[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]