[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



 
   LEADING THE WIRELESS FUTURE: SECURING AMERICAN NETWORK TECHNOLOGY

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

                            VIRTUAL HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY

                                 OF THE

                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             APRIL 21, 2021

                               __________

                           Serial No. 117-23


     Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce

                   govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
                        energycommerce.house.gov
                        
                        
                        
                        
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]        
 
 
 
                         ______                       


             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 47-148PDF           WASHINGTON : 2022       
 
 
 
 
 
                        
                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                     FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
                                 Chairman
BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
ANNA G. ESHOO, California              Ranking Member
DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado              FRED UPTON, Michigan
MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania             MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois             STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina    ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
DORIS O. MATSUI, California          BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
KATHY CASTOR, Florida                DAVID B. McKINLEY, West Virginia
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland           ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
JERRY McNERNEY, California           H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia
PETER WELCH, Vermont                 GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York                 BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York           BILLY LONG, Missouri
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon                LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana
TONY CARDENAS, California            MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
RAUL RUIZ, California                RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
SCOTT H. PETERS, California          TIM WALBERG, Michigan
DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan             EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         GARY J. PALMER, Alabama
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois, Vice       NEAL P. DUNN, Florida
    Chair                            JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah
NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California    DEBBBIE LESKO, Arizona
A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia         GREG PENCE, Indiana
LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware       DAN CRENSHAW, Texas
DARREN SOTO, Florida                 JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
KIM SCHRIER, Washington
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
                                 ------                                

                           Professional Staff

                   JEFFREY C. CARROLL, Staff Director
                TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Deputy Staff Director
                  NATE HODSON, Minority Staff Director
             Subcommittee on Communications and Technology

                        MIKE DOYLE, Pennsylvania
                                 Chairman
JERRY McNERNEY, California           ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York             Ranking Member
MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana
A. DONALD McEACHIN, Virginia         BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
DARREN SOTO, Florida                 ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois
TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida
KATHLEEN M. RICE, New York           BILL JOHNSON, Ohio
ANNA G. ESHOO, California            BILLY LONG, Missouri
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina    RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina
DORIS O. MATSUI, California, Vice    MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
    Chair                            TIM WALBERG, Michigan
PETER WELCH, Vermont                 EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon                JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina
TONY CARDENAS, California            JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah
ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois             CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota                   (ex officio)
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex 
    officio)
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------  
                              
                                                                   Page
Hon. Mike Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the 
  Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, opening statement................     2
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
Hon. Robert E. Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of Ohio, opening statement.....................................     5
    Prepared statement...........................................     6
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................     7
    Prepared statement...........................................     8
Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from 
  the State of Washington, opening statement.....................    10
    Prepared statement...........................................    11

                               Witnesses

Diane Rinaldo, Executive Director, Open RAN Policy Coalition.....    13
    Prepared statement...........................................    15
    Answers to submitted questions...............................   140
John Baker, Senior Vice President, Business Development, Mavenir.    20
    Prepared statement...........................................    22
Tim Donovan, Senior Vice President, Legislative Affairs, 
  Competitive Carriers Association...............................    27
    Prepared statement...........................................    29
    Answers to submitted questions...............................   141
John Mezzalingua, Chief Executive Officer, JMA Wireless..........    40
    Prepared statement...........................................    42
Tareq Amin, Representative Director, Executive Vice President, 
  and Chief Technology Officer, Rakuten Mobile...................    49
    Prepared statement...........................................    51

                           Submitted Material

Letter of April 20, 2021, from Darryl Gray, Chairman and Chief 
  Executive Officer, AttoBahn, Inc., to Mr. Doyle, submitted by 
  Mr. Doyle......................................................    99
Letter of January 8, 2021, from Ms. Matsui to President Biden, 
  submitted by Mr. Doyle.........................................   102
Letter of April 21, 2021, from Doug Smith, President and Chief 
  Executive Officer, Ligado, to Mr. Pallone and Mr. Doyle, 
  submitted by Mr. Doyle.........................................   104
Letter of April 21, 2021, from Eric D. Stonestrom, President and 
  Chief Executive Officer, Airspan Networks, Inc., to Mr. 
  Pallone, et al., submitted by Mr. Doyle........................   107
Brief, ``First and Only American Company to Develop and 
  Manufacture 5G in the United States,'' JMA, submitted by Mr. 
  Doyle..........................................................   109
Brief, ``Some Select Examples of Use Cases for Future Open RAN 
  NTIA Grants,'' Airspan, et al., submitted by Mr. Doyle.........   111
Analysis, ``Inseego: 5G Born in the USA,'' Moor Insights & 
  Strategy, May 2020, submitted by Mr. Doyle.....................   113
Report, ``Seize the 5G FWA Opportunity with Inseego,'' Mobile 
  World Live, submitted by Mr. Doyle.............................   119
Supplement, ``Inseego, Huawei and ZTE: A Side-By-Side Security 
  and Performance Snapshot,'' submitted by Mr. Doyle.............   135


   LEADING THE WIRELESS FUTURE: SECURING AMERICAN NETWORK TECHNOLOGY

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 21, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
     Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:30 a.m., via 
Cisco Webex online video conferencing, Hon. Mike Doyle 
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Doyle, McNerney, Clarke, 
Veasey, Soto, O'Halleran, Rice, Eshoo, Matsui, Welch, Shrader, 
Cardenas, Kelly, Craig, Fletcher, Pallone (ex officio), Latta 
(subcommittee ranking member), Guthrie, Kinzinger, Bilirakis, 
Johnson, Long, Hudson, Mullin, Walberg, Carter, Duncan, Curtis, 
and Rodgers (ex officio).
    Members present: Representatives Dingell and Joyce.
    Staff present: AJ Brown, Counsel; Jeffrey C. Carroll, Staff 
Director; Parul Desai, FCC Detailee; Jennifer Epperson, 
Counsel; Waverly Gordon, General Counsel; Tiffany Guarascio, 
Deputy Staff Director; Perry Hamilton, Clerk; Alex Hoehn-Saric, 
Chief Counsel, Communications and Consumer Protection; Jerry 
Leverich, Senior Counsel; Dan Miller, Professional Staff 
Member; Phil Murphy, Policy Coordinator; Joe Orlando, Policy 
Analyst; Kaitlyn Peel, Digital Director; Tim Robinson, Chief 
Counsel; Chloe Rodriguez, Clerk; Kate Arey, Minority Content 
Manager and Digital Assistant; David Brodian, Minority 
Detailee, Communications and Technology; Sarah Burke, Minority 
Deputy Staff Director; Michael Cameron, Minority Policy 
Analyst, Consumer Protection and Commerce, Energy, Environment; 
William Clutterbuck, Minority Staff Assistant/Policy Analyst; 
Theresa Gambo, Minority Financial and Office Administrator; 
Jack Heretik, Minority Press Secretary; Nate Hodson, Minority 
Staff Director; Sean Kelly, Minority Press Secretary; Peter 
Kielty, Minority General Counsel; Emily King, Minority Member 
Services Director; Bijan Koohmaraie, Minority Chief Counsel, 
Minority Oversight and Investigations Chief Counsel; Tim Kurth, 
Minority Chief Counsel, Consumer Protection and Commerce; Kate 
O'Connor, Minority Chief Counsel, Communications and 
Technology; Clare Paoletta, Minority Policy Analyst, Health; 
Arielle Roth, Minority Detailee, Communications and Technology; 
Olivia Shields, Minority Communications Director; Peter 
Spencer, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member, Energy; 
Michael Taggert, Minority Policy Director; Evan Viau, Minority 
Professional Staff Member, Communications and Technology; and 
Everett Winnick, Minority Director of Information Technology.
    Mr. Doyle. The committee will now come to order. Today the 
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology is holding a 
hearing entitled ``Leading the Wireless Future: Securing 
American Network Technology.''
    Due to the COVID-19 public health emergency, today's 
hearing is being held remotely. All Members and witnesses will 
be participating via videoconferencing.
    As part of our hearing, microphones will be set on mute for 
the purpose of eliminating inadvertent background noise. 
Members and witnesses, you will need to unmute your microphone 
each time you wish to speak.
    Documents for the record can be sent to Joe Orlando at the 
email address that we provided to staff. All documents will be 
entered into the record at the conclusion of the hearing.
    With that, the Chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes 
for an opening statement.

   OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE DOYLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
         CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

    Good morning. And first off, I want to thank our witnesses 
for appearing before us. Today we are talking about our 
Nation's wireless future and, to some extent, the world's as 
well. The importance of wireless has never been greater. 5G 
networks and beyond will grow our economy and enable 
revolutionary advances in technology and connectivity.
    However, as a country and a planet, we face growing 
challenge. Currently, only four major companies, two based in 
Europe and two in China, build the equipment and infrastructure 
essential for these deployments. I am glad to see 
representatives from three companies working to shake up this 
industry are here with us today.
    We have seen in the United States, Europe, and around the 
world that lack of competition in this space has divided folks 
into two camps: those that can afford secure networks and those 
that can't. And as more and more communications and commerce 
occur via wirelessly connected devices, the security and 
integrity of these networks has only become more important.
    Last Congress, we came together to pass the Secure and 
Trusted Communications Network Act to address concerns about 
the security threats posed by Huawei and ZTE equipment in 
domestic networks. But that is just the first step. We need 
national policies that aren't just built for the moment. We 
need to plan and legislate for the future, particularly in 
critical and fast-growing areas like 5G and beyond.
    It has become clear that lower costs are a driving force 
for wireless providers to use cheaper Chinese vendors. And as 
we look at networks in other countries, we can see so many 
folks struggling with this issue.
    Ensuring that the United States and folks around the world 
have secure networks depends on vendors' ability to be price-
competitive with equipment from Huawei and ZTE. That is why I 
am excited about Open Radio Access Networks, or O-RAN. Last 
Congress, we passed the USA Telecommunications Act, which 
authorized a range of programs to help accelerate the 
development and deployment of O-RAN technologies.
    This technology has the potential to level the playing 
field, and it is already unleashing the power of American 
ingenuity and competition as well as that of our allies. There 
are already efforts underway to deploy and integrate this 
technology into networks in the United States and around the 
world, but we need to do more and we need to do it faster.
    I have talked with a wide range of American network 
equipment and software companies that want to participate in 
this growing space. We have the technology, the ingenuity, and 
the ability to build this technology right here in America.
    Our leadership in virtualization and cloud technologies 
creates tremendous opportunities for O-RAN, and we already 
design and deploy the most advanced network equipment in the 
world. However, proprietary interfaces and end-to-end networks 
built by a single vendor have hampered efforts to apply this 
experience and expertise to wireless networks. We need to 
change that.
    There are a number of opportunities to fund the USA 
Telecommunications Act and to expand it. The Biden 
administration's infrastructure proposal as well as the 
Senate's forthcoming Endless Frontiers Act both provide 
opportunities for major investment that can help the United 
States reassert leadership in this critical sector. I look 
forward to working with the administration, the Senate, and my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle on these important 
priorities.
    Shifting gears, I would be remiss in this discussion about 
our wireless future and our leadership in wireless if I did not 
talk about spectrum policy. Spectrum is the fuel that has been 
powering our Nation's wireless deployments. We have led the way 
in 4G and we have the opportunity to lead it in 5G, but so much 
of that will depend on our Government's ability to coordinate 
the use of Federal spectrum and to create pipelines for 
government spectrum to be made available for commercial use.
    Over the last 4 years, we saw too many spectrum squabbles 
break out between Federal agencies as established norms and 
processes broke down. It is critical that NTIA play the role 
given to it by Congress to manage Federal spectrum resources, 
and the White House needs to make that clear to all Federal 
agencies and stakeholders.
    Ultimately, these are technical issues. And as we have seen 
time and time again, we can come up with solutions that protect 
the Federal incumbents' capabilities while at the same time 
making spectrum available for commercial use. These are issues 
that are critical to our country, to our economy, and to our 
Nation's ability to continue to lead the world in wireless 
innovation.
    I want to thank everyone for being here today. I want to 
thank our witnesses, and I look forward to their testimony.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Doyle follows:]

                 Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Doyle

    Good morning. First off, I'd like to thank our witnesses 
for appearing before us.
    Today, we are talking about our Nation's wireless future--
and to some extent the world's as well.
    The importance of wireless has never been greater--5G 
networks and beyond will grow our economy and enable 
revolutionary advances in technology and connectivity.
    However, as a country and a planet we face a growing 
challenge--currently only four major companies--2 based in 
Europe and 2 in China--build the equipment and infrastructure 
essential for these deployments.
    I'm glad to see that representatives from three companies 
working to shake up this industry are with us here today.
    We have seen in the United States, Europe, and around the 
world that the lack of competition in this space has divided 
folks into two camps--those that can afford secure networks, 
and those that cannot.
    As more and more of communications and commerce occur via 
wirelessly connected devices--the security and integrity of 
these networks has only become more important.
    Last Congress, we came together to pass the Secure and 
Trusted Communications Networks Act to address concerns about 
the security threats posed by Huawei and ZTE equipment in 
domestic networks.
    But that's just a first step. We need national policies 
that aren't just built for the moment--we need to plan and 
legislate for the future--particularly in critical and fast-
growing areas like 5G and beyond.
    It has become clear that lower costs are a driving force 
for wireless providers to use cheaper Chinese vendors.
    And as we look at networks in other countries--we can see 
so many folks struggling with this issue.
    Ensuring that the United States and folks around the world 
have secure networks depends on vendors ability to be price 
competitive with equipment from Huawei and ZTE.
    That's why I am excited about Open Radio Access Networks or 
Open RAN
    Last Congress, we passed the USA Telecommunications Act--
which authorized a range of programs to help accelerate the 
development and deployment of Open RAN technologies.
    This technology has the potential to level the playing 
field--and it is already unleashing the power of American 
ingenuity and competition--as well that of our allies. There 
are already efforts under way to deploy and integrate this 
technology into networks in the United States and around the 
world--but we need to do more--and we need to do it faster.
    I've talked with a wide range of American network equipment 
and software companies that want to participate in this growing 
space.
    We have the technology, the ingenuity, and the ability to 
build this technology here in America.
    Our leadership in virtualization and cloud technologies 
creates tremendous opportunities for Open RAN, and we already 
design and deploy the most advanced network equipment in the 
world.
    However, proprietary interfaces and end to end networks 
built by a single vendor have hampered efforts to apply this 
experience and expertise to wireless networks. We need to 
change that.
    There are a number of opportunities to fund the USA 
Telecommunications Act and to expand it.
    The Biden administration's infrastructure proposal as well 
as the Senate's forthcoming Endless Frontiers Act both provide 
opportunities for major investment that can help the United 
States reassert leadership in this critical sector.
    I look forward to working with the administration, the 
Senate, and my colleagues on the other side of the aisle on 
these important priorities.
    Shifting gears, I would be remiss in this discussion about 
our wireless future and our leadership in wireless--if I did 
not talk about spectrum policy.
    Spectrum is the fuel that has been powering our Nation's 
wireless deployments. We have led the way in 4G and we have the 
opportunity to lead in 5G.
    But so much of that will depend on our Government's ability 
to coordinate the use of Federal spectrum--and to create 
pipelines for Government spectrum to be made available for 
commercial use.
    Over the last four years, we saw too many spectrum 
squabbles break out between Federal agencies as established 
norms and processes broke down.
    It's critical that NTIA play the role given to it by 
Congress--to manage Federal spectrum resources--and the White 
House needs to make that clear to all Federal agencies and 
stakeholders.
    Ultimately, these are technical issues--and as we have seen 
time and time again--we can come up with solutions that protect 
Federal incumbents' capabilities--while at the same time making 
spectrum available for commercial use.
    These are issues that are critical to our country, to our 
economy, and to our Nation's ability to continue to lead the 
world in wireless innovation. Thank you and I look forward to 
the testimony of our witnesses.

    Mr. Doyle. So, with that, the Chair now recognizes my good 
friend and partner, Mr. Latta, the ranking member of the 
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, for 5 minutes 
for his opening statement.
    Mr. Latta, you are recognized.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. LATTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, my 
friend, for holding today's hearing. I also want to thank our 
witnesses for appearing before us today on securing our 
communications networks in the future.
    Over the last year, Americans have relied more than ever on 
broadband technology to earn a livelihood, educate their 
children, and stay connected with their families and 
communities.
    Wireless connectivity has played a key role. And thanks to 
the investment and ingenuity of our Nation's wireless 
providers, U.S. networks rose to the challenge of meeting 
Americans' unprecedented demand for voice and high-speed data 
services.
    We must continue to build upon our success to remain the 
global leader in wireless innovation. We must lead in 
developing 5G and 6G standards and deploying the next-
generation 5G technology.
    In large part, our leadership depends on ensuring that all 
generations of networks are secure and on having policies that 
encourage investment and innovation from trusted companies and 
the flexibility to bring new technologies to market right here 
in the United States.
    Congress and the Trump administration acted in many ways to 
protect and diversify our communications supply chain, 
including funding the implementation of the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act to support the removal and 
replacement of harmful equipment in our Nation's communications 
networks.
    We also worked with our Democratic colleagues last year to 
enact the bipartisan Utilizing Strategic Allied 
Telecommunications Act, which created a grant program at NTIA 
to facilitate the deployment of Open Radio Access Network, O-
RAN, technologies that would diversify our 5G supply chain, 
lower equipment cost, and help us to prevent bad actors like 
China from disrupting our networks.
    It is crucial that Congress fund this grant program and any 
funding programs that move forward. The use of Open RAN 
technology represents one such path to reducing threats. By 
enabling providers to move away from end-to-end product lines 
and mix and match vendors inside their networks, Open RAN can 
help reduce reliance on foreign equipment and ensure that 
problematic components of a network's architecture can be 
easily swapped out.
    It will also help trusted suppliers remain economically 
competitive against Huawei and others seeking to undermine our 
national security. But more work needs to be done to drive 5G 
innovation, and we must be forward-thinking in our approach to 
network security.
    Three years ago, this subcommittee held a bipartisan 
hearing examining the communications landscape, economic 
competitiveness, and national security. Congress has addressed 
many of those concerns that we have heard, in large part 
because of that bipartisan focus. However, it is clear that we 
must continue to put a focus on these efforts to preserve 
American leadership, improve transparency and information 
sharing, and remain vigilant in identifying new 
vulnerabilities.
    We can start by working together on policies to safeguard 
America's leadership of standards-setting bodies that are 
crucial for setting the technical rules of the road for 
equipment and devices.
    We should also work to address the challenges that U.S. and 
other trusted companies face to compete in a global supply 
chain and ensure that the work we have already done is being 
implemented effectively and working as intended, such as NTIA's 
information-sharing program for small and rural communication 
providers. These are important issues that deserve bipartisan 
attention. I am grateful for the opportunity to hear from 
today's witnesses how we can secure our global 5G leadership.
    And one of the great things I have always said about 
serving on the Energy and Commerce Committee is when we sit up 
on this dais--or virtually sit up on this dais, as we are 
today--that we look over the horizon 5 to 10 years. And we want 
to make sure the right laws and the right regulations are being 
put out there to make sure that our entrepreneurs and 
innovators can do what they have got to do to make sure that we 
are the leaders in the world.
    So, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate today's hearing. I thank our 
witnesses for being with us today. And with that, I yield back 
the balance of my time.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:]

               Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert E. Latta

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for 
joining us to discuss the future of securing our communications 
networks.
    Over the last year, Americans have relied more than ever on 
broadband technology to earn a livelihood, educate their 
children, and stay connected to their families and communities. 
Wireless connectivity has played a key role, and thanks to the 
investment and ingenuity of our nation's wireless providers, 
U.S. networks rose to the challenge of meeting Americans' 
unprecedented demand for voice and high-speed data services.
    We must continue to build upon our success and remain the 
global leader in wireless innovation. We must lead in 
developing 5G and 6G standards and deploying next generation 5G 
technology. In a large part, our leadership depends on ensuring 
that all generations of our networks are secure, and on having 
policies that encourage investment and innovation from trusted 
companies and the flexibility to bring new technologies to 
market here in the United States.
    Congress and the Trump administration acted in many ways to 
protect and diversify our communications supply chain, 
including funding the implementation of the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act to support the removal and 
replacement of harmful equipment in our Nation's communications 
networks. We also worked with our Democratic colleagues last 
year to enact the bipartisan Utilizing Strategic Allied 
Telecommunications Act, which created a grant program at NTIA 
to facilitate the deployment of Open Radio Access Network 
(known as ``Open RAN'') technologies that will diversify our 5G 
supply chain, lower equipment costs, and help us prevent bad 
actors like China from disrupting our networks.
    It is crucial that Congress funds this grant program in any 
funding program that moves forward. The use of Open RAN 
technology represents one such path to reducing threats. By 
enabling providers to move away from end-to-end product lines, 
and mix and match vendors inside their networks, Open RAN can 
help reduce reliance on foreign equipment and ensure that 
problematic components of a network's architecture can be 
easily swapped out. It will also help trusted suppliers remain 
economically competitive against Huawei and others seeking to 
undermine our national security.
    But more work needs to be done to drive 5G innovation, and 
we must be forward-thinking in our approach to network 
security. Three years ago, this subcommittee held a bipartisan 
hearing examining the communications landscape, economic 
competitiveness, and national security. Congress has addressed 
many of the concerns that we heard, in large part because of 
that bipartisan focus. However, it is clear that we must 
continue to put a focus on these efforts to preserve American 
leadership, improve transparency and information sharing, and 
remain vigilant in identifying new vulnerabilities.
    We can start by working together on policies to safeguard 
American leadership at standards setting bodies that are 
crucial for setting the technical rules of the road for 
equipment and devices. We should also work to address the 
challenges that U.S. and other trusted companies face to 
compete in a global supply chain, and ensure that the work we 
have already done is being implemented effectively and working 
as intended, such as NTIA's information sharing program for 
smaller and rural communications providers.
    These are important issues that deserve bipartisan 
attention, and I am grateful for the opportunity to hear from 
today's witnesses on how we can secure our global 5G 
leadership.

    Mr. Pallone. I can't hear Mr. Doyle.
    Mr. Doyle. Can you hear me now?
    Mr. Pallone. Now I can, yes.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank my friend for yielding back, and also note 
that when I was saying O-RAN I was referring to Open RAN also. 
So I just wanted to make that clear.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Pallone, chairman of the full 
committee, for 5 minutes for his opening statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE 
            IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman Doyle.
    If the U.S. doesn't lead the wireless future, then rival 
nations are posed to lead it for us and dominate the 5G 
marketplace in a way that may undermine our national security 
and economic prosperity. And China, as we know, has built the 
world's largest 5G network and suspect communications provider 
Huawei currently leads the current market share for 5G base 
stations.
    According to reports, China has more 5G subscribers than 
the U.S., it has more widespread 5G coverage, and its 
connections are, on average, faster than ours. And this is 
concerning because history tells us that early adopters and 
developers define the marketplace, drive innovation, and reap 
the economic benefits of that leadership.
    And as we saw with 4G, the global technological leaders in 
a given field can define that technology and how it is used. 
With 4G, we saw the benefits of that in the booming app economy 
that was created.
    We all know the positives and the negatives created by the 
tech boom. But in this Nation, we have the ability and 
structures to publicly debate those issues. And when government 
gets involved, it is in full view of the American people. If 
the same tech companies were founded and grew under a more 
authoritarian regime, the influence of government would be less 
apparent and potentially much more dangerous.
    The Chinese Government's involvement in Huawei and ZTE has 
raised security concerns with their equipment. We also have 
seen how China places restrictions that undermine privacy, 
security, and intellectual property interests on American 
companies entering the Chinese market.
    And based on past experience, the Chinese Government cannot 
be trusted to set the standards that govern our wireless 
future. Instead, we must help our own Nation and like-minded 
democracies once again lead in technological innovation and 
preserve a secure and free marketplace.
    And to this end, we have already made progress. We have 
funded the Secure and Trusted Communications Network Act to the 
tune of $1.9 billion to replace all suspect equipment in the 
U.S. We also enacted the Secure 5G and Beyond Act to require 
the executive branch to formulate a whole-government strategy 
to protect our 5G networks.
    And I am also encouraged by President Biden's focus on 
expanding U.S. leadership. The administration's support of 
Doreen Bogdan-Martin to lead the International 
Telecommunication Union demonstrated a commitment to a more 
inclusive and sustainable global digital landscape.
    And just last week, President Biden welcomed Japanese Prime 
Minister Suga to the White House, where they agreed to work 
jointly on the rapid development of 5G technologies. And in 
that vein, we enacted the USA Telecom Act last year to help 
fund the promotion of Open RAN networks that can be used to 
finally bring the United States and more of our allies into the 
business of manufacturing network equipment.
    Congress must nevertheless fund this legislation so we can 
promote and deploy this critical technology to create American 
jobs here at home and building the networks of the future.
    We also need to make sure that all providers, including 
small providers and communities, have the resources and 
technical assistance to leverage this technology, but we can't 
stop there. We need to leverage our Federal agencies to review 
the security issues presented by consumer equipment, especially 
equipment produced in suspect countries.
    And we must also quickly address the Trump administration's 
failure to appropriately coordinate across our Government to 
make our airwaves available for these new technologies. It is 
important that we work together to put our airways to the best 
possible use while addressing legitimate safety concerns.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.

    If the United States doesn't lead the wireless future, 
rival nations are posed to lead it for us and dominate the 5G 
marketplace in a way that may undermine our national security 
and economic prosperity.
    China has built the world's largest 5G network and suspect 
communications provider Huawei currently leads the global 
market share for 5G base stations.
    According to reports, China has more 5G subscribers than 
the United States, it has more widespread 5G coverage, and its 
connections are, on average, faster than ours.
    This is concerning because history tells us that early 
adopters and developers define the marketplace, drive 
innovation, and reap the economic benefits of that leadership.
    As we saw with 4G, the global technological leaders in a 
given field can define that technology and how it is used. With 
4G, we saw the benefits of that in the booming app economy that 
was created.
    We all know the positives and the negatives created by the 
tech boom. But in this nation, we have the ability and 
structures to publicly debate those issues, and when government 
gets involved it's in full view of the American people.
    If the same tech companies were founded and grew under a 
more authoritarian regime, the influence of government would be 
less apparent and potentially much more dangerous.
    The Chinese Government's involvement in Huawei and ZTE has 
raised security concerns with their equipment. We also have 
seen how China places restrictions that undermine privacy, 
security, and intellectual property interests on American 
companies entering the Chinese market.
    Based on past experience, the Chinese Government cannot be 
trusted to set the standards that govern our wireless future. 
Instead, we must help our own nation and like-minded 
democracies once again lead in technological innovation and 
preserve a secure and free marketplace.
    To this end, we have already made progress. We funded the 
Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act to the tune of 
$1.9 billion to replace all suspect equipment in the United 
States. We also enacted the Secure 5G and Beyond Act to require 
the executive branch to formulate a whole of government 
strategy to protect our 5G networks.
    I also am encouraged by President Biden's focus on 
expanding U.S. leadership. The administration's support of 
Doreen Bogdan-Martin to lead the International 
Telecommunications Union demonstrates a commitment to a more 
inclusive and sustainable global digital landscape. And just 
last week, President Biden welcomed Japanese Prime Minster Suga 
to the White House where they agreed to work jointly on the 
rapid development of 5G technologies.
    And in that vein, we enacted the USA Telecom Act last year 
to help fund the promotion of Open RAN networks that can be 
used to finally bring the United States and more of our allies 
into the business of manufacturing network equipment. Congress 
must nevertheless fund this legislation so that we can promote 
and deploy this critical technology to create American jobs 
here at home, building the networks of the future.
    We need to make sure that all providers, including small 
providers and communities, have the resources and technical 
assistance to leverage this technology.
    But we cannot stop there; we need to leverage our Federal 
agencies to review the security issues presented by consumer 
equipment, especially equipment produced in suspect countries.
    We must also quickly address the Trump administration's 
failure to appropriately coordinate across our Government to 
make our airwaves available for these new technologies. It's 
important we work together to put our airwaves to the best 
possible use while addressing legitimate safety concerns.

    Mr. Pallone. I would like to yield now the rest of my time 
to the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Matsui.
    Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for yielding 
to me.
    While we are still in the early stages of 5G deployment, 
the Federal Government must be a driving force in spectrum 
policy if we are to win the race to 5G and beyond. That is why 
I wrote then-President-elect Biden 4 months ago, urging him to 
adopt a unified approach to spectrum policy and a clearly 
articulated process for resolving interagency disputes.
    Over the past 4 years, significant conflicts between 
Federal agencies caused costly delays in making new spectrum 
available while also creating severe uncertainty for government 
and industry.
    Moving forward, I look forward to seeing NTIA resume its 
role as manager of the Federal Government's use of spectrum. We 
must also take steps to support a secure and diverse supply 
chain. As original cosponsor of the USA Telecommunications Act, 
I believe we need to fully fund the programs in that bill to 
support the development and deployment of Open RAN.
    I think the funding authorized by our bill should serve as 
a floor, not a ceiling. Recently, a bipartisan group of 
Senators called for an increase in funding to $3 billion, and I 
hope this chamber can find bipartisan compromise to keep pace.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yielding to me, and I yield 
back. Thank you.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentlewoman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mrs. Rodgers, ranking member of 
the full committee, for 5 minutes for her opening statement.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, A 
    REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Good morning, everyone. I too want to join in thanking our 
witnesses for coming and being with us today on the Energy and 
Commerce Committee.
    America's global leadership and ability to win the future 
depends on our capacity to harness the wireless technologies 
that will help shape our Nation and the world in coming 
decades.
    Networks will continue to get faster, stronger, and connect 
more people and devices than ever before. We are already 
preparing for many life-altering and even life-saving benefits 
of 5G, from enabling autonomous vehicles and the Internet of 
Things to improving access to remote healthcare services, 
including life-saving remote surgeries, to empowering farmers 
to increase crop yields and fight hunger through precision 
agriculture.
    And 5G promises to integrate our lives even more with the 
digital world. 5G and future generations of wireless networks 
will help fuel innovation and entrepreneurship and help connect 
millions of Americans, which is why they must be secure.
    We must make certain that America, not China, is capturing 
this innovation as well as developing and eventually deploying 
these technologies. We do not want countries like China making 
the rules and leading in technologies like 5G and 6G that could 
give them so much control over American lives and industries.
    The more we rely on communication infrastructures in our 
daily lives, the more critical it becomes to ensure our network 
is secure from those who seek to do us harm. We recognize the 
potential threats that have come from not only having a robust 
and secure supply chain, and we need to find solutions.
    We already have a track record of unity on this committee 
and success on these issues. Our bipartisan work in the last 
Congress helped fund the removal and the replacement of 
untrusted equipment through the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act.
    We also came together to catalyze the development and the 
deployment of Open RAN-compatible technologies by passing the 
USA Telecommunications Act. It established a grant program for 
deployment of Open RAN capability technology in our networks, 
and I urge for that to be funded quickly to spur the 
development of a robust, trusted equipment marketplace.
    And that is just the beginning. As we remove untrusted 
equipment from our domestic networks, we must look to the 
future and consider what the availability of trusted vendors 
will be in years to come. As our mobile networks advance, we 
also must make sure regulations don't hold back new 
technologies that have the potential to improve our quality of 
life and secure America's leadership.
    Cloud-native networks can help push software and security 
upgrades more quickly than their predecessors and help speed 
the transition to 5G and operators that use them. Multi-edge 
computing and networks bring new opportunities.
    As the Chinese Communist Party seeks to control our 
technological future, it is critical that we encourage trusted 
companies to participate and lead in international standards 
bodies and make sure Americans are at the helm of these 
organizations--Americans like Doreen Bogdan-Martin, candidate 
for Secretary General of the International Telecommunication 
Union. And I also support her. She would be the first woman and 
the first American in a long time.
    Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join together in supporting 
her. She shares our values of openness, transparency, and 
connectivity for all.
    And with that, I just want to say thanks for holding this 
important and timely hearing. I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]

           Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers

    Good morning, and thank you to our witnesses for coming 
before the committee today.
    America's global leadership and ability to win the future 
depends on our capacity to harness the wireless technologies 
that will shape our Nation and the world in the coming decades.
    Networks will continue to get faster, stronger, and connect 
more people and devices than ever before.
    We are already preparing for the many life-altering--and 
even life-saving--benefits of 5G...
    From enabling autonomous vehicles and the Internet of 
Things...
    ...to improving access to remote health care services, 
including life-saving remote surgeries...
    ...to empowering farmers to increase crop yields and fight 
hunger through precision agriculture.
    And 6G promises to integrate our lives even more with the 
digital world.
    5G and future generations of wireless networks will fuel 
innovation and entrepreneurship and help connect millions of 
Americans, which is why they must be secure.
    We must make certain that America, not China, is capturing 
this innovation, as well as developing and eventually deploying 
these technologies.
    We do not want countries like China making the rules and 
leading in technologies--like 5G and 6G--that could give them 
so much control over American lives and industries.
    The more we rely on communications infrastructure in our 
daily lives, the more critical it becomes to ensure our network 
is secure from those who seek to do us harm.
    We recognize the potential threats that come from not 
having a robust and secure supply chain, and we need to find 
solutions.
    We already have a track-record of unity and success on 
these issues on the Energy and Commerce Committee.
    Our bipartisan work in the last Congress helped fund the 
removal and replacement of untrusted equipment through The 
Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act.
    We also came together to catalyze the development and 
deployment of new Open RAN compatible technologies by passing 
the USA Telecommunications Act.
    It established a grant program for the deployment of Open 
RAN compatible technology in our networks.
    I urge for that to be funded quickly to spur the 
development of a robust, trusted equipment marketplace.
    And that is just the beginning! As we remove untrusted 
equipment from our domestic networks, we must look to the 
future and consider what the availability of trusted vendors 
will be in the years to come.
    As our mobile networks advance, we must also make sure 
regulations don't hold back new technologies that have the 
potential to improve our quality of life and secure America's 
leadership.
    Cloud-native networks can push software and security 
upgrades more quickly than their predecessors and can help 
speed the transition from 4G to 5G for those operators that 
utilize them.
    Multi-edge computing and network slicing will allow 
operators to manage the influx of devices and new industries 
all demanding access to high performance network resources.
    While the benefits of virtualized networks bring new 
opportunities, regulators should resist the urge to create 
unnecessary, burdensome regulations that hamper American 
innovation and give other countries a competitive edge.
    As the Chinese Communist Party seeks to control our 
technological future, it is critical that we encourage trusted 
companies to participate and lead in international standards 
bodies...
    ...and make sure Americans are at the helm of these 
organizations.
    Americans like Doreen Bogdan-Martin, candidate for 
Secretary General of the International Telecommunication Union, 
who I support.
    Doreen shares the values of openness, transparency, and 
connectivity for all--and she would represent us well in this 
role.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding such an important, 
timely hearing on how to secure our wireless future.
    I look forward to continuing this work.
    I yield back.

    Mr. Doyle. The gentlelady yields back, and I thank her for 
her opening statement.
    Now I would like to introduce our witnesses for today's 
hearing: Ms. Diane Rinaldo, executive director, Open RAN Policy 
Coalition; Mr. John Baker, senior vice president, business 
development, Mavenir; Mr. Tom Donovan, senior vice president, 
legislative affairs, for the Competitive Carriers Association; 
Mr. John Mezzalingua, chief executive officer, JMA Wireless; 
and Mr. Tareq Amin, executive vice president and group chief 
technology officer, Rakuten Mobile.
    We want to thank our witnesses for joining us today. We 
look forward to your testimony.
    At this time, the Chair will recognize each witness for 5 
minutes to provide their opening statement, and we will start 
with Ms. Diane Rinaldo. You are recognized for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENTS OF DIANE RINALDO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OPEN RAN 
 POLICY COALITION; JOHN BAKER, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, BUSINESS 
   DEVELOPMENT, MAVENIR; TIM DONOVAN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, 
  LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, COMPETITIVE CARRIERS ASSOCIATION; JOHN 
 MEZZALINGUA, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JMA WIRELESS; AND TAREQ 
 AMIN, REPRESENTATIVE DIRECTOR, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, AND 
            CHIEF TECHNOLOGY OFFICER, RAKUTEN MOBILE

                   STATEMENT OF DIANE RINALDO

    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, as well to 
Ranking Member Latta, full committee Chairman Pallone, ranking 
member full committee McMorris Rodgers, and members of the 
committee.
    On behalf of the 60 members of the Open RAN Policy 
Coalition, I would like to thank you for holding this important 
and timely hearing today. My name is Diane Rinaldo, and I have 
the pleasure of serving as the executive director of the Open 
RAN Policy Coalition, a coalition that not only spans the globe 
but also the mobile ecosystem.
    We are a diverse group of information and communications 
technology companies that have a common goal of breaking down 
technological barriers to promote a varied and competitive 
wireless marketplace and create a future in which radio access 
network architecture is based on a more modular design with 
open and interoperable interfaces.
    Our coalition members include carriers, vendors, 
cybersecurity providers, tower operators, cloud providers, 
innovators, startups, and legacy tech companies that have come 
together because they understand the health of the entire 
ecosystem is reliant on a secure, robust, and diverse supply 
chain. We have been working together for nearly a year to 
educate policymakers across the globe on the benefits of Open 
RAN.
    Today, I look forward to discussing the reasons why we 
believe that Open RAN will provide significant public-interest 
benefits, namely driving increased competition, providing 
technologic improvements, making services and products more 
affordable for consumers, including those in rural and 
underserved communities, and serving as a complement to 
parallel advances and enhancing network security and network 
management of 5G.
    The world is on the precipice of the fourth industrial 
revolution that will be driven by advanced wireless 
communications. While these advancements will require a faster 
and more resilient network to flourish, the continued growth of 
telecommunications networks is also predicated on certainty and 
stability within the supply chain.
    This certainty is currently in question. The small pool of 
existing vendors for wireless network build-outs has fueled 
concerns over supply chain resiliency and competition. Network 
operators are left with a limited choice for next-generation 
networks, posing economic risks and creating barriers for 
smaller firms in the 5G space.
    We are seeing firsthand that disaggregating the radio 
access network lowers the barrier to entry for new vendors in 
the marketplace. Increased vendor choice, in turn, drives 
competition and innovation, which will lead to lower prices.
    Fortunately, the United States, its partners, and the 
communication companies that serve those markets have reached 
an inflection point in the development and deployment of Open 
RAN. In short, this technology is not only ready for prime 
time, but is actively being deployed in the commercial 
communications ecosystem, thereby advancing the national 
interests of the United States and partners.
    I want to applaud the hard work done by this committee and 
staff with the introduction and passage of the USA 
Telecommunications Act last year. Fully funding the two 
programs at $3 billion will help bolster advanced wireless 
networks and futureproof our telecommunications system. I would 
also like to add that NTIA is the right agency to be 
administrating this program, but I promise that I have no 
biased opinions on that.
    Additionally, I would like to commend the recent bilateral 
engagement of President Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Suga. 
The realization of Open RAN being a common advancement for our 
two nations is further proof that collaborative approaches in 
technology is good policy.
    Promoting diversity and security in the 5G supply chain is 
of global interest and will require a common solution. The 
challenge for policymakers today revolves around a central 
question: How can we use competition and innovation to drive 
the next generation of networks?
    In order to promote this technological evolution and 
accelerate a stable, sustainable, and successful transition to 
5G and beyond, Government initiatives and policy priorities 
must support new and existing technology suppliers as well as 
small and large network operators offering open and 
interoperable RAN solutions as well as integration of those 
open components; create a competitive global ecosystem of 
diverse and trusted suppliers and service providers; and 
encourage building, maintaining, and investing in U.S. and 
technological allies' leadership for the deployment and 
development of both 5G and future wireless networks.
    The United States is at a critical juncture. The issues 
that we are discussing today and which reside under your 
jurisdiction no longer pertain only to telecom policy but also 
to economic policy and economic security. As we move to the 
digitization of everything, mobile networks are the lifeblood 
of our ecosystems. Ensuring a healthy supply chain has never 
been more important, and working with our allies to sync on 
these issues has never been more critical.
    Thank you again for your continued work on this issue, and 
I look forward to participating in this hearing.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Rinaldo follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     
    
        
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Ms. Rinaldo.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Baker for 5 minutes for his 
opening statement.

                    STATEMENT OF JOHN BAKER

    Mr. Baker. Thank you, Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member Latta, 
Chairman Pallone, and Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers. Thank 
you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
    My name is John Baker, and I lead the 5G team at Mavenir. 
Mavenir is a U.S.-headquartered company founded 16 years ago. 
We are a trusted software vendor for the U.S. mobile operators, 
serving more than 250 operators around the world.
    We are also a pioneer in providing solutions using open 
interfaces, including radio access networks, known as Open RAN. 
We have Open RAN deployments in India, Germany, the United 
Kingdom. In the United States, we are helping Dish build the 
Nation's first stand-alone 5G Open RAN network.
    Today's hearing comes at a critical time for the mobile 
network supply chain. Because of industry's consolidation and 
the banning of untrusted vendors, two companies supply nearly 
100 percent of the United States' radio access networks. These 
companies, both headquartered overseas, provide proprietary RAN 
products that lock out other suppliers, limiting competition 
and narrowing the supply chain. However, there is a solution, 
and that is called Open RAN.
    Today I will focus on three points: one, how Open RAN will 
help build a more robust and diverse supply chain; two, why 
interoperable standards will help the U.S. lead in 5G; and 
three, how the U.S. Government can help support Open RAN 
deployments.
    Firstly, Open RAN will help build a more robust and diverse 
supply chain. To be clear, Open RAN is not a technology but, 
rather, a shift in how we design and build mobile networks, 
using interoperable subcomponents from multiple vendors.
    The current RAN market in the United States is a prized 
one. We have the highest margins and profitability globally. 
But at the same time, it is limited to two incumbents who have 
locked up the market with proprietary systems.
    In contrast, the Open RAN ecosystem numbers more than 60 
companies, including several U.S. suppliers, such as Dell, 
Intel, JAM Wireless and Mavenir. Open RAN not only supports a 
diverse supply chain but also brings significant cost savings, 
increased security, and future-proof networks. An important 
benefit is that rural carriers undergo a taxpayer-funded rip 
and replace.
    Secondly, advancement of interoperable standards will help 
the United States lead in 5G and beyond. For the U.S. to lead 
in next-generation networks, Congress must facilitate U.S. 
participation in international standards. Global standards for 
mobile technologies are set by 3GPP, which used to support open 
interfaces. However, the dominant manufacturers now control the 
standard-setting process, which means the current global 
standards foster proprietary products and limit the global 
supply chain.
    To help advance interoperability, more U.S. companies need 
to participate in 3GPP, but participation is expensive. To 
increase U.S. participation in setting these important global 
standards, the United States should work more closely with 
industry and financially support involvement in 3GPP. Without 
more United States companies at the table, we are at the risk 
of being eliminated completely in the U.S. RAN market.
    Finally, the United States Government must take further 
action to support Open RAN. Around the world, allied nations 
are advancing aggressive policies to build their next-
generation networks with Open RAN. Five major European 
operators have committed to deploy Open RAN, but some are 
preparing local suppliers. But sadly, the full embrace of Open 
RAN has not happened in the United States.
    To help advance Open RAN and ensure a diversified supply 
chain, we strongly recommend three actions in the United States 
Government. Firstly, we must fund the public Wireless Supply 
Chain Innovation Fund.
    Last year, thanks to the leadership of this committee, 
Congress created a critical grant program to help companies 
like Mavenir scale, reshore manufacturing of network 
components, and advance U.S. standardization leadership. 
Congress should quickly appropriate the requested $3 billion 
for this fund.
    We also promote competition in the supply chain. While 
there are no dominant U.S. companies selling into the 5G 
equipment market, there are many vying to engage. The best way 
to engage leadership as a core industry is to encourage 
competition fostering Open RAN.
    Lastly, the United States Government can provide financial 
incentives like loan guarantees and tax incentives to propel 
our mobile operators to pursue Open RAN. This will help small 
companies scale and have the ability to compete with the 
dominant incumbent suppliers.
    Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Baker follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     
        
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Baker.
    Now the Chair recognizes Mr. Donovan for 5 minutes.

                    STATEMENT OF TIM DONOVAN

    Mr. Donovan. Chairman Doyle, Republican Leader Latta, and 
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify about how the United States can lead the world in 
future wireless services.
    CCA is the Nation's leading association for competitive 
wireless providers, representing carrier members ranging from 
small rural providers serving fewer than 5,000 customers to 
regional nationwide providers serving millions of customers, as 
well as vendors and suppliers that provide products and 
services throughout the wireless communications ecosystem.
    Wireless communication services have become inextricable 
parts of our lives, with functionality that has experienced 
tremendous growth from the humble roots of the first mobile 
phone call placed 48 years ago this month. Americans now have 
an average of 1.3 mobile devices per person and use those 
devices not only to place calls and send texts, but to work, 
learn, monitor health, connect to public safety, and access 
millions of applications.
    Through American leadership, the jobs and growth powered by 
the wireless industry and the application economy have been 
centered here in the United States. America's continued 
leadership as the industry advances to fifth-generation 
networks will be crucial to support continued innovation and 
economic growth.
    To lead the wireless future, we must focus on three 
critical pillars: Mobile infrastructure, access to secure 
equipment and devices, and a unified spectrum strategy.
    First, infrastructure. At a foundational level, the United 
States cannot lead the wireless future without ubiquitous 
advanced wireless services for all Americans.
    As you consider generational investments in infrastructure, 
I applaud the bipartisan support for broadband, based on 
reliable maps. Expanding the fiber footprint will advance 
connectivity and provide backhaul needed to expand wireless 
coverage and speeds.
    But a generational investment in digital infrastructure 
that focuses on fixed broadband alone will be incomplete. 
Simply put, there are exciting and important innovations and 
services that rely on wireless connectivity and cannot be 
supported through fixed broadband technology at any speed.
    As wireless services continue to develop, some of the 
greatest potential for 5G technologies exist beyond consumer 
use. And while the most transformational services that will 
depend on mobile broadband may not even be invented today, we 
do know this: Mobility will continue to be a catalyst for 
economic growth in rural America, and any infrastructure 
efforts that do not ensure ubiquitous mobile broadband could 
create a new digital divide of technology denial.
    Second, equipment must be available and secure. CCA 
commends this committee for its focus on network security, 
including passing and funding the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act. While the FCC has worked 
diligently to implement the program, participating carriers may 
struggle to lock in plans to move forward, due to uncertainty 
regarding the final application process, structure and timing 
of reimbursements, and other decisions that will be made by the 
FCC in the coming months. CCA encourages further transparency 
and guidance so that all stakeholders can efficiently complete 
the replacement and removal of covered equipment.
    Completing the program is a critical priority, and a 
broader look at the equipment market can help ensure 
sustainable alternatives to equipment and services deemed to 
pose a national security threat. This includes research and 
development, and CCA urges Congress to fully fund the programs 
created through this committee's bipartisan leadership and the 
USA Telecommunications Act. As that legislation recognizes, O-
RAN presents exciting new potential to disaggregate 
functionality to increase competition and reduce costs.
    The prospect of introducing new vendors into the ecosystem 
has tremendous potential benefits, but policymakers should not 
mandate specific technologies. If new technologies like O-RAN 
live up to their promise, they will succeed in the marketplace. 
Meanwhile, carriers will continue to rely on existing trusted 
vendors.
    Third, we must have a unified spectrum strategy. With 
increased wireless use, spectrum needs will only accelerate. 
These needs will be met, in part, from spectrum that is 
reallocated from Federal users. As a timely example, the 3450 
to 3550 megahertz band, which the FCC plans to auction later 
this year pursuant to your directive, will involve sharing 
between incumbent Federal users and new commercial operations. 
For that auction to be successful, industry needs more 
information about exactly where and how the spectrum will be 
available and needs that information now.
    Unfortunately, there are too many recent examples where 
NTIA and FCC adopted science-based spectrum policies that were 
questioned after the fact, even after auctions have been 
completed, including in the C-band, 24 gigahertz band, L-band 
and 5.9 gigahertz band. Congress must take steps to restore 
trust in the process, ensuring NTIA is the voice and authority 
for spectrum management and use across the Federal Government, 
just as the FCC is for commercial use.
    In closing, mobile wireless infrastructure, secure and 
innovative wireless network equipment, and effective spectrum 
coordination and management across the Government are three 
elements critically important for the United States to lead the 
wireless future. Thank you for your leadership on these issues 
and holding today's hearing, and I welcome any questions you 
may have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Donovan follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     
        
    Mr. Doyle. OK. Thank you, Tim.
    Next, we will recognize Mr. Mezzalingua.
    You are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.

                 STATEMENT OF JOHN MEZZALINGUA

    Mr. Mezzalingua. Thank you. Chairman Doyle, Ranking Member 
Latta, Chairman Pallone, Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers and 
other distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for 
inviting me to testify.
    My name is John Mezzalingua. I am the CEO of JMA Wireless, 
and I am honored to be here today. We are grateful for all that 
Congress and the administration are doing to promote the 
adoption of 5G in the U.S. and the transition to O-RAN.
    We are at an inflection point in both our industry and our 
country. As the world transitions to 5G and O-RAN, technology, 
market, and political forces are aligning to create a new era 
in communications. The policy choices we make now will 
determine the new global leaders in this industry.
    I am here today because I believe we have the opportunity 
to bring leadership in this industry back home. Technology 
designed in the U.S., manufactured in the U.S. by American 
companies will help secure our supply chain, promote high-speed 
internet for all Americans, and transform how businesses 
operate, all while creating jobs.
    We are in the early but critical stages of this 
transformation, and we believe that government has a meaningful 
role to play in helping the American people realize the 
potential benefits.
    JMA is an American wireless technology company based in 
Syracuse, New York. We design and manufacture products only 30 
yards away from where I am sitting right now that are deployed 
on virtually every cell tower in the country.
    But more to the point of today's hearing, we are also 
designing and manufacturing advanced software network-based 
solutions that are beginning to have a revolutionary impact in 
the transition to 5G for carriers, businesses, and government. 
This technology is O-RAN compliant. It is disrupting the 
marketplace, and we believe it will play a major role in 
restoring U.S. telecom leadership.
    We currently employ about a thousand people globally, with 
facilities in six cities across this country, including 
Syracuse, Dallas, Austin, Chicago, Boulder and Richmond. In an 
opportunity zone in downtown Syracuse, we are building the 
country's first U.S.-owned 5G campus, including a smart factory 
with production to begin this fall.
    Now, others on this panel have spoken about the benefits of 
O-RAN. What unlocks the real magic of O-RAN is when you take 
what has been done in hardware and do it in software. We refer 
to this as virtualization, and it is the key to restoring 
American leadership.
    This is not pie-in-the-sky stuff, it is happening now. For 
example, JMA is deploying a wireless network to the city of 
Tucson that in its first phase provides high-speed internet to 
5,000 households and businesses, largely in school districts 
most affected by the digital divide. Using CARES Act funding 
for this project, Tucson is now poised to become a world-class 
connected city.
    We have been talking about the digital divide in America 
for decades. This is the time to finally solve it, with U.S. 
companies providing the latest technology. Other cities are 
following Tucson's lead already.
    JMA was also selected by the Pentagon as a supplier for a 
5G testbed at the Marine Corps facility in Albany, Georgia, as 
part of an all-U.S. team that includes Amazon, Cisco and 
Federated Wireless. JMA is deploying our software-based RAN 
solution for a 5G network which will support warehouse 
robotics, barcode scanning, and virtual reality applications. 
As these examples suggest, we are making real progress, and we 
believe the right policies can go a long way to securing and 
accelerating U.S. telecom leadership.
    We have the following suggestions: First, focus on U.S. 
manufacturing. We are proud of our American roots as an 
innovator and U.S. manufacturer, but we are up against foreign 
competitors who benefit from industrial policies that give them 
unfair advantages.
    We believe our Government should enact policies that 
promote American innovation while staying true to our 
international obligations of fair play. For example, projects 
funded by American taxpayers should be awarded to domestic 
manufacturers.
    Second, funding the USA Telecom Act. We commend Chairman 
Pallone, Representative Guthrie, Representative Matsui, and 
many others in Congress for pushing this forward. Now it needs 
to be fully funded.
    Third, the additional funding for broadband access. We 
encourage Congress to continue finding ways to fund this 
critical infrastructure so no American is left behind.
    Last, additional spectrum. We encourage the administration 
and Congress to work together to maximize the amount of 
spectrum available.
    Thank you for your time. I welcome your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Mezzalingua follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     
        
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you very much.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Amin for 5 minutes for his 
opening statement.

                    STATEMENT OF TAREQ AMIN

    Mr. Amin. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to 
testify to you today. My name is Tareq Amin. I am the group 
chief technology officer for Rakuten, and I am honored to be 
here with you today.
    To start, let me say Rakuten doesn't think of itself as a 
mobile operator. We are, indeed, a technology company with both 
Japanese and American DNA, bringing the best of what the 
technology sector offers to advance the agility, security, and 
affordability of our wireless network and services. In fact, 
Rakuten Mobile is its own first customer. Running on our open 
cloud-based Rakuten Communications Platform, or RCP, our mobile 
network in Japan proves that open and cloud-based wireless 
networks are no longer a proof of concept. Today they are, 
indeed, a reality.
    We are driving a more diverse supply chain with continuing 
innovation across multiple technologies, and providing 
significant consumer benefits. The majority of our network 
components today comes from U.S. suppliers. We have 
collaborated with companies like Intel, Qualcomm, and Cisco to 
create this open network ecosystem.
    When I joined Rakuten, I was optimistic that they would 
give me the opportunity to do something for the wireless 
industry that is well overdue: To reimagine the network end to 
end, from radio to transport to the core and support systems, 
leveraging the internet and cloud principles.
    When we started this journey, Rakuten, indeed, had a 
choice: to select a traditional vendor or to bring the ethos of 
the technology sector to telecom. In fact, the behind-the-
scenes story at Rakuten is that we did consider going with a 
Chinese equipment supplier.
    One of my first jobs at Rakuten was to cancel the ongoing 
RFP process and reimagine how future networks should be built 
and the possibility that networks could become more secure. And 
we knew that for this network concept to become credible, an 
ecosystem needed to be created.
    Historically, wireless networks relied on a small number of 
vendors to provide complete vertical solutions from radio to 
the core and other parts of the network. It has always been 
about replacing proprietary hardware with new proprietary 
hardware, and it was never about software.
    While the model has evolved somewhat, but the reality from 
its early days is that now only a handful of mobile network 
vendors still exist. In order for our model to come to light, 
we had to find the right partners.
    For example, in 2018 we reached out to Nokia and asked them 
to sell us the radio hardware parts of their complete solution 
so that we could use them with our software-based Open RAN 
platform. It took significant courage for Nokia to agree to 
unbundle the radio, but, to their credit, they did. And from 
there we invested very heavily in a U.S.-based startup called 
Altiostar to work with Nokia and enable a deployment of a true 
cloud-based network concept in Japan.
    I personally wanted everything to be open so that we could 
dictate how we monitor this network, how we apply security, 
whether to components, software, or even hardware itself. That 
is something in which we made a cognizant choice.
    That choice enabled Rakuten to have more visibility and 
control points in our network, because we are not beholden to 
one vendor. The various parts of this network provide a needed 
check to each other to help keep the overall system more 
secure. The system has also the benefits of allowing us to 
better isolate problem areas and prevent them from 
contaminating other parts of the network.
    This last point is what brings us here today, because 
Rakuten chose to move to a more open, software-centric, cloud-
native architecture. And to this extent, we are able to 
innovate at a more granular level. We are relentlessly 
automating our network, and we are driving a more diverse 
supply chain. We believe we are better equipped to secure our 
network, and we are driving costs down. We are proud to be an 
inaugural board member of Open RAN Policy Coalition and a 
member of Competitive Carriers Association.
    Rakuten is committed to work with the U.S. Government and 
industry stakeholders to serve the American market. However, 
U.S. leadership will be critical if we are to succeed on a 
larger scale. To this end, I offer three suggestions for how 
U.S. Congress can continue to drive innovation and security in 
wireless networks.
    First, the U.S. Government should actively promote open and 
cloud-based technology for telecom networks through its 
policies and international engagement. The Japanese Government 
have been incredibly supportive of our approach. And the open 
and cloud-based communication ecosystem is the wave of the 
future, but it is young and needs to be cultivated and 
nourished if it is to grow. American leadership is imperative 
to advance this important evolution.
    Second, Rakuten urges Congress to provide positive 
incentive for American companies to embrace an open and cloud-
based future.
    And finally, Rakuten urges Congress to fund the USA 
Telecommunications Act, and I would like to thank this 
committee for your leadership on that bill. Chairman Pallone, I 
support your efforts to fund this program at a significant 
level in order to drive innovation and deployment in open and 
cloud-based systems. And I urge your colleagues to join you. 
Nothing less than American competitiveness is at stake.
    Thank you very much, and I look forward for your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Amin follows:]
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     
        
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Amin.
    And I want to thank all of our witnesses today for their 
excellent opening statements. We have concluded the openings. 
We are now going to move to Member questions.
    Each Member will have 5 minutes to ask questions of our 
witnesses. I would ask all of my colleagues to stick to that 5-
minute rule, and don't be asking a question with 2 seconds 
left. We are going to try to keep Members to that.
    And I will start by recognizing myself for 5 minutes and 
hopefully setting an example for how the rest will ask their 
questions.
    Let me start with Mr. Donovan. While Open RAN technology 
holds a lot of promise, many of your members have relied on 
larger equipment vendors to help with systems integration, 
maintenance, and troubleshooting.
    What additional steps can Congress take to ease and 
accelerate the adoption of Open RAN amongst your members?
    Mr. Donovan. Thank you for the question. So when we 
recently surveyed our members, we found that 37 percent of our 
carriers are already working with a systems integrator, but 100 
percent of those responded that they are utilizing network 
optimization and analytics tools.
    So it goes to show that, if this technology can live up to 
the promise, there is a huge market potential for it. Some 
things that Congress can do to help with that is working with 
regional hubs and setting up additional technical assistance so 
that carriers that may not have some of this in-house are able 
to get additional education and the efforts that they need to 
be able to take part in this.
    Mr. Doyle. Thanks. Mr. Baker, your company has worked with 
wireless telecommunication companies across the globe to bring 
a lot of benefits of cloud and virtualization to bear on their 
networks. How would additional Federal resources help speed the 
deployment and adoption of Open RAN here in the United States?
    Mr. Baker. Thank you, Chairman Doyle. The additional 
funding will help get the Telecommunications Act funded so that 
we can actually scale the companies to actually support these 
networks, both from system integration, also refunding the 
growth of mobile equipment companies, bringing technologies 
back from China.
    One example of that is the radio technology. There is not a 
U.S. radio company where you can go buy frequency balance with 
the U.S. market that is open to Open RAN type solutions. So it 
will support U.S. manufacturing jobs and critical components 
and ensure that U.S. companies are involved in servicing the 
next-generation networks.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
    Mr. Amin, what has Rakuten's experience been with 
developing and deploying its Open RAN network? What kind of 
advantages have you seen versus using a traditional vendor?
    Mr. Amin. Thank you, Congressman. Well, firstly, I must say 
that, for us, when we looked at how we need to construct and 
build this network, it was very clear for us that the United 
States had one of the most advanced technology building blocks 
that we require to build an open network, open platform 
architecture.
    In the early days, of course, this journey was not simple 
and easy for us to accomplish. However, the advancements that 
we have seen when it comes to scaleable automation, cost 
reduction, agility, and speed have been significant. And we 
went from the early days where this technology was being 
debated. Today, I think the merits and the capability and the 
technical merits of it is being celebrated.
    And thanks to the partners and the ecosystem that we 
created, I always say that we are scratching the surface of 
what is possible to enable autonomy in mobile networks.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
    Ms. Rinaldo, are your members concerned about supply chain 
issues related to chip shortages, and how could it impact their 
ability to get wireless products and services to markets?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, sir. Yes, the Open RAN Policy 
Coalition, just like so many other manufacturing industries 
around the world, are concerned about the shortage of chips. We 
are supportive of funding to bring back manufacturing and to 
boost that in the United States, in order to help not only our 
own supply chain but that of our partners. It is something that 
we are following, and we stand ready to help however we can.
    Mr. Doyle. Thanks. How about you, Mr. Donovan. How is that 
affecting your members?
    Mr. Donovan. Anything that increases the costs or delays 
the access to that equipment is going to have an impact on 
several of the programs that we have talked about today, from 
removing covered equipment from carriers that do have it in 
their network to upgrading to 5G. So anything we can do to make 
sure we have a steady supply chain and availability is 
something that we would support.
    Mr. Doyle. Well, thank you very much to all the witnesses. 
The Chair is going to yield back 45 seconds and recognize the 
ranking member of the subcommittee, Mr. Latta, for his 5 
minutes. Mr. Latta, you are recognized.
    Bob, I think you need to unmute.
    Bob, we still can't hear you.
    Bob, are you able to unmute? Can you hear me?
    I think maybe we will go to Mrs. McMorris Rodgers and come 
back to you, Bob, once we figure out how to get your system 
unmuted. Is that OK?
    Mrs. Rodgers. Then I need to unmute.
    Mr. Doyle. OK.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Are you unmuted now, Bob?
    Mr. Doyle. Cathy, why don't you go ahead for your 5 
minutes, and we will come back to Bob once he gets that taken 
care of.
    Mrs. Rodgers. OK. Sounds good.
    Again, thank you, everyone, for joining us today. Despite 
all the great bipartisan work that this committee has done to 
help secure our communication supply chains and safeguard our 
technology leadership, China remains a constant threat when it 
comes to our privacy, intellectual property, and national 
security. One crucial part of securing our competitive edge 
involves U.S. and trusted companies participating in 5G 
standard-setting bodies like 3GPP.
    Three years ago, under Republican leadership, this 
committee held a bipartisan hearing that examined our supply 
chain security. And we heard from experts on the need to 
bolster private-sector leadership and close collaborative 
engagement with government partners through clear and effective 
processes.
    Ms. Rinaldo, I wanted to ask you, what actions do you 
believe the United States should be taking to improve its 
public and private sector representation at these bodies, and 
what other actions can we take to bolster the trusted vendor 
marketplace and prevent China from seizing control of global 5G 
supply chains?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Ranking Member.
    Yes, I agree with you. We need more participation not only 
on the U.S. Government end, but also in the private sector. I 
think one important step to take is to formalize more 
processes. We need to permanently designate a U.S. Government 
lead at 3GPP.
    I understand that Congressman Johnson has introduced a bill 
in the past, but let me--I have--designated NTIA as the lead, 
actually. Let me tell you why that is important.
    During my time at NTIA, we had an interagency process which 
eventually tapped an individual at NTIA as the government lead. 
We need to formalize these processes.
    While you often hear that foreign adversaries are in--at 
standards bodies with thousands of people, that is not making 
the difference. What is making the difference is that they are 
more coordinated. We need to formalize these processes. We need 
to nurture this expertise at a certain agency. I would say that 
NTIA, with their expertise on telecom, is the agency to select.
    And then we need to examine the rules how the United States 
Government and private sector can come together to better 
coordinate on these issues. There are rules in the way, whether 
it be antitrust--the United States Government has to form a 
FACA, a Federal advisory committee, in order to have 
conversations. There are hurdles and barriers in the way to 
having these talks.
    The more that we discuss it and are forced to deal with 
these barriers, the less we are talking about the issue at 
hand. I think it would be smart for Congress to look at the 
barriers in place, figure out what is needed, what is not, and 
how to best move forward.
    Again, participation is of the utmost importance in going 
to the future. And, again, just learning from lessons learned 
in the past.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you for those insights.
    It seems like everyone on this committee is really excited 
about the development of Open RAN-compatible technology, and it 
is showing great promise. Rakuten Mobile has already deployed 
commercial networks using Open RAN architecture.
    Mr. Amin, what are the biggest challenges that you faced, 
and what are some of the lessons that you have learned so far? 
And then I would also like to ask if you would just speak to 
the role that government played in helping complete the 
project.
    Mr. Amin. Thank you very much, Congresswoman.
    I think, when we started early on, a lot of people thought 
that our biggest challenge is about the technology. Actually, 
it was quite the opposite of this.
    Our biggest challenge was about mind set, mentality, and 
determination to hire the right organization, to build the 
right people that are willing to do the impossible. And to pull 
these pieces together, initially we had to take a much larger 
role on what the industry now is calling a system integration.
    We learned quickly the importance of pulling these pieces 
of the puzzle together, but it was, from our point of view, 
very doable, and something that we needed to do in order to 
push the advancements in this technology in Japan, to enable 
cloud-native architecture to come to reality. So I would say 
the first biggest lesson is to put the integration processes in 
places, and then, furthermore, as time advances, to minimize 
the level of complexity in system integration, if not eliminate 
it.
    The second thing is about understanding the criticality of 
cloud-native architecture, the beauty of cloud, and the 
constant economics that you can bring in.
    And the third, which cannot be also underestimated, the 
importance of having the right ecosystem and the right willing 
partners. And we were so pleasantly surprised to see the 
embracement from all the executives of the various entities in 
the U.S. that we worked with. That was extremely welcomed, to 
all our benefit and the benefit to the consumers of course in 
Japan.
    So I would say we are extremely optimistic and think really 
the future of such technology is imminent if we continue to 
work and collaborate to embed this in our DNA from a technology 
organization.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Doyle. Gentlelady's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Pallone, the full committee 
chair, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman Doyle.
    I was going to start with Mr. Donovan.
    In your written testimony, you argue that we should take a 
broader look at the equipment market to help ensure sustainable 
alternatives to equipment and services that deem--that could 
pose a national security threat. And we have some of the 
companies that will help us do that on the panel today, and 
there are others like Airspan and our longtime partners in 
producing secure networks, including Ericsson, Nokia, and 
Samsung.
    So my question is: What have your members told you about 
how they handle technical problems in their networks when they 
arise, and do you have any thoughts on how we might make that 
troubleshooting easier for them?
    Mr. Donovan. Well, thank you for that question.
    You put your finger on one of the top issues that our 
members have been talking about as they are discussing some of 
these evolutions. And, to my colleague's point in answering the 
last question, that this is why the systems integration piece 
is so important. And, when you are with one vendor end to end 
and something goes wrong with the network, that is who you 
call.
    As conversations continue with a range of different 
equipment providers, there needs to be confidence on the side 
of the carrier that, if something goes wrong, there is one 
person that they can call, and they can help them identify 
where the problem is, especially if there are different--
different equipment from different companies involved 
throughout the stack.
    So that is something that we are continuing to evaluate. It 
is a hot topic for discussion amongst my members, and ensuring 
trust in that process is going to be important for adoption of 
some of these technologies.
    Mr. Pallone. Well, let me also ask you--I mean, as you 
know, for some time on the committee, we have raised concerns 
about the security of our network-connected consumer equipment. 
Are there ways that we can use some process at the FCC and 
elsewhere to help address the potential risks of that?
    Mr. Donovan. So yes. So the FCC already has a role in 
approving equipment to be used on the networks in terms of the 
RF side. We continue having conversations about if there is a 
role for the FCC or other Federal agencies in, you know, 
providing approval and certification on the security side, 
especially with the massive amount of growing numbers of 
devices that are more than just the smartphones that we carry 
around, to make sure that all devices that are connecting to 
the networks are secure.
    Mr. Pallone. Well, thank you, Mr. Donovan.
    Let me go to Mr. Baker.
    I have heard some controversy regarding whether Open RAN is 
really ready for prime time. I think it is, but I am interested 
in your views. So let me just ask: Is Open RAN technology ready 
for prime time and network deployments, and what will that mean 
for jobs here in the U.S.?
    Mr. Baker. Absolutely, Open RAN is ready. It is being 
deployed. We have got members on the panel here today that are 
deploying it. And, you know, as a result, you know, jobs will--
you know, will increase, and, you know, the business, through 
innovation and technology, will grow the ecosystem.
    I think one comment I would like to make is that the whole 
issue that we are really trying to address is one about open 
interfaces and ensuring, through the standardization process 
and, you know, putting enough people into the standardization 
process--and, again, that is sort of job creation, but they are 
really focusing down on the root cause of the problem, which is 
open interfaces with interoperable products.
    Mr. Pallone. All right. Thank you.
    Well, Mr. Baker, let me ask you another question.
    Last Congress, we passed the USA Telecommunications Act, 
you know, which supports security and competition in wireless 
network marketplace through the deployment of Open RAN 
technology. But, as I think has been mentioned, that act still 
needs to be funded.
    So do you believe that funding the USA Telecommunications 
Act will promote alternatives to Huawei and ZTE equipment, as 
well as competition? And, of course, what level of funding do 
you think we need?
    Mr. Baker. Yes. Thank you, Congressman Pallone.
    Yes, absolutely. You know, funding that will--is the first 
step. The second step is actually to put policy and process in 
place that actually directs the money to their correct places 
to grow the ecosystem. You know, we see on the Rip and Replace 
Act, for instance, that money is diverted, because of 
timelines, back to existing, you know, proprietary suppliers.
    So, you know, policies should direct the money to the 
companies that need to scale and grow this Open RAN ecosystem.
    Mr. Pallone. Do you want to give us--give it a shot at the 
level of funding that----
    Mr. Baker. Yes. I certainly think, you know, that----
    Mr. Pallone. It can be an estimate. It can be an estimate.
    Mr. Baker. Yes. I think the $3 billion funding number is a 
good number, and, you know, that will allow companies like 
Mavenir or Altiostar to scale and greater support the markets.
    Mr. Pallone. All right. Thanks so much.
    And I am giving back 22 seconds, Chairman Doyle.
    Mr. Doyle. I want to thank the full committee chair for his 
good example.
    I understand Mr. Latta is en route to his office to get on 
a different computer. So, with that, I am going to recognize 
Mr. Guthrie for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Guthrie. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks so 
much for having this hearing.
    As you know, I was one of the sponsors of the Open RAN 
moving forward, but I just want to make sure we look at 
everything as we move forward.
    But, first, Mr. Donovan, one of our priorities last 
Christmas was the rip and replace so we could secure our 
networks from companies like Huawei and ZTE. And you talked a 
little bit about barriers. Would you talk a little more about 
potential barriers that remain, particularly in permitting, 
barriers to move forward with the new equipment?
    Mr. Donovan. Sure. Thank you, sir, and thank you for the 
leadership in both getting the program passed and funded.
    Some of the barriers that do remain for those carriers is, 
one, knowing kind of what exactly the application process is 
going to look like, knowing when and how they will be 
reimbursed and so they can, in turn, pay the vendors that they 
are working with on the process. Some of those things are 
additional clarity from the FCC would be really helpful so 
that, while carriers are having these conversations, they can 
lock in some of these agreements and get moving on the work.
    On the permitting side, this comes back to the idea that, 
for all the talk of calling it rip and replace, it is really 
replace and then rip. We can't afford to take away connectivity 
in the rural areas where these carriers are often the only 
provider. And so, to stand up to that second network alongside, 
oftentimes there will be additional permitting work for 
colocation, review of tower integrity to make sure you can put 
up that additional equipment.
    And, even in some places, if you have microwave backhaul 
today, you know, if it doesn't make sense to continue with 
microwave backhaul, setting up a separate link, either because 
of spectrum or technology, then clearing the permitting to 
provide fiber to that site, which is going to enhance services 
for everybody that uses that site long-term. So getting 
through----
    Mr. Guthrie. Yes. I just want to get to some more 
questions.
    So, Mr. Donovan--so you kind of struck my thoughts as you 
were talking earlier. Background's in manufacturing, putting in 
complex manufacturing systems. And the best scenarios that we 
always tried to look for was turnkey, where a vendor came in 
and all the subsuppliers were part of that vendor, and they 
hand you the key, and it worked, because, if it didn't work, 
you knew who to talk to.
    And so you were talking about, you know, trying to come up 
with arrangements. I know that is difficult to do sometimes. 
But--so I just want to kind of get your thoughts on what--how 
do you make sure, if you have different vendors, the components 
are going to work together, or the components and the system 
work together?
    And then I know you talked about who is responsible if it 
doesn't, and so kind of further elaborate on that as well.
    Mr. Donovan. Certainly. So that is why some of the 
different testing is important, you know, before you put the 
technology out in the field, especially for carriers that have 
existing network footprint. And that is why some of the 
educational initiatives that go alongside it play a long role 
in building that trust--you know, things like today's hearing 
so everyone can learn more about the technology; the FCC has a 
proceeding to learn more about it--that can increase trust in 
this so that, as we move forward, that carriers feel confident 
to deploy it.
    There has also been some, you know, exciting discussions in 
the industry between the different providers of this 
technology, and architects are working in unique partnerships 
so that they can provide that turnkey solution to carriers.
    Mr. Guthrie. OK. Thank you so much.
    And then, Mr. Amin, your company, Rakuten, has used this 
process. And so your concerns about who is responsible if you 
have multiple vendors?
    And the other thing would be just security. If you are 
buying from one vendor, you have one security concern about 
that one vendor that you are working with. But, if you have 
multiple vendors or multiple components, that adds to that 
equation. Could you just kind of talk about how you address the 
comment--the issue that Mr. Donovan brought up, and then the 
security issue?
    Mr. Amin. Absolutely.
    I think, when we looked at the security architecture for 
Rakuten Mobile, it was really built under the premise of zero 
trust. And, when we looked at the--today's network, we still 
have many proprietary interfaces, and I call these are the 
black boxes that exist into our architecture.
    We needed to evolve from a company that just always looks 
and trusts everything that any OEM brings to a company that is 
able to validate not only the software component, but also the 
hardware and the silicone, and not only the hardware and the 
silicone, but it is also its origin, where it is manufactured, 
where it is built.
    So now our case. It was by design and by choice that I 
personally have looked at the components that are involved, and 
the most complex things in mobile network today, which is the 
remote radio heads and the radio units. I honestly will tell 
you I did not find it complex. I did not find it complex to 
really get to this level of detail.
    I find technology is hardware for us. It is OK for us as an 
operator to serve the duties that we have for our Government as 
well as our consumers to protect the apparatus of our security 
architecture, that we needed to really understand the entire 
supply chain management.
    And I would tell this committee it is critical to do so. It 
is really, really critical to understand that we need to evolve 
from the past into a new business model that an operator and 
even to a certain extent the new vendors must learn and 
understand how to build and secure modern platform, especially 
in Open RAN.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentleman's time has expired.
    Mr. Guthrie. My time is expired. I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
California, Mr. McNerney, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. McNerney. Well, I thank the chairman for having this 
hearing. I want to thank the witnesses for informative 
testimony and answers to the questions.
    My first question--and also want to say it is interesting 
having a hearing where the witnesses are, by and large, 
reinforcing each other's positions.
    Mr. Baker, my congressional district includes both rural 
and urban areas, and a large portion of the households are low 
income. Would you discuss the likely impact of Open RAN for 
consumers in rural areas and for low-income consumers in both 
rural and urban areas?
    Mr. Baker. Yes. Thank you, Congressman McNerney. And, 
personally, I would like to say I had the pleasure of building 
the technical wireless network in California and Nevada, so I 
really understand the area well.
    To the extent that--you know, it all comes down to 
operating a budget. With Open RAN, the promise of lower costs--
in fact, it has been proven lower costs will allow operators to 
spend more and build more regions out in the network. It all 
comes down to the budget they have available and then the cost 
of the equipment. And, you know, with lower-margin equipment, 
essentially the operators can do far more.
    Mr. McNerney. Well, thank you.
    Mr. Baker, I am also worried about the growing number of 
cyber threats. I have heard that Open RAN offers security 
benefits but that has potential to increase the threat surface 
from potential attacks.
    How can Open RAN help improve the security of our networks 
and also be a greater--have a greater threat surface that we 
can--should we be concerned about that with Open RAN?
    Mr. Baker. Sure. Good question.
    The Open RAN is tested, and it is secure, and it allows--
through interoperable interfaces allows people to be constantly 
monitoring, checking, and testing those elements. And so, if 
there is a question about a certain element in the network of 
the security value, then, you know, it could be either 
replaced, it could be monitored, it could be fixed. But, you 
know, it adds another level of security.
    And I think, you know, I referenced Stephen Bye from DISH. 
He says, you know, when you turn the lights on with open 
interfaces, you can see the cockroaches that are in the 
network.
    Mr. McNerney. Thanks for that visual there.
    Mr. Mezzalingua, I serve as the cochair of the Artificial 
Intelligence Caucus, and I understand that parts of Open RAN 
utilize the AI and machine learning.
    What are the opportunities that AI offers for Open RAN, and 
what are the challenges?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Well, I think that AI--thank you, 
Congressman, for the question.
    I think that there are so many applications that were 
mentioned earlier--AI is one of them, IoT, where there is a lot 
of discussion and talk around this. There is the use cases at 
the moment are not crystal clear. I think a lot of them are 
coming into view.
    What I do know is that, for us to take full advantage of 
what 5G brings in the broader ecosystem, we are going to need 
to have capability in this country to be able to address it.
    You referenced cybersecurity previously. You referenced the 
need for innovation, manufacturing. All of this is ultimately 
incumbent upon having a U.S. industry so that we cannot be 
dependent on any foreign actors to come up with whatever 
applications--AI, security--that are called upon in this new 
era of communications.
    Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
    Ms. Rinaldo, another area I am interested in is the 
intersection of AI and spectrum management. Looking more 
broadly beyond Open RAN, what are some of the benefits that AI 
could offer for spectrum management, and should we be taking a 
closer look at that?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Congressman.
    Yes, absolutely. I would say one of the most fascinating 
parts of Open RAN, it allows for a more layered approach going 
forward. So long gone are the days where we are stuck to a 10-
year life cycle where, as advancements come online, we can 
inject them into the network.
    We have one member company of our coalition, DeepSig. They 
are probably the smallest. They are 25 people in a reworks 
building in north Arlington, but they are doing fascinating 
work around AI, machine learning, and how do we become more 
efficient with what we have in the spectrum space?
    So, again, that layered-on approach is really going to 
benefit not only updates to the network, but, as your committee 
well knows, how can we be more efficient with the spectrum that 
we have?
    Mr. McNerney. Thank you. I am going to try and sneak in 
another question, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to make sure that the U.S. remains competitive in 
wireless technology, including 5G and the generations that 
follow. Mr. Donovan, as you point out in your testimony, in 
recent years, we have seen a lack of Federal agency 
coordination on spectrum policy.
    How does the lack of Federal agency coordination on 
spectrum policy impact U.S. competitiveness in wireless 
technology and the deployment of wireless technology?
    Mr. Doyle. And I would ask that the----
    Mr. McNerney. If you can help me out.
    Mr. Doyle. And please try to answer that quickly.
    Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
    Mr. Donovan. Certainly. You know, spectrum is the lifeblood 
of wireless. And, if you don't have certainty that the spectrum 
that you are designed with is going to be able to be used to 
the maximum extent that it was brought to market, then that is 
going to undercut wireless of every generation.
    Mr. McNerney. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Doyle. OK. Gentleman's time is expired.
    I understand our ranking member is back with us. Bob, you 
are recognized for 5 minutes. Hopefully----
    Mr. Latta. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate your 
forbearance. It appears my microphone on my computer has 
crashed, so sorry about that.
    Mr. Donovan, I can start my first questions with you. And, 
if I ask a question that might have already been asked while I 
was trying to get to another computer, just tell me that, and 
we will move on to another question.
    But, as we know that, under the Secure and Trusted 
Communications Act, which helps our small and rural 
telecommunication providers replace potentially compromised 
equipment from bad actors like Chinese companies Huawei and 
ZTE, now that we have secured the 1.9 billion in funding to 
implement this law, we need to make sure that companies can 
remove or replace covered equipment without delay.
    Under the act, those reimbursed by the program are required 
to complete the replacement of covered equipment within a year 
of receiving that funding. However, as of today, the FCC is 
still in the process setting up the reimbursement program.
    What are the barriers, Mr. Donovan, that you see that might 
delay the removal of this equipment from our companies out 
there?
    Mr. Donovan. Well, thank you for the question.
    Quickly rehash some previous discussion that there are some 
permitting issues as you really need to replace the existing 
network before you can remove the previous one.
    Some of the other barriers, you know, where we see it now 
is lack of confidence in the final application process of 
knowing exactly what a carrier will have to do to qualify. You 
know, these are carriers that are not in a position to get it 
wrong. They have to get it right. The networks are in areas 
that are often uneconomical to serve without support already. 
So they do need to make sure that they are taking the steps to 
follow the rules directly.
    And other issues out there, we--we also need a workforce 
that can complete this at the same time as there's other 
commands in the workforce, including nationwide upgrades to 5G, 
expanded network deployments. And even factors like weather are 
becoming an issue where you need to plan your build season out 
months in advance, especially in some areas with more harsh 
terrain, where you don't have a build season that goes around 
to the year.
    You have tower techs that aren't really thrilled about 
climbing up a tower at minus 40 degrees, especially if there is 
enough workforce demand that they can go elsewhere. So you are 
competing for that workforce as well as--internationally, 
across the country--as well as trying to get your work done.
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you. And let me ask a followup on 
this. As your companies continue to deploy the wireless 
infrastructure, how can we encourage them to invest in the 
innovative solutions like Open RAN-compatible technologies, 
because I know you said there is--all the issues that you are 
dealing with, but how do we get them out there to do that?
    Mr. Donovan. You know, additional information, test beds, 
access to the knowledge base that you need to move this 
forward. CCA members, you know, especially those that are 
subject to the rip and replace proceeding, have been evaluating 
Open RAN network. A recent survey showed that, of all our 
members, showed that 89 percent are evaluating it right now. To 
the extent that some of the outstanding questions that we are 
discussing at the hearing today and that are taking place in 
the record at the FCC can be resolved, that is going to 
increase confidence in carriers of all sizes and lead to 
greater adoption to the technology.
    Mr. Baker. Congressman----
    Mr. Latta. Let me ask you a better question here that--are 
there any deregulatory measures, such as streamlining upgrades 
to existing infrastructures, that can help speed rollout of 
Open RAN-compatible technologies?
    Mr. Donovan. Yes. I think, with--especially with Open RAN, 
as we are looking at different types of network architecture, 
we want to make sure that the permitting processes apply for 
what is actually being put up. And, in some cases, this may not 
be on the huge macro towers. It could be we want to just right 
size the permitting process so that there is confidence both 
from the permitting agencies that are going through the review 
process as well as carriers, that they will have certainty in 
terms of cost and time to get approved to go to construction.
    Mr. Latta. Let me ask one final question.
    You know, as we look across everything that is going across 
the world, especially where the Chinese technology is today, 
are we on par right now? Are we leading? Are we falling behind? 
Are we--where are we at, would you say, right now, out there 
with the other technologies?
    Mr. Donovan. So we are competing in the international 
marketplace, and there is potential both of the--you know, 
several of the companies that are--my colleagues on the panel 
today, as well as the existing trusted providers that, you 
know, even if headquartered in other places, do have United 
States manufacturing and jobs.
    So there is--it is--the competition is hot to--an important 
topic that you touch on, and it is going to be really important 
for the United States to continue to push forward.
    Mr. Latta. Well, I hear--the word I heard from everybody 
today was the word ``competition'' and moving forward, and that 
is what we want to make sure we are doing.
    So, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Doyle. I thank my friend.
    Let's see. Mr. O'Halleran, I believe you are next. You have 
5 minutes.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. 
I want to thank the panel for being here today on these 
important issues. I appreciate your coming and continuing 
efforts on securing America's network technology. This remains 
an important national security priority.
    Last Congress, I was proud to support Chairman Pallone's 
USA Telecommunications Act, which was a good first step in 
securing our network equipment. While our networks must be 
protected against hackers and state actors, we also need to 
finish the job on closing the digital divide.
    In rural Arizona, only 66 percent of the population has 
access to broadband at the FCC's minimum speed standard. 
Consistently, constituents across Arizona note that access to 
reliable high-speed broadband is a top priority for them.
    Inequities in broadband access results in poorer health and 
educational outcomes for those of us who live in rural and 
Tribal communities. This extends beyond using the internet at 
home. Like many rural areas, my district has miles and miles of 
dead zones where our cell phones read ``No service.'' It is the 
size of a little bit larger than Illinois.
    This is a problem when my constituents need to contact 
medical help or emergency services in remote area. The COVID-19 
pandemic has only highlighted, as many of us know, the need to 
expand access to rural communities so that students, doctors, 
and rural economies can compete in the urban areas of our great 
country.
    Mr. Donovan, I appreciate the focus in your testimony on 
the need to advance mobile connections. Do the things we are 
talking about today--network security and open standards--
impact the speed wireless carriers can build service in rural 
areas?
    Mr. Donovan. Thank you, sir, for the question and for the 
focus on rural. And I want to underscore your point of the 
importance of the need for mobile connectivity not only at the 
home but while you are moving about in ways that can only be 
met by mobile technology.
    In terms of the speed to deployment, the potential for 
additional vendors and lower costs can certainly help, as you 
know well that, in some places, the cost factor makes it very 
challenging to deploy services in rural and Tribal areas. So 
that could certainly help in terms of expediting deployment.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Mezzalingua, I know that JMA is doing good work in 
Tucson, bringing internet access to thousands of residents 
through the city's community wireless program.
    How is that going, and how can this public-private 
partnership succeed and be replicated in other communities?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Thank you, Congressman.
    First, I would say that the Government has a very 
significant role to play. You mentioned the public-private 
partnership, but the Government has a major role in the sense 
that, almost 2 years ago now, when the CBRS spectrum was 
released, which was licensed spectrum, that meant that the 
power and sophistication that was normally reserved for the 
wireless carriers is now in the hands of enterprises or 
municipalities and consumers, and then, of course, the DoD and 
Pentagon.
    So that was a major move to begin with. And then, of 
course, the CARES Act funding enabled them the rollout in 
Tucson in particular.
    Our view is that the example of Tucson, which is a highly 
sophisticated network deployed at, you know, rapid time, very 
quickly, is something that is meaningful to everybody right now 
that has a need for the urgency of having broadband. But the--
also, a critical issue is these refresh cycles--these hardware 
refresh cycles that just are a constant drain on IT budgets 
everywhere--public, private.
    This is something that, with software, you begin to 
transcend that because, instead of this rip and replace--or 
replace and rip, whatever you call it--you install it once and 
then you software upgrade like we are used to every day with 
our phones. So this is where the technology is today. This is 
how you stretch taxpayer dollars so that you actually ensure 
this--you build it once, and then you build upon it.
    This is all the benefit of what we are looking at right now 
with the Telecom Act, with O-RAN. It is all overlapping and 
consistent.
    Mr. O'Halleran. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
    Let's see. I don't see Mr. Kinzinger, so I think I am going 
to recognize my fellow Pittsburgh Pirate fan, Mr. Bilirakis, 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have two games 
today.
    Mr. Doyle. I know.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Two games.
    Mr. Doyle. We are on a streak, Gus. We are on a streak.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Doubleheader. That is right.
    So, Mr. Donovan--I thank everyone for their testimony. In 
the written testimony, you discussed the significant loopholes 
and failures in the spectrum management process. I am glad to 
see your support for my bill, the Spectrum Coordination Act, as 
part of the solution.
    As you know, this bill would require the FCC and NTIA to 
update their 18-year-old memorandum of understanding on 
spectrum coordination. I think it is about time.
    Can you specifically discuss the problems that are 
occurring because of outdated interagency agreements, like the 
existing MOU, which leads to the need for a reboot, please? 
Thank you.
    Mr. Donovan. Sure. Thank you for your question, sir.
    And so the MOU between the NTIA and the FCC is informed, as 
you mentioned, by the IRAC, the Interdepartment Radio Advisory 
Committee, process. That is the place that is designed to 
assist the Assistant Secretary at NTIA and assigning U.S. 
frequencies for Government use and reviewing how they are used.
    As that process informs spectrum, that gets reallocated and 
then eventually brought to the market by the FCC. That process 
is the appropriate way to raise concerns. What is troubling 
right now is, when the process is complete, they have gone 
through sufficient time, NTIA and FCC reach agreements based on 
the science and the engineering behind these spectrum policies, 
and then separate departments raise concerns after the fact.
    We have seen it in too many bands so far, and especially 
when recently some concerns have been raised after auctions 
have been completed that risks undermining faith in spectrum 
auctions and in business plans to know that, once you get the 
approval from regulators, you will be able to use spectrum 
along the rules that it was brought to the market under.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you.
    Next question is for Ms. Rinaldo.
    In your experience as Administrator of NTIA, are there 
specific things you would want to see addressed if and when 
these agencies formalize a new agreement? How can we encourage 
agencies to follow the statutory process and work through NTIA 
when they have a spectrum issue with the FCC, please?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Congressman.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you.
    Ms. Rinaldo. Yes, I do agree, and I concur with Tim's 
comments. I think that NTIA and FCC must formalize a process, 
memorialize it in writing that, when an agency does go outside 
the normal process, how the FCC will respond. However they 
choose to be the right process, it needs to be in writing and 
it needs to be consistent. And I think consistency will go a 
long way in ensuring that agencies follow the proper due 
course.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Very good.
    Mr. Chairman, after the introduction of the Spectrum 
Coordination Act last year, I was pleased to see that FCC and 
NTIA take interest in revisiting the agreement. However, we 
should not assume they will finish this process. We should move 
forward with ensuring this process comes to the completion with 
the Spectrum Coordination Act.
    There has been strong bipartisan interest for this idea 
since 2000--since 2020--the 2020 letter by Chairman Pallone and 
then Ranking Member Walden. So this legislation will also help 
reinstate NTIA as the authority on spectrum matters as it 
incorporates lessons learned over the last 18 years, which 
committee leaders recently addressed in a letter earlier this 
week.
    So I ask the committee--the committee leaders on both sides 
of the aisle to give strong consideration, if you will, to 
moving the Spectrum Coordination Act forward as a sign of 
unified committee commitment to this cause. I think it will go 
a long way.
    And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Doyle. OK, Gus. Thank you for your comments.
    Let's see. Miss Rice, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Miss Rice. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Baker, in your written testimony you talk about how, 
around the world, allied nations are advancing aggressive 
policies to build their next-generation mobile networks with 
Open RAN, and you mention that--you talk about the MOU that the 
five major European operators signed, totally committing to 
deploying Open RAN across the European Continent, but you say 
that, quote, ``this full embrace of Open RAN has not yet 
happened here in the U.S.''
    Can you just expound on that? And what is holding us back 
from just that full embrace?
    Mr. Baker. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman. This is a great 
question.
    I think the ability to get open standards that are 
interoperable is the clear message that needs to be taken that 
operators then can bring other vendors into their networks. At 
the moment, the current vendors which supply the United States 
networks have got them locked down to the extent that it is 
difficult for operators to bring new vendors into those 
networks.
    And in Europe, you know, even as of yesterday, you know, 25 
percent of the market was being set aside for--or being 
discussed to be set aside for new, small operators.
    And I think that is the challenge that the U.S. has, is how 
to encourage the operators to actually embrace Open RAN and 
follow, you know, follow open standards in the future so that 
we don't end up with a situation that, you know, if I am going 
to change a light bulb, I am going to have to change the wiring 
as well before I can put a new light bulb in.
    Miss Rice. Uh-huh. Well, you also talk about the--you know, 
the need to provide financial incentives as well. And, Mr. 
Baker, I heard you were asked about the amount of Federal 
investment that has to be done, and I think you were the one 
that said it should be around $3 billion.
    Are there any witnesses who have any--who take issue with 
that investment amount so we can know as appropriators exactly 
what needs to be invested?
    So I assume that everyone is--embraces that--the amount 
that Mr. Baker talked about?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Congresswoman?
    Miss Rice. Yes.
    Ms. Rinaldo. On behalf of the Open RAN Policy Coalition, I 
would say that we support the full funding of $3 billion.
    Miss Rice. Great. Thank you.
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Congresswoman?
    Miss Rice. Yes.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. What we can say is that we have one 
company--that is Huawei--that, over the years, has been--
according to reports, spent tens of billions of dollars on 
their R&D. So we certainly think--and we think that, with our 
approach and the things that we have all discussed today, we 
are--that is not something that we are--we think is necessary 
to compete.
    However, the number of 3 billion certainly is an important 
start, as somebody had said previously, for U.S. competition 
and restoring leadership just so that the playing fields become 
leveled.
    Miss Rice. Yes, for sure.
    Mr. Mezzalingua, if I can stay with you. You know, I am 
very happy to hear about your company continuing their 
investment, certainly in New York State, my home State. Can you 
just talk about the--can you just talk a little bit more--I 
have got about a minute and a half. I would just like to hear 
more about the campus--the 5G campus that you are building in 
Syracuse.
    I think it is so important for you to be successful in that 
and, you know, for all of the reasons, it keeps us, you know, 
competitive. It is a job creator. But we need more of this. If 
we are going to keep manufacturing here and dealing with supply 
chain issues, we need to support companies like you and what 
you are doing.
    If you could just talk a little bit more about how you got 
that off the ground and what you see as its potential 
successes.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Sure. Sure.
    We made this decision long ago really to enter into the 
space and then of course build the facility, long before this 
discussion was elevated to this public level. And, when we 
think about where the industry is going, we arrived 
independently at what the operators arrived on their own about 
O-RAN, which is competition makes sense, it makes sense to 
specialize, it makes sense to virtualize and use software. And 
that is where the investment came from.
    But, as far as what can be done going forward and how to 
encourage more of this kind of work, we are building this 
factory. We are excited about it. It is spanning a city block. 
We are going to have a network operations center. We are going 
to have manufacturing.
    But what is needed is that we don't want to become hostage 
to various supply chain issues in other countries, so we need 
more investment. And we have outlined this in our support in--
of all the subcomponents that are needed to then put in those 
products to the extent they are not software. Where you can 
make it software, we do, but ultimately software must run on 
hardware.
    So I see where my time is up, but there is a lot to be done 
that is within some of the proposals in the funding act that 
can start to bolster a U.S. industry.
    Mr. Doyle. Gentlelady's time is expired.
    Let's see now. Mr. Johnson. Bill, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Johnson. Well, thank you much, Chairman Doyle and 
Ranking Member Latta, for holding this important bipartisan 
hearing.
    I really appreciate today's discussion, particularly on how 
concepts such as Open RAN can help make our networks more 
secure and interoperable. You know, as cochair of the 
Congressional 5G Caucus, I completely agree that the U.S. must 
remain a leader in wireless technologies, and that is for 
expanding and upgrading connectivity, furthering American 
ingenuity and economic competitiveness, and of course for 
strengthening our own national security.
    So, Ms. Rinaldo, we all agree that the deployment of Open 
RAN technology is promising in terms of 5G innovation and 
security, but the public policy implications aren't always 
clear. In your view, should the Federal Government issue 
mandates to deploy Open RAN or condition subsidies on deploying 
Open RAN in a provider's network?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
    As a coalition, we decided from day one that we were not 
going to support mandates, that we were going to be technology 
agnostic, and we were going to advocate policies that help 
advance Open RAN, and that is what we will continue to do.
    We believe that Open RAN is the future, and we believe that 
working with the U.S. Government as well as our partners around 
the world could help bring it to scale.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. Mr. Donovan, would you like to add 
anything to that question?
    Mr. Donovan. I would agree with Ms. Rinaldo that we do not 
support mandates. You know, if the technology lives up to its 
promise, then it will win in the market, and it will be 
deployed based on industry demand and tameframes. I mean, and 
look, at every G, there have been choices that operators have 
to make in terms of technology architecture and other things, 
and we have not mandated those technologies, and that has led 
to American leadership.
    At the beginning of 4G, for one example, there was some 
competition between technology for WiMAX and LTE, and some 
operators chose one, and others chose LTE. And that freedom of 
choice in the marketplace led to the United States leading the 
way in wireless in fourth generation with 4G LTE.
    If the Government had stepped in and mandated another 
choice, that could have ceded that ground to someone else 
internationally. So that lack of a mandate really advanced the 
United States to the front of the line.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. You know, I have been doing information 
technology professionally since 1978, before it was even called 
information technology, and I can remember the positive impacts 
that open systems architecture had on an explosive innovation 
in information technology.
    But, Mr. Donovan, continuing with you, how can we 
incentivize carriers to invest in upgraded technologies with 
open interfaces?
    Mr. Donovan. So it is education. It is moving forward. You 
know, there is interest across the board. There is no one in 
the industry that is opposed to advancing O-RAN. You know, all 
of the carriers, all of the major providers are taking part in 
this process, you know, to some degree. And so those 
collaborate efforts will continue to move things forward.
    In terms of upgrades, it is continuing to push for the 
latest technologies. You know, completing the IP transition for 
some carriers that haven't been able to do so yet will give 
opportunities to continue to upgrade technologies, including 
using open interfaces.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. Mr. Amin, we have heard a lot about how 
Open RAN-compatible networks could bring more secure options to 
the marketplace, but what benefits does virtualizing a network 
for--have when it comes to security?
    Mr. Amin. Thank you very much, Congressman.
    I think today we spent a lot of the time obviously talking 
about Open RAN, but there is somewhat I believe a very good 
underlying story to what is happening in the U.S. and its 
leadership in key technology areas.
    In 2018, when we looked at building Rakuten Mobile, our 
aspiration was to look and understand what happened in the 
public cloud companies in the U.S. with significant advancement 
on virtualization, and from virtualization to consumerization, 
and new technologies such as serverless architecture.
    This showed clearly that U.S. has the foundation to build 
and advance future technologies such as Open RAN, Open Core 
Network platforms, Transport, and other support systems. This 
holistic approach allows you as an operator to have complete 
visibility; complete control points, and most importantly, 
complete isolation in network components so, if one network 
component is contaminated, they don't impact other network 
aspects of your deployment.
    Mr. Johnson. Very quickly--and I have almost run out of 
time--what impact will virtualized networks have on the ability 
to add capacity quickly?
    Mr. Amin. It is--I mean, the word that I would tell you 
that nobody in my view in telecom talk about is elasticity. 
Nobody discusses this. But luckily, today, with our platform 
and Rakuten Mobile and the platforms that we have created and 
RCP, we have enabled autoelasticity, which doesn't exist in the 
industry today. So capacity management for us is a thing of the 
past.
    Mr. Doyle. OK. Gentleman's time has expired.
    Chair now recognizes my good friend from California, Anna 
Eshoo, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Eshoo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this very important 
hearing and to all of the witnesses. You have all given 
terrific testimony.
    I want to go to Mr. Mezzalingua first.
    As you may know, I have been focused on the national 
security implications of telecommunications for years. I first 
wrote to the FCC about the threat of Huawei and ZTE back in 
2010, and our committee has done important work in the last 
Congress to protect national security, including the creation 
of a program to rip and replace equipment manufactured by 
suspicious vendors.
    Let me just put this succinctly. I don't want to have 
anything to do with Huawei or ZTE. We have the capacity in our 
country with American companies to do what needs to be done and 
deliver it to the American people safely.
    Can you tell us why hardware replacement isn't sufficient 
and why we need an open software-based solution to the national 
security threat and our wireless infrastructure? And 
succinctly, because I have----
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Yes.
    Ms. Eshoo [continuing]. Only 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Yes. Thank you, Congresswoman Eshoo.
    I mean, fundamentally and succinctly, it all comes down to, 
if you have software and if you have control of the software 
and it is U.S. based, you now have more control over this 
because it is boundariless. With hardware and with, in 
particular, existing entities that--here, you have legacy 
supply chains that are open to compromise or disruption.
    Ms. Eshoo. Right. Thank you very much. I think that every 
Member has digested that really well.
    To Mr. Donovan, we have obviously heard a lot about 5G. It 
is constantly being advertised, but most people don't know that 
most of our calls, our texts, and data flow through 4G, 3G, and 
2G. And this worries me, because older protocols are inherently 
less secure, and we don't have a clear, comprehensive 
understanding of all the vulnerabilities.
    This is why Congressman Kinzinger and myself introduced the 
Understanding Cybersecurity of Mobile Networks Act, which 
requires the NTIA to study vulnerabilities in legacy networks.
    How reliant are your member companies on legacy networks, 
and how long do you think we will continue to rely on these 
older networks?
    Mr. Donovan. Thank you.
    And, first off, this bill is a great idea. You know, this 
is a way to get at some of the security threats before they 
become front-page news that they have been exploited by a bad 
actor, so that is critically important.
    Small carriers do--are going to continue to rely on 2G, 3G, 
and 4G networks for the foreseeable future. In some recent 
surveying of our members of that--you know, 65 percent of 
members are looking at a 3- to 5-year window for continuing to 
rely before phasing out their 2G and 3G networks with, you 
know, over 85 percent of our members surveyed that they don't 
plan on fully phasing out their 2G, 3G in the next 3 years or 
longer. So identifying those bugs now is really important.
    Ms. Eshoo. OK. And another question to you, Mr. Donovan. I 
think that there is bipartisan agreement that the Federal 
agencies that use spectrum have been uncoordinated, and that is 
putting it charitably. But I think the discussion gets caught 
up in too many agency acronyms, spectrum bands, auction 
designs, and other important but really wonky topics.
    Can you distill for--distill this down for us? How does the 
lack of coordination in the Federal Government impact 
underserved communities?
    Mr. Donovan. Well, most simply way I can put it, it means 
that spectrum is not available to build out services to bring 
connectivity to those underserved communities. A lack of 
coordination means that we aren't going to uncover where 
different Federal agencies could collaborate on spectrum, could 
share spectrum, and free up additional spectrum to be used by 
the industry.
    Ms. Eshoo. Are you referring to the public side of this and 
the responsibilities that we need to carry out? I mean, there 
are plenty of companies, but they don't go into these areas. So 
can you clarify that?
    Mr. Donovan. Sure. So, you know, having access to spectrum 
is an important part of it, and----
    Ms. Eshoo. We know that. We all know that, but companies 
have brought spectrum, and they use it where they are going to 
use it. But we are still faced with underserved and no service 
in some places in our country.
    Mr. Donovan. Yes, that is--that is the problem. We need to 
make sure that investment in infrastructure includes getting 
those people connected and--but, very briefly, on the 
coordination piece, where that affects is that, if carriers 
don't know where they can and can't use spectrum when they are 
working on a business plan and making long-term investments, 
you can undercut the ability to bring service everywhere----
    Ms. Eshoo. Does that go to the maps? Does that go to maps?
    Mr. Doyle. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    Ms. Eshoo. Can he say yes or no? Does that go to the maps?
    Mr. Doyle. Sure.
    Mr. Donovan. Yes.
    Ms. Eshoo. OK. Thank you very much. Yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. OK. Let's see. Next, we have Billy Long. You are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Long. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, Mr. Donovan, what can Congress do to help smaller, 
rural carriers deploy more secure networks, whether it is Open 
RAN architecture or something else?
    Mr. Donovan. Yes, making sure that carriers have that 
information is critical to it. You know, carriers that deploy 
now-covered equipment did so because they were forced to choose 
lowest-cost options, and there was not that information shared 
by the Government that they should not do so.
    They don't--often don't have the same, you know, teams of 
security experts that some of the largest nationwide providers 
do. So making sure there is that flow of information is 
essential as these carriers make their choices.
    And something that we found that was really successful in 
that, in 2019 we partnered with the Chamber of Commerce on 
several rural education initiatives that brought together 
actors from across the Federal Government, from the whole 
alphabet soup of different agencies for in-person, you know, 
off-the-record discussions that really facilitated a flow of 
information both ways, from the carriers to the Government and 
vice versa, that has led to making some better security 
decisions.
    Mr. Long. OK. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Amin, for you, can you explain the difference 
between a virtualized brand and an Open RAN, and how do these 
type of architectures interact?
    Mr. Amin. So, in the platform choices that we started with, 
we wanted the software to completely be desegregated from 
hardware. In the industry of Open RAN, this disaggregation 
comes into the form of taking a separation of what is 
controlled--a product or a virtual machine's both CEU and DU, 
and those components are completely software based riding on 
commodity of hardware.
    And, in cloud RAN and what existed, by the way, for decades 
as traditional vendors promoted cloud RAN, you still have quite 
a bit of dependencies on proprietary hardware to run the 
software. And, in the virtualized architecture and the Open RAN 
platform architecture, the industry as a whole is moving into a 
software architecture for our really complex and important 
function in the radio.
    And, as you know, this is critical, because this is what we 
spend, as operators, 70 percent of our packets is spent into 
the radio domain.
    Mr. Long. OK. Thank you. And I will stick with you for a 
minute, Mr. Amin.
    How does Open RAN architecture promote a more competitive 
marketplace, and can you please describe how this type of 
architecture leads to more secure communications?
    Mr. Amin. So, in the definition of the security 
architecture and the apparatus, I think we discussed a bit 
earlier today that I think it is really, really important to 
apply a zero-trust policy on every network component you bring 
to your operation.
    I mentioned earlier that I believe that we need to take a 
far more advanced look at not only modern architecture as well 
as legacy architecture. That involves looking at open 
interfaces. We need to eliminate the proprietary interfaces 
that exist today that would allow the operator to insert 
additional control points, bring better visibility.
    And, most importantly, we talk a lot, of course, about 
software, but I don't think yet we have discussed enough about 
securing the supply chain and understanding where this hardware 
gets made, where does the supply chain of the silicone and the 
components come from?
    And that is what I think about the open network advantages 
to security. I really think it is critical--critical to look at 
this as a totality, including the supply chain of components, 
hardware, as well as software.
    Mr. Long. OK, thank you.
    And, Ms. Rinaldo, same question for you: How does Open RAN 
architecture promote a more competitive marketplace, and can 
you please explain how this type of architecture leads to a 
more secure communications network?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, sir. Yes. From what I hear from my 
members, the prices can be as much as 30 percent lower. Now, if 
you go by a cell tower and look up, there is the radio access 
network. Multiply that by all the cell towers, and we are 
discussing the most expensive part of a telecommunications 
network. If you can get prices at 30 percent lower, you are now 
building a case to build out in more rural areas.
    And as far as the security, Open RAN is building on the 
secure networks of 5G. Additional competition is going to drive 
security enhancements. In 2021, consumers are demanding 
security and operators are requiring it. And the additional 
competition is going to allow for increased security benefits 
in this space.
    Mr. Long. OK, thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman.
    The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms. 
Matsui, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And this has 
truly been a very interesting and productive hearing.
    We have all talked about spectrum coordination, which I 
really believe is very, very important. In fact, I wrote to 
President-elect Biden 4 months ago, urging him to adopt a 
unified approach to spectrum policy and a clear process for 
resolving interagency disputes, because the uncertainty is just 
untenable.
    It is critical, obviously, NTIA resumes its role as manager 
of the Federal Government's use of spectrum. That will allow 
NTIA to effectively represent Federal interests before the FCC 
and assure that FCC is not forced to interpret divergent 
messages from individual Federal agencies.
    Let me give you an example here. In October, the FCC is 
planning to conduct an auction of the 3.45 gigahertz band. 
While there is significant interest in the spectrum, ongoing 
uncertainty about the DoD's plans for this spectrum could 
affect the auction's success.
    While I do know firsthand that the Department's use of 
spectrum can be complex, which I did see working with DoD on 
the AWS3 auction, it is still imperative for all involved to 
have accurate and timely information.
    Mr. Donovan, can you tell me how increased information 
sharing from DoD will create a more stable and successful U.S. 
session regime, and what are the implications of the 3.45 
auction?
    Mr. Donovan. So this is a really important time for that 
spectrum band, in terms of bringing it to auction. It has been 
a little bit of a moving goalpost, where initial reports from 
NTIA looked like 93 percent of the population would be 
unencumbered with that spectrum. That has been updated that now 
the DoD may remain on up to 20 percent, including some really 
key markets in much of the East Coast from New York City to 
South Carolina, markets on the West Coast.
    And we have a high relocation cost for this band. It has 
been pegged around $13 billion. So it has implications on what 
happens to the success of an auction if you take some of those 
major markets out of play entirely or you don't provide 
carriers with the information about what that coordination 
process is going to look like. So----
    Ms. Matsui. Well, thank you. And I think what you are doing 
is saying exactly what I am saying, that we do need more 
coordination amongst the agencies in order to quickly make a 
decision on some of these aspects of it.
    Let me go on to Open RAN and consumer prices. With open and 
interoperable technology, network operators can use software to 
take the place of physical technology like switches or routers. 
This increased flexibility of virtualized cloud-native 
platforms can drastically reduce the cost of building and 
maintaining networks.
    Mr. Amin, how has this new technology helped reduce costs 
for Rakuten, and are those savings being passed along to the 
consumer?
    Mr. Amin. Thank you very much, Congresswoman. Indeed, this 
is a very important point. First of all, our technology choices 
were deliberative with one idea in mind, that we needed to 
disrupt the current marketplace in Japan, allow consumers to 
access our services at a much more affordable price.
    And for us to enable that, we knew that cloud and the 
economics that it brings will be substantial. And we realized 
more than 30 percent total cost of ownership reduction in 
running, maintaining, and deploying this network.
    And, indeed, today, if you see what has happened in Japan, 
where it was a country in which data consumption was one of the 
most expensive in the world to today being one of the lowest in 
the world, thanks to such advancements in technology such as 
Open RAN, open network, and cloud-native architecture to run 
and manage today and tomorrow's network. So, indeed, the 
consumers have benefited tremendously from Open RAN platforms 
in Japan.
    Ms. Matsui. OK, thank you. You know, I joined with 
Congressman Michael McCaul, who introduced the CHIPS Act, which 
would help address the semiconductor shortage by addressing 
American manufacturing capacity. I included the CHIPS Act as an 
amendment to last year's NDAA and recently met with President 
Biden about the urgent need to fund the programs authorized by 
this bill. I was pleased to see the President's American Jobs 
Plan includes $50 billion to implement the CHIPS Act.
    Mr. Donovan, can you describe the threat posed by a 
prolonged semiconductor shortage for America's wireless 
innovation future?
    Mr. Donovan. We have a huge demand for wireless equipment 
right now. We have talked about the rip and replace program. We 
have talked about the global competition to get to fifth-
generation services. And anything that delays access to 
equipment or increases costs puts us at a disadvantage in all 
of those pursuits.
    Ms. Matsui. Right, absolutely. And this is part of the 
supply chain that is really critical, and this could be also 
American manufacturing.
    So I can't yield back 8 seconds here, so I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentlelady.
    Let's see. Ah, I see my friend Mr. Kinzinger is back. Adam, 
you have got 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate all 
the witnesses for being here.
    Let me start with Federal coordination on spectrum. So, Mr. 
Donovan, when the FCC evaluates spectrum for commercial use and 
conducts an auction, don't potential bidders rely with 
investment-backed expectations on the regulatory structure that 
the FCC adopts when deciding whether and how much to bid on 
spectrum? Is that a yes or no?
    Mr. Donovan. Absolutely, yes.
    Mr. Kinzinger. So I raised concerns that there have been 
efforts by Federal agencies to upend FCC decisions either on 
the brink of or even after FCC auctions. For example, that 
effort occurred in regard to the 24 gigahertz with NOAA.
    Mr. Donovan, shouldn't all of this be worked out as part of 
the FCC-NTIA coordination process, and doesn't it undermine 
confidence in FCC decision-making to have these 11th-hour 
changes?
    Mr. Donovan. Yes, absolutely. You know, it is fair for 
different agencies to express concerns, to raise real issues 
that need to get worked out. But once that is worked out and 
the spectrum is brought to market and purchased by commercial 
carriers, you should be able to use it the way that you bought 
it. You wouldn't buy a house and then afterwards be told, well, 
you don't get access to two of the rooms in it. You wouldn't 
have paid for that house that way.
    It all goes into the evaluation. And we really risk lacking 
confidence in the very successful auctions program if we 
continue to raise concerns after the fact.
    Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you.
    So I want to shift to Open RAN. Today, the U.S. and its 
allies have significant economic and national security risks 
associated with one company, Huawei, providing a closed end-to-
end RAN solution.
    I will soon reintroduce the bipartisan Transatlantic 
Telecommunications Security Act, which authorizes the U.S. 
Development Finance Corporation to provide financing for secure 
5G telecom infrastructure for our European allies and partners.
    China is not to be trusted and, moreover, if anything 
happens to Huawei, they represent a single point of failure for 
our smaller rural carriers.
    As I understand it, an Open RAN approach could provide the 
U.S. and its allies an opportunity to develop a long-term 
alternative to Huawei. As a member of the House China Task 
Force, I know how Beijing competes in business. Either they 
steal technological developments or they heavily subsidize and 
capture market share.
    In the wireless industry, they have done both. So it is 
vital that we have a strong bipartisan response and not cede 
U.S. leadership in wireless. I believe Open RAN could be a 
critical part of that response.
    So, Ms. Rinaldo, could you briefly discuss why diversifying 
the supply chain is so critical to our national security, and 
do you believe companies in the U.S. and allied countries may 
be poised to lead in this effort?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Congressman, for the question and 
for your leadership on this issue. Yes, when I was former head 
of NTIA and would talk with my counterparts around the world, I 
would ask why they would choose one vendor and not another, and 
they all gave the same exact answer: cost.
    If we are able to drive competition, create innovation, and 
lower cost, that is a game changer not only for the United 
States and our manufacturers here but for the allies around the 
world.
    Nobody wants to choose an untrusted vendor, but if you are 
looking at the difference between being in the black and being 
in the red, there are serious decisions that need to be made. 
If we are able to change the tables and not make cost a factor, 
countries are going to make the right decision.
    Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you.
    Mr. Amin, we hear a lot about the benefits of Open RAN, but 
everyone seems to talk about it like it is just an idea, and 
you are actually running a network based on these technologies. 
While we think we are getting ahead, after hearing what you 
have deployed in Japan, I feel as though we may actually be 
falling behind.
    Can you speak to where the U.S. market is relative to Japan 
and, more importantly, where do you see American wireless 
innovation relative to China?
    Mr. Amin. So thank you very much, Congressman. I think I 
just want to highlight that what we have done in Japan now is 
deploy at scale with over today 18,000 Macro Base Station 4G 
running on a completely Open RAN platform architecture.
    We have taken the fear and uncertainty and doubt and the 
merit about such an advancement in telecom architecture from 
concepts to reality in about a year and a half. And I think we 
see that the potential for such a technology is just absolutely 
enormous.
    We have met with many CFOs in the last 18 months to explain 
to them across the world the advantages of such technologies 
and why they need to embrace this journey that we have 
undertaken.
    And one of those key things and tenets for us is to even 
maybe shed light to U.S. companies about the available pieces 
of this puzzle, from component vendors that are I think one of 
the most creative in the world that exists in the U.S., and 
what is required is really now tying the pieces together and 
deploying this.
    You have asked a very good question: How does the U.S. 
compete against China? I have no doubt that the software 
capability that exists in the United States is just remarkable. 
I think the focus and the effort around creation of a credible 
supply chain for chips, including manufacturing in the U.S., I 
do believe this is really vital and especially for countries 
like Japan. We rely very heavily on supply chain that exists 
from many of our partners in the U.S. And I think that the work 
that is being done on the supply chain for silicone is going to 
have a lot of value to the future potential of this technology.
    Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentleman has yielded, expired.
    Let's see. The Chair recognizes Ms. Clarke for 5 minutes. 
You need to unmute.
    Ms. Clarke. Yes, I am here. Thank you very much, Mr. 
Chairman and Ranking Member Latta. I appreciate today's 
hearing. It has been extraordinary. And I want to thank you for 
convening today's--I am sorry, I am having a little bit of 
technical difficulty here.
    I want to thank you for convening today's hearing. The 
topic is critical to the work the Energy and Commerce Committee 
has been doing to advance our national priorities and 
technological advancement, economic competitiveness, and 
national security. I would like to also thank our witnesses for 
virtually joining the committee and sharing your testimony 
addressing both the challenges and areas of opportunity 
concerning the supply chain of our wireless infrastructure.
    As chair of the Homeland Cybersecurity, Infrastructure 
Protection, and Innovation Subcommittee under the jurisdiction 
of the House Committee on Homeland Security, creating a secure 
21st century digital infrastructure remains a critical 
priority.
    As we continue to chart the path toward recovery from the 
COVID-19 pandemic and seek to modernize our Nation's 
infrastructure, we must not forget the vital role that wireless 
infrastructure plays, ensuring connectivity for all Americans, 
equitable access, and essential resources in today's digital 
reality.
    My first question is for Ms. Rinaldo.
    Ms. Rinaldo, COVID-19, the COVID-19 pandemic has proven 
that underresourced and marginalized communities depend heavily 
on wireless connectivity to remain connected and integrated in 
society. For many, wireless is the primary form of access to 
critical resources, such as telehealth services and virtual 
learning.
    How might implementing Open RAN impact both access and 
affordability of wireless services in urban and rural areas?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Congresswoman, for this important 
question. I would say that as Open RAN technologies are rolled 
out as well as 5G converge that both of these things are 
impacting underserved communities in an incredibly positive 
way. If we are able to lower prices by 30 percent using Open 
RAN technologies, you all of a sudden have a business case of 
why carriers can build out in these more underserved areas.
    As well as with bringing 5G online, there is a case study 
with smart ag--agriculture, excuse me--as well as a whole host 
of other activities that are going to bring 5G out to the more 
rural areas. Now, what do we do with that extra capacity? Able 
to provide in-home broadband, which will impact these 
underserved areas. I have great faith that as we move forward 
with Open RAN technologies as well as 5G that it is going to 
raise all boats.
    Ms. Clarke. Wonderful. Mr. Donovan, how does the current 
dependence on foreign suppliers for the network supply chain 
impact security of the broader U.S. telecommunications network 
infrastructure?
    Mr. Donovan. Thank you. So any time that you are relying on 
foreign providers, you don't control the whole process end to 
end, from the network equipment on down to user devices to even 
the components of that, to the screens, the circuits, the 
antennas. And all of those create potential for concern in the 
supply chain. So the more the supply chain that you can control 
from end to end in a trusted manner allows you to have 
confidence in the product.
    And to your previous point, I couldn't agree more the 
importance of focusing on mobile and wireless services as we 
talk about infrastructure. There are so many applications that 
can only be met by mobile, while also having the side benefit 
of being able to provide fixed wireless access connectivity 
while waiting on building out fiber to other markets.
    Ms. Clarke. So just to follow up, Mr. Donovan, why is Open 
RAN a good path for addressing these security concerns?
    Mr. Donovan. If Open RAN can prove that it has security 
advantages as well as domestic providers, then you can control 
more of the supply chain here. I think that is why there is so 
much interest in this technology.
    Ms. Clarke. Mr. Baker, in your testimony you explained that 
Open Radio Access Networks would allow the use of some 
components from a variety of suppliers, thus opening the door 
for innovation through competition. As cochair of the Smart 
City Caucus, I am an advocate for expanding smart 
infrastructure.
    How might a cloud-native 5G Open RAN network in the United 
States advance the goal of making our communities more 
resilient and efficient?
    Mr. Baker. Thank you, Congresswoman Clark. The great thing 
about Open RAN and the virtualized network is I can make 
elements or make networks that are very small or very large. 
And one big application that is coming out of Open RAN 
virtualized networks is the enterprise space. And to that 
extent, that shows that I can build a complete wireless network 
on a single server, using U.S. technology and radios that have 
been placed around the building like WiFi access points.
    So the technology scales, multiple sources, and I can build 
innovation parks, factories, offices, smart hospitals, et 
cetera, et cetera, from the use of open and interoperable 
technologies.
    Ms. Clarke. We are running out of time. I yield back. Thank 
you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma, 
Markwayne. You have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Amin, you spoke in your testimony that when you first 
joined Rakuten that you withdrew your company from a deal with 
a Chinese equipment vendor. Can you expand a little bit on that 
for me?
    Mr. Amin. So the business model for Rakuten prior to me 
coming in was really looking at an opportunity to lower the 
cost burden, as I think others spoke in this forum. And one of 
the suppliers was, of course, a Chinese equipment supplier.
    And when we looked at the cost and economics of the network 
platform that we had built in Japan with new Open RAN 
architecture, completely embracing cloud-native platforms not 
only for radio, for core, we really proved that we could get 
our costs and economics to be even lower than what is being 
offered by Chinese equipment suppliers. And to that extent, we 
have taken decisions decisively that we wanted to secure this 
network as number-one particularity.
    Mr. Mullin. So you are saying you didn't feel secure with 
using their equipment?
    Mr. Amin. No. I mean, we felt that we did not have complete 
access to all the interfaces in any of the network components, 
and we needed to secure this for us to protect our consumers in 
Japan and make sure that there is no security vulnerability in 
the platform architecture.
    Mr. Mullin. So we know companies understand this. So why 
are they continually being attracted to Huawei or ZTE? Is it 
just price?
    Mr. Amin. It is not just price. I mean, let me give you my 
view. Look, I think in the last decade I have no doubt that 
also Huawei and ZTE have really evolved and advanced their 
technology. So I think, if you looked at them in the past, 
maybe the story would be different. Cost has become the entry 
point. Low cost was an entry point.
    But most global operators today cannot have a clear 
visibility to what is really the alternative. And this is, 
frankly speaking, what we have been trying to champion now is 
an option, an alternative to what exists as traditional vendors 
in the marketplace.
    So I think, you know, the simple answer is, they now need 
to learn and understand that the world has alternatives. And I 
think discussions such as today is really critical not just 
also for the U.S. but also global marketplace.
    Mr. Mullin. So you don't think it solely has to do with 
price?
    Mr. Amin. I mean, I think price, of course, comes in, but 
there is no credible alternative that they could go to today 
that they could say, ``I could meet the same price factor as 
Huawei and ZTE would give me.''
    Mr. Mullin. Right.
    Mr. Baker, how can we ensure that trusted vendors can 
become competitive with Huawei and ZTE overseas?
    Mr. Baker. Good question, Congressman. I think, you know, 
simply funding the Telecommunications Act and getting funding 
out there but doing research and bringing radio technology back 
to the U.S. is strategically important.
    When you compare Huawei technology with Nokia and Ericsson, 
for instance, you know, Huawei's radio technology is actually 
better performing in terms of power efficiency. When you look 
at all of the issues that we have with, you know, the size of 
the power grid for the United States, you know, if we just 
addressed the efficiency of power amplifiers that are used on 
towers today, then we would see significant savings in energy 
on the power grid. So research in radio, fundamental radio 
technology will help us along.
    Mr. Mullin. John, excuse me for using your first name, but 
I am not going to try to pronounce your last name here. Do you 
want to elaborate any more on that?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Yes. I think that I support John's points. 
And I think that when it comes down to it, a lot of 
conversation has been centered around standards and how do we 
compete and what is it going to take to influence standards.
    And it is important to appreciate that standards are a 
byproduct of research and development. Once you understand how 
deeply technology works, then you can then of course influence 
standards. It also is impacted by real-life application. You 
learn things as you are involved in the field of play.
    So I think that that all relates directly to this Telecom 
Act that we have been talking about. It is going to take time, 
so urgency is the name of the game.
    Mr. Mullin. Right.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. But that is my view.
    It is Mezzalingua, by the way.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you. Well, you would tell me and I still 
would have a hard time pronouncing it. It is not something we 
get used to saying all the time in Oklahoma, but I appreciate 
it.
    Anyway, guys, hey, I appreciate everybody on the panel. I 
definitely appreciate your expertise on this. And, you know, in 
Congress we are trying to wrap our head around it, and taking 
the time to educate us means the world.
    And, Chairman, I appreciate you holding this. This is a 
true bipartisan hearing that we don't always get to have in 
Congress. So, with that, I yield back, right on time.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Markwayne.
    Let's see. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California, Mr. Cardenas, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank 
you for having this important hearing.
    I really appreciate all of the experts and people from 
industry with your opinions and apprising us of what is really 
going on out there today and, hopefully, what can improve when 
it comes to the world of Open RAN and 5G and all the things 
that Americans hear about but, unfortunately, most of us don't 
understand the details. So here we go.
    Thank you for all that you are doing to help remind us how 
important this is, not only to American jobs but, more 
importantly, in my opinion, security for American business, for 
the American economy, for American individuals and families.
    And I want to first ask the question, can one of you 
explain to me why would the American Government be concerned 
about Huawei being in any way portions of the elements of our 
system here in America?
    Mr. Donovan. Congressman, if I can start with that.
    Mr. Cardenas. And then we will go to Diane. Go ahead.
    Mr. Donovan. OK. In terms of competition internationally, 
when we are talking about 5G we are looking at what some 
studies show, that by 2035 a market as large as $13.2 trillion 
in global economic output. That is huge. It is critically 
important.
    Mr. Cardenas. Is that a per annum or is that a set amount 
over a decade?
    Mr. Donovan. That is per annum of what they are expecting 
by 2035----
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you.
    Mr. Donovan [continuing]. With all the ways that 5G is 
going to be involved in in our daily lives. So it is critically 
important that the United States lead the way.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you. Diane. I am sorry, Ms. Rinaldo.
    Ms. Rinaldo. No, you are fine. Diane is perfect.
    I would say that Congress has been sounding the alarm for 
10-plus years now that there are concerns with using untrusted 
vendors in our telecommunications networks.
    At the Open RAN Policy, we are discussing the other side of 
that coin, the economic security side of that coin. If not 
them, then who? How do we ensure a more robust and diverse 
supply chain not only here in the United States but for our 
partners around the world if we are to only go down to a 
handful of suppliers.
    Mr. Cardenas. Well, there was a famous line in a movie way 
back when there was a phone call and then all of a sudden the 
person says the phone call is coming from inside the house.
    Is that what we are talking about with Huawei and our 
security as a Nation and economically, that for Huawei to be in 
elements of our system that will be part of our infrastructure 
today and going forward that a country like China and a company 
like Huawei could potentially cause issues for us, you know, on 
an individual basis and also when it comes to our overall 
economy?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. And that has been the longstanding 
concern of U.S. politicians, is what do we do if they are in 
our networks and if there is ever a problem? I think the United 
States has done a phenomenal job of not only making this known 
but working with industry to ensure that this is remedied.
    I think now that we need to turn our eyes to our partners 
around the world and how we can help them support their 
decisions as they move forward. And I believe Open RAN is an 
important part of this conversation.
    Mr. Cardenas. And it goes without saying that there are 
trusted partners and there are partners that we have good 
reason not to trust.
    Ms. Rinaldo. I would say that is correct.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you.
    Mr. Donovan, we need to make sure that smaller cost-
sensitive carriers like your member companies can take 
advantage of Open RAN networks. What can we do--the Federal 
Government--what can we do to make sure that companies like 
those are not left behind?
    Mr. Donovan. Continued investment in mobile networks, 
especially where the smaller operators provide service, is 
going to continue to be important. And for all the talk that we 
have had today of O-RAN, one of the real key pieces that we 
haven't focused on as much is having a core that is open and 
compatible with that.
    And for smaller operators that don't have greenfield 
operations that you have networks in the field today, getting a 
core that is compatible with that that can continue to sustain 
their existing network can open up additional options like 
those provided by O-RAN providers to continue to evaluate all 
technologies.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you. Go ahead, please.
    Mr. Baker. Open cores are available today. Mavenir has been 
a pioneer of virtualization and working through open 
interfaces. So core networks are virtualized today and are 
available. And the great thing about virtualization is that 
they scale to give small virtualized elements that are cost 
effective and support these rural markets.
    So a lot of this is about education and training and giving 
the rural carriers time to make the correct decisions.
    Mr. Cardenas. Yes. Having to reinvest, reinvest, reinvest 
from scratch is not a system that would work anywhere, 
certainly not here or anywhere else, and it wouldn't have a 
future.
    So being that I am out of time, thank you, ladies and 
gentlemen, for all of your information and wisdom.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair recognizes Mr. Walberg for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for a really helpful 
hearing. And to the panelists, thank you for sharing your 
expertise.
    In order to be secure, I think, as we have discussed today, 
it becomes clearer all the time that we must protect our 
networks against outside threats, both tangible and intangible.
    One of these intangible threats and I believe a vital piece 
of securing our network and ensuring U.S. wireless leadership 
is the lesser known but critical global standard-setting 
bodies.
    These independent, business-led entities determine the 
standards by which 5G operators, equipment manufacturers, 
software providers, and others build to and specifications.
    Participants in 5G international standard-setting bodies 
have noted less and less participation from Western and U.S. 
companies and increasing participation, as to be expected, from 
Chinese companies. This raises security and competition 
concerns as China seeks to assert its influence and skew 
international standards for 5G toward Chinese-controlled 
telecommunications companies and their technologies.
    We wish and need, I believe, to push back to ensure U.S. 
leadership in 5G, but also in 6G and successive standard 
releases. That is why I am pleased to be reintroducing soon, 
with my good friends Congresswoman Dingell and Congressman Bill 
Johnson, the Promoting U.S. Wireless Leadership Act.
    This bill encourages participation by trusted companies, 
both large and small, and international standard-setting bodies 
like 3GPP and also IEEE. Our bill reflects the need for a 
unified approach to pushing back against international 
competitors like Russia and China to protect U.S. national 
security, global competitiveness, and cost-effectiveness in 
wireless communications.
    Along those lines, Ms. Rinaldo, as former NTIA Acting 
Administrator, you are involved with the ITU and other global 
technology standard-setting bodies. From your purview, how 
important is it for the U.S. to participate in leading these 
bodies, particularly when it comes to interoperability and 
security?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Yes, Congressman, you are absolutely right. 
Not only do we need additional U.S. Government participation, 
but private-sector participation as well. But I think you hit 
on a very important point with your legislation.
    During my time at NTIA, the White House ran an interagency 
process to determine who was going to lead at 3GPP. After the 
process it was determined that NTIA, the Telecom 
Administration, was the right agency. We should not have to 
relitigate this every time a new session comes about.
    The NTIA should be permanently made the designation for the 
United States Government. They have the expertise, and it is 
important to nurture the expertise at one organization as well 
as to create history for sessions to come.
    I would also say that we need to reexamine how the United 
States Government works with the private sector. It is so 
important that we better coordinate and we break down hurdles 
to having those types of conversations. I would gladly work 
with you and your team on some of my ideas.
    Mr. Walberg. I appreciate that, and I certainly agree.
    Mr. Baker, does Mavenir participate in standard-setting 
bodies and, if so, could you describe what it takes to 
participate, time, money, resources, et cetera?
    Mr. Baker. Congressman Walberg, thank you for the question. 
Yes, you know, we believe global standards are critical to the 
success of Open RAN and are going to greatly impact on whether 
we have a diverse supply chain.
    The bottom line is the U.S. needs to be involved in global 
standards and so the rules of the game, we aren't written out 
by not being there. To that extent, you know, we need to match 
the levels of funding that the Chinese give with respect to 
U.S. companies, both private and open, and be at the table for 
the standard-setting processes.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you. On a separate but pivotal issue, 
Mr. Donovan, what kinds of skills are needed for the next 
generation of telecommunications operators and workers to 
deploy new wireless network technology such as O-RAN or vRAN? 
We have got a lot of good jobs in putting up towers and all 
sorts of high-paying jobs there, but radio frequency and 
[inaudible] for instance, are issues of concern. What could you 
add on that?
    Mr. Donovan. I agree. We need to increase the pipeline of 
skilled telecommunications workers. There is huge demand today. 
That is only going to grow. And I thank you for your work with 
Congresswoman Clarke on the Telecommunications Skilled 
Workforce Act. I think that is a really good idea.
    Mr. Walberg. My time is expired. I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman.
    Let's see. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Fletcher for 5 
minutes.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you so much, Chairman Doyle. And thank 
you to you and Ranking Member Latta for holding this important 
hearing today and to all of the witnesses for taking the time 
to testify. The hearing has touched on a lot of important 
issues, issues that the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted over 
the last year, as we have seen the need for high-speed 
broadband to connect workers to jobs, students to online 
resources in every single community across our country.
    Congress has answered that call by providing significant 
broadband funding in recent relief packages, and hopefully 
there will be additional support in future infrastructure 
legislation. I know that is important to so many of us. And 
there are so many stakeholders in the mission for full 
broadband development.
    In my hometown of Houston, we are working to lead the way 
in 5G broadband deployment, investing in needed infrastructure, 
small cell, and, following up on something Ms. Rinaldo just 
mentioned, working closely with the private sector to become a 
leader in the State.
    The city's technology investments will be a huge economic 
driver for our region in the years to come. And our mayor, 
Sylvester Turner, who testified before our committee on the 
Texas power grid just a few weeks ago, has made deploying 5G 
infrastructure to underserved communities a priority for his 
administration.
    5G broadband can help bridge the digital divide by allowing 
low-cost, high-bandwidth services to stimulate the growth of 
small businesses and education in the areas that need it the 
most. I think we all understand the benefits of faster internet 
speeds and what they allow people, adults and children alike, 
to be able to accomplish and can be absolutely transformative.
    I want to make sure that our local communities have the 
resources they need, given their significant role in 5G 
broadband development. Whether because of the economic impact 
of the COVID crisis or the increasing pace of deployment, local 
governments are facing new challenges in managing permitting 
applications.
    So, Mr. Donovan, can you discuss how this challenge and how 
Congress might be able to help in addressing this challenge and 
support local communities in broadband development?
    Mr. Donovan. Absolutely. So thank you. And you have a great 
example in your district. You know, as cities and 
municipalities can take steps to be 5G ready, it can really be 
a win-win. It makes it easier for the industry and operators to 
invest and bring those services, and then the residents enjoy 
the benefits of having expanded reliability and further 
investment. It has downstream benefits of making sure that 
excess resources aren't spent in certain markets and then there 
is nothing left to build out to rural areas.
    So I appreciate Congress' focus on keeping broadband as an 
eligible service, as funds have been provided to States and 
municipalities in recent legislation. Looking forward, if there 
are ways to provide grant funding so that cities can become 5G 
ready to make it so that it is, you know, an all-incentives 
approach to work together, that can be a real win-win, 
especially as municipalities are facing an increased workload 
of permitting applications coming in with 5G at the same time 
as existing resources and staff have been really pushed to the 
max. So funding like that to reward cities for taking steps to 
become 5G ready could be a real positive for everyone.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Right. Thank you so much, Mr. Donovan, for 
those insights.
    Would anyone else on the panel like to speak to this and 
what we can do to help support local communities in broadband 
deployment?
    Mr. Baker. Yes, certainly. I think one of the factors that 
gets overlooked with Open RAN is that the new architecture 
allows you to minimize the equipment that is actually at a cell 
site. So it actually reduces the amount of zoning square 
footprint that is needed by putting a lot of the technology 
actually into the data centers and using, you know, fiber 
connection straight to the radio on the tower.
    So Open RAN offers the benefit to go back and look at how 
these sites are engineered in the future.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Terrific. Thank you, Mr. Baker.
    Anyone else like to speak to this with the few seconds I 
have left?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Yes. I would just say, Congresswoman--
thank you for your question--the Government has, through its 
CARES Act, stimulated a lot of this. We have been dealing with 
this digital divide issue for far too long in this country. It 
has been decades. And we can actually solve it now, but in a 
highly efficient way, the way that has been described here.
    So I would echo the comments about software. I would just 
encourage that it be part of a funding and viewed as 
infrastructure, because it is a form of national security that 
is let's say outside the classic definition when you think 
about how critical it is in today's everyday use of all of our 
lives.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Perfect. Well, thank you so much, Mr. 
Mezzalingua, for that insight, and I do appreciate. We are 
thinking of new ways in this Congress, and that is an important 
thing to remember.
    So thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair--let's 
see. Buddy, I see you there. Buddy Carter, you have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank all of you for being here. This is an extremely 
important subject, and we just can't tell you how much we 
appreciate your help here and you being here.
    Mr. Baker, I am going to start with you. Mavenir has taken 
a leading role on developing and deploying O-RAN technology, 
including in your work with Dish. What have you seen? What has 
been your experiences as far as the largest hurdles to develop 
a viable O-RAN network?
    Mr. Baker. I think, having built many networks globally, 
that we see the same sort of challenges. And it is all about 
coopetition, if you like. And I term it that way because Open 
RAN is about open interfaces, people working together to test 
those interfaces, people working together to test software. And 
the success of the future is about companies collaborating, but 
also competing.
    And I think as we level the playing field here, you know, 
with open interfaces you are going to see a lot more of that. 
And, you know, Mavenir has taken a very solid stance about 
helping the ecosystem, working with competitors, testing their 
products, ensuring they are ready for market, but with no 
restrictions on where they sell. So, you know, they take the 
experience and they pass it on to the next vendor. And so, 
hopefully, this will grow across the world in terms of how 
networks are going to be built in the future.
    Mr. Carter. You talk about future-proof, I believe is the 
word you used, future-proof networks against foreign 
interference, especially with rural carriers. As they work to 
update their equipment with trusted equipment, how can we, as 
legislators, how can the U.S. Government work with smaller 
companies to participate in standards, in the standard-setting 
process?
    Mr. Baker. Yes. So, you know, obviously, as I said earlier, 
standards are fundamental to the process and being at the table 
and actually being part of that decision making, so you know 
what is in the standards and you are not being written out.
    Underneath it, you know, once the standards are produced 
and shown to be interoperable--and that is the key message, 
that they must be open specifications and they must be 
interoperable.
    And then once you have got to that point, then smaller 
companies can participate, you know, with a smaller level of 
investment to develop those products that the rural carriers 
or, you know, some niche segment of the marketplace can use.
    You know, the great thing about Open RAN is you don't need 
to be a complete end-to-end supplier to actually participate.
    Mr. Carter. That is great. Thank you, Mr. Baker.
    Ms. Rinaldo, I want to ask you: The shift to O-RAN, what 
does that mean for barriers to entry into the wireless 
industry?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Well, I think what we have seen over the past 
20 years in the vendor community, there has been so little 
venture capital money, because the barriers for entry has been 
so high. By standardizing the interfaces, we have already seen 
so many new startups have come into the marketplace.
    If you were an engineer and had the best, greatest idea for 
a radio and you could only sell your product to a handful of 
companies and you have a 10-year life cycle, are you going to 
put all your energy into that radio, or might you look 
somewhere else? But now all of a sudden, you can sell to 
carriers, private networks. Your pool of customers has grown 
exponentially.
    And, again, what we have seen is the additional competition 
in this space is spurring innovation as well. So competition 
equals innovation, and it is going to bring cost down at the 
end of the day.
    Mr. Carter. Well said. Thank you. Hooray. That is great.
    Let me ask you: You also mention in your testimony how 
development of O-RAN can help spur on bilateral cooperation 
with our international partners. Other than Japan, where do you 
see the biggest room for growth?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely. I would say that this is one of 
the most important points that we focus on at the coalition. It 
is not enough just to bring Open RAN to the United States. We 
need global markets. We need our partners.
    I think the most focus right now for the coalition, of 
course, has been Asia but as well as the European Union and 
Africa. We want to ensure that the developing nations around 
the world who are struggling with 3G are able to make decisions 
based on quality and not on cost.
    So working and partnering with our partners who are in a 
place similar to us where they are deploying 5G, we can 
possibly put together our not only collective mind power, but 
most developed nations have funding to help assistance in 
developing nations by pooling that funding with the----
    Mr. Carter. Right. And finally----
    Ms. Rinaldo. Sorry. Go ahead.
    Mr. Carter. I am sorry. Finally, I have one last question 
if I can squeeze it in: Why is it so important that NTIA remain 
the leader in spectrum policy?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely. NTIA is absolutely the right 
agency. They have the expertise. They have been doing this for 
80-plus years. It is important to have a tight process where 
everyone has a voice at the table. Decisions are made based on 
fact and science, and we need to be decisive. And when a 
decision is made, we need to come together as a country and 
speak with one voice. This is the only way to make progress.
    Mr. Carter. Sounds wonderful. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Carter.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Welch for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Welch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, the adoption 
of O-RAN can present challenges to smaller providers. I am 
really concerned about rural America. And a lot of the funding 
that is out there doesn't necessarily help them, those small 
ones, switch their own network equipment to ensure that 
components are compatible.
    And, Mr. Baker, I want to ask you: What do you see as the 
practical challenges that this, what we are talking about, 
would impose on rural carriers and their ability to continue to 
improve service for rural Vermonters?
    Mr. Baker. Thanks, Congressman Welch. Good question. A lot 
of the challenges, if you like, around rural carrier adoption 
is actually the learning process and getting their confidence 
up, in terms of the new pieces of the technology.
    And, to that extent, it is worth pointing out that, 
actually, the only piece that is new in all of this is the open 
interfaces and the compute hardware that is used for processing 
the radio signals. The radios are identical. The RF planning is 
identical. But, again, it is just getting that confidence level 
that they get the quality of service.
    And companies like Mavenir, you know, we are standing up. 
But being that one [inaudible] and doing, you know, putting the 
integration services there as this market evolves. So there 
should be no lack of trust, if you like. You know, we can't do 
that job. You know, we have built some of the largest core 
networks in the world.
    Mr. Welch. What about on the expense side? You know, in all 
of these situations where you have to upgrade for whatever 
reason, the bigger companies that have more market share and 
more market power always have an advantage, because they can 
absorb and spread the cost, but our smaller providers which are 
dedicated to the local consumer can't.
    So can you address that concern I have? Because it is 
something that has repeated itself.
    Mr. Baker. Absolutely. And we have demonstrated this in the 
core networks today. And, you know, Mavenir is supplying small 
cores and large cores. The great thing about virtualized 
technology is you can build a complete network on one server 
and for a few thousand dollars end up with a complete network 
and a radio.
    You know, that is taking it to the extreme, but in the 
sense that they are getting the benefits of very high volumes 
of computer platforms. They are getting the benefits of the 
virtualized experience, if you like, that is gained already 
from the cores of mobile networks. And then their ability to 
have lower operating costs in terms of site visits. Everything 
is downloadable. And, as Tareq said earlier, it is all about 
automation, how you bring automation to bear.
    Mr. Welch. If very small rural carriers ask me, ``Peter,'' 
you know, ``how is this going to affect our bottom line?,'' you 
are telling me I can say that you will be OK?
    Mr. Baker. Absolutely. And, you know, as Tareq said from 
Rakuten, they have seen the experience of our product costs. We 
know, you know, we physically see it every day in the products 
we deal with that the products are cheaper and more cost 
efficient.
    Mr. Welch. All right. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Doyle. OK. The gentleman yields back.
    Let's see. I think Mr. Duncan is next. Jeff, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Duncan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 
this, your leadership and the ranking member's leadership on 
this important issue. We are right here near the end, guys. So 
I know a lot of questions have been asked already, but I just 
want to point out as an example of bipartisanship where we can 
work together on an important national and economic security 
issue, and I look forward to working on this further.
    The pandemic has exposed the need for us to expand domestic 
manufacturing capabilities across all industries so we are not 
reliant on foreign suppliers, especially when that foreign 
supplier is from Communist China.
    So I want to ask our panelists here--really, I will start 
with Mr. Baker, I guess--how do you view the threat of Chinese 
parts on our telecommunications system, especially as it 
relates to the potential for American businesses and citizens 
to have their data stolen and rerouted to China? Is this an 
opportunity for Chinese espionage?
    Mr. Baker. Clearly, there is always an opportunity. But 
then the other side of it is, you know, it comes back to the 
point about zero trust in any of the components and elements 
that we use within our products.
    To the extent that they, you know, could be fully security 
tested, continually monitored, you manage the supply chain and 
then you, you know, just take a zero trust philosophy across 
all of the products, software development, et cetera, et 
cetera, to ensure that the example as you gave doesn't happen.
    Mr. Duncan. I will ask Ms. Rinaldo the same question.
    Ms. Rinaldo. Sorry, Congressman. It is the tech people that 
always struggle with the mute button.
    Yes, we want to ensure that we have trusted supply chains 
going forward. And a big part of that is ensuring that there is 
additional competition so consumers, operators have choice. And 
that is what we are discussing today, how to bring additional 
competition to bear.
    The coalition doesn't--we are not here supporting any one 
company or any one technology. Our message is simple: If you 
break down the barriers for entry, you are going to drive more 
competition.
    Mr. Duncan. Is this an opportunity for Chinese espionage 
against national security-sensitive systems or our military?
    Ms. Rinaldo. So there has been a long concern within the 
U.S. Government as well as Congress about Huawei and other 
companies in our telecommunications networks. There have been 
multiple instances where intelligence officers have made public 
statements as such. At the coalition, we focus on the other 
side of the coin, the economic security side of the coin. If 
not them, then who?
    Mr. Duncan. Yes. Mr. Baker, do you think that is an 
appropriate statement?
    Mr. Baker. Yes, I do. And, again, you know, it comes back 
to processes and the interfaces. And then there are the 
security test houses that will grow out of those open 
interfaces as well to keep a watch on the products.
    Mr. Duncan. There are two things I want to know, and you 
have answered most of these today, but how can Congress assist 
and help the industry move forward or in the direction of 
greater domestic production?
    The second thing is, should that also include mining, 
production, finishing of critical minerals that go into these 
products?
    Mr. Baker?
    Mr. Baker. Yes. I think the challenge that, you know, we 
all rely on silicon and obviously the CHIPS program, bringing 
chip manufacturing and that back to the U.S. But, you know, at 
the end of the day, it is where the fundamental resources are 
coming from in terms of, you know, actually getting into the 
silicon chip.
    So, you know, at the end of the day we need the supply 
chain back in the U.S. and controlled in the right way.
    Mr. Duncan. Ms. Rinaldo, the part about what can Congress 
do to move us in the right direction for domestic production, 
what can we do more of?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Yes. At the coalition, we support fully 
funding the USA Telecommunications Act, which you passed last 
year. The $3 billion will go a long way to ensuring not only 
domestic manufacturing, job creation, and research and 
development in the United States, but as well provide the 
Secretary of State assistance to help developing nations around 
the world.
    We also focus on public-private partnerships, how the U.S. 
Government and the private sector can work together, and 
international cooperation.
    Mr. Duncan. That is great.
    Mr. Chairman, the only thing I will say last before I yield 
back the balance of my time is that we need to think about the 
critical minerals, those elements that we have available here 
in this country but we have off limits for mining. And we are 
reliant on China for so many of those rare earths, and this 
committee ought to think about that, maybe in conjunction with 
the Natural Resources Committee.
    With that, I yield back 18 seconds.
    Mr. Doyle. I thank the gentleman.
    The Chair now recognizes Ms. Kelly for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 
hearing today. We are at a critical juncture where we will 
decide America's leadership on 5G infrastructure.
    Mr. Baker, in your testimony, you mentioned the window of 
opportunity is closing. In your mind, when do you think it will 
close, and is the U.S. supply and demand robust enough to be 
successful at its current pace?
    You also proposed financial investments generally. Would 
pulling certain levers be more useful, given the closing 
window?
    Mr. Baker. A good question, Congresswoman Kelly. You know, 
we are not--you know, we don't want to pick winners and losers 
in all of this. That is the most important point of this. But 
certainly, you know, by the legislation that is in place around 
the rip and replace, where it is diverting decisions to foreign 
suppliers, essentially is going to exclude any U.S. supplier 
out of the rip and replace market, for instance.
    And then, you know, adoption by U.S. carriers--again, you 
know, the rest of the world watches what the U.S. carriers do. 
And they are sitting there saying, ``Well, if the U.S. carriers 
don't want to use it, why should we?''
    So, you know, to that extent, there are certain decision 
points that are going to get to the point of saying, ``Look, 
OK, you know, U.S. suppliers, you had your chance, but nobody 
is adopting what you are doing.''
    And I think this is coming down to how the closed 
interfaces, the proprietary interfaces are excluding U.S. 
suppliers from the market. And I think we are at a point, you 
know, in the next year or so where, if we haven't broken the 
back of this, then, you know, we are really then looking at 6G, 
which is probably, you know, 5, 10 years down the road before 
there is another opportunity.
    Ms. Kelly. Mr. Mezzalingua or Amin, do you have anything to 
add that you would like to say about this?
    Mr. Amin. I mean, just to reiterate a couple of very 
important things, I think my own view, going through this now 
for 3 years, I find that the U.S. has all the necessary 
building blocks to really build a compelling, credible 
alternative.
    I think it is really critical to look at the world in the 
lenses of why people select alternative vendors such as Huawei 
and ZTE to manage their deployment of today and tomorrow's 
technology. We have a great window of opportunity.
    By the way, I want to mention that please keep your eye 
very close on what might happen in Europe in the next 1 month 
to select this technology of Open RAN platform. This could be 
the next large breakthrough that I think we all need to bring 
an alternative, credible platform with a large ecosupply chain 
that is also coming from the U.S. and its trusted allies.
    So I do agree that we have a good window of opportunity. It 
is closing. But the good news is I think now the attention on 
this technology and merit of this technology is definitely at 
the right stage that big, large companies are finally starting 
to grasp on and jump on on the adoption of such an 
architecture.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you.
    Mr. Mezzalingua. I would simply add that I don't know that 
anybody knows when, but it is closing and we need to start 
urgently, because it is going to take time to build these 
various capabilities that we are speaking of.
    And I think at stake is not just our potential U.S. telecom 
leadership, which is within grasp--we can return this industry 
leadership back to the U.S.--but the ability to control our own 
destiny, the matters of national security, this outweighs all 
other elements, in my view. So just reiterating the funding of 
the act, the Telecom Act, so that we can get going on this and 
begin this work.
    We have shown we can do it. So that is something that is 
comforting. It is not a dice roll at this point. We have shown 
we can do it, so now it is time to help accelerate this.
    Ms. Kelly. And, Mr. Mezzalingua, while you are speaking, 
can you go into a little bit more detail on your U.S. Center of 
Excellence for security standards proposal?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Sure. Our entity that is in Syracuse, New 
York, is--well, it was long before there was any discussion of 
any government support to accelerate this industry. We believe 
in this, and we are putting our money where our mouth is at a 
private level. So we believe in the future of this business. We 
believe in our ability to compete. And so that is why we 
undertook this a long while ago.
    It is going to be a smart factory. So the very same things 
that we are going to be offering to the DoD and the Marine 
Corps base in Albany, Georgia, we are going to be doing in our 
own facility. So this is possible. I see where the time is up, 
but this is possible and we are demonstrating it with our own 
skin in the game. Thank you.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you so much. Thank you to the witnesses, 
and I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes Mr. Curtis for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I enjoyed the comments 
of Ms. Kelly and particularly how she pointed out that we don't 
want to pick winners and losers, and also Representative Welch, 
who talked about rural broadband providers.
    And I would kind of like to combine those two topics to 
bring up another rural issue, and that is, if not careful, we 
pick large companies over small companies to be successful. And 
I have got a great example in rural Utah. Intermountain 
Electronics is a small business. It is in Price, Utah. It is a 
town and a county that is struggling economically. We have got 
this very successful provider of 5G equipment that has a large 
footprint and, perhaps more importantly, it employs hundreds of 
employees in the region.
    And I have got a question to Ms. Rinaldo and Mr. Amin: How 
do we as we move forward make sure that we are successful with 
Open RAN and also not hurt our small businesses and make sure 
they have an opportunity to compete in this? Ms. Rinaldo, yes, 
if you will go first.
    Ms. Rinaldo. Thank you, Congressman.
    And I know that you are the former mayor of Provo, so these 
issues are near and dear to your heart.
    Mr. Curtis. Yes.
    Ms. Rinaldo. I would say that what we are talking about is 
going to be incredibly beneficial and impactful to your 
constituent companies. What we are discussing is how do we 
bring more competition to bear. For so long, there have only 
been a handful of companies in this space, so if we are able to 
standardize the interfaces, we are going to be able to drive 
additional competition.
    If you were to look at our website and go through our 
member list, you will certainly see some names that you know, 
but you will see a lot of names that you have never heard of 
before. And what we have seen is that there has been very 
little venture capital money in this space because the barrier 
has been so high. But now we are lowering that barrier and new 
companies are coming to bear, so it is going to be certainly a 
fascinating industry to watch over the next several years.
    Mr. Curtis. I am glad you brought up Provo, Utah, because 
my colleagues probably get tired of me bragging about it, but 
it is a great case study, I think, in a lot of these issues. 
And I will just point out that, in Provo, Utah, all residents 
have access to free internet in the city. It is a pretty 
amazing situation we have got there. Thank you.
    Mr. Amin, will you comment with the same question?
    Mr. Amin. Yes. I think this is a really, really good 
question for multiple reasons. I think, if you looked at our 
action--and it was very deliberative--that we picked a lot of 
smaller suppliers. I personally feel the smaller suppliers are 
hungry. They want to prove a point. They could bring a lot of 
innovations, a lot of disruption.
    So the private level, without necessarily a government 
involvement, we absolutely were very decisive of how we select 
and pick the suppliers. I think it is extremely critical--
extremely critical that we focus also in the startups, we bring 
VC money back into telecom.
    Unfortunately, venture capitalists don't like telecom 
because the barrier to entry is too high, and we are starting 
now to unravel this mystery for how we bring new money into 
this industry.
    And we are really optimistic, but could not agree with you 
more that it is just absolutely critical to ensure that we 
diversify to spend not only on larger suppliers but go to the 
smaller companies and reward them for great work and effort to 
support this endeavor.
    Mr. Curtis. Thank you. Let me sort of switch back to Ms. 
Rinaldo.
    Last year, I had the opportunity to serve on our China task 
force, and we released a report that included recommendations 
to increase domestic supply chain security, and one of those 
recommendations was passing and funding the USA 
Telecommunications Act. I think I have heard you comment on 
that in this hearing.
    But would you just comment on how that funding--the grant 
funding--will help accelerate 5G development and, perhaps, 
maybe even more specifically, how it might help our smaller 
companies?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely.
    I would say that this funding is twofold. In the immediate 
term, we are going to see additional manufacturing jobs, 
research and development. In the long term, we are going to 
benefit from a sustainable supply chain. We are going to be 
able to future-proof our supply chain in our telecommunications 
networks, which is going to be so incredible beneficial. It is 
going to change the way we look at the Gs.
    Long gone are the 10-year life cycles where, if there is an 
issue, something can be immediately updated. So not only in the 
near term will it help produce jobs and spur manufacturing in 
the United States. In the long term, it is really going to lead 
to incredibly amazing and innovative things for the entire 
telecommunications industry.
    And, as I mentioned in my opening comments, it is no longer 
about telecom policy. It is about economic policy.
    Mr. Curtis. Excellent. I am out of time. But, as I sign 
off, just a big shout-out to our small businesses who sometimes 
hoe a more difficult row, and I appreciate all they do to make 
our economy go. Thank you to our panel and to everybody who has 
had this hearing.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.
    Mr. Doyle. Gentleman yields back.
    The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Soto, 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Soto. Thank you, Chairman.
    Cell phones, computers, and the internet are fundamental to 
our way of life as Americans. It is also fundamental to our 
businesses and national security. Yet, American communications 
are under attack. Chinese are spying on the telecommunications 
through Huawei. Russians have unleashed an onslaught of cyber 
attacks, including the SolarWinds breach. These economic rivals 
constantly threaten us each day in this rivalry on the digital 
front line, in the battle for liberty and democracy across the 
Nation.
    At the same time, President Biden just recently unveiled 
the American Jobs Plan, and it includes research and 
development for future technologies, $180 billion to upgrade 
critical technologies and U.S. research infrastructure with a 
particular focus on research related to semiconductors, 
advanced communications, and energy technologies.
    It also includes a manufacturing piece, 300 billion to 
strengthen domestic manufacturing in small businesses, with a 
focus on supply chain resiliency for critical goods and 
preventing job losses.
    In central Florida, we have NeoCity, which develops 
semiconductors and nanotechnology along with our partner, 
SkyWater, one of the largest semiconductor manufacturers in the 
Nation. Their CEO was recently invited to the White House by 
President Biden. These trusted foundries across the Nation will 
play a key role in both communications, business, and our 
national defense.
    And, in fact, President Biden held up a SkyWater wafer, a 
slice of semiconductor used for the fabrication of integrated 
circuits manufacturing solar cells and substrates for 
electronic devices, in the White House for that visit.
    Mr. Mezzalingua, how important will the American JOBS Act's 
investment in high-tech domestic manufacturing capacity be to 
boosting both private investment, national security, and our 
economy?
    Mr. Mezzalingua. Well, I think that--thank you, 
Congressman, for the question.
    Right now, I think the examples that have been discussed 
previously have shown where we have all made progress. But, in 
order to accelerate this and make sure that we get out in front 
of this industry very quickly, it is essential. There is a 
long--there is a significant amount of work that has to be 
done, everything from--just within the R&D sphere alone, there 
is a ton of work.
    Then there is the supply chain element to make sure that we 
are not vulnerable or dependent on anybody else. There are the 
skills that are relating to bringing it all together. And part 
of that is training. Part of it is experience. So what this act 
does is--there is another--a number of elements that have to be 
attacked, and they all take time.
    So it is enormously important to allowing us to catch up. 
But I will say that, in the manner that we are doing it, we can 
compete, because the nature of the technology is such that 
smaller companies have an advantage in the sense that software 
base of all of this--the software basis has a very 
democratizing effect, so it can catch up rather quickly. It is 
not just about large big boxes of factories. Of course, you 
need factories, but at its core it is going to be software 
based.
    So I think we have a very--it is a very--it is essential to 
everything that we are doing for the broader mission that we 
are here for--here to discuss here today.
    Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Mezzalingua.
    Ms. Rinaldo, one of your members is in my home State of 
Florida. Airspan Networks is leading the way in providing open 
RAN and virtual technology. Can you elaborate how USA 
Telecommunications Act will benefit domestic companies like 
Airspan Networks?
    Ms. Rinaldo. Absolutely. The money provided by USA Telecom 
Act will help spur investment in not only Airspan, but other 
companies across the United States. It is going to help with 
manufacturing, research and development, for hiring software 
engineers, as well as provide funding for companies to send 
their people to standards bodies around the world. I think it 
is incredibly important not only to be able to participate in 
these standards bodies, but also to ensure that the United 
States Government and the private sector can come together to 
further support the common good of the industry.
    Mr. Soto. Thank you so much. This is about protecting our 
American way of life. It is about jobs, and it is about our 
national security, and I hope everyone on this committee can 
come together for these important efforts, and I yield back.
    Mr. Doyle. Gentleman yields back.
    And, now, let's see. Last, but certainly not least, my 
fellow Pennsylvanian, Mr. Joyce. You are recognized for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Joyce. Thank you for yielding, Mr. Chair. And I would 
like to thank you as a fellow Pennsylvanian, Mr. Doyle, and 
Ranking Member Mr. Latta for allowing me to join on this very 
important meeting today.
    U.S. leadership in the development and deployment of 5G and 
beyond is crucial. We all recognize this in this hearing. As we 
continue to battle the Chinese Communist Party for their 
influence and superiority in this space, we know that we can 
triumph.
    In order to achieve this, we need to put forward policy 
solutions that foster cutting-edge innovation and foster 
competition in this space, but we also must be mindful of the 
supply chain challenges that we face with respect to China. I 
look forward to engaging with this committee as they look to 
bring critical production and capacity home or into the hands 
of friendly allies.
    Mr. Amin and Mr. Baker, I have some questions for you. Some 
of the issues frequently that have been mentioned throughout 
today's hearing need to be addressed around Open RAN regarding 
scale, maturity, and integration with existing equipment.
    Can you please comment on these issues? Have there been 
challenges in this regard in your deployments?
    Mr. Amin, if you would kindly go first.
    Mr. Amin. Thank you very much, Congressman.
    Maybe I want to tell you about an interesting story. I 
haven't had the chance to paint this picture, and I think John 
talked about it.
    In Japan, the moment--the moment that we have created was 
to bring vendors that you would consider that they are a 
competitor against each other, but somehow they both find a way 
to work and coexist. For example, we have taken Airspan that 
makes Open RAN platform, and collaborating with them on 
building the hardware that is needed for our architecture. We 
have taken Altiostar that provides a software vendor and worked 
on system integration and interoperability testing between 
these two companies.
    This model proves that cooperation is very possible, even 
if the partners and suppliers compete in other geographies and 
markets.
    For Open RAN to flourish, I think the critical thing that 
we have focused on is to address the complexity of system 
integration. In our creation of what we call RCP, the Rakuten 
Communication Platform, we have taken 3 years of our journey to 
make sure that we remove the complexities for our future 
partners and customers to address minimization of the system 
integration.
    And I think it is possible to change the perception about 
the complexities of deploying Open RAN platforms around system 
integration. It is an issue that we have to address, and I am 
very confident, through education and collaboration, this is 
going to be addressed.
    Mr. Joyce. Mr. Baker, would you address this as well, 
specifically regarding integration with existing equipment?
    Mr. Baker. Yes, sure.
    I think we can start off by saying there is a lot of fear, 
uncertainty, and doubt being spread around in the marketplace 
around integration of equipment, around interfaces being 
available, around scaleability, and Mavenir has demonstrated 
through its life that, you know, you can replace hardware in 
the core of the network and you can build these very large 
virtual platforms.
    And, as an example, you know, we carry 110 million 
subscribers in T Mobile's network on virtualized platforms, two 
open interfaces. And the open interfaces on the core have been 
there from--and they still continue coming out of the--you 
know, the 3GPP process, and so Mavenir has been able to develop 
products, two open interfaces, and compete on a world market, 
gaining 39 percent share of the core market.
    And, now, you know, this is where we come back to the fact 
that, if we just get these open interfaces into the RAN market, 
then it gives everybody the ability to compete.
    And then this interoperability testing around interfaces 
will ensure that interfaces follow standards such that, you 
know, this whole fear about mix and matching products--and a 
lot of this has come about because the proprietary interfaces 
means that, you know, one vendor's equipment today doesn't work 
with the other vendor.
    So, you know, that is an immediate red flag, and that is 
because the open interfaces are not being followed. Proprietary 
interfaces are there. And so, you know, the operators avoid 
this piece of trouble and say, ``Well, I will just buy it all 
from one vendor.'' They throw their hands up in the air and 
say, ``I will buy all from one vendor because I know that these 
interfaces won't work together.''
    But, as far as the Open RAN, virtualized platforms are 
concerned, those interfaces are there and fully open to allow 
these products to interoperate.
    Mr. Joyce. I really appreciate the points that you made 
regarding the interfaces, that they are available, and the 
collaborative efforts need to occur.
    I thank you both for your answers. And, again, I thank you, 
Mr. Doyle and Mr. Latta, for allowing me to join in to this 
important meeting today. And I yield my remaining time. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you, Mr. Joyce. It was a pleasure having 
you here with the committee.
    So I want to thank the witnesses for their participation 
today. Not only your opening statements, but the back and forth 
that we have been allowed to have with you. And the many 
questions that got answered, I think, gave us a lot of insight 
into what we need to be doing.
    I want to thank my Ranking Member Latta also. I think this 
was a great hearing. I think everybody should take notice that 
there is bipartisan agreement, I believe, on moving forward. We 
know this is important to the future, and I look forward to 
working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to move 
legislation and to make sure that the proper amount of funding 
gets put into the bills that we need to do to make sure that we 
move this technology forward.
    Now I need to ask unanimous consent to have the following 
documents put into the record: a letter from AttoBahn, 
Incorporated; a letter from Representative Matsui to President-
elect Biden; a letter from Ligado to the Energy and Commerce 
Committee; letter from Airspan Networks to Chairman Doyle, 
Ranking Member Latta, Chairman Pallone, and Ranking Member 
Rodgers; brief from JMA; examples from American Open RAN 
innovators Airspan, Altiostar, DeepSig, JMA, Mavenir, New Edge, 
Parallel Wireless, Pivotal Commware, Worldwide Technology; 
document titled ``Inseego: 5G Born in the USA''--this print is 
very small--a white paper from Inseego; research from Inseego.
    So, without objection, so ordered.
    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
    Mr. Doyle. I want to remind Members that, pursuant to 
committee rules, they have 10 business days to submit 
additional questions for the record to be answered by the 
witnesses who have appeared. And I would ask each of the 
witnesses to respond promptly to any such questions that you 
may receive.
    And, with that, the committee is now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 2:39 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
    
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]