[Senate Hearing 116-574]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 116-574
THE 5G WORKFORCE AND OBSTACLES
TO BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JANUARY 22, 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
52-612 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 22, 2020................................. 1
Statement of Senator Wicker...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 3
Statement of Senator Thune....................................... 34
Letter dated January 16, 2020 to Hon. Ajit Pai, Hon. Michael
O'Rielly, Hon. Brendan Carr, Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel, and
Hon. Geoffrey Starks from Angie Kronenberg, Chief Advocate
and Generl Counsel, INCOMPAS; Patrick R. Halley, Senior
Vice Presidnt, Policy & Advocacy--The Broadband
Association; Jennifer McKee, Vice President and Associate
General Counsel, NCTA--The Internet & Television
Association; Louis Peraetz, Vice President of Policy,
Wireless Internet Service Providers Association; Brian
O'Hara, Senior Director Regulatory Issue--Telecom &
Broadband, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
(NRECA); Derrick B. Owens, Senior Vice President of
Government & Industry Affairs, WTA--Advocates for Rural
Broadband; and Michael R. Romano, Senior Vice President,
Industry Affairs & Business Development, NCTA--The Rural
Broadband Association...................................... 36
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 39
Statement of Senator Johnson..................................... 42
Statement of Senator Peters...................................... 44
Statement of Senator Rosen....................................... 46
Statement of Senator Sullivan.................................... 51
Witnesses
Hon. Brendan Carr, Commissioner, Federal Communications
Commission..................................................... 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Jimmy Miller, Chairman, National Association of Tower Erectors
(NATE) and President, MillerCo................................. 9
Prepared statement........................................... 11
Lisa R. Youngers, President and Chief Executive Officer, Fiber
Broadband Association.......................................... 16
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Harold Feld, Senior Vice President, Public Knowledge............. 21
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Shirley Bloomfield, Chief Executive Officer, NTCA-The Rural
Broadband Association.......................................... 30
Prepared statement........................................... 32
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Brendan Carr by:
Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................ 57
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 57
Letter dated December 13, 2018 to Tony L. Dearman, Director,
Bureau of Indian Education from Tom Udall, U.S. Senator;
Maria Cantwell, U.S. Senator; and Ben Lujan, U.S.
Rwpresentative............................................. 58
Letter dated April 10, 2019 to Hon. Tom Udall from Tony L.
Dearman, Director, Bureau of Indian Education.............. 58
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema.......................................... 60
Response to written questions submitted to Jimmy Miller by:
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema.......................................... 60
Response to written question submitted to Lisa R. Youngers by:
Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................ 62
Response to written questions submitted to Harold Feld by:
Hon. Amy Klobuchar........................................... 63
Response to written question submitted to Shirley Bloomfield by:
Hon. Kyrsten Sinema.......................................... 64
THE 5G WORKFORCE AND OBSTACLES
TO BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT
----------
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2020
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room
SH-216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Roger Wicker,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Wicker, Blunt, Fischer, Sullivan,
Johnson, Cantwell, Peters, Tester, Sinema, and Rosen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI
The Chairman. Good morning. The Committee will come to
order.
And I must say the accolades keep pouring in for my
decision to continue on with this hearing in spite of the late
hour last night.
We are here to discuss important issues affecting our
economy and our workforce readiness. So we will convene today
to discuss 5G workforce readiness and obstacles to broadband
deployment in our country.
I welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses and thank
them for appearing today. We will hear from Mr. Brendan Carr,
Commissioner at the FCC; Mr. Jimmy Miller, Chairman of the
National Association of Tower Erectors and President and CEO
Miller Company, Incorporated; Ms. Lisa Youngers, Executive
Director of the Fiber Broadband Association; Mr. Harold Feld,
Senior Vice President of Public Knowledge; and Ms. Shirley
Bloomfield, Chief Executive Officer of NTCA, the Rural
Broadband Association.
5G is the fifth generation of wireless communications
technology, as every member of the Committee knows and as many
more Americans are learning. Developing and deploying national
5G networks is critical for the future of the United States. 5G
promises to create 3 million new jobs, generate $275 billion in
new investment, and will spur up to $500 billion in economic
growth. With exponentially faster connections, higher speeds,
and significantly larger data capacities, 5G networks are
expected to transform almost every industry and economic
sector.
Last week, this Committee heard from administration
officials who discussed ongoing advancements in artificial
intelligence, quantum computing, advanced manufacturing, and
other cutting-edge innovations. Realizing the full economic and
social potential of these technologies will depend in large
part on the capabilities of the nation's communications
infrastructure.
As our country moves quickly toward a full-scale deployment
of 5G, increasing commercial access to mid-band spectrum and
removing barriers to infrastructure investment will be
essential to winning the global race in this technology.
To date, the FCC has taken meaningful steps to remove
regulatory barriers to broadband infrastructure investment. For
example, the Commission's efforts to streamline the permitting
process for small cell deployment and speed up pole attachment
processes will help accelerate 5G build-out and close the
digital divide.
Workforce readiness is a critical component to U.S. 5G
leadership. The equipment installation for 5G will constitute a
fundamental shift in network deployment from existing 4G
networks. With the deployment of 4G, the wireless industry has
been engaged in building and maintaining large cell towers to
provide several miles of broadband coverage to certain
geographic areas. On the other hand, 5G networks will require
the installation of small radio equipment and antennas in such
density and scale as to require a substantial increase in
labor. Maintenance of this equipment and new technical
standards for the implementation of 5G will add even more to
the workforce demand.
According to reports, the United States faces a 5G labor
shortage. Estimates suggest there are approximately 27,000
tower climbers prepared to install 5G equipment. However, it is
projected that 20,000 more tower climbers are needed to
accelerate the deployment of 5G in order to win the race and
secure the first-mover advantage in the United States.
Additional labor will also be needed to lay fiber to support
wireless connections, install radios, and deploy other
essential equipment.
To address 5G workforce needs, the Department of Labor is
engaged in a joint effort with the telecommunications industry
and other government agencies to provide training and improve
technical skills among the telecommunications workforce. The
Department of Labor's Telecommunications Industry Registered
Apprenticeship Program, in conjunction with the Wireless
Infrastructure Association, is a good example of efforts
targeted at addressing this skills gap.
This Committee is keenly interested in learning about
additional measures Federal, State, and local governments can
take to train workers and ensure that they have specialized
skills to meet 5G deployment demand.
I hope witnesses will discuss initiatives within the
private sector to improve 5G workforce readiness, including
efforts to provide on-the-job training to the current
workforce, the development of partnerships with local
educational institutions to create a pipeline for skilled
labor, and discuss how meaningful career opportunities can be
created for Americans in this important field.
Let me again thank our witnesses for joining us today.
I now recognize my good friend and the Ranking Member,
Senator Cantwell.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Chairman, can I just say thank you,
thank you, thank you for this hearing this morning?
The Chairman. That is pretty much a universal sentiment.
[Laughter.]
Senator Thune. I will echo that on the Republican side.
Thank you. Just thank you so much.
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Chairman, in seriousness, every
country recognizes 5G and the form and foundation of the next
generation of innovation. These networks will carry great
benefits and economic returns to communities. That is why major
nations, including the U.S., are making investments in network
infrastructure and developing a 5G workforce.
Having that workforce is of particular importance not
because we need to just construct networks, because we also
need to understand the design and manage especially--
especially--the security of these networks.
I am very proud of my own state of Washington. The
University of Washington establishes cohorts on cybersecurity
to encourage students who are already studying like fields to
move over and study cybersecurity in collaboration with
industry who are helping to fund those educational
opportunities. We need to do more of that.
Efforts are ongoing throughout the country to help also
craft apprenticeships and training programs to fill these
needs. The idea that there will be a single nation that wins
the 5G race is false, but we need to keep moving forward and be
very clear as it relates to 5G and the fact that no government
back door should exist on any solutions deployed in a broadband
network. We need to respect the rule of law and the fact that
these are separate entities.
The debate over who is winning this supposed race also is
something to be discussed, but we also have to make sure that
we are continuing to move forward on a reasonable approach to
5G. We should not hand the wireless industry all of the
policies it wants just to speed it up. I do have concerns that
the Trump FCC has brought into the race a narrative and is
trying to use that to not address important public policy
questions.
In 2018, the FCC took one vote after another to undercut
local community authority to govern their own communities. The
Commission voted to allow wireless carriers to bypass crucial
reviews that ensure infrastructure projects respect the value
of our community's place, historic preservation, and the
environment.
The FCC also chose to undercut tribal nations' and
localities' responsibilities to reasonably review hundreds of
siting applications associated with 5G. I do not think that is
the right way to move forward.
As Commissioner Rosenworcel testified last week, we have
time to work on these issues in a thoughtful manner. We need to
take that time and make sure that we are getting these issues
right so we can get deployment. Things that are held up in a
legal battle is not deployment. And that is why we have to get
the right answers.
Our efforts on 5G should create a cooperative opportunity.
Local communities want the benefits of these networks for their
residents, but they also want to make sure that they are
reasonably deployed. This can be a cooperative process.
In my state, Spokane worked with Verizon to develop
collaborative policies for a 5G testbed for the city, and the
City of Bellevue developed a 5G innovation partnership zone
that brings together technology, business, academia, and the
public sector on 5G network deployment in their community. And
to continue to work together in a collaborative process is the
smart policy and I think a reflection of where we need to be.
There are a lot of things about 5G that we need to work
through in a comprehensive, reasonable fashion, the long-term
proposals that will help us speed up the deployment of 5G
spectrum. And so I look forward to continuing to work with our
colleagues on that. I know we can come to solutions that answer
all the questions that we have proposed throughout these
committee hearings, and I look forward to working with my
colleagues to achieve that.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman. Really, actually, thank you
for having the hearing.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator Cantwell is not only my
teammate and Ranking Member, but my dear friend.
And we are delighted now to hear from our panel. We will
just start at this end with Commissioner Carr and proceed down
the table. We ask our witnesses to summarize their testimony in
5 minutes. The entire statements will be included in the record
at this point.
Mr. Carr.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRENDAN CARR, COMMISSIONER, FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Mr. Carr. Thank you. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Cantwell, distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for
the invitation to testify.
I want to begin by commending the Committee for its focus
on expanding America's 5G workforce. This effort is just as
important to securing U.S. leadership in 5G as our work to free
up more spectrum and modernize our infrastructure rules. That
is why I announced a 5G jobs initiative last year that looks to
address a shortage of tower climbers and telecom techs, the men
and women who put on hard hats and harnesses and build out
America's Internet infrastructure.
Getting the right policies in place here in Washington
makes all the difference to America's broadband builders. The
good news? Our recent regulatory reforms have enabled the
private sector to deliver remarkable results.
Internet speeds are up 70 percent compared to just two
years ago, the digital divide narrowed by nearly 20 percent
over the prior year alone, and telecom crews built out more
miles of high-speed fiber than ever before.
America now has the world's leading 5G platform, the very
first commercial 5G service launched here in the U.S. more than
a year ago. The private sector brought 5G to 14 communities in
2018, quickly expanded that to more than 30 in the first part
of 2019, and one provider alone has now committed to building
5G to 99 percent of the U.S. population.
We need to keep this winning streak going, and the work
this Committee is doing on spectrum and on infrastructure will
provide an additional boost to U.S. leadership.
The success we are seeing with accelerated infrastructure
builds also creates a new opportunity. Industry estimates that
it could fill another 20,000 job openings for tower climbers
alone. That would nearly double the size of this group of
skilled workers. These are good paying jobs, ones you can raise
a family on. And they are not one-off or short-term jobs
either. They are careers with a clear pathway for upward
mobility.
Take Shama Ray. She started her career as a fire fighter
and paramedic. Eight years ago, she started climbing telecom
towers. She then decided to launch her own business, and she is
now the CEO of that company. She is also working to expand
opportunities for women in the tower industry.
After seeing firsthand the incredible work that America's
tower crews accomplish, I started a process to recognize their
achievements. I am doing this through a series of 5G Ready Hard
Hat presentations. My first one went to Shama.
We need to expand this group of skilled workers, and that
is why I announced my jobs plan. It looks to community colleges
as a pipeline for 5G jobs. It is modeled on a program developed
by Aiken Technical College in South Carolina. In 12 weeks, the
program can take someone with no training and teach them the
skills to land a good paying job in the tower industry. I have
been working with stakeholders to stand up more programs like
this one, and we are already seeing results. This year,
Southeast Tech in South Dakota will launch its own tower
program.
Some businesses are tackling the worker shortage through
in-house programs like the one I saw at a new Ericson facility
in Texas last year.
The Department of Labor is also an important partner in
this effort. DOL has a registered apprenticeship program for
tower techs called TIRAP, and it already supports over 2,000
apprenticeships. So DOL's continued focus on these 5G jobs can
help address the workforce challenge.
In light of the efforts underway, community college
programs, in-house initiatives, apprenticeships, the FCC
convened a working group that can bring all these stakeholders
together, and that group is now developing recommendations to
expand our 5G workforce.
Going forward, the Federal Government should provide the
same support for technical workforce training as it does for
non-technical education. One idea that Congress is considering
is to expand Pell Grant eligibility to cover shorter-term
certificate programs. While I defer to others on the specifics
of any such reform, there may be ways to streamline the
approval process and ensure parity and opportunity between
qualifying tower tech certification programs and more
established or classroom-based learning.
In closing, I want to thank you again, Chairman Wicker,
Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the Committee, for the
chance to testify. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Carr follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Brendan Carr, Commissioner,
Federal Communications Commission
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished Members
of the Committee, thank you for the invitation to testify. It is a
privilege to appear before you again.
I want to begin by commending the Committee for its focus on
expanding America's 5G workforce. This effort is just as important to
securing U.S. leadership in 5G as our work to free up more spectrum and
modernize our infrastructure rules. And that is why I announced a 5G
jobs initiative last year to help address a shortage of tower climbers
and telecom crews--the men and women who put on hard hats and harnesses
and build out America's Internet infrastructure.
Since I joined the Commission in 2017, 5G jobs have been a leading
priority for me. In fact, my first trip as a Commissioner was to a
manufacturing plant in Claremont, North Carolina, where I met with
workers producing fiber--the physical backbone of our wired and
wireless networks. Officials across government are rightly focused on
revitalizing our manufacturing base, providing middle-class jobs, and
career pathways for those with technical training. And so it was
inspiring to see vibrant manufacturing in western North Carolina that
fit well with--and, in fact, is vital to--the new information economy.
The humming of the plant and the miles of fiber optic cable it produces
could be put to all sorts of end uses. But that plant has a special
role in advancing our country's leadership position as an innovator.
That North Carolina plant quite literally creates the high-speed
platform that will power our economy for the next decade and provide so
many other benefits to everyday Americans.
Getting the right policies in place here in Washington can make all
the difference for America's broadband builders. And the good news is
that our work to free up more spectrum and modernize our country's
infrastructure rules is enabling the private sector to deliver
remarkable results.
Internet speeds in the U.S. are now up 70 percent compared to just
two years ago. The FCC's most recent Broadband Progress Report shows
that the digital divide--the percentage of Americans that lack access
to high-speed Internet services--narrowed by nearly 20 percent over the
prior year alone. Telecom crews are building out more miles of high-
speed fiber than ever before--over 450,000 route miles in 2019 alone,
which is enough to wrap around the Earth over 18 times. Internet
providers also set a record for the number of new homes passed with
high-speed fiber at 6.5 million, which represents a 16 percent increase
since 2018.
The 5G results are especially exciting. Americans should be proud
that we now have the world's leading 5G platform. The very first
commercial 5G service launched here in the U.S. over a year ago. By the
end of 2018, the private sector extended 5G to 14 communities. Halfway
through 2019, that figure expanded to more than 30, and one provider
alone has now committed to building 5G to 99 percent of the U.S.
population.
Many of these 5G builds are powered by small cells. These are the
backpack-sized antennas that provide the fiber-like capacity and
millisecond latency that are key for many 5G applications. Because of
FCC reforms to small cell infrastructure rules, investment in small
cells has boomed. The private sector deployed 13,000 small cells in
2017, 60,000 in 2018, and now has a total estimated base of 200,000.
These figures quantify the momentum America now has for 5G. But
numbers don't tell the full story of what these infrastructure builds
mean for everyday Americans. After all, if 5G builds were limited to
the wealthiest neighborhoods of America's biggest cities, we could not
claim that our policies are working. We can claim success only when
every community has a fair shot at next-generation connectivity.
That is why I have spent a lot of my time on the Commission outside
of D.C. I have visited the communities and neighborhoods that we cannot
leave behind as the country transitions to 5G. And while there is much
more work to do, I am proud of the progress that our common sense
infrastructure policies are already delivering in many of these
communities.
Take Houston's Second Ward. This is a part of the city that hasn't
always shared in the prosperity or investments that its neighboring
communities have seen. In September, I spent time there with Mayor
Sylvester Turner and a few of the broadband builders working to connect
Houstonians. I talked to workers who were trenching fiber and powering
up small cells to boost capacity there. Why is there so much private
sector investment in that lower-income neighborhood? It's because many
households use a wireless connection as their only onramp to the
Internet, and the infrastructure rules that the FCC and local officials
put in place allow wireless providers to respond to this demand.
Providing more capacity to the Second Ward helps its residents enjoy
the benefits of fast broadband like the rest of Houston.
Next-generation builds in Houston and other high-density locations
are not enough for the U.S. to claim a leadership role in 5G. We cannot
let 5G opportunity be a unique privilege of living in a big city. That
is why this Commission has focused on making sure that rural America is
not left out of the jobs, education, and healthcare innovations built
on 5G. There, too, we are seeing results.
In Sioux Falls, South Dakota, a few months ago, I saw small cells
being installed that are now live, providing 5G service. Most people
would not have picked Sioux Falls to be among the first places to get
5G, and yet thanks to the common sense infrastructure rules that Mayor
Paul TenHaken put in place there--policies that the FCC used as the
model for our own infrastructure reforms--Sioux Falls is at the
vanguard of 5G. Our rules are designed to remove barriers at all levels
of government, and speed deployment to all communities in America.
In South Carolina, a company built a 100,000 square foot
manufacturing plant less than a year ago to meet the increase in demand
for small cells. At the facility, Jake and his crew told me that they
got jobs at the plant less than six months ago. They had been employed
in general steel and construction work before. They now have 5G jobs.
And the company says they are expanding their workforce by nearly 10
percent every month to keep up with demand.
In Elkmont, Alabama, a small-town manufacturing plant is already
seeing a big boost from 5G. The facility makes the harnesses and other
gear that America's tower climbers use to install new small cells. The
plant has doubled production over the last year-and-a-half with new
small cell builds underway.
We need to continue to build on the success we are seeing. We need
to extend America's winning streak. That means continuing our work to
free up more spectrum and streamline outdated infrastructure rules. The
leadership this Committee is showing on these issues is providing a
significant boost to U.S. leadership in 5G. I want to commend the
Committee in particular for its work on the STREAMLINE Small Cell
Deployment Act, which would update our infrastructure rules to account
for new 5G technologies.
In fact, the successes we are seeing in accelerating infrastructure
deployment have created a new challenge and opportunity. Industry
estimates that it needs to fill another 20,000 job openings for tower
climbers and telecom techs to complete this country's 5G build. That
would nearly double the size of this group of skilled workers.
One of the highest privileges of this job has been spending time
with America's tower climbers and telecom crews. Put simply, they are
the best of the best. And seeing firsthand the work it takes to build
out this country's Internet infrastructure has only reinforced in my
mind the need for programs that can train more 5G workers.
In Cincinnati, Ohio, I met with a company that has doubled the
number of small cells they are installing from 30 to 60 per month, and
they recently hired four new crews just to keep up with demand. In San
Jose, California, I met with a worker who has been climbing towers for
seven years. He now wants to double the size of his crew but is
struggling to find enough workers. Tower companies are routinely
turning down jobs because they do not have the workforce in place to
complete the work. Indeed, two years ago, when I joined Senator Wicker
at Jackson State University for a jobs roundtable, we heard from
industry leaders about the difficulty they have filling jobs.
These are good-paying jobs, too. They do not require an expensive
four-year degree. And they are 5G jobs that can help lift thousands of
American families up into the middle class. One tower company reports
that a qualified worker can earn upwards of $70,000 in their first year
of employment. And these are not one-off or short-term jobs, either.
They are careers with a clear pathway for upward mobility. Tower
companies tend to be small businesses. And I have met with women and
men who started out as tower techs and have gone on to run their own
companies.
Take Shama Ray. She started out her career as a firefighter and
paramedic. Eight years ago, she transitioned into climbing towers and
building out Internet infrastructure. In 2012, she decided to start her
own tower company, and she is now the owner of Above All Tower
Climbing, which is based in Missouri. In addition to her day job
running the business, she is now working to expand opportunities for
women in the tower industry.
Last year, I started a process to recognize America's tower
climbers and tell their stories through a series of interviews and what
I call ``5G Ready Hard Hat Presentations.'' My first 5G Ready Hard Hat
went to Shama Ray because her story exemplifies the best of America's
tower techs.
Or take Mike Young. After earning an associate degree in wireless
communications, he joined a tower company at age 18. He started out as
an entry level tower tech. He moved up to become a crew chief, then a
project manager, and then the Chief Operating Officer of the company.
Just last year, he was promoted to President of that company--Vikor
Teleconstruction, which is based in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Even
though Mike has climbed the corporate ladder, I can testify to the fact
that he keeps his tower skills sharp. I had the chance to join him on
top of a 2,000-foot broadcast tower in Rowena, South Dakota. I can
assure you that spending time in the air with Mike gave me a newfound
appreciation for the work that America's tower crews do every day.
We need to expand this group of skilled workers. That is why, as
noted above, I announced a jobs initiative to help address this
opportunity. It looks to community colleges and technical schools as a
pipeline for 5G jobs. It is modeled on a program developed by Aiken
Technical College in Graniteville, South Carolina. In 12 weeks, the
program can take someone with virtually no training, teach them the mix
of classroom and physical skills necessary to build and install new
cell sites, and enable them to land a good-paying job in the tower
industry. Dr. Gemma Frock, who developed the program, says that 100
percent of her students have received job offers upon graduating from
the program.
My 5G jobs initiative aims to stand up more community college
programs like the one at Aiken. And I have been working with
stakeholders, including the National Association of Tower Erectors
(NATE), on doing just that--focusing on schools in different regions of
the country. The good news is that we're already making progress. A few
months back, in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, I visited Southeast
Technical Institute, and talked with the trade school's administrators
about the opportunities that a tower training program could bring to
the community. I am pleased to report that the school is launching a
tower tech certification program this year. And I am continuing to work
with stakeholders to stand up more programs like these.
Of course, community college programs are not the only pathways to
expanding our 5G workforce. Some companies are tackling the worker
shortage head-on by expanding their in-house training opportunities. I
saw one leading example of this last year in Lewisville, Texas. That is
where Ericsson opened a new 26,000 square foot facility to train its
own tower climbers. In 2019 alone, Ericsson reports that 847 trainees
completed the program, which underscores the significant demand for
tower techs. Other companies are following that model.
But training workers in-house can be expensive, particularly for
many of the smaller tower companies that are building out 5G networks.
Indeed, one tower company has reported that they spend about $12,000
per person on training within the first sixth months of employment. So
I think we should continue to look for ways to support additional
training opportunities while also highlighting the good work that
businesses are doing through their in-house programs.
The Department of Labor is an important partner in this effort. DOL
already has a registered apprenticeship program for tower techs called
the Telecommunications Industry Registered Apprenticeship Program or
TIRAP. The Wireless Industry Association has been working with DOL on
this initiative, and TIRAP already supports 2,085 apprenticeships with
30 different employers. Apprenticeship programs like this hold great
promise because they allow those with obligations or families to
support a chance to earn while they learn. DOL's continued focus on
support for 5G jobs can help address the workforce challenge.
In light of the various efforts that are underway--community
college programs, in-house or third-party training efforts, and
registered apprenticeship programs--the FCC has convened a working
group that can bring all these different stakeholders together. In
particular, the FCC's Broadband Deployment Advisory Committee now has a
Broadband Infrastructure Deployment Job Skills and Training
Opportunities Working Group that is focused on expanding our 5G
workforce. I look forward to working with that group and reviewing
their recommendations. And I should note that there is a bill in this
Committee--the Telecommunications Opportunities for Workers Engaging in
Real Infrastructure Deployment Act of 2019 or TOWER Act--that would go
a long way to addressing the need for more 5G workers through a
coordinated, stakeholder-based effort.
At bottom, expanding our 5G workforce must remain a national
priority. The Federal government should provide the same support for
technical workforce training as it does for non-technical education.
Aiken Technical College, for example, has been able to get its students
access to Pell grants as well as specialized aid for its students who
are veterans by designing its program to be a credit degree pathway.
However, that designation is not without its own costs and
difficulties, and other schools, such as Southeast Tech, have chosen a
non-credit approach, which leaves them with fewer funding sources.
There is also bipartisan work ongoing in Congress--the JOBS Act of 2019
being one example--that aims to expand Pell grant eligibility to cover
shorter-term certificate programs. While I defer to others on the
specifics of any such reforms, there may be ways to streamline the
approval process and ensure parity in opportunity between qualifying
tower tech programs and more established or classroom-based learning.
* * *
In closing, I want to thank you again Chairman Wicker, Ranking
Member Cantwell, and distinguished Members of the Committee for holding
this hearing. I welcome the chance to answer your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you, Commissioner Carr.
Mr. Miller, when did you arrive in town?
Mr. Miller. I arrived yesterday afternoon.
The Chairman. Glad you made it. I hope you brought your
coat.
Mr. Miller. I did not.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Miller. But I wish I had.
The Chairman. Well, welcome from Gulfport, Mississippi, and
you are recognized for your opening statement.
STATEMENT OF JIMMY MILLER, CHAIRMAN,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWER ERECTORS (NATE)
AND PRESIDENT, MILLERCO
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the Committee, my name is Jimmy Miller. I am
President of MillerCo, a privately held woman-owned company
established in 1997 in Gulfport, Mississippi. MillerCo offers a
complete range of services for the wireless industry.
I am testifying today as Chairman of the National
Association of Tower Erectors. NATE is a nonprofit trade
organization consisting of 900 member companies, mostly small
businesses that construct, service, and maintain hundreds of
thousands of communications towers, distributed antenna
systems, small cell networks, and broadband throughout all 50
states and 13 other countries.
I am privileged to testify alongside Commissioner Carr who,
along with Chairman Pai, have been outspoken champions
advocating for greater workforce development in our industry.
Incidentally, both men have visited tower sites and both have
actually climbed towers. If any of you would like to visit a
tower site or small cell in your state, we can make this
happen. You do not even have to climb if you are afraid of
heights.
The 5G rollout, coupled with initiatives to close the
digital divide, is creating great industry opportunities as
well as a major industry challenge. The most significant
challenge is attracting, recruiting, and retaining a properly
trained and qualified workforce. As President of MillerCo, I am
regularly confronted with these workforce challenges which are
afflicting many in our industry and increasing the pressure on
small contractor companies like mine to hire individuals who we
can mold into skilled tower employees.
As previously stated, our industry has approximately 29,000
workers who we call tower technicians, and according to recent
projections, we could easily accommodate as many 20,000
additional techs over the next 10 years to meet current and
future demands.
Impediments to growing our workforce include working at
heights, sometimes up to 2,000 feet; extensive travel to
worksites; dearth of industry programs at the community
college/technical college level; competition from other
industries; lack of awareness in career opportunities in the
telecom industry; and lack of funding at the Federal, State,
regional, and local levels.
We have to do a better job of publicizing our industry and
telling the story of the career pathways and earning potential
available. Immediate earning power for technician-level workers
can range from $45,000 to $70,000 per year with lots of room
for advancement for growth. And what other profession allows
employees to be promoted on their way down, in our case down a
tower?
A major component of NATE's workforce development effort
deals with training. It is not a quick undertaking. We can
often get a technician through basic safety and technical
training in two weeks, but he or she needs at least a year on
the job to become competent.
Additionally, the technical skill sets continue to become
more complex. Today's technicians need to expand and diversify
their skill sets to include training in areas such as small
cell antenna installations, 5G equipment specs and design,
fiber optics, distributed antenna systems, and 5G RF.
Other obstacles in the march to 5G and broadband expansion
are the lack of accurate and timely broadband coverage maps and
regulatory processes and timelines that inhibit our work.
There are ways to help address our workforce shortage. The
tower and wireless installation at Aiken Technical College in
Aiken, South Carolina and the wireless infrastructure
technician program at Southeast Technical Institute in Sioux
Falls, South Dakota are two educational programs that exemplify
how higher education and private industry can partner.
Another way is to advance companion legislation to House
bill 1848, the Communications Jobs Training Act. This
bipartisan legislation would authorize $20 million per year for
3 fiscal years for a competitive grant program to develop
curriculum and certificate programs at community colleges,
vocational institutes, and military organizations to attract
and train a future pipeline of workers. This is NATE's top
legislative priority this year.
Attracting veterans for tech careers is another priority.
NATE members Warriors4Wireless is directly involved in training
veterans for new careers in our industry.
My written testimony also has details on the National
Wireless Safety Alliance, which provides portable nationwide
credentialing and certification, and on the Telecommunications
Industry Registered Apprenticeship Program.
My written testimony also highlights other bills NATE
supports that seek to address small cells and broadband.
I would like to thank the Committee for this opportunity
today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jimmy Miller, Chairman, National Association of
Tower Erectors (NATE) and President, MillerCo
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, my name is Jimmy Miller.
I am the President of MillerCo, a privately held woman-owned company
established in 1997 in Gulfport, Mississippi. MillerCo offers a
complete range of services for the wireless industry. These services
include the installation and maintenance of wireless technologies and
any other appurtenances associated with a cell tower site including the
FAA Obstruction Lighting Systems.
I am testifying today on behalf of the National Association of
Tower Erectors, also known as NATE, for which I serve as its Chairman.
NATE is a non-profit trade organization whose membership encompasses
all layers of the communications infrastructure ecosystem, and now
includes over 900 member companies that construct and service and
maintain hundreds of thousands of communications towers, distributed
antenna systems (DAS), small cell networks and broadband throughout all
50 states and 13 other countries. I am honored to serve as a voice
today on behalf of NATE's membership, a majority of which are the small
business contractor firms like mine that enable connectivity on a daily
basis.
I am also privileged to testify alongside FCC Commissioner Brendan
Carr and Lisa Youngers at today's hearing. Commissioner Carr, along
with FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, have been outspoken champions advocating
for greater workforce development in our industry. Incidentally, both
Chairman Pai and Commissioner Carr have visited a number of our NATE
member tower facilities around the country, and both have actually
climbed towers with the crews from some of our member companies. If any
of you would like to visit a tower site or small cell pole in your
respective states, we can make that happen. You don't even have to
climb if you are afraid of heights!
Given the demographic reach and diverse make-up of NATE's
membership, the Association is well positioned to articulate what we
believe to be the primary obstacles to 5G and broadband deployment
during today's hearing.
I want to start by focusing on the most significant challenge with
which our industry and contractor firms like mine are dealing, which is
the shortage of a properly trained and qualified workforce that is
expected to possess the diverse skill set necessary to produce the
expansion of universal broadband, public safety and ubiquitous 5G
coverage across North America, while completing the broadcast repack.
If we are to win the hyper-competitive global race to build and deploy
5G, which will enable our national, state and local economies to
leverage technologies based on the Internet of Things, smart cities,
artificial intelligence and virtual reality, we must ensure that we
have enough trained workers. We simply cannot meet these national goals
without doing so.
2020 marks the early stages of what appears to be a protracted
cycle for the telecom industry as we deploy the next generation of
wireless and integrate innovative technologies to enhance the economy.
However, the 5G rollout, coupled with targeted initiatives to continue
to expand broadband and related infrastructure to rural and underserved
areas of the United States, is creating a major industry challenge
across the country, its various regions and communities. This challenge
involves attracting, recruiting and retaining a skilled, productive and
safe telecom workforce for all industry sectors.
Based on industry estimates, our industry has approximately 29,000
workers, who we call tower technicians, as part of our existing labor
pool. According to recent projections, the industry could accommodate
as many as 20,000 additional technicians over the next 10 years to meet
current and future demands related to next generation infrastructure
and broadband deployment activities.
In my role as President of MillerCo, I have experienced first-hand
the challenges associated with attracting, recruiting and retaining
workers. These workforce challenges confronting the industry serve to
increase the pressure on small contractor companies like mine to hire
individuals who we will mold into skilled tower technicians.
Based on my personal experiences and the feedback NATE receives
from our member companies on a weekly basis, some of the impediments to
growing the workforce include, but are not limited to, the following
factors:
Lack of public awareness of the telecom industry's career
opportunities
Dearth of industry programs at the community college/
technical college level
Competition from other industry sectors and construction
trades
The surging demand for new workers created by 5G deployment,
rural broadband initiatives and projected new builds (explosive
demand far exceeds supply)
Decline in population growth (fewer students in pipeline)
Lack of funding at the federal, regional, state and local
levels
Unwillingness to work at heights and extensive travel are
barriers to entry for prospective workers
Graying workforce unable to handle rigors of technician jobs
Lack of awareness by parents, youth and adult workers of a
viable career and pathway in the industry
It is not enough for men and women to say they want a career as a
wireless infrastructure technician. They first have to be willing and
physically capable to do the job, often working at elevation. While
there are many thousands of communication structures less than 200 feet
high, there are an enormous number taller than that, and broadcast
towers can reach 2,000 feet high. The workforce we are seeking to
attract to our industry must be able to possess a diverse skill-set
that can navigate many different sizes of communications structures.
These highly skilled technician positions must be filled by people
sufficiently educated and trained in proper techniques and in the use
of the requisite equipment. This is not a quick undertaking. Employers
who train their own employees and the industry's private training
company providers can often get a technician through rudimentary safety
training in two weeks, but he or she needs at least a year on the job
to become competent at a specialty in which the employer works.
Additionally, the technical skill-sets required of technicians
continue to become more complex as next generation technologies evolve.
Today's technicians need to expand and diversify their skill-sets to
include training in areas such as small cell antenna installation, 5G
equipment specifications, 5G construction best practices, 5G
infrastructure design, distributed antenna systems, fiber work; as well
as possess a fundamental understanding of spectrum bands and radio
frequency (RF) characteristics related to 5G.
In addition to the workforce challenges I have articulated, I would
be remiss if I did not mention several other obstacles to the 5G and
broadband build cycle that I and other NATE members are experiencing.
One threat to 5G and broadband deployment is the extensive
regulatory processes that are often in place at the federal, state and
local levels. To maintain the United States' position as a global
leader in 5G and accomplish the government and industry's collective
deployment objectives, the Association favors streamlining the
processes at the federal, state and local levels to modify or eliminate
unnecessary, expensive and oftentimes excessively onerous regulations.
Another impediment that bears mentioning as an obstacle, which has
been well documented, is the lack of accurate and timely broadband
coverage maps. The Association's members on the frontlines of
deployment know better than most where the coverage gaps exist, and
some of the issues associated with broadband mapping inaccuracies
present a threat to our country's future deployment objectives.
Potential Solutions
Addressing the industry's challenge to attract, recruit and retain
a skilled, safe and productive workforce will require a commitment of
collaboration at the federal, regional, state and community levels
between companies, educational and community-based institutions.
Additionally, it will require a great deal of advocating and
coordinating to ensure that information is shared and relationships are
forged consistently across the Nation.
NATE's leadership has committed to investing in workforce
development and training initiatives to promote the professional career
path opportunities available in our thriving industry. The
Association's commitment in this arena is reflected by the
establishment of the NATE Workforce Development Committee. The mission
of this group is to create awareness and provide information of the
many career opportunities in the telecommunications industry to
individuals. Through partnerships, the NATE Workforce Development
Committee is working to facilitate educational opportunities to
individuals who are seeking a new vocation/occupation.
I am proud that I joined some of my colleagues in representing NATE
in a workforce development-themed event at the White House last year
commemorating the one-year anniversary of the Pledge to America's
Workers initiative, a key program of the Administration's National
Council for the American Worker. At the event, we affirmed our
organization's commitment to facilitating training and professional
development opportunities for 10,000 current and future workers over
the course of the next five years.
A major component of workforce development is the abundance of
training available in the industry to develop and grow a skilled
workforce. NATE facilitates high quality training by providing best
practices guidelines, standards and subject-matter expertise to ensure
that minimum benchmarks are established in training curriculum.
Additionally, NATE has approximately 25 private training companies
which provide third party training services as members of the
Association.
The NATE EXCHANGE also continues to be a ``go-to'' website platform
for wireless construction and maintenance companies and individual
tower technicians to gain access to training courses in the wireless
infrastructure industry. The EXCHANGE, which offers technical training
courses from our member training providers in 17 different skill
categories, is a valuable benefit as NATE member companies qualify for
discounted rates in designated training courses offered on the website
portal.
Federal grant-enabled training sessions have been a resource that
NATE has tapped into to facilitate training in the industry. For the
fifth consecutive year, NATE was selected by the U.S. Department of
Labor--OSHA to receive a Susan Harwood Targeted Topic Training Grant.
The Susan Harwood Training Grant Program awards funds to non-profit
organizations on a competitive basis. Awards are issued annually based
on congressional appropriation.
Through these training grants, NATE has been able to positively
impact the marketplace by developing curriculum and offering free
training sessions nationwide on courses including topics such as Train-
the-Trainer, Fall Prevention, Rigger Awareness, Advanced Rigging
Principles and Wireless Rooftop Deployment (this year's grant program).
As an added benefit, at the conclusion of every grant program year,
NATE makes the training curriculum available on the Association's
website for companies and workers in the industry to utilize.
To provide further direction and focus to NATE's workforce
development efforts, the Association recently retained GKF Consulting,
LLC to develop an industry-specific needs assessment and workforce
strategic plan. A central hallmark of this plan is to address the
educational needs of the industry by advocating for a workforce system
of ``Telecom Center of Excellence'' certificate-based programs
strategically located around the country at community colleges and
technical institutes.
NATE believes that the Tower and Wireless Installation Program at
Aiken Technical College in Aiken, South Carolina and the Wireless
Infrastructure Technician program at Southeast Technical Institute in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota are two existing educational programs that
should serve as models to emulate nationally to promote the
professional career path opportunities available in our industry.
These two programs are great examples of higher education and
private industry partnering to help meet the skilled labor shortage
that limits future growth. For many companies like mine, we are the
entity that provides the training and the resources while on the job.
Developing more programs like this will provide the necessary training
and resources prior to starting in the field, which will only help to
elevate the individual and the industry, and in turn will provide much
greater outcomes for success for everyone across the board.
Members of the Commerce Committee can play a role in helping
support this effort by introducing and advancing companion legislation
in the Senate to H.R. 1848, the ``Communications Jobs Training Act.''
This bipartisan legislation, introduced in the House by Reps. Dave
Loebsack (D-IA) and Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), would authorize $20
million per year for three Fiscal Years to direct the FCC to carry out
a competitive grant program to make funding available to develop
classroom and field-based curriculum and certificate programs at
community colleges, vocational institutes and military organizations to
attract and train a future pipeline of workers to build, deploy and
maintain the next generation networks and related infrastructure that
are so vital for America's future. This is NATE's top legislative
priority for the 116th Congress and we ask that members of the
committee embrace this important bill in the Senate. While this and
other measures that deal with workforce development only represent
modest steps that are frankly insufficient to enable our industry to
keep pace with the growing demand for enhanced communications services,
they are collectively a significant step in the right direction.
NATE also views S. 2363, the ``Tower Infrastructure Deployment
Act,'' as another bill that merits Senate support. This legislation
would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to establish a
Telecommunications Workforce Development Advisory Council within the
FCC to facilitate participation in industry-specific workforce
development programs and identify ways to improve workforce development
in the communications industry.
NATE's commitment to workforce development is also highlighted in
the Association's investment in providing the initial round of seed
funding to support the launch of the National Wireless Safety Alliance
(NWSA). NWSA is a 501(c) (6) assessment and certification organization
that provides nationwide, portable worker credentials to tower
technicians in progressive worker categories in order to ensure
continued excellence and professionalism in the industry. After workers
receive training to become tower technicians, companies have an
opportunity to ensure that their workers obtain NWSA certification
credentials that are applicable throughout the country. Workers,
regardless of their training pathway, will ultimately be required to
take a standardized NWSA knowledge and field-based assessment in order
to become certified. NWSA offers worker certification credentials in
the following worker categories: Telecommunications Tower Technician I
(TTTI), Telecommunications Tower Technician II (TTTII), Antenna & Line
Specialty and Foreman. Much like an electrician's card, the NWSA
certification card is a source of pride for workers and is creating a
career pathway for the industry's technician workforce to follow.
The Wireless Infrastructure Association is the national sponsor of
the Telecommunications Industry Registered Apprenticeship Program
(TIRAP) and this initiative represents another opportunity to grow the
workforce. I have the privilege of serving on the TIRAP Advisory Board.
TIRAP administers a total of nine occupations, all critical to the
development and deployment of 5G networks. Apprenticeship-based
training is tailor-made for companies like mine.
TIRAP's entry-level apprenticeship is the occupation of
Telecommunications Tower Technician (``TTT''). A TTT is a member of a
crew performing general construction activities with an emphasis on
tower system installation and maintenance/inspection of existing
support structures used in the provision of telecommunication systems,
including personal wireless communications, public safety
communications, utility networks and broadcasting.
The apprenticeship utilizes a competency-based approach that
measures the individual apprentice's skill acquisition through a
combination of specified minimum number of related technical
instruction, on-the-job learning and the successful demonstration of
competency in a variety of skills and safety protocols as described in
a work process. The work process schedule developed by TIRAP draws from
current regulations and industry standards and generally accepted best
practices to outline the necessary competencies that must be mastered
by the apprentice in order to be credentialed as a TTT. 5G will require
many additional occupations beyond tower techs. RF engineers, site
acquisition managers, antennae installers and host of others will be
required to deploy next generation wireless networks.
While the White House has made 5G workforce deployment a priority,
the Department of Labor has yet to turn its focus on addressing 5G
workforce challenges. There need to be additional opportunities for
companies and organizations to grow apprenticeship programs in the
telecommunications sector. It is my hope that some of these issues can
be appropriately addressed and the process significantly streamlined to
allow more workers to be trained in accordance with TIRAP training
pathways and for employers to receive funding for some of the training.
It is essential that DOL place a priority on developing the 5G
workforce through apprenticeships as an industry of the future that
will create jobs in virtually every sector of the economy; by some
estimates, up to 22 million jobs will be supported by 5G.
Speaking of apprenticeship programs, NATE encourages Commerce
Committee members to assist our industry by also supporting S. 951, the
``Apprentice Hubs Across America Act of 2019.'' This legislation
promotes registered apprenticeships within in-demand industry sectors
like ours, through the support of workforce intermediaries and for
other purposes.
Attracting transitioning veterans with military backgrounds for
technician careers is another focal point for the Association and
presents a golden opportunity for the industry. NATE member
organizations Airstreams Renewables, Inc. and Warriors4Wireless (W4W)
are both directly involved in training veterans for new careers in our
dynamic industry.
NATE holds a Board of Directors seat in the W4W organization that
is bridging the gap between the demand for trained and deployable
wireless technicians, and the thousands of qualified service men and
women eager to transfer the skills they've learned in the military. W4W
provides training, advanced certification and transitional support,
giving veterans the building blocks they need for an exciting and
fulfilling career in the telecommunications industry.
The efforts of the W4W organization are starting to scale.
According to President and CEO Kevin Kennedy, in 2019, the organization
trained and placed 141 veterans (who attended a two week training
program and were then connected to hiring partners) with industry
companies and directly placed (identified veterans, screened and then
connected to hiring partners) an additional 309 veterans to industry
companies. This equates to a total of 450 veterans the W4W organization
assisted and connected to jobs in the industry in 2019 alone.
Additionally, for the past 30 months, W4W has had a 100 percent success
rate in getting their technician graduates at least one job offer.
In 2020, W4W projections include training and placing 280 veterans
to employers and directly placing an additional 320 identified veterans
to employers in the industry, for a total of 600 veterans assisted.
NATE believes that enhancing the use of emerging technology like
unmanned aerial systems--drones--into commercial communications
infrastructure work will also play a role in helping to address the
tower industry's workforce shortage by maximizing the use of our
available manpower, without the loss of any jobs. We estimate that the
use of drones for tower inspections can reduce the number of climbs by
tower technicians by as much as one-third, which will reduce risk to
climbers while facilitating and expediting necessary tower work.
We hope that these collective efforts will help to attract more
potential workers. But a simple fact remains: it seems that the
services our industry provides all too often are taken for granted, and
many people--particularly younger individuals--don't even think about,
much less contemplate, a career in our industry. We have to do a better
job of marketing and publicizing our industry and telling the story of
the career pathways and earning potential available in our industry.
The last several years, NATE officials have made a concerted effort
to conduct workforce development meetings and forged relationships with
representatives from third party, national advocacy organizations
including the Association of American Community Colleges, the
Association for Career and Technical Education, Capitol Tech
University, the League of United Latin American Citizens, the
Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council, the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the National Black
Church Initiative and the National Urban League. During the meetings,
NATE focused on educating these organizations on the career
opportunities available in the wireless and broadcast industries to
help promote the profession and recruit a pipeline of workers into the
industry.
Immediate earning power for technician level workers can range from
$45,000 to $70,000 per year with lots of room for advancement and
growth. It is not uncommon for technicians to follow a progressive
pathway of being promoted to a crew foreman, a construction manager,
project manager and even a company executive-level role. What other
profession allows employees to be promoted on the way down--in our
case--down a tower!
I also would like to return briefly to the subject of streamlining
the existing burdensome regulatory environment that I referenced
earlier in my remarks. NATE is currently represented by Miranda Allen,
CEO of member company RSI Corp, on the FCC's Broadband Deployment
Advisory Committee's (BDAC) Job Skills and Training Opportunities
Working Group. Additionally, Leticia Latino-van Splunteren from member
company Neptuno, USA Corp is serving as the Chairwoman of the BDAC's
Job Skills and Training Opportunities Working Group. NATE is encouraged
by the work that the BDAC and its working groups are doing to identify
opportunities to remove current regulatory barriers. It is imperative
that the FCC prioritize implementing recommended processes as soon as
possible so as to expedite 5G deployment.
NATE applauds the bipartisan leadership of Senators John Thune and
Brian Schatz in introducing the ``STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment
Act.'' As you know, this legislation would implement fee limits,
streamline deployment timelines and include other key measures that
would position the United States to win the global race to 5G. You and
your colleagues can play a major role reducing the regulatory obstacles
to deployment by supporting legislation like this and others that may
be introduced.
NATE supports efforts by Congress and various Federal agencies that
seek to update broadband coverage maps, especially in rural America
where there are many white spaces to fill. Accurate coverage maps will
provide Members of Congress and the Federal government the clarity and
information to make more efficient, targeted use of funds so that
industry can deploy broadband to the areas that truly need it.
Legislation introduced by Chairman Wicker, with the support of many
Senate co-sponsors, the ``Broadband DATA Act,'' is an important step in
this process as this measure would require the FCC to change the way
broadband data is collected, verified and reported.
NATE is also supportive of the ``Broadband Interagency Coordination
Act,'' bipartisan legislation introduced by Chairman Wicker and Senator
Amy Klobuchar. This legislation would require the Federal
Communications Commission, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
National Telecommunications Information Administration to enter into an
interagency agreement that mandates coordination among the agencies for
the distribution of broadband deployment funds.
NATE also commends Chairman Wicker and Senators Gardner, Baldwin,
and Peters for recently introducing the ``Industries of the Future Act
of 2020.'' NATE supports this forward-looking legislation as a
mechanism to ensure that the next generation wireless networks and the
infrastructure jobs they create receive the appropriate level of
research, development and funding to ensure the United States remains
the global leader in wireless innovation.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the Committee for this
opportunity. Please be assured that NATE's commitment to safety,
education and training in constructing, maintaining and deploying
communications infrastructure will never be compromised. NATE members
will do everything we can to help meet the wide range of national
communications goals, including the completion of the repack and the
expansion of broadband and other endeavors addressing 5G as well as
programs to close the digital divide. Our bottom line is that we want
work to be done properly and efficiently, and that at the end of the
day, we want our workers to come home safely. This is good for us, for
you, for our Nation's economy, competitiveness and homeland security,
and for our vital communications capabilities.
The Chairman. And thank you very much for your testimony.
Ms. Youngers, you are now recognized. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF LISA R. YOUNGERS, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, FIBER BROADBAND ASSOCIATION
Ms. Youngers. Thank you. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Cantwell, and members of the Committee, I am Lisa Youngers,
President and CEO of the Fiber Broadband Association. Thank you
for inviting me to testify today.
The Fiber Broadband Association has more than 250 members
dedicated to accelerating the deployment of all fiber networks
throughout the country. While this hearing's focus may start
with 5G, it is important to understand that fiber is the
fundamental network technology for the 21st century providing
the underlying infrastructure not just for 5G but for wireless
networks, smart communities, and smart grids, as well as
Internet of Things applications, while also providing direct
connections to homes, businesses, and anchor institutions.
To date, we are making great progress in the deployment of
all fiber networks throughout the U.S. In 2019, over 450,000
fiber route miles were deployed, and as of September 2019, 46.5
million homes have access to all-fiber networks, 6.5 million
more than the year before.
We expect that good news about all fiber deployments will
continue especially as fiber is deployed to support small cell
and 5G deployments. This is critical given that other
countries, including China, have adopted programs to rapidly
deploy fiber.
Additionally, in the case of China, it has intentionally
built so much excess fiber manufacturing capacity, enough to
take over both the entire U.S. and European fiber markets, that
Chinese manufacturers are almost certain to offer dumped prices
to U.S. 5G providers.
Even with the good news about fiber deployments, there are
ways for us to accelerate our efforts.
First, we need to address workforce issues. FBA members
find that getting and retaining skilled personnel are among the
biggest chokepoint in deployments. Yet, these are good jobs
with a good career path. The personnel shortfall has become so
bad that I have construction members starting to turn away work
and some contractors have stopped buying new equipment because
there are not enough skilled personnel to run the machines.
Our members have already started addressing these issues,
and you have heard about some of those efforts here today. They
are partnering with community colleges and trade schools to
develop programs and curricula that will give students training
on deploying fiber broadband networks. One member teamed with
the State Technical College of Missouri to create a utility
system technician associates degree, and a North Carolina local
provider partnered with Wilson Community College to provide
fiber deployment training. Members are also working with high
school students to discuss fiber job opportunities and
training. These efforts are significant, but they will not
alone meet increasing workforce demands. federally supported
workforce development programs and apprenticeships are needed.
We commend the Department of Labor's Employment and Training
Administration for its programs and urge it to prioritize
granting funds for fiber broadband deployment and 5G training
and apprenticeships. Congress should also explore other
opportunities to find new funds to support this type of
training.
We also urge Congress to enact the TOWER Infrastructure
Deployment Act, introduced by Senators Gardner and Sinema,
which would create the Telecom Workforce Development Advisory
Council to advise the FCC. We ask that the Committee include in
this legislation, a directive that individuals with expertise
in fiber workforce issues be appointed as members of the
Council.
In my written testimony, I discuss other barriers to fiber
deployments and how to address them. Let me highlight two.
First, the FCC should adopt later this month Chairman Pai's
Rural Digital Opportunity Fund draft order which, with the
budget clearing round proposal, will bring higher performance
broadband to unserved areas with less Federal funding, thereby
helping to close the digital divide.
Second, across the board, my members tell me that access to
poles is a continuing problem even after the 2018 FCC order. We
urge the FCC to be vigilant and address these concerns.
Further, we need a more expeditious, less costly way to
resolve disputes between utilities and attachers. We therefore
urge Congress to enact legislation providing for an alternative
dispute resolution process akin to what is included in standard
commercial contracts.
I will close by reiterating three points.
Fiber is the fundamental infrastructure for 5G, wireless
networks, smart communities, and Internet of Things.
Two, workforce issues are a chokepoint to fiber and 5G
deployments.
And three, barriers to deployment remain. We are working
industry to industry on solutions, and those are preferable.
But government must step in where market forces may not be
working.
Thank you very much for your time today.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Youngers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lisa R. Youngers, President and Chief Executiv
Officer, Fiber Broadband Association
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
Committee, I am Lisa Youngers, President & CEO of the Fiber Broadband
Association (FBA). Thank you for inviting me to testify today.
The Fiber Broadband Association is the only association across the
Americas dedicated to accelerating the deployment of all-fiber networks
to all locations and for all purposes. We have more than 250 members
including broadband service providers, network deployment contractors,
equipment vendors, and others, all of whom are dedicated to
accelerating the deployment of all-fiber networks throughout the
country. As I expect you know, fiber is the fundamental network
technology for the 21st Century providing the needed underlying
infrastructure not just for 5G, but for wireless networks, smart
communities, smart grids, as well as Internet of Things applications,
while also providing direct connections to homes, businesses, and
anchor institutions.
To date, we are making great progress in achieving our goal of
rapid all-fiber network deployments. As of September, 2019, 46.5M homes
have access to all-fiber networks (about 40 percent of total homes),
and 20.5M homes are connected with fiber--a 44 percent penetration
rate. Over the past year, all-fiber networks became available to 6.5M
additional homes--a record level of additions. While large providers
account for most fiber connections, over the past year, smaller
providers accounted for 25 percent of the new home connections and 41
percent of all-fiber capital expenditures. All-fiber deployments to
various customer end-points are at record levels. In 2019, over 450,000
fiber routes were deployed--driven by new deployments to homes,
upgrades by cable operators, and the beginning of deployments to 5G
sites and small cells.
We expect the good news about all-fiber deployments will continue,
especially should the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopt and
implement the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund with the so-called
``budget clearing round'' proposal, which many of you support. This
proposal will drive support for future-proof networks to many more
locations in unserved areas. We also expect further progress as the
Rural Utilities Service continues to implement the ReConnect program by
awarding funds for all-fiber network builds.
As for removing barriers to all-fiber deployments, FBA members have
developed new construction techniques that lower the cost and shorten
the timeline for fiber-builds, and they have worked to develop and
provide training for the many new employees that are needed on their
projects--a subject I will touch on further in a moment. The FCC and
state and local governments have made significant strides over the past
several years. For example, the FCC's 2018 pole attachment order, which
instituted One-Touch Make-Ready (OTMR) and other measures, was a
positive step. Additionally, many of our members support efforts that
require government entities to act promptly to approve access to their
rights-of-way at cost-based rates.
That said, there are still too many barriers that delay and even
halt all-fiber deployments. This not only harms consumers, but
jeopardizes our international competitiveness. A recent report from the
Center for a New American Security highlighted that ``China has
invested more heavily [than the U.S.] in the fiber and physical
infrastructure for standalone 5G,'' and that ``the Chinese government
has undertaken significant investments in building up a more robust
digital infrastructure of fiber optic networks that are important to
facilitate the large-scale deployment of 5G.''
Based on recent discussions with our members, let me highlight some
barriers to deployment that are of greatest concern to them.
Labor and Job Training
The annual investment from the private and public sectors in
communications infrastructure is enormous--by our count more than $80
billion--and we see that trend continuing. Not only are we rapidly
building all-fiber networks across the country, but providers are
investing enormous amounts in other communications technologies,
including 5G. As a result, our members are telling us that getting and
retaining skilled personnel is among the biggest chokepoints in
deployments. Yet, these are good jobs with a good career path. The
personnel shortfall has become so bad that one of my construction
members said it has started to turn away work. Another member said the
company is short 100 crews needed to support the amount of work they
could bring in--not people, crews. And one of my equipment providers
said that after two years of record sales, contractors have stopped
buying new equipment because they do not have enough people to run the
machines.
As I mentioned at the outset, our members have been engaged in
efforts to increase the workforce for the fiber industry. Because
existing educational programs do not provide the skills they need,
companies are partnering with community colleges and trade schools to
develop programs and curricula that will give students training on
deploying broadband networks: from creating network architecture and
reading blueprints, to fusing, splicing and closing fiber connections,
and from operating heavy machinery to climbing poles and towers to
install fiber and other equipment, as well as training on how to
conduct ``locates''--the ability to locate and mark other facilities
that are already in the ground.
One example of such a program is the Utility System Technician
associates degree at the State Technical College of Missouri. This
degree offers students a hands-on education, learning how to install
and maintain utility systems, including fiber, and even offers a
``Fiber Optic Technician'' certification. The program is up and running
thanks to $2 million in state funding, donations from private companies
in the form of heavy operating equipment, and industry support in
creating the curriculum. Another example is Wilson Community College in
North Carolina, which partnered with a local fiber broadband provider
to bring a 10-week course and a 5-day boot camp on fiber deployment
training to the school in 2019. There are already efforts to expand
these courses into a degree or certificate program. Each of these
programs and their curricula can be models for other institutions
across the country.
In addition to these developments, other members are working to
drive interest in broadband deployment careers among high school
students. One member has created a scholarship for high school students
planning to enroll in community colleges or trade schools and who have
an interest in apprenticeship or pre-apprenticeship in construction
trades. Another member has been working with a local high school,
talking to students interested in engineering and other careers in the
broadband construction industry and providing them with internship
opportunities. Our members have also been ramping up their on-the-job
training, which they feel is needed to support employees new to the
industry and as an addition to tech school or community college
training. These efforts are significant, but they will not alone meet
increasing workforce demands.
Federally-supported workforce development programs provide
productive opportunities to support and expand educational
opportunities. The Department of Labor (DOL) Employment and Training
Administration overseas two grant programs that can make a difference.
The Workforce Opportunities for Rural Communities (WORC) and the
Apprenticeship Readiness grant programs are each geared toward
supporting educational institutions and other programs that will
provide skills training that help put people to work. In fact, working
with some of our members, some community colleges are waiting to hear
back now on applications for Apprenticeship Readiness grants to support
their efforts to establish new utility programs or update existing
programs that provide fiber and other communications deployment
training. In 2019, these DOL grant programs offered $130 million
combined in grants, any portion of which could make a significant
impact in developing the broadband deployment workforce. The Department
of Labor should prioritize granting funds for broadband deployment,
fiber deployment, and 5G training--calling out those areas in their
grant programs and announcements specifically. Congress should also
explore other opportunities to find new funds to support this type of
training.
I also want to mention the TOWER Infrastructure Deployment Act,
introduced by Senators Gardner and Sinema. This legislation would
create the Telecom Workforce Development Advisory Council to advise the
Federal Communications Commission on workforce needs in the
communications industry, ways to encourage participation in industry-
led workforce development programs, and ways to improve workforce
development in the industry. We encourage the Committee to ensure this
legislation includes a directive that individuals with expertise in
fiber workforce issues be appointed as members to the Advisory Council.
Pole Attachments
In adopting the Federal pole attachment statute (Section 224 of the
Communications Act), Congress understood that poles were both an
essential and limited input for cable and telecommunications providers.
The alternative is burying facilities, which takes far longer and can
cost twice as much. Yet, while the statute seeks to facilitate access
to poles (while accounting for important safety and reliability
concerns), there remain issues in getting the utilities to abide by
regulations they believe are contrary to their interests. As a result,
while the FCC has spent the past 40 years diligently working to
implement the statute, FBA members continue to have substantial
problems in getting timely access to poles at reasonable rates. For
instance, a utility just informed one of our members that it would need
to pay $400 per pole just to conduct a survey of potential attachment
issues. Another utility increased make-ready charges to a long-time
service provider by 500 percent--and to make the problem even worse,
this utility is entering the broadband business as a competitor to our
member. One of our service provider members needed access to only 10
poles, but the project was held up for months because it refused to
buckle under and pay the utility's unreasonable make-ready fee for one
pole. And, other service providers have told us they consistently face
issues getting utilities to deliver power to their facilities once they
are finally on the poles. Without power, services cannot be provided.
We hear examples like these virtually every day. So, what can be done
to improve the situation?
First, in its 2018 order, the FCC sought to address utility
concerns that attachers comply with safety and reliability
requirements by establishing a process whereby electric
utilities would certify contractors that attachers could then
hire to undertake survey and make ready work on poles and to
make attachments. The FCC now needs to make sure this process
is fully implemented as soon as possible and that the utilities
are not allowed to cause further delay by not having available
enough certified contractor personnel.
Second, even though the FCC recently adopted rules to
facilitate the filing and pursuit of pole attachment
complaints, the process continues to be so costly and take too
long that it is unusable to address most issues attachers face.
In effect, attachers may have a right, but they do not have a
remedy, which leads to utilities dragging out the process and
making unreasonable requests. We propose Congress enact
legislation establishing a commercially reasonable remedy--that
is, the same type of alternative dispute resolution process
that is found in commercial agreements between parties with
equal bargaining power, and it must be one where an appeal can
be taken to court--and not to the full FCC.
Third, the FCC needs to regularly review its rules--either
by seeking comments or holding a workshop to ensure the rules
are truly addressing problems--such as the power issues
discussed above--and the FCC should regularly ask stakeholders
whether they have additional concerns that need to be
addressed.
Access to Railroad Easements
One of the most vexing problems for FBA members is getting the
right to cross railroad tracks. On its face, you would not think it
would be that difficult to string a wire over or bury one under
railroad tracks. The actual work typically can be completed within a
day, if not much less time. However, virtually anyone building an all-
fiber network can tell a story about having difficulties getting to
cross the tracks--and there are lots of railroad tracks in the U.S.
Just like with pole access, it too often takes too long and costs too
much. But, unlike with poles, there is no Federal statute to help. As a
result, providers can be held up for six months or more, and the fees,
while sometimes reasonable, can skyrocket. One FBA member had to cross
two tracks next to each other, each of which was owned by a different
railroad. One charged $5,000 to cross its tracks; the other $25,000,
thus showing the arbitrariness of these charges. And, quite frankly,
even a $5,000 fee is unreasonable. To address this concern, South
Dakota has enacted a law with a $750 crossing fee, and it updated this
law two years later to prevent railroads from adding surcharges to this
amount. Other states also responded with Iowa setting a $750 fee,
Wisconsin a $500 fee, and Nebraska a $1,250 fee.
FBA encourages the Committee to examine this issue further, and we
encourage additional states to enact crossing laws. In the meantime, we
have reached out to railroad representatives to begin a dialogue on
ways to address our members' concerns.
State and Local Rights-of-Way
Virtually all fiber providers need access to state and local
rights-of-way, and most have good relations with state and local
governments. However, there are outliers that take too long to approve
an application or seek to charge market, rather than cost-based, rates.
Let me raise just one pending example.
For years, the New York State Department of Transportation (DOT)
did not charge telecommunications providers for use and occupancy of
the state-owned rights-of-way. However, that ended a year ago, when the
state, as part of revenue legislation, adopted a new law authorizing
the DOT to charge ``fiber optic utilities'' a fee that could be up to
market value. No fee was imposed on other network technologies.
Moreover, ``fiber optic utilities'' are prohibited from passing the fee
along to consumers. So, the fee, contrary to Federal law (Section 253
of the Communications Act) is discriminatory and not cost-based--and it
is hidden from the public. As we all know, if you want less of
something, you tax it. At a time when we are seeking to bring all-fiber
networks to new homes and businesses and to support 5G and wireless
networks and smart communities, New York State's action is clearly
counter-productive. Hopefully, the State will rethink this law. The
alternative is for fiber providers in New York State to seek relief in
court.
Federal Rights-of-Way
Congress is to be commended for adopting, as part of the MOBILE NOW
legislation, provisions that seek to improve the process for access to
Federal rights-of-way. It was warranted. Just several years ago, the
Forest Service took 16 months to grant a permit to one of our service
provider members to deploy fiber in a mere 8 miles of Federal
government rights-of-way. Our member was able to engineer, permit, and
construct the other 142 miles of this build in much less time.
While we are hopeful that the new law helps expedite the processing
of permits by Federal agencies, we urge the Committee to be vigilant.
Just recently, one member was held up for 6 months waiting for a
Federal agency to sign-off on a permit. We understand that a large part
of the problem is that issuing right-of-way permits is not a primary
task of Federal agencies, and so they can be easily tasked in other
areas. For that reason, we believe Congress should establish a shot
clock in the range of 90-120 days, which is similar in duration to what
is required by the FCC for wireless siting applications. Moreover, if
the agency does not meet the deadline, the application should be deemed
granted.
Entry Barriers
While I have focused my testimony so far on barriers to
deployments, let me add that there are still barriers to become an all-
fiber provider. Many states have acted recently to tear down those
entry barriers for electric cooperatives by enacting legislation that
permit their entry while guarding against harm to electric ratepayers
and to broadband competition. Further, many electric cooperatives in
these states have built all-fiber broadband networks and are providing
high-performance service to locations that once received inadequate
service. We urge states that have not acted to follow.
Although FBA strongly supports private sector providers driving
all-fiber builds, we are troubled by the continuing barriers many
states have erected to municipal provision of broadband service. While
some claim that municipal entry will undermine the free market, no one
can assert that the free market is working well in many higher-cost
areas to bridge the digital divide. That is why we support government
subsidy programs, and that is why municipal entry, when driven by the
local community, should be permitted. Just look at Colorado, where
residents in Fort Collins and many other communities determined that
private providers were not going to build higher-performance broadband
networks they need and voted to enable their municipalities to provide
all-fiber broadband service. FBA thus urges Congress and States to
permit communities in rural areas to determine their ``broadband
destiny.''
Let me conclude by saying that we should not lose sight of the
tremendous progress we have made over the past 20 years in wiring
America with fiber. At the same time, we know that we can accelerate
that pace and ensure deployment of this fundamental infrastructure--the
very infrastructure needed for 5G, wireless networks, and smart
community and IOT applications--throughout the country. The Committee
is to be applauded for keeping up the pressure to address barriers we
still face, and the FBA stands ready to work with you to address these
concerns.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Ms. Youngers.
And now Mr. Feld of Public Knowledge. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF HAROLD FELD, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, PUBLIC
KNOWLEDGE
Mr. Feld. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Cantwell. Thank you all for inviting me to testify on this
important issue.
This is our fourth transition from one mobile wireless
architecture to another, fifth if you include the analog sunset
in 2008. Each transition has presented its own challenges. Each
transition has also been accompanied by stakeholders clamoring
for changes to give themselves and their specific business
models advantages. This frequently takes the form of dire
warnings that unless the FCC or Congress acts immediately to
satisfy these industry demands, we will fall behind rival
countries and therefore suffer some unspecified but certainly
dreadful consequence.
Despite these warnings, our nearly 30-year streak as a
global leader in wireless technology remains intact. American
companies such as Qualcomm, Apple, and Google continue to lead
in wireless equipment and wireless operating systems. Why? In
no small part because Congress has consistently resisted the
hype from the wireless industry and maintained a steady,
balanced course on policy. When the FCC has gotten caught up in
the wireless industry-generated buzz about digital transition
or spectrum crunch or whatever catchy name is being used to
create an artificial crisis, Congress has acted to rein in the
headlong rush urged by special interests.
To be clear, balance does not mean inaction or complacency,
but it does mean that Congress must look past the hype to
address the real underlying issues. For example, in 2005,
Congress acted to strike a balance between broadcasters, the
wireless industry, and public safety to move the digital
transition forward. In 2012, Congress acted to resolve
outstanding issues and create the first-ever incentive auction.
In each case, Congress moved with deliberation to address
genuine obstacles to progress while ignoring the self-serving
hype of industry stakeholders.
If we had no mid-band spectrum slated for auction and no
spectrum ready to open for WiFi 6, we would be in danger of
falling behind in 5G deployment and adoption. But this is not
the case. The FCC has two mid-band auctions scheduled for the
near future, the 3.5 gigahertz CBRS auction and the 2.5
gigahertz BRS auction. These, combined with existing mid-band
spectrum already held by the major wireless carriers, provide
sufficient spectrum to begin a successful transition.
Even if the FCC wanted to schedule substantial auctions
immediately after the current scheduled auctions, it would take
time for wireless carriers to overcome capital depletion from
two successive auctions and existing deployment plans. Taking
the time to get it right on issues such as C-band is much more
important than whether the auction takes place in 6 months, 12
months, or 18 months.
By contrast, no new spectrum suitable for WiFi 6 is
available or even on the table other than the proposed 5.9
gigahertz and 6 gigahertz bands. Without swift action by the
FCC to open these bands to sharing on a non-interfering basis,
WiFi 6 deployment, a critical component of a successful 5G
strategy, will be severely stunted.
Nowhere is balance more necessary and appropriate than in
the ability of local governments to protect local safety and
quality of life. Unlike carriers, local officials are
responsible to their voters and must address their concerns
about safety, aesthetics, disruption of local traffic, and
equitable deployment. No one doubts that these communities want
to see new networks with new capabilities deployed. But
localities have other concerns as well, and Federal policy
should respect those concerns. The Communications Act
explicitly preserves zoning authority to local authorities for
this very reason. Congress should reverse the FCC's preemption
of local authority to protect local concerns and restore the
appropriate balance between carriers and communities.
To be clear, there is a huge difference between local
governments negotiating policy concerns and private companies
demanding outrageous fees such as the railroad crossing fees
mentioned in Ms. Youngers' testimony. Where private sector
companies use their market power to extort monopoly rents,
Congress should do as it did with pole attachments and step
into level the playing field.
Finally, workforce shortages are a serious concern, but
Congress must make sure that workers are not exploited in the
name of winning the race to 5G. Congress and regulators must
remain vigilant to prevent any shortcuts with regard to safety.
Additionally, Congress should do its best to ensure that the
good jobs created during the building boom do not simply
disappear when the demand returns to normal. Thoughtfully
designed training programs, especially those that promote on-
the-job learning, can simultaneously meet demand and bring good
paying jobs to rural and urban communities struggling with
poverty and high unemployment.
To conclude, I observe that many of the members of this
Committee have seen wireless transitions before. You know
better than most how challenging it can be to separate hype
from real needs requiring congressional action. In considering
what steps to take, Congress should continue to follow the path
of success of a healthy skepticism about urgency and doomsday
predictions, combined with a balanced policy toward all
stakeholders.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Feld follows:]
Prepared Statement of Harold Feld, Senior Vice President,
Public Knowledge
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you for inviting me
to testify today on this timely and important topic.
America has led the world in wireless technology and innovation for
over 3 decades. The secret to our success has been our ability to
strike the right balance among the elements that create our dynamic and
innovative wireless ecosystem. Congress has struck a balance between
the role of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in setting
national policy and the role of the states in protecting the interests
of their residents. Congress has struck a balance between the need for
both exclusively licensed spectrum auctioned to carriers and unlicensed
spectrum open to everyone. Within auctions, Congress has struck a
balance among competing public policy goals such as competition,
protecting incumbent services, protecting Federal services, and
ensuring a pipeline of sufficient spectrum in a variety of frequency
ranges for new deployments. While the FCC makes the policy choices in
the first instance, it does so subject to the balance struck by
Congress.
Maintaining this balance is critical to our continued leadership in
wireless. We do not pursue a ``flavor of the month'' or crisis
management approach. Our spectrum policy depends on a combination of
innovation and reliability that recognizes the importance of all
stakeholders throughout the supply chain. As a result, we do not simply
lead the world in deployment of millimeter wave technology and 5G
generally. American companies such as Qualcomm lead in the development
of microchips that provide the essential guts of wireless hardware.
Apple and Google lead the world in development and deployment of
wireless operating systems. While no one should take this leadership
for granted, it is a testament to the importance of maintaining a
steady and balanced policy.
Unsurprisingly, stakeholders routinely emphasize the importance of
their contribution and push the FCC and Congress to put a thumb on the
scale to favor their specific needs. For example, during the roll out
of 4G technology, the wireless industry repeatedly pushed the idea of a
``spectrum crunch'' that would make widespread adoption of 4G
impossible and cede U.S. leadership in wireless to other countries.\1\
Then, as now, wireless networks and their industry allies warned that
unless Congress and the FCC acted immediately to provide wireless
networks with their wish list, the United States would fall behind in
the ``race'' to 4G. Fortunately, Congress recognized the importance of
maintaining a proper balance among stakeholders. While adopting new
innovations such as incentive auctions, Congress resisted the urging of
wireless networks to radically preempt states or to eliminate
allocations for unlicensed spectrum. As a consequence, U.S. leadership
in wireless remained intact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ David Talbot, ``The Spectrum Crunch That Wasn't,'' MIT
Technology Review (November 26, 2012). Available at: https://
www.technologyreview.com/s/507486/the-spectrum-crunch-that-wasnt/; See
also Tim Farrar, ``The myth of the wireless spectrum crisis,'' GIGAOM
(October 21, 2012). Available at: https://gigaom.com/2012/10/21/the-
myth-of-the-wireless-spectrum-crisis/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we confront the challenges to 5G deployment going forward,
Congress should look at the ``5G race'' and predictions of doom with a
jaundiced eye. Globally, the demand for new mobile services is driving
rapid deployment of 5G without the need for Congress or the FCC to
alter the balanced policies that have served us so well over the last 3
decades.\2\ While we can expect wireless providers to highlight every
successful deployment abroad as a ``danger to U.S. leadership,'' we
should not lose sight of the long-term steady pace of deployment here
in the United States. Wireless networks are already busy deploying 5G
networks without the need for additional incentives. The idea that a
few months of delay of a particular auction mean that we are doomed to
live in China's wireless shadow, or that the need to negotiate with
local communities to protect local quality of life and ensure that the
benefits of 5G are distributed equally to all Americans will cause
deployment to grind to a halt, should be dismissed as nothing more than
the usual high-pressure lobbying by incumbents eager for any advantage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Juan Pedro Tomas, ``Qualcomm sees faster than expected 5G
global deployment,'' RCR Wireless (December 9, 2019). Available at:
https://www.rcrwireless.com/20191209/5g/qualcomm-sees-faster-than-
expected-5g-global-deployment
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While framing deployment of 5G as a ``race'' with other nations is
a potentially useful metaphor to emphasize the importance of 5G as an
area of policy, we should not confuse this with a literal race to see
who can deploy the greatest coverage most quickly. As we have seen
repeatedly over the last 30 years of wireless development, who is
``ahead'' for some transient period of time while the rest of the world
``catches up'' is a meaningless statistic. Standards are global, as is
the market for wireless. Qualcomm and other U.S. equipment makers
compete for market share across Asia, Europe and South America. To the
extent China poses a threat to U.S. dominance, it comes from China's
structural advantages: a large captive market, state subsidies and a
willingness to steal technology it cannot develop on its own. Whether a
spectrum auction happens a few months earlier or a few months later
makes no difference in the overall scheme of things.
Of course, there is a difference between policy ``balance'' and
``complacency.'' Below, I highlight several areas where the Congress
should act to preserve the necessary balance and resist the efforts of
wireless networks to push the panic button to gain unwarranted--and
ultimately detrimental--concessions. Nevertheless, to the extent we
must characterize the deployment of 5G as a ``race,'' we should
recognize it is not a sprint but a marathon--and one we are leading
quite handily. Even CTIA, which has the most to gain from pushing the
panic button on policy, now agrees that the United States has pulled
ahead of countries such as South Korea and is once again ``leading the
5G race.'' \3\ What is important is getting the policy balance right,
not adopting wrong policies as quickly as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Jeremy Horowitz, ``CTIA: U.S. and China Lead Global 5G Race,
followed by South Korea,'' VentureBeat (April 2, 2019). Available at:
https://venturebeat.com/2019/04/02/ctia-u-s-and-china-lead-global-5g-
race-followed-by-south-korea/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Workforce Issues: Opportunities for Local Training and Job Creation
Every transition from one wireless network standard to another
creates a demand for tower climbers. However, there is currently a
severe skills gap--meaning there are not enough trained tower climbers
to meet industry demand.\4\ One way to meet the demand for tower
climbers is to increase funding for work-based learning programs in
tower climbing. These programs are well-suited towards individuals
living in communities of color, or rural communities with relatively
high unemployment rates, and relatively low incomes. Many unemployed or
under-employed individuals do not have the resources to support their
families while they train for a new career. Work-based learning
programs allow these individuals to train for a better future, while
supporting their families, because these programs allow students to
learn necessarily skills while on-the-job. Work-based-learning programs
also benefit employers, who are able to train employees for their exact
needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ''The Surge for Tower Climbers to Build a 5G Network,'' 3M
(July 24, 2019), https://workersafety.3m.com/surge-tower-climbers-
build-5g-network/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, it is important to note that because demand is cyclical,
the short-term demand generated by the need to build out 5G
infrastructure does not ensure long-term employment for workers. As a
consequence, programs designed to meet the shortage of tower workers
need to look not merely to training and safety,\5\ but also to
guaranteeing to tower workers a productive future after the current
boom subsides. This applies not merely to tower climbers, but to other
job opportunities that will follow in the wake of deployment. Papers
from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies \6\ and
Brookings Institution \7\ highlight the unique opportunity that 5G
deployment provides for local communities to work with network
providers to create local jobs and address long-standing issues of
digital inequity. Carefully thought-out Federal policies designed to
address not simply the immediate short-term need, but the post-5G
deployment world, can have positive long-standing impact on local
communities and the American tech workforce. Congress should resist the
rush to look only to the immediate short-term labor needs and consider
what systemic programs and work-based-learning programs can create good
local jobs in traditionally marginalized rural communities and
communities of color.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Tower climbing remains an extremely dangerous job. See US Tower
Structure Related Fatalities, http://wirelessestimator.com/content/
fatalities. A rush to hire new climbers must not result in reduced
safety training or fewer safety precautions. The FCC and OSHA must
continue their oversight of this vital job to ensure that worker safety
remains paramount. See OSHA: Communications Towers, https://
www.osha.gov/doc/topics/communicationtower/.
\6\ Yosef Getachew, Alejandra Montoya-Boyer, and Spencer Overton,
``5G, Smart Cities and Communities of Color,'' (Joint Center for
Political and Economic Studies 2017). Available at: https://
jointcenter.org/5g-smart-cities-communities-of-color-2/
\7\ Nicole Turner Lee, ``Enabling Opportunities: 5G, the Internet
of Things, and Communities of Color,'' (Brookings 2019). Available at:
https://www.brookings.edu/research/enabling-opportunities-5g-the-
internet-of-things-and-communities-of-color/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Governments Are Partners, Not Barriers
We need not merely 5G network deployment, but 5G adoption.
Historically and consistently, the rate of local adoption depends
heavily on close relationships with local communities. When providers
work with local communities, it creates important relationships and
trust which help spurs adoption. When networks run roughshod over local
communities, it generates resentment and resistance.
In 1993, as part of the revisions to the Communications Act that
made the dramatic growth of mobile technology possible,\8\ Congress
carefully considered what powers to leave at the local level and what
to permit the FCC to preempt to promote wireless deployment. Congress
explicitly left zoning, health and safety regulation to the states.\9\
Unfortunately, wireless networks have consistently urged that the FCC
preempt local authority that Congress explicitly chose to preserve.
Despite a lack of any record evidence that preemption in the name of
``streamlining'' has positive impact on deployment, the FCC has proven
unfortunately responsive to these industry demands.\10\ Congress should
not merely reject calls from the wireless industry for further
`streamlining,' but should affirmatively roll back the FCC's preemption
overreach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub. L. 103-66.
\9\ See 47 U.S. C. Sec. 332(c)(7).
\10\ ``Public Knowledge Response to Opposition to Public
Knowledge's Petition for Reconsideration and Motion to Hold in
Abeyance,'' WC Docket No. 17-84 (Filed October 15, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
History shows that preemption of local authority does nothing to
encourage deployment on a national basis. To the extent that localities
engage in significant negotiations to protect local interests such as
historical landmarks or ensure service to the entire community, they
have every right to do so. After all, it is members of local
governments, not representatives of carriers, who live in the community
and are accountable to local residents. The history of cable franchise
preemption demonstrates that preempting local governments allows
carriers to short-change poorer neighborhoods and rural communities.
For example, despite FCC ``streamlining'' of local franchise authority
to encourage cable competition in 2006,\11\ and additional
``streamlining'' of local franchising authority on the state level,
urban neighborhoods and rural communities continue to lack access to
affordable broadband.\12\ Indeed, urban areas have seen the return of
``redlining,'' with broadband providers simply failing to spend money
to upgrade systems in communities of color.\13\ Similarly, rural
communities have seen deregulation lead not to investment, but to
ongoing problems with rotting legacy copper as deregulated carriers
simply decline to invest in rural communities with low rates of
return.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Implementation of Section 621(a)(1) of the Cable
Communications Policy Act of 1984 as Amended by the Cable Television
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 22 FCC Rcd 5101 (2006).
\12\ See FCC National Broadband Map, available at: https://
broadbandmap.fcc.gov/#/
\13\ See Bill Callahan, ``AT&T's Digital Redlining of Cleveland,''
National Digital Inclusion Alliance Report (2017). Available at:
https://www.digitalinclusion.org/blog/2017/03/10/atts-digital-
redlining-of-cleveland/
\14\ See, e.g., Commission Inquiry Into the Service Quality,
Customer Service, and Billing Practices of Frontier Communications,
Report of the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Docket No. P-407, 405/
CI-18-122 (January 4, 2019). Available at: http://mn.gov/commerce-stat/
pdfs/frontier-service-quality-report-final.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all these reasons, Congress should ignore the claims of
wireless networks that without further preemption of local authority
America will ``lose the race to 5G.'' To the contrary, by giving
carriers free reign over local deployments, we will see large swaths of
urban and rural America cut out of the 5G future entirely.
Spectrum Depends on a Proper Balance of Licensed and Unlicensed
Spectrum
Congress and the FCC both recognize the importance of licensed and
unlicensed spectrum to 5G. The FCC has already scheduled two
significant mid-band spectrum auctions--the CBRS auction and the 2.5
GHz auction. The FCC has also indicated that it will auction 300 MHz of
C-Band spectrum. Efforts to open new mid-band spectrum for WiFi 6,
notably the 5.9 GHz band and the 6 GHz band, remain delayed.
Lack of sufficient spectrum for unlicensed access remains a
significant barrier to the success of 5G. Many of the technologies
being developed for 5G, such as Internet of things (IoT) networks,
require access to WiFi 6. As with all wireless technologies capable of
supporting gigabit speeds and many thousands of new devices that will
be dependent on 5G, WiFi 6 requires large, contiguous blocks of
spectrum. The combination of access in the 5.9 GHz band and the 6 GHz
band will create these needed spectrum blocks, allowing users of
unlicensed access to leverage the existing deployment in 5.8 GHz for
maximum efficiency.
Since the FCC opened numerous licensed bands to unlicensed
underlays in the 1980s, we have demonstrated that access to spectrum on
an unlicensed basis can easily co-exist with licensed spectrum without
causing harmful interference. The improvements in technology over the
last 30+ years make this coexistence easier than ever. In support of
the need to bring certainty to these proceedings after years of
engineering study and debate, Public Knowledge attaches a letter from
November 5, 2019 signed by Public Knowledge and 34 other wireless
equipment manufacturers, tech companies, and public interest
organizations urging FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to open the 6 GHz band to
unlicensed use on a non-interfering basis with existing licensed users.
Conclusion
It is understandable that wireless network providers look to the
conversion to 5G as an opportunity to secure advantages over other
wireless stakeholders by pushing the panic button and fostering an
impression of crisis. As with the 4G ``spectrum crisis,'' the danger to
U.S. wireless leadership has been greatly exaggerated. Certainly,
Congress must take necessary steps to ensure the timely deployment of
5G to all Americans. But these steps should reflect the policy of
careful balance that has served us so successfully for the last 3
decades. By ignoring the hype and fear-mongering, Congress can address
the genuine obstacles to 5G deployment without leaving poorer
communities in rural or urban America behind.
Thank you, and I am happy to answer any questions at this time.
Attachment
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Well, thank you very much, and thank you to
all of our witnesses for staying within the time limit.
Ms. Bloomfield.
STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY BLOOMFIELD, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NTCA-
THE RURAL BROADBAND ASSOCIATION
Ms. Bloomfield. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell,
members of the Committee, we so appreciate the opportunity to
testify today talking about obstacles to broadband deployment
and the need for a strong workforce to actually build these
networks.
Shirley Bloomfield, CEO of NTCA-The Rural Broadband
Association. We represent 850 community-based providers
deploying broadband infrastructure in 46 States.
Economics of broadband are difficult if not impossible in
many rural markets. The rates that rural consumers pay are
rarely sufficient to cover even the cost of operating in rural
areas, much less the large capital expenditures that are
required to deploy broadband in these communities.
That is why ongoing support from the High-Cost Universal
Service Fund program, overseen by the FCC, is so critical to
making a business case for rural broadband now and into the
foreseeable future.
The high-cost program supports the fixed rural broadband
networks that play an essential role in the provision of mobile
wireless service because wireless needs wires, and 5G is going
to be a fiber-fed product. In fact, a technical paper released
last year found that because 5G will require fiber installed to
small cells or towers closer to the user, deploying rural 5G
capable networks could actually be nearly the equivalent of
simply providing fiber to the home.
NTCA is really supportive of the work that Congress has
done, the FCC, and USDA over the past several years on helping
make the business case for rural broadband, including this
Committee's work on the Broadband Data Act, the FCC's upcoming
rural digital opportunity fund, and the support for fiber-built
networks from USDA's Reconnect program. Your devotion to these
issues has resulted in broadband deployment in some of the most
remote parts of our country, but there is still more work to be
done and communities yet to serve.
However, there are other significant barriers to
deployment. One obstacle to broadband deployment in rural areas
continues to be Federal permitting. NTCA recognizes the need to
protect our nation's natural resources and well designed
permitting processes are really a part of that protection.
However, we believe these goals can be achieved without
significantly delaying rural broadband deployment. We have got
companies that have about an average of 25 employees. Time and
money spent on permitting delays translates to time and money
not spent building broadband.
In South Dakota, for example, we have a small rural
provider who had a multimillion dollar fiber deployment that
confronted the Forest Service and wound up having a permitting
delay of over a year. And we know what a short construction
season you have in South Dakota.
We believe that reforms such as harmonizing agency
applications, increasing staffing in local offices for
permitting, providing a categorical exclusion for the
installation of communications infrastructure on previously
disturbed lands would expedite both wired and wireless network
deployment without harming the environment.
Another deployment issue in the process for deploying
broadband networks is railroad rights-of-way. In Missouri, we
have one member who waited months and spent $50,000 for rights-
of-way across just three railroads which did not even include
the cost of construction, just the fees and resources required
for approval. These fees are usually for boring beneath a
railroad track, a job that is finished in just a few hours and
does not require touching railroad property. Unfortunately, in
states with laws that have capped railroad crossing fees, we
are seeing increased safety or observation fees, which appear
to serve as an offset.
To be clear, we are not arguing for free access to railroad
rights-of-way, but common sense rules of the road are needed to
ensure that we can continue the work of delivering broadband to
those currently on the wrong side of the digital divide.
Pole attachments also remain a concern. In 2018, the FCC
updated its pole attachment access rules to adopt a new one-
touch make-ready regime under which a new attacher may perform
all work to prepare a pole for that attachment. For NTCA
members seeking to invoke this rule, a common barrier is the
lack of properly staff or outside contractors who can perform
this work even when the work is ready to begin.
So this is one area where focusing on workforce development
could actually help advance broadband deployment, and it brings
me to the critical workforce issues teed up by the Committee.
Networks of the future are going to be hybrid networks. We
are going to need trained personnel for both fiber and
wireless. 5G is an access technology that builds on fiber
backbones. Many NTCA members are already partnering with local
schools and technical colleges to train that homegrown talent
for the innovative careers, but these demands can be
overwhelming for small school districts that do not have the
economies of scale that can support specialized instruction.
Rural broadband providers also interestingly can play a dual
role here by enabling distance education that actually bridges
the geographically dispersed students and instructors and
support training the very staff that they need.
So we need to encourage partnerships on the State, local,
and regional level to develop apprentice programs. We need DOL
to focus on telecom-specific programs, and we need continued
support for benefit plans like the ones we offer at NTCA that
allow us to aggregate all of our rural employees across the
country so we can offer competitive benefit plans to recruit
and retain talent in these rural areas.
We appreciate your leadership and we are delighted to be
here today. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bloomfield follows:]
Prepared Statement of Shirley Bloomfield, Chief Executive Officer,
NTCA--The Rural Broadband Association
Introduction and Background
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the
Committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify today to discuss
continued obstacles for broadband deployment and the need for a strong
workforce to build out the next generation of broadband networks across
America.
I am Shirley Bloomfield, CEO of NTCA--The Rural Broadband
Association, which represents approximately 850 small businesses
deploying broadband infrastructure in 46 states.
These cooperatives and small commercial companies serve the most
rural parts of the United States, reaching areas that contain less than
five percent of the U.S. population, but which are spread across more
than 35 percent of the U.S. landmass, or roughly seven subscribers per
square mile.
So how do we overcome the challenges of distance and density to
deploy and sustain rural broadband? In the first instance, you need a
business case to even consider deploying rural broadband. Questions
related to deployment obstacles are important, of course--but if you
can't afford to deploy the network at all, those questions never come
into play.
The economics of broadband are difficult, if not impossible, in
many rural markets. The rates that rural consumers pay are rarely
sufficient to cover even the costs of operating in rural areas, much
less the large capital expenditures required to deploy broadband in
rural America.
That's why ongoing support from the High-Cost Universal Service
Fund program overseen by the FCC is critical to making a business case
for rural broadband, both now and into the foreseeable future.
NTCA is supportive of the work that Congress and the FCC has
accomplished over the past several years on rural broadband, including
this Committee's work on the Broadband DATA Act and the FCC's recently
released Rural Digital Opportunity Fund Order, which will be voted on
by the FCC next week and aims to distribute over $20 billion in High
Cost USF support to over ten years. Your work on these important items
is essential to build the business case for small providers to deploy
and then continue to operate and deliver affordable services in rural
areas.
The High-Cost Program supports the fixed rural broadband networks
that play an essential role in the provision of mobile wireless
service. Indeed, to deliver on the greatest promise of 5G, fiber will
need to be installed to small cells or towers which must be located
very close to the user. But in rural America specifically, where
customer density is often measured in miles rather than feet, it will
take unprecedented investment in fiber to deliver 5G capabilities. In
fact, a technical paper released last year found that deploying 5G-
capable networks to such rural areas could be nearly the equivalent of
simply providing fiber to the home, especially if using the spectrum
bands that promise the highest level of 5G service and speed.
With this as backdrop, Congress should therefore implement and
promote policies that will advance both the future of 5G wireless
technology and the fiber networks needed to connect thousands of
``small cells'' and otherwise respond to consumer and business demands.
For rural consumers to have a broadband experience reasonably
comparable to that in urban America as the statutory mandate for
universal service dictates, we must enable and support deployment of
both fixed and mobile broadband networks. At bottom ``wireless needs
wires''--or, these days, ``5G needs fiber''--if we are to ensure
sufficient broadband access in rural America.
How Permitting Reforms Can Help Overcome Digital Divides
Once the business case for rural broadband network deployment has
been made in the first instance, we must address significant barriers
to deployment. One outstanding obstacle to broadband deployment
continues to be obtaining reasonable and timely access to rights-of-way
on Federal lands. NTCA and its members recognize the need to protect
our Nation's natural resources, and appropriate, well-designed
permitting processes are a necessary part of such protection. However,
we believe these goals can be achieved without the significant
deployment delays that providers currently experience.
Smaller providers like those in NTCA's membership have neither the
staff nor the resources to navigate complex regulatory structures for
securing the permits needed to deploy broadband networks over vast
rural expanses. For companies and cooperatives with an average of
approximately 25 employees, time and money spent on permitting delays
translates to time and money not spent building broadband.
In South Dakota, for example, a small, rural provider's
multimillion-dollar fiber deployment requiring U.S. Forest Service
approval confronted permitting delays that put completion of the
construction project on hold for more than a year.
We believe sensible reforms such as harmonizing agency
applications, increasing staffing in local offices for permitting, and
providing a categorical exclusion for the installation of
communications infrastructure on previously disturbed Federal lands
would improve broadband deployment speeds without harming the
environment. While legislation has attempted to take this on in the
past, it has focused largely on facility deployment for mobile wireless
services--but as noted above, these wireless networks require robust
wired backhaul to realize their full potential, which means we need
greater focus on harmonizing and rationalizing permitting rules related
to deployment of fiber networks as well.
Another example of a deployment barrier is the process for
constructing broadband networks across or within railroad rights-of-
way. In Missouri, one NTCA member waited seven months and spent roughly
$50,000 for rights-of-way across just three railroads; these were not
the costs of construction--this sum represents just the fees and the
resources required for railroad right-of-way approval. In some parts of
the country, such delays can push construction into the winter months,
when boring into the ground is not possible. A delay of a few months
then becomes a one-year or longer delay, as crews wait for the ground
to thaw and soften.
Further, the ''fees'' are often for boring beneath a railroad track
where the railroad crossing intersects state highways. In such cases,
the fiber installed under the railroad does not touch railroad property
on either side of the track and the work is completed by the broadband
provider in a few hours.
Several states have recognized these issues and made efforts to
address these concerns by capping railroad crossing fees.
Unfortunately, in these states, members are now reporting increased
``safety'' or ``observation'' fees, which appears to serve as an offset
for crossing fees and an end-run around the caps. To be clear, this is
not to say that those installing networks should be given free access
to railroad rights-of-way, but common-sense rules of the road are
needed to ensure we can continue the work of delivering broadband to
those currently on the wrong side of the digital divide.
The examples described above highlight the continued need for
sensible reform of permitting procedures to ensure greater efficiency
and timeliness in the process, especially when the work involves
replacing or upgrading facilities in existing rights-of-way.
Finally, I would like to briefly mention the impact of ``one-touch-
make-ready'' poles on deployment of broadband networks in rural
America--and this segues into a discussion of workforce development.
In 2018, the FCC updated its pole attachment access rules. This
included adoption of a new ``one-touch-make-ready'' (OTMR) regime under
which a new attacher may opt to perform all work to prepare a pole for
a new attachment.
NTCA members seeking to invoke this new rule report a common
barrier in the lack of properly trained staff or outside contractors
qualified and available to perform the work. Even when the process for
invoking one-touch-make-ready is complete such that work can begin, the
lack of qualified staff can act as another barrier to timely
installation of broadband infrastructure. This is one area where
focusing on workforce development could help advance broadband
deployment, and brings me to a discussion of the workforce issues teed
up by the committee in this hearing.
A Workforce for Tomorrow's Rural America
As manufacturing, agriculture and other fields are responding to
the increasing incorporation of technological development and broadband
connectivity into their lines of business, some NTCA members are
already working with local schools to train homegrown talent for the
innovative careers that did not exist a quarter-century ago but are now
among the fastest-growing sectors of job opportunities.
School curricula that evolved to meet the needs of the Industrial
Revolution must evolve again to meet the demands of the tech and
communications revolution. These demands, however, can seem
overwhelming for small school districts challenged by economies of
scale that cannot support specialized instruction. Several approaches,
if not a combination of them, may be advantageous.
1. Convene local and regional industry, political leadership and
school administrators to identify job and educational
opportunities and to assess whether local/regional educational
curricula meet those needs. With the STEM economy enjoying
double-digit growth, a multi-party force to capture its gains
would be pivotal for rural areas.
2. Bring rural broadband providers into the conversation to identify
and/or create broadband-enabled responses such as distance
education, which can bridge geographically-dispersed students
and instructors. While 91 percent of urban students take AP
courses, only 66 percent of rural students take those
opportunities. The difference may be related to a combination
of factors, but increased access would seem like one helpful
step toward increasing the take-rate.
3. If they do not yet exist in the community, develop internship and
apprenticeship programs that earn academic credit.
4. Encourage partnerships on the state, local or regional level to
develop apprenticeship programs that can help address the
current or future workforce needs.
5. Continue to support benefit plans like those offered by NTCA to
our membership where, through the national scope and scale of
aggregating rural broadband employees, our members can offer
competitive benefit plans that at least help to recruit and
retain talent in rural communities.
NTCA--The Rural Broadband Association is grateful for this
committee's continuing leadership and focus on identifying and solving
barriers to broadband deployment. It will take a holistic hybrid
deployment of wired and wireless networks to make 5G services a reality
in rural America, and taking steps to reduce barriers to deployment of
both--and training workforces to assist in the deployment and operation
of both--will be key to overcoming our Nation's digital divide. Thank
you for inviting me to be with you today and I look forward to the
chance to converse further with you on these topics.
The Chairman. Thank you very much and thank all of you for
your excellent testimony.
I am going to defer my questions to later on in the hearing
and at this point I recognize Senator Thune for whatever
questions.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for
having this hearing.
And thank you to all of you for sharing your thoughts on a
really important subject.
Commissioner Carr, we always appreciate you coming to South
Dakota and climbing towers and operating heavy farm equipment.
Quite a proficiency at pheasant hunting too.
[Laughter.]
Senator Thune. But you have seen I think a number of
carriers that are beginning to deploy or at least invest in 5G
networks across the country, including in places, more rural
areas like South Dakota, my home state. And I am wondering as
you look at the things that are happening out there, there is
still work I think that needs to be done to ensure that all
areas of the country reap the benefits of the new technology.
And I am wondering maybe if you could speak to some of the
items that the FCC has been working on to facilitate the
deployment of 5G and whether or not Congress should build upon
those efforts with legislative initiatives like the Streamlined
Small Cell Deployment Act.
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
From my perspective, the end goal for us is to make sure
every community in the country has a fair shot at next gen
connectivity.
I spent a lot of time in South Dakota and seen firsthand
the progress that is being made there. Sioux Falls has small
cells live today that are providing 5G service. I think that is
a much better indicator of where we stand as a country than the
first time 5G lights up in New York or San Francisco.
I was on the Pine Ridge Indian reservation, and fiber is
being built out there in the next couple years in nearly every
location. And that is going to help power next gen services.
We are certainly not at the mission accomplished phase yet.
One important step we are taking at the FCC is our vote
next week to establish the digital opportunity fund for rural
America. That is going to help support even more builds across
rural America.
And to your point, the bill that you all have been working
on here, the Small Cell Deployment Act, would help codify and
extend a lot of the modernization efforts that we have been
attempting to do at the FCC, and that would mark another
significant win for U.S. leadership in 5G. So I support that.
Senator Thune. Thank you for everything that you and your
fellow commissioners at the FCC are doing to advance the cause
of building out; not only is the FCC working to make spectrum
available but it is also working to make sure the
infrastructure that is necessary to carry it is built.
Mr. Miller, do you have any additional thoughts on
deploying 5G networks or how the provisions outlined in the
Streamlined Small Cell Deployment Act would specifically help
NATE's member companies?
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Senator.
5G is going to have to be deployed in masses. The sheer
quantity is tremendous as compared to traditional technologies
that have been built. So streamlining and standardization is
imperative for success from a contractor perspective.
Senator Thune. Ms. Youngers, the MOBILE NOW Act established
the Dig Once policy, and as policymakers, are there refinements
that we should be considering to the Dig Once provisions?
Ms. Youngers. Thank you, Senator. And thank you for the
question and of course for supporting the Dig Once policies.
In general, for efficiency reasons we support Dig Once
policies, and my members and our association are constantly
looking at ways to improve those. We support those efforts and
we stand ready to work with you on those. I do not think we
have any specific recommendations at this time, but we can
certainly provide them in the record. But as a general matter,
our association supports those dig once policies for the
efficiency reasons.
Senator Thune. Ms. Bloomfield, anything to add to that?
Ms. Bloomfield. Well, I think you know better than a lot of
people how difficult it is for small companies to actually deal
with a lot of those different barriers. And one of the things
that I had the opportunity, serving on the FCC's BDAC Council,
was to be able to see how important it is going to be to
harmonize and streamline. And I think the initiatives that you
put forward are things that our association very strongly
endorses. So thank you for your leadership.
Senator Thune. Commissioner Carr, as we discussed at a
field hearing that I held last year in South Dakota, it is
imperative that the United States lead in the deployment of
next generation broadband services, and in order to achieve
that goal, we got to make sure we have the necessary workforce
to build out these services, particularly in rural areas. And
you mentioned in your testimony that you are working with the
National Association of Tower Erectors to establish more
community college programs like those at Southeast Tech in my
home state to train and graduate more workers who are ready to
help build out these next generation networks.
So could you briefly elaborate on the progress being made
and whether or not the FCC is coordinating with other relevant
agencies like the Departments of Labor and Education to address
the workforce needs in the communications industry?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
The FCC has convened a working group that can bring
together a wide range of stakeholders to help address this
issue. And to your point, I think we need to continue to work
to expand community college programs. It can cost about $13,000
over the first 6 months to train a tower tech in-house. A
significant portion of those costs can be saved through short-
term community college programs.
I think hearings like this are going to go a long way in
helping to stand up more of those programs and creating
opportunities. Your leadership helped identify this for
Southeast Tech and helped them get their program across the
finish line. I think if we can stand up a few more programs it
is going to help open up opportunities for families but also
serve the national imperative of getting this infrastructure
built out.
Senator Thune. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, Mr. Chairman, I have got a letter I would like to get
entered in the record too. It is from the U.S. Telecom
regarding the letter of credit and the FCC's Rural Digital
Opportunity Fund.
The Chairman. Without objection, it will be entered.
[The information referred to follows:]
January 16, 2020
Via ECFS
Hon. Ajit Pai,
Hon. Michael O'Rielly,
Hon. Brendan Carr,
Hon. Jessica Rosenworcel,
Hon. Geoffrey Starks,
Federal Communications Commission,
Washington, DC.
Re: Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, WC Docket No. 19-126; Connect
America Fund, WC Docket No. 10-90
Dear Chairman Pai and Commissioners O'Rielly, Carr, Rosenworcel and
Starks:
Through the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF), the Commission
has the opportunity to bring the power and promise of a broadband
future to every corner of the country. The undersigned organizations,
representing broadband innovators of all shapes and sizes, deploying a
range of different technologies, and collectively serving millions of
Americans, support the goal of connecting every American to broadband.
Many of our members are motivated about the prospects of participating
in the RDOF auction this year.
The draft Order that has been circulated does an admirable job of
balancing many competing issues, on which some of our organizations
have differences of opinion. However, one issue that unites us all, and
many other commenters in the record, is the need to significantly
reduce the burdens of the letter of credit (LOC) requirements so that
these obligations correspond more appropriately to the risks presented.
As drafted, given the magnitude of the RDOF even as compared to prior
auctions, the LOC requirements will be a gating factor to participation
for many companies, large and small. If modifications to the LOC
requirements are not made, many companies could be effectively barred
from participation in the auction and those that do will not be able to
bid on the full amount of locations they might otherwise be able to
serve because of the difficulties in obtaining and the cost of the
required credit. Additionally, the LOC requirements conservatively will
result in over $1 billion in RDOF support (6-7 percent of the total
Phase I funding) going to banks and other financial intermediaries
rather than to building broadband in rural communities.\1\ Also, in
some cases banks are requiring cash collateral for the LOC and the
carrying costs are treated as debt, both of which impair the borrowing
power of support recipients.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See e.g., Reply Comments of WISPA, WC Docket Nos. 19-126, 10-90
at 29-32 (filed Oct. 21, 2019); Comments of USTelecom, WC Docket Nos.
19-126, 10-90, 19-195, at 44 (filed Sept. 20, 2019); Comments of
Geolinks, WC Docket Nos. 19-126, 10-90, at 9-11 (filed Sept. 20, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Encouraging robust participation and prudentially managing risks to
the Fund are both important goals, but should not, and need not, be
mutually exclusive. We understand that the Commission has a
responsibility to safeguard the funds it administers while protecting
against potential defaults. We support such fiscal responsibility.
Unfortunately, the compounding nature of the requirement as drafted to
maintain letters of credit for multiple years of service is
unsustainable and unprecedented at this scale. Nor is it necessary to
fully and adequately address the underlying risk management goals for
the Fund.
Each of our organizations filed comments in the record explaining
our concerns on this issue, along with a number of other commenters. In
order to enable the widest possible participation by our own members
and other companies in the RDOF, we urge you to take seriously the
concerns that have been raised and to consider modifying the LOC
requirement to minimize the direct and indirect costs associated with
obtaining and maintaining LOCs. In light of the existing authority that
the Commission has to withhold funds from those who fail to meet their
deployment commitments along with a range of other enforcement tools at
its disposal, the Commission can achieve our shared goal of preserving
and protecting the Fund without imposing the unreasonable,
unsustainable, and ultimately unworkable multi-year LOC requirements
currently in the draft order. Thus, we urge the Commission to implement
more targeted mechanisms for effective risk management that will not
deter or prevent their participation.
The Commission is on the cusp of a major step forward for rural
Americans, bringing broadband connectivity and the opportunities that
come with those connections to communities whose future depends on it.
Our members are eager to serve these communities and to meet and exceed
RDOF deployment milestones, starting in year one, if they have the
chance to do so. A program adjustment to the LOC requirements will help
to make this a reality.
Sincerely,
/s/ Angie Kronenberg /s/ Patrick R. Halley
Angie Kronenberg Patrick R. Halley
Chief Advocate and General Senior Vice President, Policy &
Counsel Advocacy
INCOMPAS USTelecom--The Broadband Association
/s/ Jennifer McKee /s/ Louis Peraertz
Jennifer McKee Louis Peraertz
Vice President and Associate Vice President of Policy
General Counsel Wireless Internet Service Providers
NCTA--The Internet & Television Association
Association
/s/ Brian O'Hara /s/ Derrick B. Owens
Brian O'Hara Derrick B. Owens
Senior Director Regulatory Senior Vice President of Government &
Issues--Telecom & Broadband Industry Affairs
National Rural Electric WTA--Advocates for Rural Broadband
Cooperative Association (NRECA)
/s/ Michael R. Romano
Michael R. Romano
Senior Vice President, Industry
Affairs & Business Development
NTCA--The Rural Broadband
Association
The Chairman. Senator Cantwell.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I feel like the testimony already is just reminding me of
the history of the Northwest, the electrification of our hydro
system and what we were able to achieve. And I know that some
people may debate public and private power. We debated all the
time in the Northwest. But I guarantee you even the private
power entities are so thankful that they have access and get
some support from public power. So it clearly has benefited us
over and over and over and over again. We, I say, used to store
apples and now we store bits. So it just shows you how
diverse--what we thought was once just about basic electricity
is now continuing to unfold as the change in the economy
unfolds.
So I am a very big supporter of moving as fast as we can,
but I also want to make clear a few issues that I do not think
we have to run over interests on. I appreciate a more
collaborative effort.
So, Mr. Feld, you pointed out in your testimony that the
FCC has used the race to 5G to quicken action to sharply
curtail authorities for State, localities, and tribes to review
construction of wireless and wireless infrastructure.
Do you believe that that was a justified move on the part
of the FCC, and what direction do you think we should take in
the future?
Mr. Feld. I do not believe that it was justified, and I
will say that history shows us whether it was cable franchising
or other efforts to move wireless transitions forward, that
every time we have treated local communities as barriers to be
overcome rather than as collaborators it has been to our
detriment and to the detriment of the local community.
I think that what we do need to see is the FCC playing a
supportive role with local governments in ensuring that they
understand the benefits of 5G and that there is an appropriate
and suitable balance between local community concerns and the
desire of carriers to deploy their networks.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
Ms. Youngers, in Spokane I mentioned they have introduced a
smart cities and communities--I have introduced the Smart
Cities and Communities Act, but working with them because they
want to be a smart city. I am very proud of what they are doing
in Spokane because they are building a whole first net zero
block. I mean, so they are just trying to take this
sophistication as part of their campus that is in downtown
Spokane, the university campus, and build out something.
Seattle is very proud of the Bullitt Center and the fact
that it is the smartest building in the world. And so Spokane
is going to take that to the next level.
But is that the way to do this, the collaborative effort
with cities and then particularly in that collaboration, if you
can identify the workforce issues? Because then you are
marrying up the workforce demand along with the deployments.
Ms. Youngers. Right, Senator, exactly. And I am aware of
some of the efforts of Seattle and Spokane certainly leading
the way as a smart city. And we agree with you and as the Fiber
Broadband Association, we speak with cities that are becoming
smart all the time. And one of the first things they need to do
is take an inventory of where are their fiber assets because
you need fiber to support smart city efforts and those smart
city applications. Certainly as those cities look to those
efforts, I think they can marry them with some of the workforce
and some of the training efforts further into the community.
I will note we hear a lot about pole climbers as the needed
skill set for 5G deployment. My members would add things like
reading blueprints, being able to design a network and an
architecture, being able to maintain a network, operating a
backhoe and other heavy machinery, including being able to deal
in trench technology. There is a lot of other skill sets as
well. And certainly as cities come online to become smart, I
think there are a lot of opportunities to buildup their own
workforce as well as we look at these new technologies and new
networks. So I agree with you and I know Seattle and Spokane
are leading the way on that.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
And, Mr. Miller, I would just be remiss--I went to your
website. Thank you for showing your daughters and showing the
diversity of women who are needed in this field as well. I am
sure as a computer scientist you see the very broad
applications here, and I think that is what we have to get
people to see is that this is a very big task.
So I liked the fact that you mentioned the government
should be involved several times in your testimony. I agree
both on the training and making this happen. This is not a
mystery. It is an opportunity and we need to seize it. So thank
you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
Senator Tester.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
holding this hearing today. I have always said that sleep is
overrated, and you are certainly putting that to the test.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. There are apparently Members of the House of
Representatives who agree with you.
[Laughter.]
Senator Tester. Yes, they probably do.
So I am going to start with you, Mr. Carr, and I am going
to kind of follow up on the questions that Senator Thune had in
that he talked about promoting a program with community
colleges for tech training that would apply for these. And I
got the assumption from your answers that the only school that
was involved right now was Southeast Tech. I think that was the
name of it. Is that correct?
Mr. Carr. There is a number. There is one in South
Carolina, Aiken. There is a new one that is standing up in
South Dakota. There are about five or six others that are in
the pipeline thinking about it.
Senator Tester. So I welcome you to Montana and I can
connect you up with the board of regents and the community
college presidents, if you want.
Mr. Carr. Great.
Senator Tester. The challenge has been getting these folks
to come to these programs. I mean, that has really been the
challenge. I mean, let me give you truck driving as a prime
example. There is a big demand for truck drivers out there. One
of the community colleges set up a truck driving program and
they could not get people to come even though the jobs were
there. They were good paying jobs. Truck driving might not be
for everybody but the truth is that tower climbing might not be
or if they are a backhoe operator.
So how do you get the folks to get there in adequate
numbers to meet the 20,000 or 40,000 people you need?
Mr. Carr. I think it is a great question. One of the chief
challenges with every group that looks at this issue is
highlighting and emphasizing the opportunities that are there.
One company, for instance, says that it pays about $70,000 for
a qualified tower tech in their first year.
And to your point, I think there are three main challenges.
One, the cost of standing up community college programs, the
affordability for students to go through those programs, and to
your point, making sure we have a pipeline of students so the
existing programs do not dry up. And we got to tackle it at all
three phases.
Senator Tester. And this is just a suggestion. One of the
things that I noticed in their program--and although different,
it is still a trade that you work with your hands--is that the
best people that can help funnel these people are the people in
the high schools and the businesses themselves, like yours, Mr.
Miller. You need people. You see somebody at an FAA convention
that they may ask you to speak at. Funnel these folks to these
programs. And I think it is really important. And I think it is
the key, by the way.
And that is why I would love to have you come to Montana.
And here is why. Just as in South Dakota and just as maybe in
Mississippi too, if you train kids from rural America, they
might come back and go to work there. And that is actually my
question. With 5G and, look, I have been pushing you and others
on the FCC to have demo projects in rural America because I
think that rural America will be left out in the cold on this
one just as we--and I do not mean this negatively speaking--
just as we have on prior technologies.
What can we do to ensure that as this workforce is
developed that we can get folks to work in rural America?
Mr. Carr. Thanks again for the question.
And that is really what we are focused on at the FCC. When
I spent time in Montana earlier this summer, I went to small
towns like Utica and Forsythe, and there there are construction
crews that are plowing miles of new fiber. And so I think the
opportunities for the jobs are going to be there in every
community, and that is what we need to keep a focus on.
Senator Tester. By the way, thank you all for being here.
Mr. Miller, you have got a firm that builds towers I
assume? And is that mainly what you do?
Mr. Miller. No, sir. Service and maintenance is primarily
what we do and construction.
Senator Tester. So you are statewide? Are you multi-state?
Mr. Miller. Multi-state, yes, sir.
Senator Tester. How many employees do you have?
Mr. Miller. Approximately 70.
Senator Tester. How many employees would you hire if they
were available?
Mr. Miller. At least a dozen right now. We are actively
hiring.
Senator Tester. How much of your work is done in rural
America?
Mr. Miller. A large percentage of our work is done in rural
America. We service cell towers.
Senator Tester. I got you.
So the challenge is--and I have used this example in this
Committee many times. We can talk about all sorts of Gs in the
world. When I am on the farm, I got no G on this baby. It just
does not work. And so getting it out to rural America is really
important.
And I think that you had talked about--I cannot remember
the statistics, but the Internet speeds are 70 percent faster.
I think you said that, Mr. Carr. And the digital divide is 20
percent reduced. Does that include rural America that Internet
speeds are up 70 percent in rural America?
Mr. Carr. Those are averages. And when you look, for
instance, the closing of the digital divide by 20 percent----
Senator Tester. That is all rural. Right? A huge part of
that is.
But what about the Internet speed portion?
Mr. Carr. It is an average.
Senator Tester. Is rural America bringing it down or is
rural America raising it up?
Mr. Carr. That is a good question. I would have to unpack
the data that the provider uses for that.
Senator Tester. So I want to go over to the rural telephone
folks or whatever you are called now.
Ms. Bloomfield. Broadband.
Senator Tester. Rural broadband folks.
They are co-ops. Right?
Ms. Bloomfield. We have all of the co-ops in the country
and community-owned and operated companies. Yes.
Senator Tester. But these are the folks that support folks
like me that live in the sticks.
Ms. Bloomfield. They are your neighbors.
Senator Tester. Yes. Right on.
So you talked about a benefit plan offered by NTCA members
of national scope, aggregating--this is your words--rural
broadband employees so that you could recruit and retain talent
in rural America.
Does the government play a role in that?
Ms. Bloomfield. Absolutely. So one of the things that we
were able to do years ago was to get a preemption from State
regulation so that we would be able to operate this benefit
plan and actually combine scope and scale.
Senator Tester. I got you, but what does the Federal
Government do to make that work? Is it a tax benefit or what is
it?
Ms. Bloomfield. It is a preemption from State law. So it
has come through the regulatory process that allows us to
operate. But I will say also things that you have done
recently, work on PBGC premium relief, some of those
initiatives, health care, all of those things that allow us to
offer competitive products so that those kids who are homegrown
employees have incentives to stay in those communities.
Senator Tester. Thank you. I was not paying attention
probably because I was too tired.
[Laughter.]
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Tester.
Senator Johnson.
STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to first talk a little about the delineation between
the Federal Government role and private sector. Obviously, in
this 5G space, the Federal Government has to allocate
broadband. We need to reduce, remove different barriers whether
it is permitting or again just other regulatory barriers
talking about the workforce, the appropriate role in terms of
rural broadband where you do not have a private sector
incentive there.
In terms of workforce development, we need to fix our
immigration system, our legal immigration system, the 1.1
million people we are granting legal permanent residency to.
Less than 10 percent have a job. It is all family
reunification. We've got to go more toward a Canadian or
Australian system where 60 percent are tied to some work. By
the way, the full spectrum of job skills from low to high are
skilled.
But I really want to go back to workforce development
because coming from the private sector, before I did this silly
thing, I ran a manufacturing plant. We have not been able to
hire people for decades primarily because we have for decades
been telling all our young people you have to get a 4-year
degree, and we have made loans readily accessible. We have
enticed our children to collectively incur $1.5 trillion of
student loan debt providing them degrees that employers do not
value where there are real jobs.
We also have a welfare system that pays people not to work,
but let us not focus on that.
Let us talk about what we really need to do. I do not
believe the Federal Government is effective at providing
training programs. So I am trying to dissuade you from looking
to the Federal Government to hop in here for workforce
development. What I am asking the associations to do is to get
into the private sector. Mr. Miller, get into high schools.
There is no doubt about it. You are going to have to work with
the technical colleges to provide the degree programs that
industry needs. We need to get to our children and encourage
them and let them know that there is no first or second class
way to realize their full human potential. All work has value.
There are great careers in manufacturing and in construction.
That is the first thing.
There is an organization in Wisconsin called Gold Collar
Jobs. They literally provide coloring books for second-graders
not just showing doctors and engineers but showing people
welding and working.
So my point is, yes, work with technical colleges. We need
to change the attitude that we have been beating into our
children's head for decades, you have to get a 4-year degree or
you are some kind of second-class citizen. There are great
jobs. There are great careers.
But my final thought is, as I look at my kids who are in
their 30s, they've got a lot of friends that did not go on to
college. Those adults now have children. They have got debt,
but it is a mortgage on a house and a boat. They are living a
life. The really smart kids went on to college and graduate
school. Some are not even working and they are $200,000 or
$300,000 into debt.
So I guess I will just kind of throw that open. Again,
encourage your associations. Use your power. Talk to the
private sector. Get them involved in middle school, in high
school and change that attitude in terms of all the valuable
occupations out there. Go to work, work hard, go home, forget
about it, go fishing.
Would you like to comment on that? Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. Senator, thank you.
In the infamous words of my daughters, we have to figure
out how to make hard work cool again. I am not sure I am the
right person to do that. I was not raised to--you know,
coddled. And maybe that is not the right choice of words. But
we have to get in these kids' heads exactly what you are saying
to articulate that hard work is cool. It can be rewarding. It
has a great career path. So you are exactly right.
Senator Johnson. I have talked to kids and when I tell them
this, you can almost see relief. I do not have to go to
college? No, you really do not. So again, we entice and we
force so many kids to college that just really it is not for
them. They would rather do something else but we are forcing
them.
Yes, Ms. Youngers.
Ms. Youngers. Thank you, Senator.
My construction members agree, and as I detailed in my
written testimony, we have at least one member that in fact is
reaching into the high schools. They are doing internships to
teach them about fiber deployment construction jobs. We have
another member that just launched a scholarship for high school
students wanting to go on in the construction area in
apprenticeships or community college work. And we have other
members starting initiatives to reach back further into the
high schools to develop a way to introduce them to these kind
of careers. It is not just construction. You are building fiber
networks. You are building 5G networks. These are the future
and hopefully you make it cool. And so we do have members who
are hearing what you are saying and they are reaching further
in and, as you are suggesting, trying to set that up at the
high school level. And we are looking at other initiatives as
well that our members will work directly with trade schools or
community colleges and try to develop even more programs. So
they agree with you.
Senator Johnson. So, again, what I am telling you is the
Federal Government does not need to be involved in this type of
effort, but this is crucial. It is really a root cause. So
focus on the Federal Government--the things that they must do,
the broadband, immigration reform, but when it comes to
workforce development have the private sector do that at a very
early level.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Johnson.
Senator Peters.
STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN
Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for our
witnesses today. It has been an interesting discussion.
Clearly, workforce is on all of our minds and I think it is
on your minds as well and one that I have been focusing a great
deal of effort on as well.
To Senator Johnson's point, where the Federal Government
puts their money is an indication of what we prioritize, and it
is clear that a substantial amount of money goes into 4-year
degree programs even though that may represent roughly 35
percent of the American population that goes on to get a 4-year
degree. And yet, career technical education, which could help
65 percent of the American folks out there, gets about one-
tenth of the resources that we put into 4-year programs. And so
many of these CT programs are underfunded. Demand far exceeds
the actual seats that they have in their programs because there
are folks, as I travel around Michigan, who want to get into
these programs but they cannot because of the shortage of
resources.
And one thing that I have also found is that we have to do
a better job when it comes to apprenticeships and understanding
how we work with private industry and create apprenticeship
programs that allow folks to learn their trade while also
learning other skills at the same time but on apprenticeship
programs, one of the most effective ways to do that.
And I know there is a TIRAP program, the Telecommunications
Industry Registered Apprenticeship Program. So, Mr. Miller,
this is for you. I think you have some familiarity with this
program.
We have two community colleges in Michigan that I know are
working with Monroe County Community College and Kalamazoo
Valley Community College.
Do you know how many companies are enrolled and
participating in the TIRAP program?
Mr. Miller. I think that answer is 27 companies and roughly
2,000 registered apprentices.
Senator Peters. Mr. Carr, you are familiar with this as
well?
Mr. Carr. The TIRAP program has about 30 companies in it
right now, about 2,000 apprenticeships in it. The Wireless
Industry Association has been working with them on those
efforts.
Senator Peters. It has 30 now. What is the goal, and do we
need more?
Mr. Carr. I think we certainly need to expand our
workforce. For my part, I have been focusing more of my time on
the community college side to see where we can reorient those
programs. WIA and others have been working with the Department
of Labor to expand the TIRAP program.
Senator Peters. You are using the TIRAP program now, Mr.
Miller, in your company?
Mr. Miller. I do not, no, sir.
Senator Peters. Is there a reason why you do not? Are there
some issues associated with it that are not attractive for you?
Mr. Miller. Well, I am on the advisory board for TIRAP. We
do most of our training in-house.
But the administrative and management piece for a small
business like me--there is nothing to compel me to take that
route when there are other routes I can take.
Senator Peters. What would make that program better in your
mind?
Mr. Miller. I understand funding has been an issue with the
apprenticeship program, and while their curriculum is good if
not better than the community college and other avenues we have
talked about here at this hearing, it is having difficulty
getting traction at the Department of Labor from a funding
perspective.
Senator Peters. So it seems like it goes back to what I
mentioned. Here we have a program. As you said, the curriculum
is as good or better than anything available in a community
college. Did I hear you correctly?
Mr. Miller. Well, it is equivalent. It is another path that
we need to make work, yes, sir, whether we take the community
college, private-public partnership, apprenticeship program in-
house. There is a certification body that sits on top of all
that when a student is ready, he will be card-carrying that
says I can do this. I am safe to climb and I am safe to rescue
somebody.
The Chairman. Who issues that card, Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. It is an alliance formed by NATE called the
National Wireless Safety Alliance, and it is assumed to be an
ANSI-approved certification body that includes a practical and
a written test at different levels of certification.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Of course, Senator Peters, we will not take that out of
your time. You may proceed.
Senator Peters. That was a good question.
So that model, obviously to your point saying it is
underfunded. Are there other types of apprenticeship programs
that you think would be helpful to you? And I want to open this
up to anyone else. What should we be thinking about in terms of
an apprenticeship program?
Ms. Youngers, I know you have talked about all the variety
of other skills that are necessary in the industry. Do you see
any shortages or gaps in that in relation to your demands and
needs?
Ms. Youngers. I think my members would say they still see
those shortages, and you can even hear from the different
testimony today we are identifying what those right skill sets
are. And so I think my members want to keep driving at
solutions. Here are the other things we still need, heavy
machinery operators, ability to read blueprints, ability to
design a network.
And I know someone mentioned earlier, when this all stops,
what happens? The employees maintain those networks. Those
networks have to be maintained in an ongoing way as well.
So I think my members would say they still see shortages.
We are only sort of at the beginning of identifying what all
those shortages are.
Senator Peters. And all those skills you mentioned are all
skills that someone requires of an apprenticeship program for
the most part.
Ms. Youngers. Right. So my members like the community
college approach. They also like apprenticeships. And then when
they talk about on-the-job training, they believe they need
that in addition to those other skills they are coming in with.
They think it all can work together. So I think they would
applaud any efforts to increase apprenticeship availability and
certainly the community college efforts that are going on, and
then they will still bolster that with their on-the-job
training. And that is also continuing. That does not just stop.
They have to continually train their employees as well.
Senator Peters. Mr. Feld.
Mr. Feld. I would add to this that recruitment and
targeting particular communities for recruitment is a
tremendous opportunity for not simply a win but multiple wins.
Back many years ago when I was starting out, I was in dropout
prevention, and programs that guaranteed jobs after high school
graduation, assuming that you meet certain qualifications, are
extremely useful in giving students incentive to stay in
school, complete the program, knowing that when they do, there
will be good jobs available for them.
Additionally, I would point out that the Minority Media
Telecommunications Council and Natural Urban League are
supporters of TIRAP. This is an example of how reaching to a
variety of audiences, including those that we do not
necessarily think of in minority communities, in urban
communities, that targeting these for outreach, working with
community organizations, not just the community colleges but
other organizations that are trusted within the community, that
are embedded in the community--all of these are proven
approaches and are an opportunity to reach out to urban and
rural communities that have traditionally suffered from high
unemployment and provide the opportunity for good, long-term
paying jobs.
Senator Peters. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Rosen, is that you down there at the end of the
dais? You are recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Rosen. Good morning everyone. Thank you for being
here today. Thank you for your hard work and effort in this
regard.
I got to do something fun a couple weeks ago because in my
home state of Nevada, we host the Consumer Electronic Show. And
let me tell you what I saw there was just amazing, how
technology is going to advance people with disabilities, people
who are aging. It is going to improve our travel, our home,
even our cooking. There are washing machines that will just
about do everything for you except put away the laundry. And so
it is really tremendous.
And Nevada is also home to data storage centers, emerging
solar, geothermal. We are number two in the country in
geothermal technology, battery storage research, and we have so
many tech startups.
And so, of course, upgrading our wireless industry, doing
all these things is going to require at least 20,000 new
workers, skilled workers in order to deploy all of this and use
all of this technology. I know you have been talking about
that.
So of course, we must invest in workforce development. In
fact, Senator Blackburn and I just last week introduced the
Advanced Manufacturing Jobs in America Act that is going to
have the Department of Labor work with the Manufacturing
Extension Partnerships, community colleges, tribal colleges,
other partners to give the kinds of technical training and
skills that we are going to use.
And so, Mr. Feld and Mr. Miller, would you share with us
additional recommendations you may have for improving
participation in the existing workforce development programs
especially for our under-represented and rural communities--I
have a lot of that in Nevada--and the challenges that could
exist for not just rural but women, people of color, and those
with disabilities? Please.
Mr. Feld. There is something called the Willie Sutton Rule
which is Willie Sutton was a bank robber. He was asked why do
you rob banks? He said that is where the money is.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Feld. Part of this is recruitment where the communities
are. It is challenging when you tell people in these
communities that you need to go to a local community college,
enroll in these things, in some cases either have lengthy
commutes or leave your community. For example, I would say that
there are a large number of tribal governments which would be
interested in workforce development programs, and these tribal
governments should be seen as partners. And there should be
outreach perhaps encouraged by Federal programs to employers to
reach out to these communities.
Similarly, I would say that my son is an Eagle Scout, of
whom I am very proud. I know that there is a lot of beginning
training that is done in the scouts that leads people to
careers. I would say work with youth-oriented organizations,
particularly those that work with women, that work with
traditionally disadvantaged communities, that these are all
potential partners in the non-commercial sector who would be
quite eager to work with commercial providers in providing good
jobs for people.
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Senator.
It goes back to we have got to make hard work cool again.
And another thing that is interesting about this industry
is most of us--we take our cell phone for granted. It works. We
talk. We send pictures, and we take it for granted.
And behind the scenes every day, thousands of towers are
being climbed and maintained or being constructed. But it is
all invisible to you. And it is a great thing, but it is also
hidden from our workforce. So that was part of my testimony. We
have got to get the word out that this is a career. It exists.
It is real.
Going back to earlier discussions, we have definitely got
to get at the high school level and begin the recruitment there
is my thoughts.
Senator Rosen. And I would like to--just in final, in
closing, I would just like to say not just make hard work cool
again because a lot of work is hard. What we have to do is try
to pair somebody's talents with the work and then that is what
makes the work good for you regardless of what the work is. And
so that is what is important, is that there is good work out
there for people. Pair your talents, pair your passion, make a
good living, build your family, build your community. That is
the message I think we need to get out.
So thank you for your time. Yes?
Mr. Feld. If I could just add one last point. There is also
the need to reassure people who go into this that there will be
continued employment after the current boom subsides. One of
the things I have heard that has deterred--in the truck
industry, for example, I hear from the autonomous vehicle side
that people are concerned about going into careers in trucking
because they keep being told that 10 years from now those jobs
will disappear. So certainly apprenticeship programs are an
excellent way to keep people within the workforce, but an
important element is to reassure people who sign up for these
careers today that they are not going to be unemployed 5 years
from now when we finish the massive deployment.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Rosen.
But I think, Mr. Feld, that is a phenomenon all the way
across our economy. Is it not? Because what used to be a career
that a person could have for 30 or 40 years, in our society the
technology is changing so much and the economy is changing so
much that we are going to have several careers.
Do you have anything you would like to----
Mr. Feld. I would like to put in a plug for the Digital
Equity Act which tries to address some of that concern with
regard to providing opportunities for training across a wide
range of digital opportunities where these skills that are
needed can be developed and transferred from one career to the
next. So I believe that, yes, you are right. This is a very
common problem. Fortunately, there are some good solutions in
the pipeline.
The Chairman. Great. And, boy, for those truckers, a 10-
year career and then moving on to something that might pay even
more might not be so bad.
Commissioner Carr, in your written testimony, you mentioned
a number of success stories. Houston, Cincinnati--these are big
towns. Then you mentioned places where you might not expect
such success in 5G, Sioux Falls, South Dakota; Elkmont,
Alabama. What suggestion would you make to a not-so-big town so
that they might have the same type of success that you have
pointed to in your written testimony?
Mr. Carr. Thanks, Senator, for the question.
You know, the finish line for us is every single community
getting next gen connectivity. And to your point, we have
established guardrails at the Federal that build on those
infrastructure policies that a lot of those State and local
leaders are seeing successes put in place. So we put guardrails
at the Federal level that reflect that. And I would simply
encourage a lot of State and local governments that want to see
5G, that want to see the economic opportunity to continue to
update and modernize their approach to infrastructure builds.
That will go a long way.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Miller, you have come a long way for this testimony. I
want to make sure that you have said all you need to say. But
let me start off by asking you about the challenge in getting
young people trained to work in your company and in your field,
and then what is the challenge in keeping them there. How long
does it take to take someone who is interested, get them into
one of these programs, and get them started making a good
living? And then what is the problem in--what are our
challenges in losing them?
Mr. Miller. Thank you, Senator.
First off, the majority of the training initially for
anybody in the wireless industry is safety. So it is a high
risk industry. Working at heights is not normal. It takes a
special person to do that. So you are looking at at least two
weeks of climbing with somebody, climbing classes, rescue
classes, basic rope techniques, basic rigging techniques. So
everything we do up there we have to carry up or get it up
there somehow. So that is the first two weeks of it. Then you
have got an employee that can assist you on a tower.
After that, you move into the more technical details of it,
whether it is align an antenna. There is fiber optic cable on
towers. So you are dealing with more of the technical aspects
of it.
But a thoroughly competent employee skilled in this
industry, 8 months to a year before they really know it all.
The Chairman. That is a relatively encouraging bit of
testimony because it is not a terribly long time.
Mr. Miller. It is not. Some of the issues we do face is
competing industries.
The Chairman. OK, and that brings me to part two of my
question.
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Who is trying to hire these kids away from
you?
Mr. Miller. Two things.
First off, the height and the travel. And a lot of people
are intrigued by this industry, but the travel versus family
can start weighing on a person. That is one of our biggest
hurdles is the travel aspect of this industry.
Second to that is more glorified jobs that perhaps have
less outdoor exposure. You know, you get trapped on a tower at
300 feet when it rains or the temperatures are like today, it
can be a harsh environment to work in.
The Chairman. Well, thank you very much.
Now, Mr. Feld, you made a statement that I would like for
you to expand on and that is the idea of working as
collaborators rather than barriers. Tell the Committee exactly
specifically what you are talking about, and what needs to
happen and how can we help.
Mr. Feld. Thank you.
I would point to a program in West Virginia where they
provide grants to local governments to do broadband planning
and make-ready. And what this allows is for the local community
to pinpoint exactly what the needs are, who the potential
collaborators are within the community. And therefore, when the
discussion comes to providers, they are able to have informed
discussions about what the concerns are, how to avoid those
concerns, what assets the locality can contribute to make the
deployment more economically viable and attractive. And it
becomes a collaborative relationship where the issue is, look,
we want to have these services, but we have very legitimate
concerns. And if you put a micro-cell next to somebody's
bedroom, you know, they are going to call me not the carrier.
So those are the sorts of things that you want to see
communities work out together with carriers to develop plans
that make these an opportunity and where carriers do not just
come in and are trying to stick to their schedule, are not
concerned about that call from an outraged voter, and make sure
that things are done right.
The Chairman. Commissioner Carr, do you wish to elaborate
on this issue of collaboration versus barrier?
Mr. Carr. Yes. I think it is an important topic. Again,
today I think Senator Cantwell laid out State and local
governments are going to play a big, big role in determining
the pace and nature of 5G build-out in this country. We put
some guardrails in place, as I noted, at the Federal level. But
at the end of the day, it comes down to good faith
negotiations, reasonableness on both providers and individual
communities and State and local governments to make sure the
job gets done in those places. And we have seen a tremendous
up-tick in infrastructure build over the last few years, but we
are not there yet. So we need to continue to see collaboration
on those issues.
The Chairman. What if negotiation does not get you there?
Mr. Carr. There are some backstops that we put in place on
Federal law. But to be honest, there are a lot of communities
and private sector builders that were not able to bridge the
gap in their negotiating positions, and since the FCC stepped
in and built on some common sense local ideas, those gaps are
being bridged. There are communities across the country now
that have reasonable infrastructure policies in place that are
a win-win for the local community and for the U.S. leadership
in 5G, and I think we are going to continue to see that.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Cantwell, do you have further questions?
Senator Cantwell. I always have further things, but I saw
our colleague, Senator Sinema. I do not know if she is----
The Chairman. I think she has deferred.
Senator Cantwell. OK.
Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that the witnesses here have
done a good job this morning illuminating this issue.
And, Mr. Miller, you brought something to the forefront
here. I do not know if we have forgotten about hard work, but I
do think that we need to illuminate how important this issue
is. So in that regard, I think if we put out a statement that
we are calling all of our citizens who can help us build out
the system and why it is so important to build it out, I
definitely think people will respond. And I think that
elevating that to a bigger national priority and illuminating
the fact that that is--you know, it is kind of what we have
done.
Building the hydro system, as I said--I cannot wait for
this movie to ever be made, The Boys in the Boat, because yes,
it is a story about us in the Olympics, but it is about a bunch
of guys who also helped build the hydroelectric system in the
country. And it will help illuminate what the danger of that
hard work was. People died and it was risky. But the benefits
of building that out for our Nation just paid such tremendous
dividends as this next phase will too.
So thank you for talking about the workforce in a way that
shows the hard work that these individuals do. So thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
Ms. Bloomfield, I am told you had your hand up on the last
exchange. So you are recognized.
Ms. Bloomfield. I just wanted to conclude. As you all are
talking about collaboration, you are talking about smart
cities. One of the initiatives we put underway is creating
smart rural communities. And it is that collaborative spirit,
and part of it is when we talk about training, we are talking
about technical training. And that is very key obviously,
building these networks. But the other part of it, the
collaborative piece, is how do you then train your communities
to actually use the broadband that you are deploying. How do
you actually make these communities smart? How do you get
technicians in rural health care hospitals to actually
understand and not be afraid of using some of that
infrastructure? So I just wanted to throw out that that is
another important piece that we think about. It is the user
side, not just the builder side. So again I think they kind of
go hand in glove.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Sullivan, they are already starting to turn the
lights out, but you are recognized.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAN SULLIVAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I just want to thank the witnesses.
I have a very basic question. Commissioner Carr, maybe we
can start with you, but I would like to open it up to all the
panelists here.
You know, we talk about rural and we talk about my State,
which is really, really rural. And you know, there is
legislation. I cannot remember exactly what year it was but in
the 1900s, the Telecommunications Act actually mandates--
mandates--broadband deployment to all parts of America--all
parts, including the most rural. And sometimes I think the
FCC--no offense, but particularly with this Chairman--does not
get it, does not understand it, does not recognize what the
mandate of the law is. And so how do we do that? How do we do
that? It is great to have it in New York City and 5G
everywhere. Heck, we are still trying to get 4G, 2G, 3G in my
State.
And sometimes the Federal agencies forget about us, and it
is frustrating. It has been really frustrating with this FCC in
particular. And I think they violate the law in a lot of ways.
I think they ignore constituents in places like Alaska. So how
do we get there? Because, you know, we are all Americans and
sometimes these big Federal agencies in D.C. forget about the
Americans who live 4,000 miles away, and it is frustrating,
really, really frustrating. We ought to move the FCC to
Anchorage and maybe you guys will pay attention.
Do you have any thoughts on that?
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
I think our goal has to be to make sure every single
community in this country gets----
Senator Sullivan. Do you think every commissioner knows
that?
Mr. Carr. I would hope so.
Senator Sullivan. I do not think they do.
Mr. Carr. For my part, I spent time up in Utqiagvik, the
northernmost community in Alaska in the country.
Senator Sullivan. Wonderful people. Right? Some of the most
patriotic Americans in the whole country.
Mr. Carr. I had a chance to climb a telephone pole there,
help splice fiber, go underground in their utilidor. I was out
on the Aleutian Island chain, climbed a tower there----
Senator Sullivan. Also great people.
Mr. Carr [continuing]. With Rodrigo who grew up on the
island. He now has a job as a tower tech, a tower climber, out
on one of the Aleutian Islands in Alaska.
We are not across the finish line yet. There is a lot more
work that we have to do, and I am committed to continuing to
make progress on this issue.
Senator Sullivan. So how do we do that? Do you not have a
mandate to do that, first of all?
Mr. Carr. We are standing up a number of funding
mechanisms.
Senator Sullivan. Do you have a mandate to do that?
Mr. Carr. Yes. The Communications Act, absolutely.
Senator Sullivan. So I just always find it a little bit
frustrating that I have to remind commissioners that this is
not like an option. Congress spoke. Everybody, all Americans,
including my constituents. So how do we get there?
Mr. Carr. We are taking a number of steps right now to try
to do that.
Senator Sullivan. I think the Chairman is going backward on
rural health to be perfectly honest, but that is a whole other
topic.
Go ahead. I apologize. I actually feel very passionately
about this, as you can imagine, but I will let you answer the
question.
The Chairman. The witness can answer the question.
Mr. Carr. Thank you, Senator, for your leadership on this.
It is incredibly important.
I have seen the challenges that come with connecting rural
and remote parts of Alaska. It is like nothing else that we
have in this country. I have gone from Anchorage to a small
clinic in Manokotak. It was two flights, a drive on what passed
for a passable road, and you needed a four-wheel drive to get
to this clinic. And when we have health care, telehealth
delivered in these remote communities, it is life or death,
obviously. It is also financial. It can cost $10,000-$70,000 to
do a lifeline flight when it is available out of these
communities.
When I was in Utqiagvik, I was in the airport. I was just
talking to a woman who was waiting for a flight. I told her I
was with the FCC. We were here to talk about telehealth and
broadband expansion. She said you have no idea what it means to
a member of this community to get to stay here and get health
care delivered right here through telehealth or otherwise
rather than having to get on a plane and go to even Anchorage.
So stories like that stick with me, and we need to continue to
make progress because we are not where we need to be yet.
Senator Sullivan. Well, look, I appreciate the fact that
you have come up to Alaska a number of times and you have a
real sense.
The one thing that is a bit of a frustration is the law is
clear. The law is clear in my view. And yet, you hear from the
FCC, well, it is really expensive. But the law does not say, of
course, it is really expensive, but it still does not matter
that you are not supposed to do it. There is nothing in the law
that says you can do it, FCC, unless it is really expensive.
Then you do not have to. That is not in the law.
So I think one of the things that frustrates me--and maybe
I will just leave it open to the final panelists--is that there
is no cost-benefit. You are supposed to do this. And we need
your help, and I appreciate you being up there.
Do any other witnesses have thoughts on extreme rural
communities for states like mine?
Ms. Bloomfield. So, Senator, I represent all of the
independent providers and co-ops in Alaska, and I do know the
challenges firsthand they of connecting particularly their
villages. And it is very unique because they actually have very
dense villages but then miles and miles to carry that traffic.
So I was very excited. You have a carrier up there, Matt
Nusca, MTA, that just announced that they are creating a fiber
connectivity to the Lower 48 which I think will create some
redundancy and some great opportunities. And USDA just
announced some ReConnect money that will be going to Alaska to
build some broadband infrastructure out there in some of the
village communities.
So, again, trying to find a way to connect all those pieces
is going to be important, but those folks have a huge challenge
ahead of them.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
Mr. Feld. Senator, I would say there are a couple of
concrete things that the FCC can do right away.
First is to expand the tribal window for the 2.5 gigahertz
application process and to commit to doing further windows for
those deployments. In a lot of tribal areas, these frequencies
could be used to promote rural broadband.
Second, I do need to point out that it is one of the core
central responsibilities of the Communications Act that says in
its opening sentence to bring to all Americans. You are
absolutely 100 percent correct about that. And we, Public
Knowledge, work with the Broadband Connects America Coalition,
which brings together a number of rural groups.
But I know people may not be happy to hear this, but it is
Title 2 of the Communications Act that was developed during the
electrification of America when we were first deploying our
national phone system that contains the tools that is designed
to solve this problem through the Universal Service Fund in
section 254, through the responsibility of carriers to serve
everyone within their service area not cherry-pick only those
where it is most profitable to serve. And I realize this is
unpopular with no Democrats in the room, but this should be
bipartisan. But broadband is clearly the utility of the 21st
century, as essential as electricity, as essential as the
telephone was, and it should be classified as Title 2 so that
State and the Federal Government have the tools to bring that
service to all Americans.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, if we can have one more witness for just a
comment, if that is all right.
Ms. Youngers. Thank you.
And I would just add and echo we agree with you. Actually
the language in the statute is that rural Americans should
receive the comparable service of their urban counterparts--
comparable service.
Senator Sullivan. It is not about cost. Right?
Ms. Youngers. Right. And so we agree and we echo that.
The Fiber Broadband Association is a fiber educator. We
educate entities on how to build fiber networks, and we are
seeing more and more entities come to us from rural America who
want to build their own high-speed fiber network because their
residents need it and it brings so many other benefits. And
frankly, you need fiber in the community anyway if you ever are
going to have 5G certainly to support wireless networks,
Internet of Things applications, and even other things that we
have not even talked about. Fiber optics can also provide
sensing and security applications for pipeline safety, border
control. So there are a lot of reasons to have fiber in the
community and we are witnessing rural communities, including
either electric co-ops or municipal networks, come to us and
say we are going to build our own fiber networks, sometimes a
public-private partnership, but how do we do that? And so we
are seeing it drive further into rural America.
I know you have particular challenges in your state, but I
think the good news is we are seeing fiber drive closer to
rural America.
Senator Sullivan. Well, thank you.
And I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for indulging me
here, but I think the witnesses are making a really good point
that sometimes, to be honest, is lost on the commission. The
number of times that I have heard a commissioner or commission
staff say, well, you know, you guys are really expensive up
there in Alaska, so we cannot do X, Y, and Z, or we are going
to cut back X, Y, Z. It is a frustration. I think you are
violating the law, and we need to work together to get this to
all America, which was the mandate of the Congress over two
decades ago. So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Sullivan.
The hearing record will remain open for two weeks. During
this time, Senators are asked to submit any questions for the
record. Upon receipt, the witnesses are requested to submit
their written answers to the Committee as soon as possible but
no later than Wednesday, February 19, 2020.
So I thank the witnesses.
At this point, I want to take a point of personal
privilege. My long-term staff assistant and case worker, Linda
Tollison of Tupelo, Mississippi, died yesterday. She was with
me when I was a struggling lawyer. When I went to Congress, she
became a public servant. When I moved over to the U.S. Senate,
she joined our she joined our staff there. She believed in hard
work. She believed in her family, and she helped literally
thousands of Americans receive the benefits to which they were
entitled. And she represents thousands and thousands of people
like her who work for this Congress and they work diligently
and serve the public.
So behalf of them, without objection, this hearing is
adjourned today in honor of and in memory of Linda Tollison.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
Hon. Brendan Carr
Question 1. As you know, we have highly consequential, outstanding
items before the Commission. Please provide a status update on the
following petition: Maniilaq Association's appeal of USAC's denial of
FY2017 FRNs.
Answer. The Commission has granted the waiver sought by Maniilaq
Association, and directed USAC to reinstate the funding commitments
within 60 days, and discontinue its recovery actions against Maniilaq.
The final order can be found here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/
attachments/DA-20-173A1.pdf
Question 2. A popular band of spectrum, the C-band, is being
prepped to be made available to wireless carriers. Alaska's C-band is
critical for telemedicine and other important programs. In a response
to a letter the Alaska delegation sent last year regarding C-band
incumbents in Alaska, the FCC responded that one of the 4 principles
for reallocation of this band is ``protecting services that are
currently delivered.'' As the FCC begins to reallocate critical C-band
spectrum, what considerations are you giving to incumbent users who it
may be impossible or impractical to relocate?
Answer. In Unalaska, I had the chance to see firsthand the
important role that C-Band spectrum plays in connecting rural and
remote parts of Alaska. While there, I visited the one health care
clinic on the island, and it depends on C-Band to offer telehealth
services. The draft decision that the FCC is scheduled to vote on at
our February meeting excludes areas outside of the contiguous United
States from the proposed license modifications.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Hon. Brendan Carr
Question. Commissioner Carr, thank you for your recent visit to New
Mexico and to the Mescalero Apache Reservation. As you saw firsthand,
New Mexico is a beautiful state to live in--but we have many challenges
to access high-speed broadband.
My friends at Mescalero Apache Telecom have done excellent work
serving their customers with the infrastructure challenges they face--
but you saw for yourself the significant hurdle facing school
children's access to adequate broadband in that area.
In 2018, Senator Cantwell, Representative Lujan, and I wrote to the
Bureau of Indian Education requesting that it work with schools and,
where possible, allow BIE schools to use a local broadband connection
that may be more affordable and faster.
BIE refused this request with a flurry of excuses.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of the
letter and response in the record.
Commissioner--we all know that children in BIE schools are at an
extreme disadvantage when it comes to high-speed broadband.
Additionally, as the BIE cited in its response to me--90 percent of the
cost of broadband for BIE schools comes from the E-Rate program. So
BIE's decision not only hinders access to higher speeds, it also puts a
burden on the extremely important E-Rate program. Will you commit to
work with me to help our Native students gain access to high-speed
broadband, including advocating to allow BIE schools to use a local
broadband connection if more affordable and faster?
Answer. I greatly appreciated the chance to see firsthand the
challenges that come with expanding Internet connectivity across rural
New Mexico and remote stretches of the Mescalero Apache Reservation. On
that visit, I had the chance to meet with students at the Mescalero
Apache School and learn how they are leveraging Internet connections to
expand opportunities, including in STEM. I am not familiar with the
nuances of the BIE program or regulations, but I would welcome the
chance to work with you on any ideas that would enable better and more
affordable broadband connections at BIE schools.
______
Congress of the United States
Washington, DC, December 13, 2018
Tony L. Dearman,
Director,
Bureau of Indian Education,
Department of the Interior,
Washington, DC.
Dear Director Dearman,
We are concerned that Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) schools have
been paying significantly greater amounts for slower broadband service
than non BIE schools in the same area, and urge the BIE to take full
advantage of new Federal IT procurement policies that appear to allow
more flexible and improved options. As you are well aware, broadband
connectivity is no longer optional for students to effectively prepare
for our 21st century society and economy--including students located in
remote areas of our country. Not only are these students being left
behind by crumbling physical infrastructure, they are also being left
behind due to needless obstacles blocking them from accessing high-
speed broadband at school which do not make the best use of limited BIE
funds.
For many years, every BIE school has been required to purchase
telecommunications services under the General Service Administration's
Networx contract. However, on June 15, 2017 the Office of Management
and Budget (0MB) issued a new memorandum, M-l7-26, which revised and
rescinded a number of previous 0MB Memoranda. This new memo rescinds
and replaces M-08-26 that outlined the agencies' transition to the
Networx contract. It is our understanding that now BIE schools may no
longer be required to receive their information services through the
GSA contract, under which services can cost as much as 23 times more
than other schools pay for comparable services in the same geographic
area.
We seek your confirmation that this change allows BIE schools
flexibility to pursue other options outside of the GSA contract that
may offer better service at lower prices. If so, we then request that
you outline any specific efforts that BIE has taken and plans to take
to assist BIE schools to reduce costs and obtain faster service with
more flexible options to secure broadband services for BIE schools and
students while complying with Federal contracting procedures.
We look forward to working with you to improve broadband service
for BIE schools and request a response by January 11, 2019.
Sincerely,
Tom Udall
U.S. Senator
Maria Cantwell
U.S. Senator
Ben Ray Lujan
U.S. Representative
______
United States Department of the Interior
Bureau of Indian Education
Washington, DC, Apr 10, 2019
Hon. Tom Udall,
United States Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Udall:
Thank you for your letter dated December 13, 2018. On behalf of the
Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) and Indian Affairs, we thank you for
your continued support of Indian children and for your outreach.
The BIE in partnership with Indian Affairs more broadly supports
BIE-operated schools, Tribally controlled schools, Tribal colleges and
universities, adult learning centers and juvenile detention centers
located on 64 reservations across 23 states serving approximately
42,000 students. The Education Native American Network (ENAN) Wide Area
Network (WAN) interconnects these schools and post-secondary
institutions to provide Internet access to students. Many BIE schools
are located in some of the most remote locations in the country and
lack an adequate level of connectivity to the Internet. This hampers
the modem demands of teaching and learning. Broadband-enabled teaching
and learning has fundamentally reshaped education at all levels and has
improved access to expanded educational opportunities. Broadband access
is particularly important for schools located in remote locations
because it can mitigate the impact that geographic isolation can have
on student achievement, particularly lack of access to deep applicant
pools of effective teachers and principals.
The ENAN WAN circuit costs for BIE K-12 schools are funded 90
percent by the FCC's E-Rate Program and 10 percent by BIE's Education
IT Central Office budget. After accounting for Tribal colleges and
universities, adult education centers, dormitories, and other BIE
offices, which are not E-Rate eligible, E-Rate funds approximately 70
percent of the overall circuit expenses with the remaining 30 percent
paid by BIE's Education IT Central Office budget.
We have successfully upgraded 83 circuits for BIE K-12 schools to
meet broadband status. However, there are currently 14 K-12 schools
using BIE ENAN circuits that do not meet broadband status but at the
direction of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs they are being
upgraded.
The 0MB Memorandum 17-26 rescinded 0MB Memorandum 08-26, which
required agencies to procure data services using the GSA Networx
contract. The successor to the Networx contract is GSA's Enterprise
Infrastructure Solutions (EIS) contract. The Department of the
Interior's Chief Information Officer (CIO) has issued a memorandum,
dated August 19, 2018, directing all Bureaus and Offices to use the GSA
EIS contract. An enterprise contract such as EIS allows agencies with
limited staff and resources to focus on services and customer support
with less time spent on administrative matters, such as billing and
contract management. This will enhance BIE's ability to provide high-
speed broadband services to all BIE-funded schools, Tribal colleges and
universities, at reduced costs.
There are many challenges in building and maintaining a WAN that
interconnects remote sites spanning multiple states. The ENAN network
circuit cost to connect remote sites typically costs more than
procuring broadband service locally. The higher costs are due to
guaranteed up-time of data circuits, service level agreements, and data
encryption to ensure secure transmission of data, which are not
typically offered by local vendors.
Indian Affairs and BIE are working on transitioning to the new GSA
EIS contract. The EIS contract affords us the opportunity to assess the
use of state-of-the-art technologies, such as software-defined wide-
area network (SD-WAN) and Zero Trust Networking (ZTN) to replace
outdated networking protocols and platforms currently in use. This
could allow us to procure local broadband services using secure data
transmission over the Internet. There are also other technologies
currently available that we are assessing for implementation on the
ENAN network, such as Virtual Private Network (VPN) technologies to
allow us to procure local broadband services at reduced costs.
If the individual schools were to procure broadband circuits
locally instead of using ENAN, the ability to provide a number of
centralized services would be compromised and would increase costs for
each school in goods, services, and labor; such as:
Child Internet Protection Act (CIPA) Compliance
Anti-virus software and licenses
Centrally managed vulnerability patching
Centrally managed/distributed computer images
Microsoft Windows desktop/laptop licenses
Microsoft Server licenses
Server management
Centrally managed directory services
Direct access to other DOI and BIE Systems
Centrally managed e-mail services
Indian Affairs and BIE understand the value of providing students a
21st Century education that includes access to the latest technology
and support for digital learning. We will continue our work together to
ensure our students have such opportunities. If you have additional
concerns or require further attention. please contact our office at
(202) 208-6123.
Similar letters are being sent to the Honorable Maria Cantwell and
the Honorable Ben Ray Lujan.
Sincerely,
Tony L. Dearman,
Director,
Bureau of Indian Education.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
Hon. Brendan Carr
As you know, Educational Broadband Services (EBS) resides in the
mid-band spectrum, in the 2.5GHz band and has helped foster programs
that tackle the homework gap and digital divide by providing spectrum
for broadband services. In Arizona, the Havasupai Tribe uses EBS
channels for wireless routers for their members to take online classes.
Last year, the Tribe was granted four new EBS channels that they intend
to use for telemedicine.
Last year, the FCC finalized a rule to update the framework for
licensing EBS spectrum in the 2.5 GHz band. The final rule included
priority filing windows for Tribes to apply for 2.5GHz licenses before
issuing licenses for any remaining spectrum through auction.
First, I want to again thank the Commission for establishing a
Tribal Priority window for new EBS license issuance for Tribal National
in the final rule. This decision provides Tribes with the opportunity
to expand rural broadband, accelerate 5G deployment, close the digital
divide, and bridge the homework gap.
Question 1. How will the FCC work to help recipients of these
licenses meet buildout requirements?
Answer. I agree that the Rural Tribal Priority Window is a
significant opportunity to improve broadband service offerings and to
close the digital divide on Tribal lands. I recently spent time with
Tribal leaders on the Mescalero Apache Reservation, and they conveyed
their interest in the 2.5 GHz spectrum and appreciation for the
expanded Priority Window. The FCC is committed to assisting Tribes
through this process, including through a number of engagements lead by
FCC Commissioners in the Office of Native Affairs and Policy. For
example, the Commission's website contains detailed information on the
Tribal window (https://www.fcc.gov/25-ghz-rural-tribal-window),
including links to workshops, presentations, tutorials, and staff
contact information.
Question 2. Has the FCC considered opening priority windows for
tribal communities in other future license auctions?
Answer. This is the first time that I am aware of the FCC opening a
priority window for Tribes. I am open to considering additional windows
where doing so will further the public interest.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
Jimmy Miller
The National Association of Tower Erectors works hard to ensure
workers in the communications infrastructure industry have the
training, education, and assistance necessary for workers to safely
complete their duties.
Question 1. How can the Federal government best work with
universities, colleges, and career and technical schools to best
prepare students for the jobs needed to build 5G networks and leverage
the potential of this technology?
Answer. Of course, recognizing and appreciating that a problem
exists is the critical first step in trying to resolve it, and our
industry's workforce shortage is certainly a problem. Solving it--or at
least taking steps to address it--is clearly in the national interest,
as critical communications capabilities and the infrastructure that
support them are inextricably linked to our Nation's economy and
competitiveness as well as its security. So having a strong Federal
role in helping to build 5G networks, in addition to developing the
associated infrastructure and smart technologies, and leveraging the
potential of this technology is paramount.
As I mentioned in my oral testimony before the committee, NATE
strongly supports the bipartisan ``Communications Jobs Training Act''
that has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and is
encouraging a companion version of the bill to be introduced in the
U.S. Senate. I am very proud that we worked closely with the original
sponsor, Congressman Dave Loebsack (D-IA), on this initiative. While
the funding that the bill would authorize--$20 million per year for
each of three Federal Fiscal Years--is enormous to small businesses
like mine, it is quite modest in the Federal world. As NATE
representatives discussed with your staff last year, the bill, if
enacted would start the ball rolling in the development of curriculum,
certificate programs and training towers at community colleges,
vocational institutes and military organizations, thereby helping our
industry attract and ultimately educate and train people who will be
prepared to build, deploy and maintain 5G networks and other telecom
infrastructure.
NATE's Workforce Development Committee has established a
standardized telecommunications technician curriculum model that can be
adopted by community college, technical institutes and veterans
organizations interested in starting a program. Much like the
Association did with the programs at Aiken Technical College in South
Carolina and Southeast Technical Institute in South Dakota; we are
committed to working with lawmakers, educational institutions and
industry stakeholders to identify, support and facilitate programs at
schools around the country. NATE would be excited to collaborate with
Senator Sinema and her staff to identify potential schools in the state
of Arizona that may be ideal institutions to start Wireless
Infrastructure Technician programs.
In order to get the ball across the goal line, we advocate the
development of a comprehensive package of telecom-related legislation,
several of which have already been introduced and are pending before
the Senate Commerce Committee. We believe a package stands a greater
chance of enactment than individual bills do. My written testimony
notes several of these bills, including:
Sen. Sinema's ``Tower Infrastructure Deployment Act,''
that would facilitate participation in industry-specific workforce
development programs and identify ways to improve workforce development
in the communications industry;
the ``Industries of the Future Act,'' which would ensure
appropriate levels of funding for certain careers in demand due to next
generation wireless networks;
the ``STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act,'' which would
reduce regulatory obstacles to deployment; and
various apprenticeship bills, such as the ``Apprentice
Hubs Across America Act.''
Beyond enactment of such authorizing bills, appropriations of
authorized funds will be essential if we are to win the race to 5G and
beyond.
My testimony also referenced the U.S. Department of Labor--OSHA
Susan Harwood Targeted Topic Training Grant that NATE has received for
the past five years. These funds, which enable us to develop curriculum
and free training sessions nationwide, are subject to annual
congressional appropriations; accordingly, we urge the Appropriations
Committees to continue funding this important program, too.
Another key program that offers enormous potential--especially if
there were to be any way to highlight the telecom industry--is the
Perkins Act, which as reauthorized helps individuals gain the academic
and technical skills needed to be successful in today's workforce.
Providing funding for Career Technical Education (CTE) programs and job
training for students, and charging states with setting and making
progress on their CTE goals, will facilitate connections between
secondary and postsecondary education and employers.
There are other federally supported workforce development programs
that provide productive opportunities to support and expand educational
opportunities, as my industry peer Lisa Youngers of the Fiber Broadband
Association testified when we were on the panel together before the
Commerce Committee. As she said: ``The Department of Labor Employment
and Training Administration provides oversight over two grant programs
that can make a difference. The Workforce Opportunities for Rural
Communities and the Apprenticeship Readiness grant programs are each
geared toward supporting educational institutions and other programs
that will provide skills training that help put people to work . . .
Congress should also explore other opportunities to find new funds to
support this type of training.''
Question 2. How do we ensure that individuals of working age get
the right training to obtain infrastructure and other jobs related to
5G deployment?
Answer. First and foremost, it is essential that potential workers
are made aware of jobs--good jobs--in our industry. It is not enough to
seek out people who are attending community colleges, vocational
institutes and military organizations. We need to actively inform and
solicit potential workers while they are in high school. One of the
critically important things that must be done is getting the word out
that we have really good paying jobs available. And, as I said during
the hearing, we have to make hard work cool again.
I also testified specifically about training. My written statement
noted that our ``highly skilled technician positions must be filled by
people sufficiently educated and trained in proper techniques and in
the use of the requisite equipment. This is not a quick undertaking.
Employers who train their own employees and the industry's private
training company providers can often get a technician through
rudimentary safety training in two weeks, but he or she needs at least
a year on the job to become competent at a specialty in which the
employer works.''
There are many training pathways readily available to prospective
workers who enter the industry, including, but not limited to,
employer-based training programs, private, 3rd party training
providers, transitioning military training programs and the
Telecommunications Industry Registered Apprenticeship Program (TIRAP).
The industry's worker certification credentialing organization, the
National Wireless Safety Alliance (NWSA), is perhaps one of the most
important elements of ensuring that workers are trained in accordance
with the technical skills and standards required of the 5G deployment
cycle. NWSA provides nationwide, portable worker credentials to tower
technicians in progressive worker categories in order to ensure
continued excellence and professionalism in the industry. After workers
receive training to become tower technicians, companies have an
opportunity to ensure that their workers obtain NWSA certification
credentials that are applicable throughout the country. Workers,
regardless of their training pathway, will ultimately be required to
take a standardized NWSA knowledge and field-based assessment in order
to become certified.
NWSA offers worker certification credentials in the following
worker categories: Telecommunications Tower Technician I (TTTI),
Telecommunications Tower Technician II (TTTII), Antenna & Line
Specialty and Foreman. Much like an electrician's card, the NWSA
certification card is a source of pride for workers and is creating a
career pathway for the industry's technician workforce to follow. This
is significant as it ensures that workers can demonstrate they have the
skills necessary to build, upgrade and maintain 5G networks in a
quality and safe manner. NWSA certified personnel provide the wireless
carriers, vertical real-estate companies and engineering firms the
confidence to know that the personnel working on their infrastructure
and networks are professionals.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to
Lisa R. Youngers
Question. You indicated in your oral statement that China has
significant excess optical fiber manufacturing capacity. What will be
the impact on the U.S. fiber optics industry if Chinese manufacturers
are allowed to dispose of this surplus in the U.S. market? If the
surplus Chinese fiber is imported and installed in our domestic
networks, does it potentially threaten the security of our networks:
that is, can it technically be designed to facilitate unauthorized
exfiltration of data or to enable network disruption? If so, how would
this technically be performed?
Answer. As I said in my testimony, if Chinese manufacturers are
allowed unfettered access to the U.S. optical fiber market, they would
likely ``dump'' their huge excess production capacity into the U.S.
Market. China has enough excess capacity to supply the entire U.S.
market all by itself. The aggressive pricing that would be required to
dispose of such a large surplus would cause enormous harm to the U.S.
optical fiber industry and its workers.
In addition, in such case, Chinese fiber would be deployed in the
U.S. 5G network and threaten the security of the supply chain for
optical fiber technology. It would also make the 5G network vulnerable
to unauthorized access by an adversary.
If so motivated, an adversary could easily exfiltrate data off an
optical fiber network without detection. Deloitte published an article
in 2017 that explains in non-technical terms how easy it is to tap a
fiber networks. The article states:
``Deloitte finds that there is a prevailing, misguided belief
that fibre networks are more secure than other media, such as
copper and wireless technologies. Fibre networks are vulnerable
to taping through the use of well-known techniques such as man-
in-the-middle, re-routing and exploiting protocol
vulnerabilities and software vulnerabilities in network
devices.
There is also a perception that fiber networks are much better
protected against physical interference and the installation of
tapping equipment. This is a misunderstanding: fiber networks
are at least as vulnerable to physical tapping as traditional
copper.
Attackers can use various methods, but at present the least
expensive option is using optical splitters or clip-on couplers
to bend the fibre, transferring the signal in multiple
directions and making it possible to tap into network traffic
reserved for others.''
If so motivated, an adversary could remotely disrupt a network. In
an unpublished paper, Dr. Alan Willner, a renowned professor at the
University of Southern California, described how material changes can
be induced by an adversary into an optical fiber to cause the denial of
service. One such method is the application of light at a certain
wavelength to remotely disrupt a network. The paper states that:
``High optical power can be surreptitiously injected into an
optical fiber link (either at a wavelength close to or far away
from the signals) to:
(i) permanently change the material properties for absorption
or partial reflection. An example could be an organic
polymer-based element, which can yellow over time with
light.
(ii) be absorbed by the dopants and produce a saturable
absorber, which will now absorb the data signal light as
long as the powerful light in present.
(iii) be absorbed by the material (or by a deposited film) and
crack the fiber due to highly localized energy and heat.
(iv) trigger an optical ``fuse'', such that the fiber core can
be made fairy thin and the optical power density becomes
too high thus melting the short circuit-breaking fuse.''
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
Harold Feld
Question 1. Last year, the Justice Department and Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) approved the proposed merger of T-
Mobile and Sprint. One argument used to justify the merger is that it
is necessary to maintain America's leadership in deploying 5G. As the
Ranking Member of the Antitrust Subcommittee and a member of the
Commerce Committee, I am skeptical that further consolidation in the
wireless market is the answer to our challenges concerning 5G
deployment. In your view, how will further consolidation of wireless
carriers impact the deployment of 5G?
Answer. Historically, consolidation slows innovation and increases
prices. This is particularly true for the broadband industry. From
2009-12, when the wireless industry was essentially a duopoly between
AT&T and Verizon, we saw precisely this pattern in wireless. Prices for
services consistently rose, and deployment of advanced 4G networks
lagged behind other countries. Bandwidth caps stifled innovation, and
rural consumers remained entirely unserved. In 2011-12, regulatory
interventions to promote competition--denial of the AT&T acquisition of
T-Mobile and requiring significant divestitures by Verizon as a
condition of acquiring spectrum from cable operators--gave T-Mobile
sufficient spectrum and cash to compete vigorously. Massive investment
by Softbank in Sprint followed as the industry became more competitive.
The resulting 4-firm competition pushed all carriers to invest heavily
in their networks and to lower prices aggressively, to the benefit of
consumers.
With further consolidation, we can expect history to repeat itself.
The combination of T-Mobile and Sprint creates a dangerously high level
of concentration, and DISH faces the challenge of simultaneously
building a state-of-the-art network while attracting customers already
locked in to rival networks through equipment and long-term contracts.
With three national carriers dominating the market, each has
significantly less incentive to compete on either price or quality of
service. To the contrary, each can hope to increase profit more by
cutting capital expenditure on upgrades than by investing in expensive
5G deployment, particularly outside the most profitable markets. Should
the market consolidate even further, we should expect increases in
prices and decline in investment to increase dramatically.
We should expect this to impact rural areas the hardest. Rural
areas already face the challenge of being more expensive to serve due
to the lower population density. In addition, because rural areas
generally have lower average income than urban areas, customers in
rural areas tend to generate lower revenue than customers in urban
areas. What drives carriers to compete in these areas--to the extent
they do--is competition. Intense competition in urban areas forces
carriers to expand into more rural areas in search of new customers. As
competitive pressures drop, this incentive weakens. Even where carriers
do expand into rural areas, the impact of higher cost and lower quality
of service from consolidation disproportionately hurts rural areas due
to the existing challenges of higher cost of deployment.
Question 2. As a strong supporter of a free and open internet, I
was extremely disappointed to see the FCC's elimination of net
neutrality rules go into effect last year, especially after the
bipartisan vote in the Senate to maintain those rules. I have
cosponsored legislation to restore net neutrality rules and keep the
Internet free and open for all Americans. Can you speak to how the
FCC's repeal of net neutrality protections has impacted consumers'
ability to benefit from advancements in our communications networks?
Answer. The repeal of Title II and elimination of net neutrality
negatively impact consumers in two ways. First, the loss of the net
neutrality rules and replacement of the previous strong transparency
rules with weaker rules has already had deleterious effects on wireless
users--including public safety users. The weaker transparency rules
allow wireless carriers to sell ``unlimited'' service with significant
bandwidth caps.\1\ This included throttling the Santa Clara fire
department during the 2018 wildfires. Wireless ISPs have discriminated
against specific streaming services, degraded video traffic from rival
services, and blocked other rival services such as Skype. At other
times, wireless carriers have charged additional fees for HD and 4K
streaming.\2\ We can expect similar forms of price gouging, traffic
discrimination and throttling to occur on 5G networks, depriving
consumers of the two most significant advantages of 5G--faster speeds
and lower latency. At the same time, this will discourage innovation
designed to take advantage of the faster speeds and low-latency offered
by 5G. The absence of net neutrality will reverse the previous virtuous
cycle to become a vicious cycle where consumers will pay more and
receive less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For this example and others cited, see generally, Lindsay
Stern, ``Broadband Providers Are Quietly Taking Advantage of an
Internet Without Net Neutrality Protections,'' Public Knowledge Blog
(January 29, 2019). Available at: https://www.publicknowledge.org/blog/
broadband-providers-are-quietly-taking-advantage-of-an-internet-
without-net-neutrality-protections/ and Lindsay Stern, ``Two Years
Later, Broadband Providers Are Still Quietly Taking Advantage of an
Internet Without Net Neutrality Protections,'' Public Knowledge Blog
(December 10, 2019). Available at: https://www.publicknowledge.org/
blog/two-years-later-broadband-providers-are-still-taking-advantage-of-
an-internet-without-net-neutrality-protections/.
\2\ Guile Conencia, ``Would You Pay an Extra $10 to Stream 4K
Service on Your Verizon Device,'' Wirefly (October 25, 2017). Available
at: https://www.wirefly.com/blog/news/would-you-pay-extra-10-stream-4k-
video-your-verizon-device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the loss of Title II protections will continue to
perpetuate and exacerbate the digital divide, and leave consumers
helpless against high prices and consumer rip offs outside of the world
of net neutrality. Title II provides the source of authority for the
FCC's existing ``truth in billing'' laws applicable to traditional
phone service. Title II classification of broadband would also make
broadband eligible for coverage under the Universal Service Fund (USF)
contribution rules and place existing broadband eligibility of Lifeline
on solid legal footing. Indeed, in Mozilla v. FCC, the D.C. Circuit
remanded the FCC's classification of Broadband as Title I on the
grounds that the FCC failed to properly consider the impact of its
decision on Lifeline and other USF programs.
In short, the continued classification of broadband as a Title I
information service and the elimination of net neutrality deprive
consumers of access to services designed to take advantage of the
higher speeds and lower latency of 5G, reducing incentive of consumers
to adopt 5G. The absence of net neutrality and Title II authority
retards the deployment of 5G, particularly in rural areas. It leaves
consumers vulnerable to price gouging and other consumer harms, such as
the misuse of their real-time location data and other sensitive
personal information. Reclassification of broadband as Title II, and
restoration of the 2015 net neutrality rules, would provide much needed
consumer protections, enhance 5G deployment, and spur greater
innovation on 5G networks when deployed.
______
Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
Shirley Bloomfield
Question. According to the FCC, only 65 percent of Americans living
in rural areas have access to broadband. Further, the May 2019 FCC
Report on Broadband Deployment in Indian Country noted approximately 47
percent of houses on rural Tribal lands have access to broadband.
As we discuss 5G deployment, it is critical that we not forget to
provide basic broadband access to all Arizonans in urban, rural, and
tribal areas.
How do we continue the conversation around 5G deployment while
simultaneously working to ensure that underserved and unserved
communities have access to reliable connectivity?
Answer. 5G offers great capabilities and promise to help us realize
higher broadband speeds across the nation, including for millions of
Americans who live in the most rural and remote parts of our country.
Next-generation wireless connectivity will be an important tool for
reaching consumers and businesses in some rural areas, and certainly
for delivering higher mobile speeds in urban areas. In practice,
however, promised speeds won't be realized without a significant
investment in fiber backhaul.
The possibilities of 5G are realized in part by placing fiber-
connected radio equipment and antennas very close to the customer.
Practically speaking, reaching rural Americans with 5G will require a
fiber deployment to nearly every rural location to make 5G technology
work as it does in urban areas. That fiber backhaul does not currently
exist in many rural areas and on Tribal lands, which makes 5G
technology particularly impractical and expensive for rural America.
For the preceding reasons, at this time, 5G-enabled mobile services
must be a complement to robust wired broadband technologies rather than
a replacement for them. Whether fixed or mobile, wireless service must
be supported by a robust fiber-optic backbone to be truly successful in
hard-to-serve parts of our country and to keep pace with consumer
demand.
Additionally, ongoing support for the High-Cost Universal Service
Fund is critical to making a business case for rural broadband. The
High-Cost program supports the fixed rural broadband networks that play
an essential role in the provision of mobile wireless service. Wireless
needs wires, and 5G will require a fiber backbone. Well-designed
Federal permitting processes and addressing railroad right-of-way
issues will also help speed broadband deployments and will go a long
way toward helping providers shift costs from obtaining approvals to
investing in networks.
[all]