal. Let me finally ask Commissioner
O'Rielly and Commissioner Rosenworcel on the topic of
enforcement. Robocalls. Will the FCC be able to meet its
deadlines under the TRACED Act, and what more would you
recommend that Congress or the FCC do in furtherance of the
goals, which I think are virtually unanimously shared on this
panel and in the U.S. Senate that we need to do more to protect
consumers against robocalls?
Mr. O'Rielly. I am committed to getting at and enforcing
the statute against illegal robocalls. I think the Chairman is
committed as well and has been aggressive on this issue, and I
anticipate meeting the deadlines that Congress established for
us.
Ms. Rosenworcel. You would have to look far and wide to
find anyone who likes Rachel from card member services or that
IRS agent with that imminent threat of the lawsuit.
The FCC needs to do more to fix this problem, and if we
find that the new authorities you gave us in the TRACED Act are
insufficient, I think it is incumbent on us to come straight to
you to ask for additional authority.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thank you all for being
here. Thank you, Commissioner Rosenworcel, in particular for
coming to Connecticut on the topic of robocalls. It was an
extraordinarily valuable and enlightening visit, and I
encourage all of you to get out in the field and give us the
benefit of your expertise and wisdom. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Peters.
STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And each of our witnesses today, we appreciate this
conversation.
You know, as we are talking about future industries, I
think it is also important to remember our current industries
and how important they are and how they are going to actually
be impacted by all of the things that we are talking about
right now. And I want to talk specifically about manufacturing
and precision manufacturing and how these new technologies,
particularly artificial intelligence, will radically transform
the factory floor. We will see increases in productivity. We
will be able to capture massive amounts of data that occurs
right now in the production facility and handle that in new,
creative ways. 3D printing, nanotechnology, all of these future
technologies are going to have an impact on manufacturing.
And especially coming from Michigan as a great, big
manufacturing state, I am a big believer, as I think many folks
on this committee are too, that you really cannot be a great
country and really have a strong economy if you do not actually
make stuff. And that is what manufacturing does. It actually
makes things.
And, unfortunately, we have not had a comprehensive
manufacturing policy in this country. It does not matter what
the administration is. There really is not that kind of
cohesive, coherent approach to it. In fact, we have a lot of
different programs that deal with manufacturing. You represent
programs of manufacturing in your relative agencies.
But we do not even know how much we spend. I was struck by
the fact that the GAO did a study in 2017, and they were asked
to account for Federal manufacturing and how much we spend on
it. And they said they could not do it because there are 58
different manufacturing programs spread across 11 different
Federal agencies. That does not make sense to me. It is not
coordinated. Certainly, there is a lot of duplication of
overhead and cost, which we could be directing into actually
making sure that we have a highly competitive manufacturing
sector like our competitors do, whether it is China or South
Korea or Germany. I mean, the list goes on of folks who are
really good at this.
So, my question to Dr. Copan and Dr. Cordova and others who
would want to weigh in, but the two of you do have some of
those manufacturing programs--how can we benefit from better
coordination and thinking this through in a more comprehensive
way across agencies and across programs? What should we be
doing? Whoever wants to start of the two of you.
Dr. Cordova. Well, I will start with the National Science
and Technology Council, which the Office of Science and
Technology Policy runs. And that is a vehicle where all of the
agencies, including the science agencies, come together and
discuss what they are doing, such as best practices and how to
move to really good policy. I will leave it to Mr. Kratsios to
talk in more detail about what is going on in the manufacturing
areas.
I just want to say, as you know well, Senator Peters, NSF
is heavily invested. We do know our number, which is $250
million presently and, with the grace of Congress and
increasing our budget, will be more for this current fiscal
year now. And we are really investing in Partnerships for
Innovation, and your state has one of the highest stakes in the
Partnerships for Innovation program. We are putting a lot of
money into increasing research in manufacturing. We have a lot
of engineering research centers and industry/university
research centers around the country, several dozen of those,
where we have students. And so we have a development of
students in manufacturing. So we have a real emphasis on this.
And for the future, our engineering directorate is planning
something called Future Manufacturing. They have identified
four key areas, including cyber, bio, folding and eco-
manufacturing, various other things, to really put an emphasis
on where the future of manufacturing and the future work will
be.
So NSF is very invested in that.
Senator Peters. Let me just interject here. I appreciate
all you do. You do great work.
My question is to what extent do all 58 programs actually
talk to each other, and how are the 11 agencies actually
talking together? Is there coordination across the Federal
Government, not individual programs doing great jobs?
Dr. Cordova. And we do. Our agencies--like NIST and the
Department of Energy, NASA, and others, we are constantly
coming together through the National Science and Technology
Council. But also, we have our own programs of getting together
on a quarterly basis, and we have made various field trips to
our manufacturing sites. I was recently with Walter Copan at
one of our quantum sites and with Paul DeBarre of DOE at some
of our other sites.
So maybe, Michael, you could talk for a little bit about
the----
Senator Peters. What can we do better? Tell me what we can
do better, not what we are doing great. What can we do better?
Mr. Kratsios. I think utilizing the power that we have
together across the agencies and the coordinating functions of
the National Science and Technology Council is something that
could be leveraged, I think, even more effectively for the
future. We have taken important strides already in the past
several years to bring together a much more cohesive, strategic
planning process around advanced manufacturing, including our
work with Manufacturing USA institutes and the Manufacturing
Extension Partnership which provides a great deal of insight
from the voice of industry to the Federal Government and to the
programmatic effectiveness that we have. But I believe that our
working together to actually now execute even more effectively
on the strategies that have been laid out are vital for the
future of industrial leadership in this Nation for the benefit
of us all.
Senator Peters. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
We have Senator Tester and then Senator Young.
Senator Tester.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I want to thank you all for being here.
The first question is for Mr. O'Rielly and Ms. Rosenworcel.
Look, Chairman Pai has made a commitment to spend $9 billion in
5G infrastructure in rural America. I support that commitment,
but I have concerns about FCC's ability to execute this task.
Folks in rural America and rural Montana have waited for years
for the Mobility Fund to get out the door, and you guys know,
as well as I, it never happened. And the lack of reliable cell
service in our communities has tremendous, enormous public
safety impacts, business impacts. In fact, as I walked in this
room right now, I sat down and I said, oh, gosh, I forgot my
cell phone. I need to get my cell phone. If I was on the farm,
who cares? It does not work anyway most of the time.
So your thoughts on getting that $9 billion out. Is it
possible? Is it going to happen? What can I look for as metrics
to monitor its occurrence? Either one can go first.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Thanks, Senator.
Listen, I share your frustrations. It was two years ago the
FCC started its work on the Mobility Fund. This committee spent
the last year reminding us that we do not have maps that tell
us where service is and is not.
Senator Tester. That is true.
Ms. Rosenworcel. For starters, we have to figure that out,
and then we have to figure out how to deploy those funds to the
right places. All I have seen to date is the Chairman's press
release about $9 billion, but I have seen no improvements with
our maps. And I think that is a problem.
Senator Tester. Go ahead.
Mr. O'Rielly. I would say the Chairman has made a
recommendation. We will have an NPRM, which will ask a host of
questions.
Senator Tester. What is an NPRM?
Mr. O'Rielly. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It is the
initial stage. And we will ask all of those questions and then
what does it mean for 4G. What does it mean for those areas
that do not have 4G today? And so that is something that is
part of our process to explore all of those issues before we
make final decisions.
Senator Tester. And thank you both. And thank you both for
your service.
But I will tell you this. Rural America is kind of behind
the curve anyway in my opinion, and if we do not do this, and
do this right and do this reasonably quickly--you have to be
smart about how we spend the money, so we do not want to waste
it. But if we do not do this and do it right, it is crazy. I
mean, it is crazy that we do not have better service in rural
America. And we have had many hearings on this and we have
talked about the fact that we are going to need government
support because there is not enough people out there to do it.
All I would say to you guys is push the Chairman, and if we
need to push the Chairman, come to this committee and say,
look, we have pushed, you need to push, too. OK? Thank you very
much.
A previous question talked about workforce in regard to
building of towers and kind of hands-on labor that would need
to be done for telecommunications towers, tower climbers and
the likes. And it was asked previously, and I do not know who
answered it. But the question was said, well, this is really a
DOL issue and I agree. The question is who is putting pressure
on the DOL to make sure we are getting the kind of well-trained
employees out there.
Mr. O'Rielly. I think that I made that as part of my
testimony, and so I will answer your question.
I know that DOL has just put out a new announcement of
funding that includes telecommunications and communications as
part of its apprenticeship program. So the point that
Commissioner Rosenworcel mentioned--I think they have expanded
their apprenticeship program. But it is more than just tower
climbing I should say.
Senator Tester. It is.
Mr. O'Rielly. It is RF tuning and siting, communications
engineering, and a whole host of other skills.
Senator Tester. So can I ask just a request? We have a
thing called a board of regents in Montana. They probably got
one in Nevada. They probably got it in Michigan. They probably
got one in Indiana. Could you send out some information of what
kind of workforce is needed so that those folks who oversee our
tech schools--they are probably called something else now--can
put out the kind of people we need? Because the truth is you
can have all the best laid plans, but if you do not have a
workforce, you are done. Thank you.
Last question. This goes to you. And I am going to butcher
your name. Kratsios?
Mr. Kratsios. Kratsios.
Senator Tester. Well, pretty close.
[Laughter.]
Senator Tester. So do you deal in the word of plant and
animal alterations for food basically, like GMO wheat, like GMO
salmon, that kind of stuff?
Mr. Kratsios. That is something our office covers, but it
is not in my portfolio.
Senator Tester. So can I just ask--and my time is limited.
I am down to 20 seconds. But I have had different
administrations into my office to ask if testing could be done
on a lot of these genetically altered wheat, for example, or
corn or soy or salmon. And the response has always been, ``you
know what? Wheat is wheat when wheat is not wheat. And we are
pretty smart. But I got to tell you Mother Nature always bats
last. Always bats last.'' And so could I get some sort of
commitment, as we move into this, that we treat these altered
plants and animals with the same kind of respect that we would
treat new vitamins or prescription drugs that come onto the
marketplace?
Mr. Kratsios. Yes, absolutely. From what I understand,
there has been a big effort over the last few years to try to
ensure that as these new types of genetically modified both
foods and plant products are overseen through a regulatory
process, that includes the USDA, FDA, and also EPA. And we have
done a lot to try to streamline that effort so when there are
innovators who are working on these new types of plants or
animals that they know the right regulatory pathway. But we
will certainly look into this.
Senator Tester. I would just say I hope that there is a
general admission that, quite frankly, our longevity is going
down. We are seeing things like autism and glucose intolerance
and all these things that I never heard of when I was a kid.
And by the way, you can say they were still there. They were
just not identified. I do not buy that. Things are changing,
and we should try to get to the bottom of it especially when it
applies to food. Thank you very much.
The Chairman. Senator Tester, you and I voted for a mapping
bill last year, which passed the Senate. It is now in the
possession of the House of Representatives.
Senator Young.
STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,
U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA
Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
I want to thank all our witnesses for your presence here
and for your service. I really appreciate your testimony.
I thought I would begin by discussing something that may
have been asked previously. It pertains to access to data and
how that impacts our ability to research and develop some of
these industries of the future that we are discussing today.
China, of course, has an advantage of sorts over us. They
can unabashedly take private information from their citizens
and leverage that data into significant innovations. I think of
artificial intelligence where the feedstock of AI, as those
algorithms learn, is massive data sets. And thankfully, we
Americans subscribe to a different system. We have different
values and protections in place. And it is very important I
think that we do.
But, Mr. Kratsios, in your testimony you mentioned improved
public access to high quality Federal data with the sort of
popular recognition that there is data out there that could be
made available without in any way infringing upon an
individual's privacy.
Perhaps you can discuss OSTP's efforts to increase access
to such data and relatedly maybe touch on how the United States
might better utilize the data that we do have to boost
innovation.
Mr. Kratsios. Yes, absolutely. As we were identifying the
executive order that launched the U.S. national strategy on AI,
this came up from all over the place, from the research
community, from academics, from private sector players. So one
of the directives that the President gave to the Office of
Management and Budget was to work with the agencies to identify
high value Federal data sets that would be valuable to the
research community in pushing AI forward. OMB is working on
that request now. They put out on the street a request for
information to hear from the community, if they are aware of
data sets the Federal Government has which, through the right
types of processing, could be released and hopefully we will be
able to make some public announcements soon regarding that
particular data.
The other thing that I think is critically important that
we do in parallel to more data is recognizing there are
important research and development questions around this data
analysis that we continue to invest in. So things like
homomorphic encryption we are able to actually do AI analysis
without revealing some of the personal information of that data
is something that a lot of our agencies look at and DARPA is
funding. So in parallel to try to get more data out, we can
build better technologies in order to be doing analysis on data
that is more sensitive.
Senator Young. If you identify areas where a modification
of the existing authorities might be helpful in furtherance of
your work there, please do not hesitate to let my office know.
We would love to work with you on that.
Mr. Kratsios. Absolutely. Health care always comes to mind.
That is the one that is the highest value of it all, so highest
risk.
Senator Young. Director Copan, Cordova, I enjoyed having
dinner with the two of you at CSIS the other evening. We
discussed a related topic to this, industries of the future and
some of China's activities. So it was a free-flowing
conversation. And one of the things that came up was the Bayh-
Dole Act, a public policy that was designed to incentivize more
innovation. I think it is generally regarded as a very
successful piece of legislation. But it came to my attention
that really it is due for modernization as the world has
changed.
So perhaps you could give me an overview, each of you, very
briefly, what challenges might exist to the current law and how
we might optimize it to ensure U.S. leadership in this area?
And if one director covers it, of course the other one can fill
in gaps wherever you see fit. Thank you.
Dr. Copan. Thank you very much, Senator, for your question
and for your leadership.
We have embarked as NIST and really across the Federal
Government on a review of Federal technology transfer,
legislation, policy, and best practices. This has resulted in
an interagency effort. A green paper was issued by NIST
summarizing those things that we have heard from public sector
and private sector entities. And we are working very closely
now with members of this committee, as well, toward the
development of legislative language to modernize, in
particular, the Stevenson-Wydler Act, the sister act of the
Bayh-Dole Act that governs technology transfer from federally
funded research at our nation's research institutes.
The green paper outlines important findings for
modernization. The speed of business today, and the
expectations in our digital economy, are much different when
this foundational, important legislation was put in place; and
we look forward to working with the community of practice and
with this committee to advance those changes.
Senator Young. Thank you.
Director Cordova, anything to add?
Dr. Cordova. Well, I will just add that there is a real
emphasis on public-private partnerships, and we could really
use some changes there to make it easier to have those kind of
partnerships because everything is a one-off and that is a lot
of work. And we all want to work together. So having policies
reformed so that it makes it much easier to do translational
research across those boundaries would be great. So we are all
working together on that.
Senator Young. Excellent. I look forward to maintaining the
dialogue. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Young.
Senator Rosen.
STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Rosen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for being here today, your hard work and your
knowledge and passion for a lot of these topics.
I really want to say we must have the broadband map first.
That comes before anything else because if you do not know
where you have it and you do not know where you do not, how are
you going to get started? Pretty simple there.
But I really want to talk a little bit about Nevada and my
home state of Nevada advanced manufacturing. We are one of the
fastest growing sectors in our economy. We are actually ranked
second for advanced manufacturing growth. We know that despite
this pattern of accelerated growth, there is a widening gap
between new advanced manufacturing jobs and the workers that
are qualified with the skills to fill them.
Like Senator Blackburn said, I along with others and
Senator Blackburn just yesterday introduced the legislation to
promote productive relationships between the Manufacturing
Extension Partnerships. Those centers are educational
institutions in the advanced manufacturing industry. And this
legislation is going to help facilitate pilot projects between
all of those entities to support education, to support training
so we can better equip our workers.
So I want to talk a little bit about--you know, in Nevada,
we have a Nevada industry excellence center led by Mark
Anderson. He plays and that center plays a critical role in
providing resources. And in Nevada, 99 percent of our
businesses are small businesses.
So, Director Copan, I want to ask how we in Congress can
help better potentiate what you are doing to support the
Manufacturing Extension Partnerships, the work that they do for
small and medium-sized businesses like those 99 percent in
Nevada and really speaking, building on Senator Tester,
especially in those rural areas.
Dr. Copan. Indeed. Thank you so much, Senator.
The Manufacturing Extension Partnership is truly an
American treasure that enables small manufacturers, medium-
sized manufacturers, as well as entrepreneurs, to have access
on a shared basis to advanced technologies, and the latest
knowledge in terms of cybersecurity protections and risk
mitigation. As we know, small to medium-sized companies that
are the victims of cybersecurity attacks, in general, the
majority of them will be out of business within half a year and
it is a remarkable challenge that our Nation faces.
An area that we are focused on at MEP and also the synergy
with the manufacturing institutes, Manufacturing USA, is to
look at leveraging much more broadly the networks that are
available to us nationally creating much stronger ties. And
thank you for your leadership in the legislation that is
looking to the future of building the workforce. There have
been hundreds of thousands, who have been educated through
these partnerships with the Manufacturing USA programs and with
MEP, and we need to continue to strengthen that.
Many of the questions from our Committee today have focused
on the future of the workforce. And, as we make, we learn, and
we innovate as a nation. And so recapturing that ability with a
prepared workforce, as well as to simplify the way in which
states and Federal Government and educational institutions and
the Federal research enterprise can collaborate, to the point
again around technology transfer and modernization in the era
of the 21st century, is absolutely essential.
So thank you very much for your support. MEP is very
popular across all of Congress, and we do realize that there
are opportunities to continue to leverage that great network.
Senator Rosen. And building on that, you see what Senator
Peters said about so many--you know, 50-plus different
programs, agencies spread all around. So we know that we are
going to have labor shortages in this area. Like Senator Tester
said again, we have board of regents probably at most public
universities, State universities across the country. We have
unions for high school, secondary education, whatever they are.
How do you think that we can get the word out about these kinds
of programs, grants or partnerships that communities, not just
the large ones with a lot of staff, can apply for, but some of
the smaller, underrepresented areas, more challenged areas? How
can we potentiate that, get the word out and coordinate that? I
think that is key.
Dr. Cordova. NSF has a program where we will, upon
invitation, travel to any site in the country.
Senator Rosen. Can I stop you there? Upon invitation?
Dr. Cordova. Yes.
Senator Rosen. What if someone does not know about this? So
I think we should not wait for the invitation. You should be
putting out the information about what you provide and then
people can ask. If I do not know you are there, how can I
invite you?
Dr. Cordova. Well, we do fund in every single state. We
fund a lot of programs, and certainly, we do in Nevada. And
they know, because they receive large grants from us, that they
can help out by inviting us. And we constantly communicate with
them that we have a program where NSF will bring a whole lot of
people there to talk about how----
Senator Rosen. You are not engaging underrepresented,
underserved communities. If they are large institutions, we
know they have the resources to bring you there. But it is my
smaller communities that do not have it. It is my
underrepresented communities that do not have those resources.
So I would just ask you to see if you can find a way that
through our chambers of commerce, perhaps somehow to reach out
to people who do not have these large resources, please.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
Senator Udall.
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you, Chairman Wicker.
And thank you to all the witnesses. I think it has been an
excellent panel here today.
It is essential that policymakers both at agencies and in
the Congress push past the buzzwords that dazzle but mean very
little to my constituents in rural areas. And you have heard a
lot today about rural areas. There is no doubt being from a
rural state that rural areas are hurting. They are falling
behind. I would associate with Senator Tester and some of the
other Senators that talked very passionately about rural areas
being behind.
And I would like to thank you, Commissioner Rosenworcel,
for being such a great advocate for our rural areas both here
today and on many other occasions.
For our students to be prepared to work in our industries
of the future, they must have access to high-speed broadband
networks at home, at school, and frankly on the bus on the way
to school. I, along with Senator Gardner, introduced a bill
that would allow Wi-Fi on school buses to be reimbursed by the
E-Rate program. I started working on this issue after a visit
by Commissioner Rosenworcel where she traveled to New Mexico.
We went to several rural communities, and we heard directly
from students how Wi-Fi on their school buses would make a
difference in their school work and quality of lives.
I look forward to having this bill marked up, Mr. Chairman,
by the Committee. It is a good bipartisan bill. We all know how
much it would benefit our school kids.
Commissioner Rosenworcel, you have been sounding the alarm
on the need to close the homework gap for years. Can you
outline the benefits to our students if we open the E-Rate
program to pay for Wi-Fi on school buses?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. Thank you, Senator, for the
question, your work on this.
We know seven in 10 teachers assign homework that now
requires Internet access, and one in three households do not
have it. Where those numbers overlap is the homework gap. It is
the cruelest part of the digital divide. And you see it in kids
in McDonald's trying to do their homework, in library parking
lots, and rushing to the homes of friends and family just to do
math sets and English assignments.
We can fix this. It is within our power, and one of the
best and easiest ways to start fixing it is to put Wi-Fi on our
school buses. It is especially potent in rural America because
kids in rural America spend so much time going to school and
back. And if we do that, we can turn ride time into connected
time for homework and help close what is a really hard part of
the digital divide.
Senator Udall. Thank you for that answer.
Dr. Cordova, as an honorary New Mexican, we are sad to see
you are stepping away from the NSF soon. Our universities have
benefited greatly from their partnerships with the NSF and most
importantly the significant amount of investment.
Can you speak to how our great universities in New Mexico
are uniquely situated to prepare the workforce of the future?
Dr. Cordova. Yes. I am not just an honorary New Mexican.
Actually tax-wise, I am a New Mexican.
Senator Udall. Well, we are very happy about that.
Dr. Cordova. I have a home and a driver's license and so
forth in New Mexico.
So, yes. New Mexico is just a great state. That is why I
made it my home. And it has the wonderful national laboratories
there that can do so much as far as workforce development. We
work with all of them. I was a member of Los Alamos National
Laboratory for 10 years. That is where I started in New Mexico.
And they also have a great ``three cultures'' in the state.
And so we have a program for tribal colleges and universities.
We are very active with the Navajo community in New Mexico. And
we also have an I-Corps program to develop students to learn
more about how to translate their discoveries into research. We
have STEM workforce development programs of many scales,
especially at New Mexico State University. The University of
New Mexico has a CyberCorps program. So there are many NSF
programs. And the program that I mentioned where we go and we
take our senior leadership to the state and explain how to get
more investment--we did that recently, a year or two ago in New
Mexico, with great results because a lot more people applied
for grants after that program.
So I really see it as a state with huge potential because
of the underrepresented communities and because of the
strengths of laboratories and centers that we have there to
really make inroads on education. I have made a pledge to the
previous Governor, which I would make to the present Governor,
that when I do leave the National Science Foundation, I would
like to be a part of raising the education and the STEM
workforce development in the state.
Senator Udall. Great, great. Thank you so much, Dr.
Cordova. And thank you to the entire panel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Udall.
Dr. Cordova, I understand there is a Senate seat coming
open in New Mexico.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. You might want to look at that.
And, Senator Udall, staff tells me we are lacking a score
on the school bus legislation, and without that, we are unable
to do a markup. So perhaps we could both work on that really
good idea.
Senator Udall. We will work on that.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Udall.
Dr. Copan, I want to ask you about graphene. We understand
this is a material that could improve products from asphalt to
airliners. Congress recently provided NIST with $1.5 million to
fund and pursue graphene research activities with industry and
academic institutions with expertise, existing capabilities,
and infrastructure related to the commercial application of
graphene.
In my home state, the University of Mississippi established
a center for graphene research and innovation. Recently, last
fall, the center designed a graphene-enhanced polymer material
that was launched from the Wallops flight facility in Virginia
to be tested at the International Space Station for protection
against hypervelocity impacts. The material will spend a year
orbiting the globe and be tested for effectiveness.
What do you think about that? Is this the next big thing?
And can you highlight some of the work that NIST is doing to
advance graphene research and the commercialization of the
product?
Dr. Copan. Indeed. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and
thank you for your support for the work that is going on that
relates to leveraging this very important material. It is
central to the future quantum sensors. It is central to the
future of electronics. It is important in energy storage and
advanced computing.
And we began our effort on graphene research in the earlier
2000s, as the efforts expanded from graphene to include other
two-dimensional materials. So they are unique because they are
flat, and they have remarkable electronic properties.
We are also leveraging the work that we do with other
Federal agencies. The Department of Defense is a close partner,
DARPA, Navy research laboratories, collaborations also with the
National Science Foundation and the academic community.
We have also worked closely with the National Graphene
Association. It is so important for us always in our research
to have the insights from industry and the partnerships that in
the future will enable commercialization of new products, new
process technologies, and new applications.
We are currently also working to develop an updated plan
for our research and development agenda, and we look forward to
working with you and the stakeholders as we advance that
effort.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Dr. Cordova, I noticed you nodding when Dr.
Copan said how central graphene is. Do you have any comments
you would like to add?
Dr. Cordova. It is just a great example of serendipitous
discovery. I know the discoverers of graphene and did a
presentation with one of them at the World Economic Forum a
couple years ago. That is what NSF really invests in. We invest
in curiosity-driven, discovery-driven research, and we invest,
as I said earlier, across all fields of science and engineering
because you never know where the next breakthrough is going to
come from. And this was just a great example of a breakthrough
coming.
But obviously, you have to have a prepared mind. So I was
smiling because I was thinking how many of us would have had
the accident that those two researchers had. Saying, ``Oh, wow,
this is the material that will change the world and have huge
economic benefits.'' Most of us would say, ``Oh, well, this is
a scrap of tape with some stuff on it,'' and thrown it in the
trashcan. So you do have to be raised in an environment where
you recognize something once you have discovered it?
We talk about the industries of the future. We have
identified, as Michael Kratsios said, in this administration a
number of them. We are really investing in them. But our
attitude at the National Science Foundation has been that
actually the industries of the future might come from a place
that is totally unexpected. And I mean, just look at where the
whole computer world is right now, and we just did not expect
as scientists in the late 1980s that we would send stuff
through e-mail. It was just our private scientific papers. We
had no idea. We had no idea when we funded Sergey Brin and
Larry Page that they would develop Google from what was just a
digital library project.
So I just always smile when I think of graphene and the
accident that created all of this.
The Chairman. And finally, Dr. Cordova, let me ask you to
expand a little on dynamic spectrum sharing. I think you
mentioned this and Mr. O'Rielly, and Senator Blackburn dealt
into this to an extent. But how helpful is that going to be?
And if you could describe it for our listening audience today.
Dr. Cordova. Yes. I think, as has been said by our
commissioners, it is just essential, absolutely essential, that
we have in our tool box a way to dynamically spectrum share.
The Chairman. And by that, what do you mean?
Dr. Cordova. By that, what I mean is that you do not take
every isolated wavelength and just assign it to somebody and
say that one is yours, this particular gigahertz, this
megahertz is yours. You get to use it. It will have no
spillover. It is just yours and nobody else can use it.
But what is happening is that signals are not--they do not
come like just straight lines, like pencil lines, what we call
in the math business, delta functions. They spread over a large
amount of frequencies. So when some company is acting at 24
gigahertz and is producing their signals they are transmitting,
it is actually going to spread out into other wavelengths that
are nearby and that are going to affect our detection of water
vapor in the atmosphere, which is critical for weather
forecasting.
So we absolutely have to look at ways that we can all
share. The spectrum is a precious resource and it is a limited
resource. We do not have infinite amounts of it. And so we must
treat it like it is a reverent thing because it is all that we
have for communications.
So right now, it is very crowded and, as has been said just
beautifully by our people testifying here, some of it could be
wasted because it is not being used very efficiently. It was
taken over at a period of time a long time ago where the use
that was is not the use that is needed now. There are also more
technologies in order to compress signals and to make them less
spread out over everything. And private companies have that and
some of that technology is private.
And so what the NSF has done--and we have made it a
foremost priority and we are going to be doing it in this
year's budget, thanks to the new plan that Congress just passed
for us--is we are taking leadership among the agencies for
developing this concept of what we call a dynamic spectrum. So
it is not static--that you get one wavelength and someone else
gets another one; we will all share the spectrum. It could be
at different times. It could be sharing the same frequency but
in different proportions.
The Chairman. How about different priorities?
Dr. Cordova. Yes, and different priorities. Absolutely. But
we will use this as a resource that is limited and constrained.
And so we are going to set up a testbed or multiple
testbeds for where we can do this dynamic spectrum sharing. One
would be in West Virginia at our Green Bank Telescope facility
where we already have some rules about sharing. But it does not
incorporate space sharing from space satellites at all. It is
just about ground-based sharing.
So I think this could be a very productive way to achieve
Ms. Rosenworcel's goal of sharing.
The Chairman. So to our two commissioners, what does
Congress need to do on this? We will start with Commissioner
Rosenworcel.
Ms. Rosenworcel. I am going to start by saying I share the
NSF's optimism about spectrum sharing. It represents the
future. It takes our scarce airwaves and turns them into
abundance. The more we can support research in this area, the
more the United States can lead and our wireless future will be
brighter.
The Chairman. So support research.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely.
The Chairman. Commissioner O'Rielly?
Mr. O'Rielly. But it is something we already have and
something we are using. And there are some concerns here. I
would say in terms of our CBRS, the spectrum at 3.55 that we
are going to implement for spectrum sharing already and then
make available licenses later this year; we have lower power
limits because we are trying to deal with all the different
entities in one space. That does not correspond to what the
providers would like to do to be able to offer full-scale 5G
services. So I think it is a tool in a tool box. It is not the
solution. We are still going to need exclusive licensed
spectrum. But it can solve those issues where you have a
congested band and how to deal with different people where you
cannot move them.
Ms. Rosenworcel. I am more optimistic. I think we are going
to use this tool throughout our airwaves over time, and it is
going to take these scarce airwaves and make them more
abundant. And so the more we invest in basic research now, the
better off we will be.
The Chairman. You are both making me optimistic.
Do we have the technology we need now?
Mr. O'Rielly. Yes.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Yes.
Dr. Cordova. Yes. And I would add that we are also
expanding research into the terahertz regime. An example would
be Brown University--I have gone there and toured their
facilities. We could actually take this spectrum--we have just
been talking about the radio portion of spectrum, but we could
move along it so we could have a lot more capacity.
I have lived my life in the electromagnetic spectrum
because I am an astrophysicist. And I want to put in a plug for
the astronomers of the world too. We really care about what is
happening with the electromagnetic spectrum because everything
we know about our origins and evolution of the universe, the
making of stars and galaxies, the 3 degree microwave
background, and the Nobel prizes that have been given for
discovery about the tiny little planet in the big universe in
which we live in have been done by utilizing the
electromagnetic spectrum.
Dr. Copan. If I could just add. I think it is important for
us to have future policy decisions that are guided by data and
that we are in a situation to provide the kind of standards
that would ultimately support the effective use of the very
promising technologies that are currently in our laboratories.
And certainly, NIST is a part of that journey, in developing
standards, and providing the underpinning testing and
validation.
The Chairman. Thank you all.
Senator Cruz.
STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS
Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you to each of the witnesses for being here today.
Commissioner O'Rielly, let me start with you. You mentioned
in your testimony that a report commissioned by Qualcomm
outlined the potential economic benefits of 5G by 2035. And
according to the report, in the next 15 years 5G will enable
$13.2 trillion of global economic output, support 22.3 million
jobs, and produce economic global growth of $2.1 trillion.
If the United States fails to roll out 5G before China,
what kind of economic impact would that have on the U.S.?
Mr. O'Rielly. Well, I think all of the data points that you
just cited that I previously referenced will transfer to other
countries, including China, all of that benefit. And it is not
just--being the leader in 5G, it's not just about one
particular technology. It is about setting standards for the
future for 6G, going from what we were able to do at 4G, and
setting the environment and all the applications that go on top
of--that utilize the technologies. And it is much more
expansive than we have given it credit for in the past, and all
of that will flow to other countries and all the benefit will
be to the detriment of the United States.
Senator Cruz. Who is winning the race right now?
Mr. O'Rielly. I think it is a tough slog. We have
obligations and we are working really hard at the Commission to
make sure wireless providers in the United States have the
resources to compete domestically, internationally, they have
the spectrum, they have the infrastructure policy, they have
the environment to be able to compete. But it is going to be a
tough slog when you have foreign nations who are throwing
billions and billions of subsidized dollars to facilitate their
providers for multiple different reasons.
Senator Cruz. In Commissioner Rosenworcel's testimony, you
mentioned that last year the Defense Innovation Board had
concerns with the FCC's approach prioritizing high-band
frequencies over mid-band frequencies. The board's statement
that the United States will, quote, not likely own 5G
innovation and thus will not set the standards for the rest of
the world is more than a little concerning.
Ms. Rosenworcel. Absolutely.
Senator Cruz. It is critical for the U.S. to win the race
on 5G.
Can you discuss where the United States stands in
comparison to the rest of the world when it comes to freeing up
mid-band spectrum and why this spectrum is so important to
winning the race to 5G?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure, Senator. I think we are behind.
There are at least 16 other nations that have already auctioned
mid-band spectrum. As far back as two years ago, South Korea,
Japan, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia, lots
of places worldwide are trying to do this early because those
are the airwaves that propagate far and also have capacity.
But the United States is alone in making high-band spectrum
the focus of our early 5G efforts, and there is a reason for
that. It just does not go very far--those signals. As a result,
we are only going to see deployment in urban America and not in
rural communities. We need to pivot to 5G that is focused on
mid-band fast, and I think the best way to do it is to expedite
the auction of the 3.5-gigahertz band, which is sitting around
and ready to go.
Senator Cruz. Can you also address why it is important from
a national security perspective that technologies like apps for
your phone be built on the 5G network of the United States and
not China?
Ms. Rosenworcel. Sure. There is a Chinese national
intelligence law from 2017 that gives the state rights to
access its networks, and so the deployment of that equipment
comes with significant vulnerabilities. That is not true in the
United States and with some of the European vendors that have
traditionally provided service. Going forward, we are going to
have to build a bigger, more competitive and diverse market for
5G equipment in order to ensure security.
Senator Cruz. Dr. Copan and Dr. Cordova, back in 2016 I
held the first congressional hearing focused directly on
artificial intelligence. At that hearing, we heard testimony
that AI was at an inflexion point even then, at the precipice
of experiencing the full potential AI can unleash.
According to a September 2018 report by McKinsey Global
Institute, by 2030 AI could potentially add approximately $13
trillion to current economic output.
What does the United States need to do to continue to lead
in AI so that Americans realize those overwhelming economic
benefits associated with this growth?
Dr. Copan. Let me begin. And thank you so much, Senator,
for that question.
It is going to take targeted and sustained investments to
ensure that the United States maintains a strong position of
leadership, and also the translation of that investment into
value for the economy. Part of that is having research data
frameworks and more broad access to data. That is the fuel, if
you will, for the utilization of artificial intelligence in all
its domains to ensure that the United States has the full
access to the benefits that are available.
Our programs at NIST include work around standards and
tools to support trustworthy AI, expanding upon fundamental
research on AI systems, and then working also globally to
ensure that the United States has a voice at the standards
tables, to ensure that our industries, and also that our
values, are effectively represented.
Dr. Cordova. I feel very optimistic about our investment in
artificial intelligence. At the National Science Foundation in
the past year, we spent $500 million in this area over all of
the agency, and we intend to invest a lot more.
And I especially feel optimistic because it is a priority
of this administration. And I would like to particularly
acknowledge the efforts of our Chief Technology Officer, Mr.
Kratsios, because he has really been leading the U.S. effort on
artificial intelligence. And perhaps if you would like, he
could just say a couple of words about our strategic plan for
the U.S. in artificial intelligence, which builds on the
previous administration but extends it to more partnerships and
more activity.
Senator Cruz. Sure. Mr. Kratsios?
Mr. Kratsios. Sure. The strategy we unveiled last year is
focused on four pillars, the first of which is a commitment to
a renewed focus on fundamental research and development. And we
have brought together a group, an interagency group, called the
Select Committee on AI, which is the heads of all of our major
R&D agencies. They coordinate the spending for AI across the
Federal Government. Also we are the first administration in
history to prioritize artificial intelligence in a budget
request to Congress, and a lot of work is done there.
The second pillar of our strategy is always around
workforce, and that falls in really two pieces.
One is we need to create a pipeline of AI-talented
Americans who are going to make the next great research
discoveries. And the efforts we have done, as an administration
is to prioritize AI grants and fellowships at our agencies. So
at the President's direction now, we are giving more AI grants
and fellowships across the Federal Government.
The second piece is preparing and training Americans for
next generation or 21st century jobs. It is a big effort we
have done through all our American worker programs.
The third pillar is around regulation. We have to create a
regulatory environment that allows AI innovation to succeed
here in the United States. We had a big launch last week of our
AI regulatory principles, which are a first of a kind in the
world where we are actually directing agencies in the way that
they should be approaching the regulation of AI power
technologies.
And the fourth I think that is most critical especially in
light of some of what our adversaries are doing is our
international engagement. It is absolutely critical that
artificial intelligence is developed in a way that reflects
American values. We have adversaries around the world who are
using artificial intelligence to track people, to surveil
minorities, and to, frankly, imprison folks, and this is
something that is extraordinarily disturbing and challenging to
many in the West. And if we want to drive--it is more critical
than ever to drive and ensure Western leadership in AI because
if we do not, those values, which I spoke about, are the ones
that are going to be baked into technology developed by our
adversaries. So we have worked at the OECD and we worked
internationally to try to guide folks to kind of lean in on
Western values underpinning AI.
Senator Cruz. Thank you.
The Chairman. Commissioner Rosenworcel, what part of the
spectrum is sitting around waiting and what do we need to do?
Ms. Rosenworcel. What part of the spectrum is sitting
around waiting?
The Chairman. You just made a statement.
Ms. Rosenworcel. I think that the agency should have
prioritized auctioning the 3.5-gigahertz band fast for mid-band
purposes over its high-band auctions in the 24, 28, 37, 39, and
47-gigahertz bands. And I was just making that point.
The Chairman. How helpful would this be?
Ms. Rosenworcel. It would be extraordinarily helpful for
two reasons.
First, it is a new and innovative model. We have a
hierarchy of access rights in it that is unlike anything else
in the world and explores access that is more dynamic to
spectrum within the model. That is very exciting. It is custom-
built for the Internet of Things. That is going where industry
is going. That is where the future is at.
And in addition, what is most important about it is when we
auction it, we can immediately go to market with it. That
distinguishes it, frankly, from the C-band where we have a lot
of work to do with launching satellites, developing filters,
and developing compression technologies before it can truly go
to market. And so what is unique about the 3.5-gigahertz band
is it is ready to go, and I think we should be expediting our
auction of it right now.
The Chairman. Commissioner O'Rielly?
Mr. O'Rielly. Yes. So 3.55 to 3.7, the citizens band radio
service, is something I have taken the lead on. It is scheduled
for auction in the summertime. There are things that need to be
decided to lead up to that point. I have made this larger point
for a long while. There is a built-up timeline that requires--
getting to an auction point. It takes a long time for there to
be software or policymaking decisions to get to the auction. We
finally have the auction scheduled, and we will move forward at
that point.
But it is not operational today. We are still on the
generalized access service, the GAA portion. The unlicensed
like piece is not at full commercial deployment. It is still in
initial commercial deployment. So there are pieces that need to
be decided, so it cannot be expedited to tomorrow even if we
wanted to.
We also want to provide enough time to those that want to
bid to be able to be ready, and that requires making sure they
are up to speed. We are expecting smaller providers to
participate, and we want them to be able to know how the
auction process works because they are more than likely not
familiar. So it does require a little bit of time.
I am glad that it is happening this summer. I would have
loved to it have been earlier, but it was not a lack of
interest at the FCC that kept this from happening. There were
software issues. There were policy issues and then actually
working with the dynamic frequencies that we talked about, that
system of how everyone can live in the same place. We have to
deal with the U.S. Navy radars that live there, and that has
been really difficult. You know, we are finding on a monthly
basis some new locations that need to be protected that have
added to the complexity.
The Chairman. Well, thank you. And I suppose we could go on
and on and back and forth. But I want to thank each and
everyone of our panelists this morning and this afternoon.
The hearing record will remain open for two weeks. During
this time, Senators are asked to submit any questions for the
record. Upon receipt, witnesses are requested to submit their
written answers to the Committee as soon as possible, perhaps
that afternoon, but no later than Wednesday, February 12, 2020.
And with that, if there is nothing further, we conclude the
hearing and express our great appreciation to the witnesses.
This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Michael Kratsios
Question 1. How does the United States compare to other nations in
advanced manufacturing technologies? In order to remain competitive,
what specific technologies/processes need additional focus in the
United States?
Answer. Advanced manufacturing--which includes both new
manufacturing methods and the production of new products enabled by
innovation--is an engine of America's economic power and a pillar of
its national security. Advances in manufacturing enable the economy to
continuously improve as new technologies and innovations increase
productivity, enable new products, and create entirely new industries.
Many other countries are making significant advances in advanced
manufacturing and there is intense global competition in this critical
field. The Trump Administration has taken important actions to maintain
and strengthen U.S. leadership. For example, the Administration named
advanced manufacturing as a top research and development budget
priority.\1\ In 2018, President Trump unveiled a Strategy for American
Leadership in Advanced Manufacturing,\2\ which described several key
areas of emphasis including educating, training, connecting industries
and the manufacturing workforce, and expanding the capabilities of the
domestic manufacturing supply chain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/M-18-
22.pdf. Federal departments and agencies were again directed to
prioritize R&D in advanced manufacturing in the President's FY 2021 and
FY 2022 Budgets.
\2\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Advanced-
Manufacturing-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To remain competitive, the Administration is focused on
manufacturing leadership in emerging markets, investment in advanced
technologies, and the ability to effectively leverage new technologies
and platforms across industrial sectors.
Question 2. Wichita State University now offers a graduate
certificate in additive manufacturing, intended to fill a skills gap
identified in the manufacturing industry. They join just a handful of
universities nationally providing advanced education in additive
manufacturing. How can we ensure our academic programs, like those
found at Wichita State University, are equipped with the necessary
tools and applied learning experience necessary for our future
workforce to meet demand?
Answer. Academic programs that help equip Americans to meet the
demands of our future workforce are critical to the Nation's prosperity
and economic growth. The Trump Administration is committed to ensuring
American workers of all ages and backgrounds have the skills, training,
and knowledge they need for success in our 21st century economy.\3\ For
over three years, the Administration has taken an approach of investing
in Science Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and computer
science education, expanding access to apprenticeships and job training
opportunities, and engaging with private sector partners to reskill,
upskill, and train Americans for the jobs of today and tomorrow.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Ensuring all American's have the foundational skills required
to succeed in critical areas, such as advanced manufacturing, is a
central pillar in the Administration's 2018 STEM strategic plan,
``Charting a Course for Success: America's Strategy for STEM
Education.'' https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/
STEM-Education-Strategic-Plan-2018.pdf
Question 3. In November 2019, the Senate Homeland Security and
Government Affairs Committee produced a bipartisan report titled
``Threats to the U.S. Research Enterprise: China's Talent Recruitment
Plans.'' The report generally found that China openly recruited U.S.-
based researchers and scientists in the public and private sectors to
provide China with knowledge and intellectual capital in exchange for
monetary gain that significantly contributed to China's global rise
over the last 20 years. My CJS appropriations bill for FY 2020 included
report language that directs OSTP to convene Federal Government
representatives from pertinent agencies like NSF along with law
enforcement to assess current risks and threats to research integrity
from foreign influence, including aspects of foreign talent recruitment
and other intellectual property concerns. Would you please speak to the
importance of effectively attracting talent from abroad to participate
in U.S.-backed research efforts while also appropriately deterring bad
actors from other countries from stealing intellectual property
resulting from such efforts?
Answer. The United States attracts, educates, and trains some of
the world's most creative, intelligent, innovative, and determined
students and researchers, which has produced decades of game-changing
discoveries and innovations. We continue to uphold the core values of
our research enterprise: openness, transparency, merit-based
competition, reciprocity, and accountability. However, our adversaries
around the world have long invested time, money, and effort to
undermine America's advances. The Trump administration has taken
decisive action to protect the U.S. research enterprise and promote our
continued global leadership.
Most notably, President Trump issued a proclamation denying visas
to certain academic programs' graduate and post-graduate students and
researchers affiliated with certain Chinese institutions, helping
prevent the Chinese Communist Party from exploiting access to our
Nation's educational and research centers to advance its national and
military development.\4\ Federal research agencies, such as the
Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, and the National
Institutes of Health, have also taken important actions to protect
their critical R&D efforts and products or outcomes from subversion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-
suspension-entry-nonimmi
grants-certain-students-researchers-peoples-republic-china/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To help coordinate the many ongoing Federal efforts to address
research security, in mid-2019, the White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy, announced the Joint Committee on the Research
Environment (JCORE). Over the last year, JCORE has focused its efforts
on identifying the scope and scale of risks, generating guidance for
Federal agencies to strengthen protection of U.S. government-supported
research and development against foreign government interference and
exploitation, and developing recommendations for academic and research
institutions.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/
Enhancing-the-Security-and-Integrity-of-Americas-Research-
Enterprise_7.13.2020.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Hon. Michael Kratsios
Background. When it comes to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), we
have read a lot recently about potential data and cyber concerns with
Chinese-manufactured drones. While I am deeply concerned with China and
their positioning across many emerging technology industries, not all
security threats across industries are equal, and some may be mitigated
through risk management for limited applications.
I raise this as I am concerned with the effectiveness of the
approach to ban the non-defense related Federal use of drone technology
due to the UAS, or even one of its components, being made in China,
absent American alternatives. As we work to stand up our domestic drone
industry, we need to confront the cybersecurity challenges and supply
chain risks in a manner that supports the development of our industry
and utilization of technologies to meet the needs of vetted civilian
missions. With that in mind, I think it would be constructive to start
a conversation around developing UAS-specific standards and
requirements that address cyber and data concerns, in order to ensure
the Federal Government has access to the drone technology of today and
vulnerabilities from all potential sources are addressed. This
standards-based approach would not only confront challenges confronted
by Chinese drones, but make drones from all sources more secure for use
by the Federal Government.
Question. What is OSTP's and NIST's view of this issue?
Answer. The Administration recognizes the serious security concerns
associated with Chinese-made drone technologies.
The Administration also recognizes that American alternatives exist
today that meet supply chain and cybersecurity requirements at
comparable cost and performance to foreign-made drones. Several
industry standards groups have initiated work to define cybersecurity
standards for drones. The drone industry has clearly heard U.S.
government concerns about cybersecurity for these aircrafts. The drone
industry recognizes that cybersecurity protection will be required
before the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) allows expanded,
large-scale commercial operations of unmanned aircraft.
With the right guidance on trusted components for Federal drones
and industry cybersecurity standards, and appropriate regulatory
development and oversight, we will see enormous growth in our domestic
manufacturing capability--establishing the United States as the world
leader in drone technology and regulation and setting a secure, safe,
and trusted standard for this key industry of the future.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to
Hon. Michael Kratsios
Background. It is my understanding that you were one of the authors
behind the Presidential Memorandum to the Department of Transportation
that created the UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP). One of the stated
objectives of the IPP was to, ``test and evaluate various models of
State, Local, and Tribal government involvement in the development and
enforcement of Federal regulations for UAS operations.'' This included
the testing of ``reasonable time, place, and manner limitations on low-
altitude UAS operations.''
Question 1. Would you agree that the success of drone integration
would require State, Local, and Federal coordination and
responsibilities?
Answer. The IPP leadership has underscored that the safe
integration of UAS innovation into our national airspaces will require
close coordination among State, Local, and Federal authorities as well
as private sector and academic collaboration.
Question 2. Can you provide an update on the status of the IPP
testing of reasonable time, place, and manner limitations, and the
coordination between federal, state, and local governments?
Answer. In January 2020, the FAA held its first localized unmanned
traffic management tabletop exercise with the North Carolina Department
of Transportation, one of the IPP Lead Participants. This exercise
explored the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders,
including State officials, with regard to several different types of
UAS operations in both typical and atypical circumstances. There was
positive feedback from this exercise, and the FAA is planning
additional exercises with other IPP Lead Participants.
Question 3. Last summer, the FAA testified before this Committee
that they had not conducted this testing in either a law enforcement
context or a non-law enforcement context. What plans does the
Administration have to carry out this important objective in the
President's memorandum?
Answer. Through the IPP, the FAA continues to learn about the UAS
needs of localities when it comes to emergency management services and
law enforcement. For example, the San Diego IPP has demonstrated unique
uses of UAS for public safety and first responders, such as natural
disaster surveying.
Question 4. Do you think the FAA or another Federal agency is in
the position to directly address every drone related issue in the
United States without state or local involvement?
Answer. The views, perspectives, and experiences of State, Local,
and Tribal governments are essential for developing the regulatory
framework that will support the full integration of UAS into the
national airspace system. The lessons learned from the IPP will be
invaluable as the Administration develops rules and policies that spur
innovation and expand capabilities and product offerings, while never
compromising on safety or airspace efficiency.
Question 5. Mid-band spectrum holds important qualities that will
be useful not only for 5G networks, but for all future technological
innovation. The Federal Government has a substantial amount of control
over mid-band spectrum use, but they lack a market-based allocation of
spectrum, which I believe has led to greater inefficiencies and
misallocations. What is the Administration doing to identify
inefficiencies in government spectrum usage?
Answer. President Trump is committed to ensuring America's global
leadership in 5G technology and innovation. Making more mid-band
spectrum available for commercial 5G deployment is a key part of that
mission.
President Trump released a memorandum \6\ in Fall 2018 highlighting
the policy of the United States to utilize spectrum efficiently and
effectively. In this memorandum, the importance of 5G was highlighted
along with a specific call for cooperation and collaboration between
Federal and non-Federal users. The White House and the Department of
Defense (DoD) announced that 100 megahertz of mid-band spectrum between
3450-3550 megahertz will be made available for coast-to-coast 5G
deployment at full commercial power levels. Through unprecedented
collaboration between the White House and DoD, the Trump Administration
worked carefully to ensure commercial use of this critically needed
mid-band spectrum in no way compromises military preparedness and
national security. As a result, the spectrum will be auctioned in
record time and U.S. wireless industry will be able to build and
operate 5G networks nationwide using this band.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-
memorandum-developing-sustainable-spectrum-strategy-americas-future/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Research and development priorities have also been identified and
are being pursued which will aid in identifying inefficient spectrum
usage. These include the pursuit of spectrum flexibility and agility to
use multiple bands and new waveforms, the improvement of near real-time
spectrum awareness, and the increase of spectrum efficiency and
effectiveness through secure autonomous spectrum decision making.
Question 6. One solution for finding spectrum inefficiencies is to
identify the ``opportunity costs'' associated with Federal spectrum
holdings. Do you support efforts to value the ``opportunity costs''
associated with Federal spectrum holdings?
Answer. Access to spectrum is an essential component that Federal
agencies often need in order to meet their statutory missions,
including protecting public safety and defending our national security.
At the same time, America's national economic growth and global
dominance in technology and innovation is fueled by our private
sector's ability to utilize spectrum. The Trump Administration is
committed to working with the private sector and Federal agencies to
find a balanced solution in meeting core national priorities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Hon. Michael Kratsios
Impact of A.I. On Society
There is no doubt that technologies like A.I. will be incredibly
transformative for growth and productivity, but I am concerned about
how the adoption of new technologies might increase inequality--for
example, job losses resulting from adoption of A.I. and automation in
manufacturing.
I am also concerned that we aren't considering the ethical
implications of some A.I.--for example some have posed that A.I. could
be used in criminal sentencing, but without standards for
trustworthiness, how can we be sure that such algorithms are unbiased?
Question. How can the Federal Government address this issue and
ensure that low-skilled American workers aren't left behind?
Answer. The Trump Administration believes deeply that advances in
artificial intelligence will have meaningful benefits supporting the
health, security, education, and prosperity of all Americans, from
improving health care outcomes to revolutionizing transportation and
enhancing efficiencies in agriculture. We also remain committed to the
development of AI technologies in a manner that protects and upholds
privacy, civil rights, civil liberties, and human rights.
In February 2019, President Trump signed an Executive Order on
Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence.\1\ The
Executive Order launched the American AI Initiative, our national
strategy for AI leadership, and included a number of directives to
support trustworthy AI innovation and promote an AI-ready workforce for
the 21st century.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-
order-maintaining-american-leadership-artificial-intelligence/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As called for in the Executive Order, in January 2020, the White
House issued for public comment the U.S. AI Regulatory Principles,
making the United States among the first in the world to release an AI
governance framework. The principles will guide the development of
Federal AI regulatory approaches to support innovation, along with an
appropriate level of regulation that does not stifle innovation, while
providing for the protection of privacy and security, and the
application of anti-discrimination laws in the use of AI technologies.
In addition, the President's Executive Order directs Federal
agencies to prioritize AI-related apprenticeships and workforce
initiatives. The United States must empower current and future
generations of Americans through apprenticeships, skills programs, and
STEM education--among other things, with an emphasis on computer
science--to ensure that American workers of all backgrounds are capable
of taking full advantage of the opportunities created by advances in
AI.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/ai/ai-american-worker/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
Background. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to
transform the U.S. and global economy. Entities in Missouri and across
the Nation have voiced their intent to increase investment in AI
development, and U.S. Government agencies will continue to implement AI
across a number of mission sets in the near term.
In Europe, a set of ethical guidelines for trustworthiness in AI
have been developed and are being piloted at organizations like the
International Organization for Standards and the International
Electrical Commission.
NIST recently released a plan for Federal engagement and noted that
increasing trust in AI is key to both its adoption and the economic and
societal benefits it can offer. That same trust will be integral to
properly discern operations and processes in which humans should remain
``in the loop,'' and accountable for decisions that are based on AI
outputs.
Question 1. It is my understanding that NIST is working with
stakeholders to develop AI requirements that consider accuracy,
reliability, safety, security, and bias; does NIST intend to pursue
efforts to develop an AI trustworthiness framework, or a set of
frameworks?
Answer. The ability to measure and quantify accuracy, bias,
security, safety, and reliability are essential in enabling trust and
confidence in the use of AI systems. To foster collaboration and
develop a shared understanding of what constitutes trustworthy AI, NIST
is organizing a series of workshops bringing together government,
industry, academia, and other stakeholders. These workshops will focus
on developing a risk management approach to the design, development,
and use of AI. They will inform the definition of key concepts and
building blocks for trustworthy AI (i.e., what to measure); the
development of metrics, benchmarks, and testbeds (i.e., how to
measure); and the implementation and operationalization of AI.
Consistent with our mission, our focus will be on the development of AI
standards and related tools.
Question 2. Does NIST plan on developing a set of guidelines and
best practices to assist in managing the societal impacts of AI?
Answer. NIST is actively participating in, and contributing to, the
Administration's efforts to promote the thoughtful and ethical
development and use of AI technologies, both within the United States
and internationally. In 2019, following broad public and private sector
engagement and input, NIST published ``U.S. Leadership in AI: A Plan
for Federal Engagement in Developing Technical Standards and Related
Tools'' (Plan). Issued in response to Executive Order 13859,
``Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,'' the
Plan's recommendations include facilitation of research and
collaboration across scientific disciplines to increase understanding
of how societal and ethical considerations relate to, and can advance
the development and use of, standards for reliable, robust, and
trustworthy AI technologies. As a standards and technology agency, NIST
is investing in the development of foundational tools that can
contribute data and clarity to the discussions about the ethical
development and use of AI technologies. These tools include means to
identify sources of error, bias and its propagation, and improve the
explainability of AI systems. NIST staff also participate in the
development of consensus-based international standards, focusing
efforts on the development of standardized terminology and
nomenclature, use cases, and big data standards.
NIST has been working with stakeholders in the AI community to
identify the technical requirements needed to cultivate trust that AI
systems are accurate, reliable, safe, secure, explainable, and free
from bias. Tools and solutions resulting from these efforts will help
address questions about societal impacts of AI. NIST tools help
organizations use technologies, like AI, effectively, which in turn
makes our Nation more competitive.
Question 3. In August 2019, NIST took an important step towards
greater Federal Government collaboration on AI standards development,
which deserves acknowledgement. With technology advancing relatively
quickly, does NIST intend to move forward on a voluntary framework
process focused on AI trustworthiness, similar to the NIST
cybersecurity framework, or the privacy framework that is currently
under development?
Answer. The successful development of NIST frameworks for
cybersecurity and privacy engineering was possible in large part due to
the technological maturity and broad expertise among stakeholders in
these issues. As AI development is still in early stages and the
development of the necessary technological underpinnings for
trustworthiness are still underway, the development of a voluntary
framework for AI trustworthiness may be premature. However, NIST is
already working with the community and stakeholders to develop specific
measurement tools and protocols for various facets of trustworthiness,
which will create the foundation for any future development of an AI
trustworthiness framework.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
Question 1. Wichita State University is one of 10 organizations
that received funding from the manufacturing institute, Advanced
Robotics for Manufacturing (ARM), for new education and workforce
development projects. Wichita State University was also one of five
awardees of America Makes' Directed Project Opportunity for Advanced
Tools for Rapid Qualification. How are these manufacturing institutes
and awarded programs creating value to the United States?
Follow-up. How do you measure success of these institutions and
what specific outputs would be beneficial to the United States?
Answer. Kansas has a very active aviation and aerospace business
environment. Wichita is a focal point for this hub, and Wichita State
University is a true leader in education, training, and research in the
field. Because the Department of Defense (DOD) sponsored the two
projects you cited through its Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing
(ARM) and America Makes institutes, detailed information on the
outcomes of these projects would come from DOD.
Overall, these projects clearly enhance the Nation's future in
science, research, and engineering. America Makes and the ARM
Manufacturing USA institutes, which are funded by DOD and in which NIST
plays a collaborative role, fortify the aerospace industry in the
Kansas region through advances in robotic automation, additive
manufacturing, and workforce development. The following are examples of
the success and outputs as a result of collaborative applied research
projects at Manufacturing USA institutes.
America Makes' third satellite center is now located at the
National Institute for Aviation Research on the campus of
Wichita State University. This partnership will advance polymer
and metal additive manufacturing, or 3D printing, in the
aviation industry. It has the unique distinction of being
America Makes' first industry-specific Satellite Center solely
focused on advancing the use of additive manufacturing within
the aerospace industry.
Automation Manufacturing--Technicians for the Future--With
funding from ARM, a project team led by Wichita State
University will create an efficient and low-cost method for
upskilling workers and increasing the number of available
skilled technicians through three degree programs: Robotics
Technology, Maintenance and Reliability, and Industrial
Automation Machine Maintenance.
Automated Wire Harness Assembly--With funding from ARM, a
project led by Wichita State University will leverage advances
in robotic technology to automate wire harness assembly,
resulting in cost reduction and consistent product quality.
Wire harness assembly is currently a time-intensive, manual
process.
Large Metallic Sanding and Finishing--With funding from ARM,
a project led by Wichita State University will leverage
advances in robotic technology and vision-based machine
learning to increase productivity in sanding tasks,
specifically large metallic panels that are often round and
cylindrical in shape. If successful, a single worker will be
able to safely supervise the sanding of several panels
simultaneously.
Service Life of Additive Manufacturing in Harsh
Environments--With funding from America Makes, a project led by
Wichita State University's National Institute for Aviation
Research seeks to overcome the performance limitations and
degradation of additive manufacturing polymer materials when
subjected to demanding, harsh environments by delivering an
open and comprehensive set of manufacturing tools to improve
the rate of qualifying materials and part families.
A team of America Makes collaborators--researchers from
Wichita State University's National Institute for Aviation
Research, the Air Force Research Lab, RP+M, Texas A&M
University, and the Federal Aviation Administration--received
the Defense Manufacturing Technology Enabler Award in December
2019 for their project ``Qualification Framework for High-
Performance, Low-Variability Additive Manufacturing (AM)
Parts.''
Finally, ARM and America Makes recently released the first public
qualification database of additive manufactured material along with
public material and process specifications. This partnership enabled
the transition of technical data and methodologies to dozens of
additive manufacturing organizations and allowed for the design and
production of high-quality aerospace parts. Designers are now able to
use this data to redesign traditional parts into AM parts to provide
weight and cost reductions through part consolidation. This program is
contributing to the expansion of the industrial part supply base.
Question 2. As you're aware the FY2020 Commerce, Justice, Science,
Appropriations bill included an additional $8 million dollars to expand
NIST's ongoing artificial intelligence efforts, in support of President
Trump's Industries of the Future initiative. As Chairman of the
Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee, I was happy to
have been able to secure this funding increase and look forward to
working with you as you determine how best to execute that funding. In
that vein, I'm aware of NIST's plan, issued in 2019, that outlines the
role of government in artificial intelligence standards development,
and want to pull on a few strings from that report. I believe
developing standards for artificial intelligence are an important, yet
often overlooked, component of designing and deploying intelligent
systems--because these standards will play a critical role in fostering
and enabling public trust in intelligent systems. Can you expound upon
how NIST intends to grow public trust in intelligent systems, via
standards development?
Answer. AI has long been a strategic priority for NIST. An
important goal for NIST is to develop the foundation for confidence and
trust in AI that results in an expanded commercial marketplace and new
research outcomes. The President's Fiscal Year 2021 budget request
proposes an increase of $25 million for measurement tools and testbeds
to accelerate the development and adoption of interoperable, secure,
and reliable AI technologies.
NIST staff lead or participate in standards development activities
related to AI and its applications in intelligent systems in a number
of standards development organizations, such as the Joint Technical
Committee 1 of the International Organization for Standardization and
the International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO-IEC/JTC1), ASTM
International, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers (IEEE). These standards development activities cover
terminology, big data, and the application of AI and machine learning
(ML) technologies in robotics, autonomous systems, and materials
discovery. NIST's participation helps facilitate rigor, fitness-for-
purpose, and timeliness of the resulting standards. The use of these
standards--whether for contractual purposes in a business-to-business
environment, in consumer-facing applications, or in support of
regulatory actions--helps generate greater confidence among
stakeholders concerned with AI/ML technologies.
Follow-up. In particular, how NIST will broaden participation in
the development of these standards?
Answer. By statute and policy, NIST is responsible for facilitating
standards-related information sharing and coordination among Federal
agencies and with the private sector. Consistent with this role, and
the recommendation in the NIST report ``U.S. Leadership in AI: A Plan
for Federal Engagement in Development Technical Standards and Related
Tools,'' \1\ NIST proposed to the National Science and Technology
Council (NSTC) Machine Learning and/Artificial Intelligence (ML/AI)
Subcommittee that the NSTC ML/AI Committee should designate a Standards
Coordinator. In October 2019, the NSTC ML/AI Subcommittee appointed a
NIST staff member as the USG AI Standards Coordinator. The Standards
Coordinator serves as a go-to resource within the Federal community on
AI-related standardization matters, facilitates information sharing and
AI-related engagement among Federal staff, and is responsible for
gathering and sharing AI standards-related needs, strategies, roadmaps,
terminology, use cases, and best practices to support reliable, robust,
and trustworthy AI in government operations. The USG AI Standards
Coordinator, working with agency representatives on the NSTC ML/AI
Subcommittee, the Interagency Committee on Standards Policy, and agency
Standards Executives, will assist interested agency staff participating
in AI standards development activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2019/08/10/
ai_standards_fedengagement_
plan_9aug2019.pdf
Question 4. NIST produced a green paper detailing steps to
modernize technology transfer practices in the U.S., including
reduction of regulatory and administrative hurdles, increasing private
sector engagement, supporting entrepreneurship, and measurement of
effectiveness among others. Given NIST's role as a standards-setting
agency, how would you recommend leveraging authoritative analysis and
metrics to improve technology transfer outcomes in the U.S.?
Answer. The President's Management Agenda charged the Federal
enterprise with improving the transition of federally funded
innovations from the laboratory to the marketplace, and we must
identify and use meaningful metrics to assess the effectiveness of
strategies implemented for that purpose. NIST is coordinating the
development of a government-wide approach for reporting outcome metrics
to capture the full range of Federal R&D contributions. NIST is also
investing in government-wide economic impact studies that analyze
impact metrics such technology utilization, economic impact, and other
effects on the Nation's innovation base. These strategies address the
need to improve the Federal enterprise's understanding of global
science and technology metrics, trends, and benchmarks.
NIST is additionally exploring several different strategic
activities to improve Federal technology-transfer assessment and
analysis. NIST, working with the Interagency Working Group on
Technology Transfer, is finalizing an updated Federal Government-wide
approach by developing standardized methodology for data collection,
definitions of metrics, and data collection processes. Unified data
processes will help agencies better align their data collection with
global measures, which will allow for better benchmarking of technology
transfer performance. NIST has initiated a study with the National
Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine to make recommendations
in reporting data, software, and software applications that may expand
the definition of technology transfer. Additional activities include
identification of data sources to evaluate company-level impacts of
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology
Transfer (STTR) programs and use of publicly available Federal
innovation data to support research in the field of science and
innovation policy.
Question 5. As the Chairman of the Consumer Protection Subcommittee
with jurisdiction over data security, I am interested in hearing more
about the cybersecurity applications that artificial intelligence is
able to support. Would you please describe the work that NIST
researchers are doing to utilize AI in automating cyber vulnerability
assessments for digital infrastructure?
Answer. NIST is working on the early stages of research related to
AI cybersecurity applications. For example, we are conducting research
to determine the viability of using AI to understand the severity of
vulnerabilities based on unstructured submissions to the National
Vulnerability Database, the U.S. government repository of standards-
based vulnerability management that enables automation of vulnerability
management, security measurement, and compliance. NIST scientists are
taking data from instances of commercially available products and the
current data residing in the National Vulnerability Database. We will
utilize NIST vulnerability analysts and the process and business rules
for the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) V3 to train the
commercially available AI algorithms to assign metrics to assigned
common vulnerability enumerations (CVEs). The results between
traditional approaches and AI assisted approaches will be compared and
the results published.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
Background. When it comes to unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), we
have read a lot recently about potential data and cyber concerns with
Chinese-manufactured drones. While I am deeply concerned with China and
their positioning across many emerging technology industries, not all
security threats across industries are equal, and some may be mitigated
through risk management for limited applications.
I raise this as I am concerned with the effectiveness of the
approach to ban the non-defense related Federal use of drone technology
due to the UAS, or even one of its components, being made in China,
absent American alternatives. As we work to stand up our domestic drone
industry, we need to confront the cybersecurity challenges and supply
chain risks in a manner that supports the development of our industry
and utilization of technologies to meet the needs of vetted civilian
missions. With that in mind, I think it would be constructive to start
a conversation around developing UAS-specific standards and
requirements that address cyber and data concerns, in order to ensure
the Federal Government has access to the drone technology of today and
vulnerabilities from all potential sources are addressed. This
standards-based approach would not only confront challenges confronted
by Chinese drones, but make drones from all sources more secure for use
by the Federal Government.
Question. What is OSTP's and NIST's view of this issue?
Answer. Existing cybersecurity standards, practices, and other
resources can be customized and applied in the context of unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) to achieve the appropriate and necessary
cybersecurity outcomes. While these standards and practices can never
completely eliminate the threat of data exfiltration or other nefarious
action by a foreign state actor, if properly applied they can help
mitigate the risk in the use of commercial products developed outside
the U.S. Existing NIST publications include the Framework for Improving
Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity ver. 1.1 (Cybersecurity
Framework) https://www.nist.gov/cyber
framework, NISTIR 8259 Recommendations for IoT Device Manufacturers:
Foundational Activities and Core Device Cybersecurity Capability
Baseline (Draft) https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2020/
NIST.IR.8259-draft2.pdf, and NISTIR 8228 Considerations for Managing
Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks https://
nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2019/NIST.IR.8228.pdf. In addition, NIST
has many other relevant publications on topics including robust
wireless security networks, the secure storage and transfer of data,
and platform firmware resiliency that are available on the NIST
Computer Security Resource Center, https://csrc.nist.gov/, all of which
could be applied to UAS. NIST leads research, development, and
engineering, and produces recommendations and best practices for
cryptographic algorithms, methods, and protocols. NIST has initiated a
process to standardize so-called lightweight cryptographic algorithms,
or algorithms that require low energy or computer power to run and are
suitable for use on devices that operate remotely or are not regularly
updated or connected to a network.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
Impact of A.I. On Society
There is no doubt that technologies like A.I. will be incredibly
transformative for growth and productivity, but I am concerned about
how the adoption of new technologies might increase inequality--for
example, job losses resulting from adoption of A.I. and automation in
manufacturing.
I am also concerned that we aren't considering the ethical
implications of some A.I.--for example some have posed that A.I. could
be used in criminal sentencing, but without standards for
trustworthiness, how can we be sure that such algorithms are unbiased?
Question 1. How can we ensure that A.I. won't exhibit inherent
biases that might negatively affect disadvantaged populations?
Answer. NIST is working to provide a foundation for trustworthy AI
through standards, tools and performance measurement. Addressing
concerns about the potential for bias in AI systems requires a multi-
pronged approach that involves the development, validation, and use of
tools that (i) ensure that training and testing data used to develop
and train AI systems are balanced and do not introduce bias at the
earliest stage of development; (ii) support the transparency of
decision-making in the use of AI systems by ensuring their
explainability, allowing the community to clearly understand the
factors that contribute to how an AI system arrives at a decision; and
(iii) can be used to quantify bias and error, such that these
mathematical approaches can be used to identify and detect bias and the
propagation of bias in an AI system. Furthermore, the incorporation of
these tools into consensus-based standards can help with adoption and
use of such tools in a transparent manner. NIST will continue to
provide data on the performance of AI systems, including their
statistical biases, to inform policymakers, AI system producers, users
and the public.
Question 2. What are you doing to promote ethical development and
use of A.I. technology?
Answer. NIST is actively participating in, and contributing to, the
Administration's efforts to promote the thoughtful and ethical
development and use of AI technologies, both within the United States
and internationally. In 2019, following broad public and private sector
engagement and input, NIST published ``U.S. Leadership in AI: A Plan
for Federal Engagement in Developing Technical Standards and Related
Tools'' (Plan). Issued in response to Executive Order 13859,
``Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence,'' the
Plan's recommendations include facilitation of research and
collaboration across scientific disciplines to increase understanding
of how societal and ethical considerations relate to, and can advance
the development and use of, standards for reliable, robust, and
trustworthy AI technologies. As a standards and technology agency, NIST
is investing in the development of foundational tools that can
contribute data and clarity to the discussions about the ethical
development and use of AI technologies. These tools include means to
identify sources of error, bias and its propagation, and improve the
explainability of AI systems. NIST staff also participate in the
development of consensus-based international standards, focusing
efforts on the development of standardized terminology and
nomenclature, use cases and big data standards.
To foster collaboration and develop a shared understanding of what
constitutes trustworthy AI, NIST is organizing a series of workshops
bringing together government, industry, academia, and other
stakeholders. This effort will focus on developing a risk management
approach to the design, development, and use of AI. It will inform the
definition of key concepts and building blocks for trustworthy AI
(i.e., what to measure); develop and formalize metrics, benchmarks, and
testbeds (i.e., how to measure); and ultimately provide a pathway for
implementation and operationalization of AI.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
Hon. Dr. Walter Copan
Manufacturing Extension Partnership
NIST's Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) previously made
funding awards to MEP Centers to embed personnel in some of the
fourteen Manufacturing USA Institutes pursuant to the ``Embedding MEP
in Manufacturing USA Institutes Pilot'' program. This pilot program
serves an important purpose, to provide needed technology acceleration
assistance to small and mid-sized U.S. manufacturers through the
establishment of results-oriented collaborations between the nationwide
system of MEP centers and the public-private manufacturing innovation
institutes operating as part of the Manufacturing USA network. It's my
understanding that the last round of solicitations for this program
closed in June of 2017.
Question 1. Are there plans to expand the program beyond the
initial pilot or create new partnerships with MEP and Manufacturing
Institutes?
Answer. Beginning in 2017, the Hollings Manufacturing Extension
Partnership (MEP) program embedded a MEP Center staff member in each of
the Manufacturing USA Institutes, and also conducted outreach to inform
small and medium-sized manufacturers about the opportunities available
in each institute. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of
2020 requires the Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office at
NIST to leverage the MEP National Network to ensure engagement of small
and medium-sized manufacturers in the institutes across the supply
chain, and to ensure that the program results effectively reach small
and medium-sized manufacturers. Many of the initial pilot projects are
ongoing and results are being evaluated, but it is already clear this
program is having a positive impact.
Building upon the experience gained in the embedding collaboration
between MEP Centers and Manufacturing USA Institutes, the NIST MEP will
be awarding up to three Advanced Manufacturing Technology Services
competitive awards this spring. Through this mechanism, the MEP Centers
will be able to continue partnerships with the Manufacturing USA
institutes and engage other advanced manufacturing technology
organizations. The awards of up to $1 million will go to MEP Centers
for projects designed to accelerate MEP Center delivery of advanced
manufacturing technical assistance to small U.S. manufacturers. The
emphasis is on advancing technologies that enable the operation of
digitally connected, smart manufacturing systems within factories and
across manufacturing supply chains. Implementation of these Industry/
Manufacturing 4.0 technologies by small U.S. manufacturers is intended
to provide new use cases demonstrating improved product quality and
innovation, greater manufacturing process efficiency, and increased
supply chain connectivity.
Question 2. Has NIST considered partnership opportunities beyond
the embed program previously implemented?
Answer. Yes. NIST has established programs that connect small
business clients and MEP Centers directly with expertise, technical
capabilities, and resources across the NIST laboratories. NIST is
collaborating with other agencies whose missions contribute to or are
affected by advanced manufacturing, in order to identify and leverage
resources that will further assist Manufacturing USA Institutes and
their partner organizations. The work of the MEP National Network is
providing small and medium-sized companies nationwide increased access
to expertise and resources in areas such as cybersecurity, digital
manufacturing, process automation, and industrial robotics. This effort
increasingly leverages the MEP Network's nationwide capabilities.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Dr. France Cordova
Question 1. As the Chairman of the CJS Appropriations Subcommittee,
I remain a staunch supporter of robust resources for Federal research
initiatives including those administered by the National Science
Foundation (NSF). Congress recently appropriated $8.278 billion for NSF
in FY 2020, which is $203 million more than the prior fiscal year, and
I understand that this money is being put to great use by improving our
research capacity at institutions across the Nation to further our
global standing in innovative technologies such as artificial
intelligence, machine learning, and quantum computing. However, I have
heard from many stakeholders regarding their concerns with
commercialization of federally funded research. My Startup Act would
accelerate commercialization of taxpayer-funded research by requiring
Federal agencies supporting research to dedicate a portion of their
extramural funds to improve commercialization and transfer of
technology. Besides more resources, what other actions should Congress
consider to improve commercialization outcomes related to research
supported by the Federal Government?
Answer. Thank you for your continued strong support of the National
Science Foundation and for your leadership in ensuring that the United
States remains the global leader in science and engineering. NSF has a
long track-record of supporting the commercialization of federally
funded research and the agency has made a concerted effort to support
researchers who believe they have a commercially viable idea. For
example, NSF's Directorate for Engineering's Division of Industrial
Innovation and Partnerships (IIP) supports programs to accelerate NSF-
funded and federally funded fundamental research into market
opportunities and fosters public-private partnerships to advance
technological innovation. IIP runs a number of very successful
programs, including the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
program.
The SBIR program was first piloted by NSF in 1977, and subsequently
formally established by Congress in 1982. Today, SBIR has broad reach
throughout the government, with eleven Federal agencies now having SBIR
programs. Government-wide, these programs set aside $3 billion
annually and have granted 160,000 awards. The budget is 3.2 percent of
a research agency's extramural R&D budget--which is approximately $200
million at NSF. NSF SBIR grants have been critical to the success of
what are major companies today. For example, NSF SBIR seed funding led
to Symantec, which is now a global leader in cybersecurity. It was
founded in 1982 by Gary Hendrix who was funded by an NSF SBIR grant.
Likewise, Qualcomm was launched after co-founder Andrew Viterbi
invented the ``Viterbi Algorithm'', a mathematical formula to eliminate
signal interference, paving the way for widespread use of cellular
technology. After receiving NSF SBIR funding during the 1980s in its
early years as a small business, Qualcomm grew to become a world leader
in wireless technologies and particularly 5G, a critical industry of
the future.
In addition to providing funding, NSF uses experiential education
to help researchers gain valuable insight into starting a business or
industry requirements and challenges. The NSF Innovation Corps (I-
Corps) program helps potential entrepreneurs understand market needs
and opportunities, thus increasing their chances of successfully
translating new technologies. I-Corps was designed to foster
entrepreneurship that will lead to the commercialization of basic
research. More than 1,300 teams have participated in the program since
2011. In addition, over 1,000 NSF SBIR and STTR Phase I awardees have
participated over the past six years in a condensed version of the I-
Corps program.
Another program closely related to I-Corps that supports pathways
to commercialization is the Partnerships for Innovation (PFI) program.
The PFI program encourages the translation of promising, fundamental
discoveries made by NSF researchers into products and services that
benefit the Nation. PFI nurtures entrepreneurial spirit by pairing
elements of I-Corps training with prototyping and advanced technology
development, giving technologists and engineers in academia a set of
tools to successfully transition their inventions into impact. Through
I-Corps and PFI, NSF helps prepare researchers in advance of starting
new firms. These programs serve as important training grounds and help
researchers improve their success rates in securing SBIR and STTR
funding and follow-on investments.
NSF Convergence Accelerator seeks to transform how NSF supports the
most innovative science, reflecting its commitment to be at the
cutting-edge, supporting foundational research, while also encouraging
rapid advances through partnerships between academic and non-academic
stakeholders. NSF Convergence Accelerator is an entity that will make
timely investments that (1) initiate new capabilities to accelerate
convergence research in areas of national importance, and (2) build
capacity in multi-stakeholder convergence teams to address these
critical challenges. While NSF Convergence Accelerator is separate from
directorates in leadership, budget, and programmatic approaches, it
will be aligned with, build upon, and stimulate new directions for
directorates' foundational research investments. Focusing on use-
inspired, convergence research, with directed deliverables and using an
approach that rewards innovation, risk-taking, and transition to use,
NSF Convergence Accelerator is modeled on acceleration and innovation
activities that have proven successful at the most forward-looking
universities and companies. These activities will become a standard
part of NSF's portfolio of funding mechanisms to accelerate research
across a broad range of themes.
NSF is always assessing the performance of its programs, and this
process has led to new supplements, new outreach and enhancements. NSF
is committed to helping startups address all the potential risks--
marketplace and technical risks, and even the potential skills gap--
that researchers may experience in exploring the commercial marketplace
and identifying and leveraging the opportunities that new technologies
offer the Nation.
Question 2. In November 2019, the Senate Homeland Security and
Government Affairs Committee produced a bipartisan report titled
``Threats to the U.S. Research Enterprise: China's Talent Recruitment
Plans.'' The report generally found that China openly recruited U.S.-
based researchers and scientists in the public and private sectors to
provide China with knowledge and intellectual capital in exchange for
monetary gain that significantly contributed to China's global rise
over the last 20 years. My CJS appropriations bill for FY 2020 included
report language that directs OSTP to convene Federal Government
representatives from pertinent agencies like NSF along with law
enforcement to assess current risks and threats to research integrity
from foreign influence, including aspects of foreign talent recruitment
and other intellectual property concerns. Would you please speak to the
importance of effectively attracting talent from abroad to participate
in U.S.-backed research efforts while also appropriately deterring bad
actors from other countries from stealing intellectual property
resulting from such efforts?
Answer. NSF is committed to sustaining the United States' position
as a global innovation leader. To do so, we must continue to attract
the brightest scientific minds from around the world while continuing
to develop our own domestic talent, and we must address any threats to
the integrity of research enterprise, both domestically and globally.
The values that have driven NSF and its global research partners for
decades are openness, transparency, and reciprocal collaboration; these
are essential for advancing the frontiers of knowledge. Our science and
engineering enterprise is put at risk when other governments endeavor
to benefit from the global research ecosystem without upholding these
values. NSF co-chairs the Joint Committee on the Research Environment
(JCORE), which was stood up by the Office of Science and Technology
Policy in the White House in 2019. Through JCORE, NSF coordinates
policy and practices on science and security with the White House, with
sister science agencies, and with the intelligence and law enforcement
communities. NSF, together with our colleagues across the government,
is working to address the risks to research, which include conflicts of
interest and commitment; breaches in confidentiality of the merit
review process; and leakage of pre-publication data before researchers
are ready to release that information.
NSF has taken a number of steps over the past year to address these
concerns. First, NSF issued a policy stating that NSF personnel may not
participate in foreign government talent recruitment programs that may
jeopardize the integrity of NSF's mission and operations. Second, NSF
has reiterated its long-standing requirement that researchers disclose
all other sources of support, both foreign and domestic. Disclosure of
all sources of support is central to transparency and integrity. To
ease the burden on researchers and institutions, we are also working to
create a streamlined process to improve the reporting of that support.
Third, NSF has developed and is delivering science and security
training for our entire staff.
Finally, NSF commissioned the JASON advisory group--outside experts
with top security clearances--to conduct a study and recommend ways for
NSF to better protect its merit review system and for grantee
institutions to maintain balance between openness and security of
scientific research. Specifically, NSF asked JASON to examine the value
and risks of the openness generally associated with fundamental
research. NSF also asked what good practices could be put into place by
academic researchers and funding agencies such as NSF to balance the
open environment of fundamental research with the needs for national
and economic security.
The JASON group delivered their report in December 2019. On
Tuesday, March 4th, NSF released our response to the JASON study and
announced additional steps the agency is taking to secure federally
funded research. The full response to the JASON report can be found
here: (https://nsf.gov/news/special_reports/jasonsecu
rity/NSF_response_JASON.pdf).
In the report, JASON provided NSF with many helpful findings and
recommendations. One of those findings is that the U.S. needs to
continue to attract and retain the best science talent from across the
globe. NSF strongly agrees with the importance of continuing to
encourage foreign-born scientists to train and work in the U.S. The
United States benefits significantly from the influx of international
talent to our country. Dating back to the Manhattan Project era, the
United States has attracted the best and brightest scientists from
around the world by allowing great thinkers to pursue, and benefit
from, their ideas.
The 2020 Science and Engineering Indicators report, titled ``The
State of U.S. Science and Engineering'' confirms that the United States
is ``the destination for the largest number of internationally mobile
students worldwide (19 percent in 2016).'' Indeed, a majority of
science and engineering doctorate recipients with temporary visas
stayed in the U.S. The two largest (by number) international sources of
U.S. Ph.D. students are the countries of China and India. The stay
rates in the United States for Chinese Ph.D. degree holders remained
stable at 84 percent from 2013-2017 and the stay rates for Indian Ph.D.
degree holders remained at 85 percent during this period.
The U.S. research environment is internationally diverse. JASON
stated that this U.S. research environment is based upon the values of
ethics in science including objectivity, honesty, accountability,
fairness, and stewardship. The JASON group found that there are indeed
problems that stem from foreign influence with respect to research
transparency, lack of reciprocity, and reporting of commitments and
potential conflicts of interest.
Per the JASON findings, NSF acknowledges that more work needs to be
done to define the scale and scope of the problem. There are also
additional actions that need to be planned and taken regarding science
and security at both the agency level and government wide. Effective
March 2020, NSF has created the position of Chief of Research Security
Strategy and Policy. The Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy
will be the NSF focal point to provide science and security strategy
and policy recommendations to NSF leadership and to represent the
agency at interagency forums.
The Chief of Research Security Strategy and Policy will chair an
NSF strategy group to develop NSF recommendations for the agency to
maintain scientific openness and collaboration while taking action to
uphold the ethics and values of the scientific enterprise. The Chief of
Research Security Strategy and Policy will be responsible for
developing detailed implementation plans in response to the JASON
report and to address continuing needs in science and security. As the
JASON report found, there are many stakeholders with the responsibility
for maintaining the integrity of fundamental research. The Chief of
Research Security Strategy and Policy will work across this stakeholder
community to develop good practices to assess risk and take appropriate
actions.
NSF is dedicated to maintaining a vibrant and diverse research
community that thrives on the values of openness, transparency, and
merit-based competition. NSF-funded research is a major contributor to
U.S. economic growth, national security, and global leadership. To
maintain our robust research ecosystem, it is important that we
understand and vigilantly address emerging risks to the Nation's
science and engineering enterprise. Simultaneously, it is important
that we acknowledge that a great strength of the U.S. research and
engineering enterprise is the diversity of talent--both domestic and
international--and we must commit to maintaining that strength.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
Hon. Dr. France Cordova
National Spectrum Strategy and Science Spectrum
I have raised concerns many times about how the FCC's proposed
licensing of 5G related spectrum for commercial use may severely
degrade weather forecasting. Commercial communications could also
interfere with science, including Earth observations needed to
understand climate change and astronomy research, which helps us
understand the universe.
There is some precedent for commercial users and science users
reaching ``mutually acceptable agreement'' that both promotes
commercial applications and protects science.
Question 1. Is there a framework in place to protect scientific
observations from interference?
Answer. There is a framework in place to protect some scientific
observations from interference globally, regionally, and domestically.
That framework includes allocations of specific frequencies in the
spectrum to protect scientific observations from harmful interference,
recommendations and reports with technical guidance for protection of
scientific observations, as well as ``quiet zones'' that provide
astronomy with geographic protection from ground-based transmitters.
There are two main challenges with respect to frequency protection
for science applications. First, the protected spectrum allocations for
scientific services may still be degraded from transmissions using
adjacent or nearby frequencies, even when regulatory limits are met.
Second, some types of scientific observations increasingly require
access to wider bandwidths than indicated by their allocations for
observations of weak signals that may be dispersed or shifted in
frequency. In both cases, it can be difficult to guarantee that
scientific observations will not be degraded from transmissions in
other frequency bands. For example, the officially defined level of
harmful interference in the 10.6-10.7 GHz radio astronomy band is 2
percent data loss, which seems manageable. But, this is formally
calculated by averaging over the entire visible sky. In reality,
modeling has indicated radio astronomy will likely suffer up to 30
percent degraded observations in certain portions of the sky where they
are more likely to observe. There are similar examples at other
frequencies and for other types of scientific services. Mutually
acceptable agreements between commercial users and radio astronomy
observatories, for specific geographic locations, may be achieved in
some cases because many astronomical sites are geographically remote
and contain few commercial interests. But, the only framework in place
to require geographic coordination broadly across the spectrum within
the United States is the quiet zone concept, which only requires
coordination for transmissions from the ground. This leaves the quiet
zones susceptible to transmissions from satellites. Furthermore, all
other astronomical sites not situated within quiet zones are much more
vulnerable. Earth observations and atmospheric science observations
often are less geographically isolated, especially observations taken
from spacecraft, which can make coordination even more challenging.
Internationally, the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU)
World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) is a treaty conference tasked
with revising the international Radio Regulations. Under the treaty,
nations including the United States retain sovereignty in making their
own domestic spectrum rules (barring causing interference to their
neighbors), but individual nations generally adhere to large parts of
the Radio Regulations and many nations incorporate them entirely.
International guidelines are important because frequency waves do not
stop at country borders and allocations for many applications work best
when harmonized and when there is assurance of no harmful interference
(e.g., radars on airplanes landing in the United States or into a
foreign country, satellites in orbit, etc.).
Regionally, there is a similar process for international
coordination via the Organization of American States at the meetings of
the Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL) Permanent
Consultative Committee II on Radiocommunications (PCC.II)\1\. However,
prior to two years ago, there was no forum at CITEL PCC.II meetings for
discussion of Science Services. The United States successfully
advocated to amend the CITEL PCC.II Satellite Working Group to include
Scientific Services in the Fall of 2018. This Working Group is now co-
chaired by a United States delegate from NSF.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.citel.oas.org/en/Pages/PCCII/default.aspx
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Domestically, United States Federal agencies that utilize spectrum
meet monthly through the Interdepartment Radio Advisory Committee
(IRAC), chaired by the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), to discuss sharing and compatibility issues
related to commercial and scientific uses of the spectrum, as well as
uses supporting the public good such as military and public safety.
Agencies with science missions participate actively in this process.
Further, NTIA submitted a Radio Astronomy Report to Congress last
year in response to requests included in Senate Report 115-275, which
accompanied the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019, Pub. L. No. 116-
6. In that report, NTIA described U.S. scientific community spectrum
needs that include:
Research and engineering investment in technical
capabilities for Radio Frequency Interference (RFI) excision
and avoidance, new methods of RFI protection (e.g.,
transmitters with shaped beams) and dynamic spectrum sharing.
Opportunities to support research and development, RFI
research, coordination, and dynamic spectrum sharing.
In short, the framework is in place for studies to be conducted and
submitted as part of a formal decision-making process domestically,
regionally and internationally to protect certain science observations.
However, there are challenges to this framework:
(1) Exclusively protected scientific frequencies can be impacted by
emissions from adjacent-band transmissions. Science services
have much stricter requirements than other services, which
makes this challenge particularly difficult for the science
services.
(2) Scientific observations also utilize frequencies not exclusively
protected. Similar to industry, science is rapidly progressing,
and requirements for scientific observations are changing with
time.
(3) Coordination requirements in quiet zones were established
decades ago and are no longer enough to protect scientific
assets within these zones (e.g., the National Radio Quiet
Zone). Furthermore, coordination requirements for space-based
scientific sensors would require a very sophisticated
capability for dynamic sharing in time that presently does not
exist.
Question 2. How can we ensure spectrum for scientific uses is
protected moving forward?
Answer. To ensure scientific uses of the spectrum are protected
moving forward, United States scientific agencies need to continue to
participate actively within the established domestic, regional and
international processes. Participation within the established framework
is primarily for the purpose of protecting the bands currently
identified for scientific use, especially as the demand for commercial
uses of the spectrum continues. Additionally, new geographic protection
zones and additional requirements for coordination within the existing
quiet zones may help protect radio astronomy and some atmospheric
science applications. Finally, methods to dynamically share the
spectrum in time may help to provide access to larger portions of the
frequency spectrum for critical scientific observations during set
periods of time. Mutually acceptable solutions between scientific
services and commercial uses are possible with robust technical
analysis, research and development, and innovative new ideas.
Astronomy telescopes tend to be in remote locations and hence
geographic protections can be utilized to accomplish protections. The
NSF is working with NTIA, FCC, and 5G industry providers to calculate
coordination distances from telescopes to ensure 5G does not interfere
with astronomy. NSF specifically works with NTIA through the IRAC
process described in Question 1, and with NTIA, FCC and the State
Department on U.S. submissions to the international ITU process through
the State Department-led U.S. preparatory process. Similarly, NSF is
working collaboratively with satellite companies to come to mutually
acceptable coordination agreements.
Further, the 2019 World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC-19),
held in Egypt last fall, dealt with many regulatory issues of
importance to science, including radio astronomy and atmospheric
science. In preparations, and at the Conference, NSF worked with NTIA,
the Department of State and the Federal Communications Commission,
along with other science agencies, to successfully achieve outcomes
positive for radio astronomy and science more broadly while
simultaneously advancing important U.S. economic and commercial
objectives. A case in point is 5G. The conference identified several
high frequency bands (between 24 GHz and 86 GHz) for 5G. Some of these
bands are shared with, immediately adjacent to, or close to radio
astronomy and passive allocations; WRC-19 outcomes included an
invitation to administrations to develop coordination and protection
measures for radio astronomy. Some other candidate bands were not
identified for 5G due to concerns of interference to radio astronomy
and passive remote sensing.
Future protection of science observations may require enhanced
geographic protections, protection of existing allocations, and
possibly expanded access to the spectrum for science observations. In
addition to new and expanded geographic protections, enhanced spectrum
access for all services, including scientific observations, may be
accomplished through exploration of dynamic spectrum allocation. Many
science observations, as with other uses, are not conducted 24/7, 365
days a year. Hence, if they only require access to certain frequencies
some of the time, dynamic spectrum allocation through coordination with
other services could make additional spectrum available. NSF's recent
Spectrum and Wireless Innovation enabled by Future Technologies (SWIFT)
solicitation includes efforts to study this type of dynamic spectrum
allocation on small scales in pilot test beds.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Hon. Dr. France Cordova
Question. I introduced the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act
with Senator Rubio to assist veterans reentering the workforce by
directing the National Science Foundation (NSF) to encourage veterans
to pursue STEM careers. Our bill passed the Senate last month, and we
are working to ensure that it is signed into law this year. Can you
speak to NSF's efforts to strengthen our STEM workforce, and how
recruiting veterans for these opportunities can contribute to these
efforts?
Answer. Investments in education and STEM workforce are vital to
the Nation's continued global leadership. NSF is a leader in Federal
efforts to educate and train a workforce for the 21st century economy;
remove barriers to participation in STEM careers; increase diversity,
equity, and inclusion in STEM; and promote excellence in STEM education
for all learners. NSF's education and STEM workforce investments are
primarily housed in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources
but represent agency-wide investments in the education of tomorrow's
scientists, engineers, and educators. Examples of these investments
include:
The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program focuses
on the education of technicians for the high-technology fields
that drive our Nation's economy.
The NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program encourages the
development and implementation of bold, new, and potentially
transformative and scalable models for STEM graduate education
training.
The CyberCorps: Scholarship for Service (SFS) program
supports cybersecurity education at higher education
institutions. SFS also focuses on workforce development by
increasing the number of qualified students entering the fields
of information assurance and cybersecurity, which enhances the
capacity of the U.S. higher education enterprise to continue to
produce professionals in these fields to secure the Nation's
cyberinfrastructure.
Computer Science for All (CSforAll) will build on ongoing
efforts to enable rigorous and engaging computer science
education in schools across the Nation, to prepare the STEM
workforce of the future.
The Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) recognizes
students with high potential in STEM research and innovation
and provides support for them to pursue research across all
science and engineering disciplines.
The Hispanic-Serving Institutions Program (HSI) seeks to
enhance the quality of undergraduate STEM education at HSIs and
to increase retention and graduation rates of undergraduate
students pursuing degrees in STEM fields at HSIs.
The Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) is committed to enhancing the
quality of undergraduate STEM education and research at HBCUs
to broaden participation in the Nation's STEM workforce.
The Improving Undergraduate STEM Education (IUSE) initiative
supports the development of the STEM and STEM-capable workforce
by investing in the improvement of undergraduate STEM
education, with a focus on attracting and retaining students on
degree completion.
The Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP) provides
awards to Tribal Colleges and Universities, Alaska Native-
serving institutions, and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions
to promote high quality STEM education, research, and outreach.
The NSF INCLUDES (Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of
Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science)
Big Idea builds on decades of broadening participation research and
discovery funded by NSF. It is a comprehensive national initiative
designed to enhance U.S. leadership in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) discoveries and innovations by
focusing on broadening participation in these fields at scale. The
vision of NSF INCLUDES is to catalyze the STEM enterprise to
collaboratively work for inclusive change resulting in a STEM workforce
that reflects the population of the Nation.
NSF recognizes that veterans are underrepresented in STEM and are
an underutilized workforce for the U.S. science and engineering
research and industry communities. NSF is dedicated to exploring
alternate pathways of encouraging veterans' engagement into STEM
fields. Enhancing veteran STEM engagement will subsequently bolster the
country's STEM workforce pipeline, which is a high priority for both
NSF and the Administration. NSF currently supports the participation of
veterans in STEM in a variety of ways, including supporting awards
focused on veterans, awarding grant supplements for veterans, and
encouraging support for veterans in program solicitations. Two examples
of this support include:
The Veterans Research Supplement (VRS) Program within NSF's
Engineering directorate affords veteran students, veteran
teachers, or veteran community college faculty opportunities to
participate with active IIP and EEC grantees to conduct basic
and/or industrially relevant research in order to gain a deeper
understanding of engineering.
The Boeing Women in STEM Workforce program is a special
funding opportunity (under NSF INCLUDES) that is partially
funded by a gift from The Boeing Company as part of its Women
Make Us Better and Women in Leadership Initiatives. NSF invites
supplemental funding requests for traineeships and conference
proposals that support efforts aimed at enhancing the STEM
knowledge base, skillset, leadership and management capacities,
and/or contributions to the STEM enterprise of women following
a career break. Women veterans' entry or re-entry into the STEM
workforce is of particular interest.
NSF's goals align well with the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers
Act as we seek to create further advancement opportunities for veterans
in our efforts to develop a dynamic STEM workforce.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Michael O'Rielly
Question 1. At CES conference last week, companies were
demonstrating new Wi-Fi technology that can deliver faster speeds,
lower latency, and better capacity for Wi-Fi users. But I understand
that these technologies rely on wide bandwidth channels to deliver
those consumer benefits. Do we have enough unlicensed spectrum to
support deployment of these new technologies?
Answer. At the current time, there is a lack of spectrum allocated
for unlicensed services and the two workhorse bands, 2.4 and 5 GHz, are
becoming very congested. Further, these bands do not have the wide
channels needed for next generation unlicensed services. As such, I am
leading efforts to increase spectrum available for unlicensed use, and
this goal has become a priority for this Commission. I am hopeful that
the Commission will act in the coming months to permit unlicensed
services in the 6 GHz band and a sizable portion of the 5.9 GHz band.
Question 2. How should the FCC move forward on its 6 GHz proceeding
to ensure we have sufficient spectrum to enable next-gen Wi-Fi?
Answer. The Commission needs to act quickly to permit unlicensed
services within the 6 GHz band, and I expect it to do so. This must
include allowing low power services indoors and very low power services
throughout the band, and establishing technology protection
requirements to permit higher-powered unlicensed services as well. All
of this can be done while fully protecting incumbent users of the band
from harmful interference.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to
Hon. Michael O'Rielly
Background. The Internet has caused a communication renaissance in
our country revolutionizing nearly every sector of our economy. This
renaissance has also come to the video marketplace. Unfortunately, our
current legal framework for video largely reflects a world of the 1980s
and early 1990s. This was a world that did not use the internet, now a
common tool that consumers use to view video entertainment today.
Question 1. How are consumers affected by these outdated
regulations?
Answer. As you know, many consumers are supplementing their cable,
broadcast, and satellite video providers' offerings or switching
entirely to programming delivered through streaming, over-the-top, or
virtual MVPDs. Yet, since that leaves providers with fewer customers
among whom to spread overall costs, those remaining customers are
forced to pay higher prices for services. Moreover, a number of legacy
video providers are dropping video content altogether, forcing
consumers to find alternative programming sources. In sum, the current
regulatory structure imposes asymmetric burdens on competitors in the
same video services marketplace and is harming legacy customers and
their providers as a result.
Follow-up. Would consumers benefit from a concerted effort to
update our laws and remove burdensome mandates?
Answer. Absolutely, the answer is yes. While some might argue there
are plenty of choices for new content in today's marketplace and no
need for reform, we are not seeing a fully efficient market at work
because of the disparate treatment between the unregulated, high-tech
companies that offer video content and the traditional providers that
expend significant resources on regulatory compliance. Without
regulatory reform, consumers are at risk of losing access to valued
programming. Any outdated video regulations that require cable
operators to dedicate resources toward compliance or unnecessary
burdens directly reduce the amount of investment they could be making
to build out their broadband networks.
Question 2. Reforms in this space should also include updates to
our cable franchise framework, particularly the franchising
requirements outlined in Section 621 of the Communications Act. Could
you explain how the current cable franchise framework affects cable
operators today?
Answer. Fundamentally, the current framework gives local franchise
authorities (LFAs) disproportionate leverage over cable operators due
to the broad nature of many of the statute's provisions, and its
underlying assumption that cable companies operate as monopolies. This
provides all new video entrants that operate outside of this framework
with enormous advantages, including in terms of cost and procedural
ease. It's one significant reason incumbent providers are preparing
their own over-the-top offerings. Such a structure is not sustainable
for incumbent providers and their current customers.
Follow-up. How could reforms to this current framework help enable
more broadband deployment and investment?
Answer. A more holistic approach to video offerings, one that
recognizes the dynamic competitive environment, could be incredibly
beneficial for everyone--providers and consumers alike. By removing
regulatory overhang, prevalent within the current franchising
structure, incumbent video providers would be free to offer more
competitive offerings, rather than be forced to migrate to other
technologies because of regulatory arbitrage. This would free up
capital to invest in new programming and expansion of services.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question 1. At CES conference last week, companies were
demonstrating new Wi-Fi technology that can deliver faster speeds,
lower latency, and better capacity for Wi-Fi users. However, I
understand that these technologies rely on wide bandwidth channels to
deliver those consumer benefits. Do we have enough unlicensed spectrum
to support deployment of these new technologies?
Answer. The airwaves used by Wi-Fi are getting crowded. Already our
current Wi-Fi bands are congested because they are used by more than 9
billion devices. By some estimates, we may see billions of new devices
connecting to our networks through the Internet of things. Add this up,
and we're going to need a significant swath of new unlicensed spectrum
for Wi-Fi to keep up with demand.
Congress saw this coming. In the Mobile Now Act, it asked the FCC
to identify 100 megahertz of spectrum below 8 GHz for unlicensed use.
That opportunity could come from the 5.9 and 6 GHz bands. They are
ideal places to explore Wi-Fi expansion because they are close to our
existing Wi-Fi bands. These bands also offer an opportunity to
introduce wider channels--channels that will be able to take advantage
of the new Wi-Fi 6 standard and deliver speeds faster than 1 gigabit
per second. In other words, this is how we develop next-generation Wi-
Fi. This is important because up to 70 percent of 5G traffic may be
offloaded to Wi-Fi, which means going forward we will need Wi-Fi that
can keep up with faster 5G speeds.
Question 2. How should the FCC move forward on its 6 GHz proceeding
to ensure we have sufficient spectrum to enable next-gen Wi-Fi?
Answer. As mobile, fiber, and cable technologies move toward
gigabit speeds, Wi-Fi has become the bottleneck to getting faster
broadband inside the home. It feels like getting off a superhighway and
onto a gravel road. This needs to change.
To deliver Wi-Fi speeds even faster than 1 gigabit per second, we
need to introduce wider channels--at least 160 megahertz-wide. The 6
GHz band offers the opportunity to do that. However, in the FCC's
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, it proposes to limit indoor Wi-Fi to
part of the 6 GHz band, unless it employs automatic frequency
coordination. That could hinder the development of unlicensed service
in this band because it would allow only one new 160 megahertz-wide
channel for Wi-Fi. One channel will not meet the expected demand for
today's devices, much less prepare the country for the growth we
anticipate over the next few years.
If we can introduce Wi-Fi throughout the 6 GHz band, that could
allow up to seven potential 160 megahertz-wide channels. This could
help expand the innovative and economic potential of Wi-Fi throughout
the United States.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel
Question. In November, the FCC barred the use of universal service
funds for the purchase of 5G equipment and services from companies that
pose a national security threat, such as Huawei and ZTE. You have
emphasized the need for effective action to ensure 5G security.
In your view, what more should be done to address the
security threats posed by equipment from these companies?
Answer. I believe we need a comprehensive national plan with a
fully coordinated interagency response to meet the 5G supply chain
challenge. Here are three ideas it should include.
First, we need an approach to supply chain security that recognizes
that despite our best efforts, secure networks in the United States
will only get us so far because no network stands by itself. Our
networks still will connect to insecure equipment abroad. So we need to
start researching how we can build networks that can withstand
connection to equipment vulnerabilities around the world. One way to do
this is to invest in virtualizing radio access networks--or open RAN.
The RAN sits between your device and a carrier's core network. It is
traditionally the most expensive and restrictive part of the network.
To this end, right now all major components of a RAN have to come from
the same vendor. There is no way to mix and match. But if we can unlock
the RAN and diversify the equipment in this part of our networks, we
can increase security and push innovation in the market for equipment
to where the United States is strongest--in software and
semiconductors. This also will give carriers around the world that are
locked into upgrade cycles with a single foreign vendor a way out. The
FCC can help by developing testbeds in the United States that bring
together operators, vendors, and other commercial and government
interests to support open RAN models. We can even build this into our
ongoing efforts to authorize city-wide 5G testbeds in New York and Salt
Lake City.
Second, we need to survey our network operators and identify where
untrustworthy equipment is currently present. We lack a full national
accounting of insecure equipment in existing networks and developing a
plan to fund replacement, as contemplated by the United States 5G
Leadership Act, requires that we start one as soon as possible.
Moreover, when we do the FCC should identify the steps it can take to
secure the 5G supply chain beyond just the universal service program.
Third, with 5G we are moving to a world with billions of connected
devices around us in the Internet of things. We need to adjust our
policies now to ensure this future is secure. After all, the equipment
that connects to our networks is just as consequential for security as
the equipment that goes into our networks.
Here is what that could look like. Every device that emits
radiofrequency at some point passes through the FCC. If you want proof,
pull out your smartphone or take a look at the back of any computer or
television. You'll see an identification number from the FCC. It's a
stamp of approval. It means the device complies with FCC rules and
policy objectives before it is marketed or imported into the United
States. This routine authorization process takes place behind the
scenes. But the FCC needs to revisit this process and explore how it
can be used to encourage device manufacturers to build security into
new products. To do this, we could build on the National Institutes of
Standards and Technology draft set of security recommendations for
devices in the Internet of things. This effort specifies the
cybersecurity features to include in network-capable devices, whether
designed for the home, hospital, or factory floor. It covers everything
from device identification, device configuration, data protection,
access to interfaces, and critical software updates. In other words,
it's a great place to start--and we should do it now.
[all]