[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CONNECTING AMERICA: OVERSIGHT OF NTIA
=======================================================================
VIRTUAL HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATION AND TECHNOLOGY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 16, 2022
__________
Serial No. 117-68
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Published for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce
govinfo.gov/committee/house-energy
energycommerce.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
59-388 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 rdenas., 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 DEBBIE 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
TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Staff Director
WAVERLY GORDON, 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 rdenas., 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. Jerry McNerney, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, opening statement............................... 2
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Hon. Robert E Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Ohio, opening statement..................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the
State of New Jersey, opening statement......................... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Washington, opening statement..................... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Hon. Anna G. Eshoo, a Representative in Congress from the State
of California, prepared statement.............................. 66
Witnesses
Alan Davidson, Assistant Secretary for Communications and
Information, Administrator of the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.... 20
Prepared statement........................................... 23
Answers to submitted questions................................... 96
Submitted material
Letter of February 15, 2022, from Claude Aiken, President and
CEO, WISPA to Mr. Doyle and Mr. Latta, submitted by Mr. Mr.
McNerney....................................................... 67
Letter of February 16, 2022, from Tom Quaadman, Executive Vice
President, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to Mr. Doyle and Mr.
Latta, submitted by Mr. McNerney............................... 70
Letter of February 2, 2022, from Connect Americans Now, CAN, to
Administrator Davidson, submitted by Mr. Latta................. 72
Letter of February 15, 2022, from Bill Baker, CEO, Owner,
Nextlink, to Mr. Pallone., et al., submitted by Mr. Latta...... 74
Letter of December 22, 2021, from Ms. Rodgers, et al., to Mr.
Cardona, Secretary, U.S. Department of Education, submitted by
Mr. Latta...................................................... 77
Letter of December 22, 2021, from Ms. Rodgers, et al., to Ms.
Rosenworcel, FCC, submitted by Mr. Latta....................... 80
Letter of December 22, 2021, from Ms. Rodgers, et al., to Ms.
Remaley, Acting Secretary, National Telecommunications and
Information Agency, submitted by Mr. Latta..................... 83
Letter of December 22, 2021, from Ms. Rodgers, et al., to Ms.
Yellen, Secretary, Dept of Treasury, submitted by Mr. Latta.... 87
Letter of December 22, 2021, from Ms. Rodgers, et al., to Mr.
Vilsack Secretary and Ms. Small,Under Secretary, U.S.
Department of Agriculture Secretary, submitted by Mr. Latta.... 91
CONNECTING AMERICA: OVERSIGHT OF NTIA
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2022
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
Committee on Energy and Commerce,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 12:05 p.m. via
Webex, Cisco online video conferencing, Hon. Jerry McNerney
(member of the subcommittee), presiding.
Members present: McNerney, Veasey, Soto, Eshoo, Welch,
Schrader, rdenas., Kelly, Fletcher, Pallone (ex officio); Latta
(subcommittee ranking member), Guthrie, Bilirakis, Johnson,
Hudson, Mullin, Walberg, Carter, Duncan, and Curtis.
Also present: Representatives Tonko, Joyce, and Barragan
Staff present: Jennifer Epperson, Senior Counsel; Waverly
Gordon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel; Jessica
Grandberry, Staff Assistant; Mackenzie Kuhl, Press Assistant;
Jerry Leverich, Chief Counsel, Communications and Technology;
Joe Orlando, Policy Analyst; Chloe Rodriguez, Clerk; Johanna
Thomas, Counsel; Kate Arey, Minority Content Manager and
Digital Assistant; Sarah Burke, Minority Deputy Staff Director;
Michael Cameron, Minority Policy Analyst, CPC, 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, Oversight and Investation Chief Counsel; Tim
Kurth, Minority Chief Counsel, CPC; Clare Paoletta, Minority
Policy Analyst, Health; Olivia Shields, Minority Communications
Director; Michael Taggart, Minority Policy Director; Everett
Winnick, Minority Director of Information Technology; Evan
Viau, Minority Professional Staff Member, Communications and
Technology; Kate O'Connor, Minority Chief Counsel,
Communications and Technology.
Mr. McNerney. The Subcommittee on Communications and
Technology will now come to order.
Today is--the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology
is holding a hearing entitled, ``Connecting America: Oversight
of NTIA.''
Due to the COVID-19 public health emergency, today's
hearing is being held remotely. All Members and witnesses will
be participating via video conferencing.
As a 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 we have provided to staff. All documents will be
entered into the record at the conclusion of the hearing.
The Chair now recognizes himself for 5 minutes for an
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY McNERNEY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORINIA
Today's hearing comes at a crucial time in our Nation's
history for delivering high-speed, reliable, and affordable
broadband to all Americans. Never before has Congress and the
president made such a bold investment, $65 billion, to connect
Americans to one of the most valuable resources of the 21st
century, the internet. And the pivotal agency that is going to
help us cross the finish line and reach this important goal is
the one that is before us today, the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, the NTIA.
NTIA plays a key role in developing and overseeing
telecommunications and technology policy for this country.
Indeed, Congress long ago designated NTIA as the president's
primary adviser on these critical policy issues. It is not
surprising that, in the bipartisan infrastructure law, we in
Congress designated the NTIA to administer this historic $65
billion investment to connect Americans across the country to
reliable, high-speed, and affordable broadband.
This is certainly a big responsibility to place on one
agency. But the recent confirmation of Mr. Alan, our witness
today--we have someone who is up to the task at hand.
The bipartisan infrastructure law is poised to have a
massive impact on the roughly 30 million Americans who
currently cannot connect to the internet. As we have all
learned during the COVID-19 pandemic, broadband is the
foundation that allows so many Americans workers to support
their families, our children to expand the horizons and
complete their homework, and all of us to strengthen our bonds
with family and friends, even when we are thousands of miles
apart.
I am particularly pleased that the bipartisan
infrastructure law included my Digital Equity Act. There is no
doubt that the over 45 billion in the law to fund and build out
of new networks will help communities in my district and across
the country.
But universal connectivity does not stop at network access.
Families need to be able to afford this service. The individual
must have devices and technical skills to use those services
for their needs. The Digital Equity Act provides funding to all
50 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, to
develop State digital equity plans that identify barriers faced
by their residents in accessing broadband.
One of those State plans--once those State plans are
completed, it will fund projects to address the barriers
identified in the plans to make sure that the goals of
universal connectivity is meaningful to everyone.
The bipartisan infrastructure law does not stop there. Even
for those who have physical access to those networks and the
skills to take advantage of them, a challenge remains for many
in finding plans that they can deliver high-speed broadband
services at affordable prices. In today's economy, broadband is
an absolute necessity. No family should have to choose between
the internet and other basic household needs.
So I am pleased that the bipartisan infrastructure law
makes tangible investments in broadband affordability, so that
we can ensure that economically vulnerable households are not
put in a position to make difficult decisions, such as deciding
what essential services to do without. These investments
include the affordable connectivity program at the FCC, but
also the low-cost option that recipients of the development
program administered by the NTIA are required to provide. These
are two separate and distinct ways to address broadband
affordability, and will, no doubt, separately ensure broadband
is affordable to people across the country.
Last, but certainly not least, we have all seen in recent
months, thanks to a trend that began in the last
Administration, what happens when NTIA and the FCC do not row
in the same direction. Thanks to the hard work at the NTIA and
the FCC and others in the last few weeks, we have finally begun
to see some progress in resolving the spectrum issues left over
by the Trump Administration.
Even better, we saw yesterday that the NTIA and the FCC
have announced a new spectrum coordination initiative to ensure
that our government once again speaks with one voice on
spectrum management matters.
And it doesn't stop there. The NTIA is working on cutting-
edge issues like artificial intelligence and cybersecurity that
will benefit all of us.
For all of these reasons, I am pleased to have Mr. with us
today. I look forward to the conversation.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McNerney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jerry McNerney
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McNerney. And with that, the Chair yields back. The
Chair now recognizes Mr. Latta, the ranking member of the
Subcommittee on Communications and Technologies
[sic], for 5 minutes for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY LATTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Mr. Latta. Well, I thank the Chairman and my good friend
for conducting today's hearing. I greatly appreciate it.
And good afternoon, and welcome to the first oversight
hearing held by the Communications and Technology Subcommittee
this Congress.
I would also like to start off again, Mr. Secretary--
Assistant Secretary Davidson, again congratulating you on your
confirmation to lead the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration. It is a very, very important post.
The COVID-19 pandemic magnified the importance of internet
access, as so much of our daily lives moved online. From
telehealth to education, nearly every aspect of American life
was forced online overnight. And unlike our international
counterparts, our providers were well positioned to step up and
make sure their networks were successful in handling the spike
in traffic.
Fortunately, the Trump Administration's FCC made great
progress connecting Americans across the country. Americans
without access to broadband service fell by 14 percentage
points in 2018, and Americans living in rural areas with access
to broadband at 250 megabits per second increased by 85 percent
since 2017.
Yet, despite the success, more work must be done to close
the digital divide in many of the hardest-to-reach parts of our
country, including in my district. By statute, NTIA is the
president's principal adviser on all telecommunications and
information policy, and is responsible for representing the
executive branch on both domestic and international
communications policies. And with the passage of the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, NTIA is now at the
forefront, expanding broadband connectivity across all of the
United States.
NTIA received an unprecedented $43 billion of funding for
broadband deployment, and over 15 billion to promote digital
equality--equity and broadband affordability. This staggering
investment must first prioritize hard-to-reach, unserved areas.
However, I am concerned that we are seeing this Administration
move the goal post by redefining what it is--what it means by--
considered ``served.'' By moving the goalpost, and not having
proper safeguards in place, we risk leaving Americans with no
service further behind.
In addition to this funding, Republicans have outlined
comprehensive broadband permitting reform legislation that
would make it easier to deploy broadband on Federal lands in
hard-to-reach areas. As the assistant secretary, you have the
discretion over how these funds are spent, and I encourage you
to keep these concerns in mind as you draft the rules.
NTIA is also manager of all Federal spectrum. Federal
agencies rely on spectrum for mission-critical systems, but
they must also be held accountable for efficiently using their
spectrum resources.
Additionally, as more Americans rely on wireless devices
and the growth of the Internet of Things, making spectrum
available for commercial use is necessary for America to lead
in future generations of technology.
NTIA has the distinct role of balancing both interests, and
representing the voices of all Federal agencies on spectrum
matters. This is not an easy task. We continue to see Federal
agencies circumvent NTIA in the spectrum management process, or
ignore changes in the spectrum landscape. More frequently, we
see these technical spectrum disputes spilling out into the
public.
The most recent example is the--with the FCC's C-Band
order. Rather than engage with expert engineers at the NTIA and
FCC and participate in FCC's public and transparent process,
the aviation industry and the FAA engaged in fearmongering
tactics by going to the press and threatening to ground planes.
As the commercial spectrum landscape continues to evolve
with advances in new technologies, NTIA is at the center of
preserving Federal missions, and ensuring Federal users are
prepared for new developments in the spectrum landscape. It is
our responsibility, as members of the Energy and Commerce
Committee, to oversee NTIA's implementation of these diverse
and important tasks, and provide necessary direction when
challenges arise.
Today's hearing is a great start to what I hope is the
first of many oversight hearings on these important topics. And
again, Mr. Secretary, it is great to have you with us today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bob Latta
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Latta. And Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. McNerney. Well, the gentleman from Ohio yields back,
and it is good to see your face, and not just hear your voice,
Bob.
Mr. Latta. Well, thanks very much. Good seeing you.
Mr. McNerney. The Chairman 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 McNerney. Good to see you.
Today the committee is conducting important oversight of
the NTIA. And I would venture to guess that most Americans have
never heard of NTIA, but the agency plays a crucial role in
connecting Americans.
I am pleased President Biden has prioritized the agency's
role by appointing Alan Davidson as administrator. It was
unfortunate that, during the majority of the Trump
Administration, NTIA did not have a politically appointed
leader. And Administrator Davidson's leadership is going to be
critical, as NTIA is poised to deliver on one of the most
important economic and equity issues of the day, and that is
universal access to robust and affordable broadband service.
Our broadband internet is not a luxury. It is a necessity.
It is needed for Americans to do their jobs, run their small
businesses, study for school, meet with their doctor for a
telehealth visit, and connect with family and friends.
Unfortunately, studies estimate that as many as 30 million
Americans are still without home broadband internet access, and
members of this committee on both sides of the aisle have for
years discussed ways to address this issue so that everyone can
take part in today's digital society.
In November Congress and President Biden delivered for the
American people with the bipartisan infrastructure law that
included a historic $65 billion investment in broadband
programs, and this funding will support the cost of building
these networks into rural and under-served communities,
including tribal communities, so that they can finally benefit
from the economic and educational opportunities they deserve.
And this investment will ensure every American has access to
reliable, high-speed internet.
Affordability is also an issue when it comes to broadband
access, and the bipartisan infrastructure law tackles it in
different ways. Most notably, it created the Affordable
Connectivity Program at the Federal Communications Commission.
Under the ACP, one in four American households are now eligible
to receive a discount of $30 every month on their internet
bill, or $75 a month for people living on tribal lands.
The law also requires providers that receive money from the
Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program at NTIA to offer
a low-cost service plan for low-income Americans. And through
these efforts and others, we need to make sure that
affordability is not a barrier to universal connectivity,
because broadband is so essential.
And finally, the bipartisan infrastructure law also
includes digital equity funding to help ensure that people have
the skills and tools they need to connect when they have
access. So beyond the positive impacts to individuals and
communities, this investment is also critical to ensuring that
America's economy can successfully compete on the world stage.
You only need to look at the enormous investments China has
made in fiber, putting it on track to connect more than a
billion people to broadband. So we can't allow other nations to
get ahead of us in building the economy of the future.
While NTIA's work of implementing the programs within its
purview is only just beginning, the agency also is
administering the programs we enacted on a bipartisan basis in
the Consolidated Appropriations Act in 2021. So I look forward
to getting an update on all of these investments today, as NTIA
continues its monumental work of connecting America.
Congress has also tasked NTIA with the important
responsibility of managing Federal spectrum users, and
coordinating with the FCC to ensure that our airwaves are
effectively managed between Federal and commercial users.
Sadly, during the Trump Administration, that responsibility was
ignored, in my opinion, and resulted in unnecessary and
counterproductive public fights in multiple spectrum bands,
including the C-Band.
So I am hopeful that, with the new leadership at NTIA, we
will move past these public spectrum disputes, and instead rely
on the work of the expert agencies in coordination with the
Federal partners to reach decisions that serve the public's
interest. So I was pleased to see yesterday that Administrator
Davidson and FCC Chairwoman Rosenworcel moved to update their
spectrum memorandum of understanding, consistent with
legislation this committee unanimously reported to the House
back in November. And this is an important step to get this
country's management of its airwaves back on track.
I also believe that rolling out a national spectrum
strategy will better position NTIA to ensure that the Federal
Government is coordinated with respect to our airwaves, and
that is going to help consumers, commercial carriers, and
Federal agencies with the spectrum resources they need and for
the--you know, they need now, as well as for the future.
So there is a lot for us to discuss today, as we continue
our important work on connecting America. I welcome
Administrator Davidson, and I look forward to hearing from him.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Pallone. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman
McNerney, for the balance of my time.
Mr. McNerney. The Chairman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes Mrs. McMorris 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. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to join in congratulating Assistant Secretary
Davidson on your confirmation to lead the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration.
NTIA is tasked with ensuring all Americans have a reliable
broadband connection. This is a massive responsibility,
requiring significant investment. And because of this, it is
imperative that the Energy and Commerce Committee perform its
duty and conduct regular oversight of NTIA and other agencies
under its jurisdiction.
Having the NTIA assistant secretary before us today is a
great start. I hope we can have leaders from the Federal
Communications Commission before us soon, which Ranking Member
Latta and I have requested.
By statute, NTIA is the president's principal adviser on
all telecommunications and information policy, and is
responsible for representing the executive branch on both
domestic and international communications policies. This
includes managing all Federal spectrum use, ensuring the
security of our communications networks and their supply chain,
overseeing FirstNet and the implementation of the nationwide
Public Safety Network, coordinating broadband funding
activities across the government, and now implementing the
biggest investment in broadband infrastructure in our Nation's
history.
Access to broadband has never been more important than
COVID-19: remote schools, telehealth, virtual meetings, and
business. Because of the light-touch regulatory policies in
place before the pandemic, broadband providers have invested
tens of billions in their networks over the past decade, which
is why, during the pandemic, American broadband networks were
so dependable, even as these networks faced an unprecedented
surge of individuals and businesses moving online full-time.
Unfortunately, many Americans continue to live in areas
with no connectivity at all. The last major investment in
broadband was in 2009, when Congress passed the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act. NTIA received 4.7 billion, much
of which turned into a missed opportunity when funds were
directed to overbuilding and failed projects. We cannot afford
to let this happen again.
Through the infrastructure bill, Congress provided NTIA
nearly 43 billion for broadband deployment, more than 10 times
the amount administered in 2009. This funding must be targeted
to truly unserved areas. That is, areas currently lacking
broadband speeds the FCC considers served, which are those
areas that lack download speeds of 25 megabits per second and
upload speeds of 3 megabits per second.
Congress also designated NTIA to track and coordinate how
funds are being used for broadband access across the
government, the Federal Government, which ensures that funds
are going to unserved areas, and not being used to overbuild in
areas that already have reliable access.
The only way to connect all Americans is by reliably
tracking broadband funding, making sure agencies utilize the
FCC's updated maps, and prioritizing unserved areas first. NTIA
must get this right in order to close the digital divide once
and for all.
We also must make sure that our networks are secure. The
Department of Commerce is implementing rules to enhance the
security of our communications network supply chain. NTIA is
also administrating an information-sharing program for small,
rural providers, which is a key provision of this committee's
Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act. I look forward
to hearing about NTIA's progress in this space, and their
growing mission to promote supply chain security.
We also cannot forget about the importance of wireless
connectivity. Wireless technologies can offer connectivity in
areas unreachable by fiber. A critical role NTIA plays in
promoting economic growth is managing Federal airwaves
effectively to ensure America leads in next-generation
technologies. In this role, NTIA has a dual task of making sure
agencies have enough spectrum for their missions, while also
making sure they use their spectrum resources efficiently, and
working toward repurposing spectrum for commercial use.
Spectrum is a valuable, finite resource, and as we have
seen in recent years, distributing this resource is only going
to become more challenging over time. During recent high-
profile disputes over spectrum allocations, we have seen
certain agencies, such as the Department of Transportation and
the Department of Defense, attempt to assert authority over
commercial spectrum bands, where those agencies do not hold
licenses. These costly interagency battles threaten our ability
to lead the world in next-gen communications, and NTIA must
assert its authority in the spectrum management process to
prevent that from happening.
If NTIA needs congressional support to execute its duties,
we stand ready to ensure it has the resources and the
authorities necessary to do so. We must have trust in the
expertise at the NTIA and the FCC, and confidence in NTIA's
leadership in this spectrum process, which requires regular
oversight like today's hearing.
Finally, I would like to add that NTIA's role in overseeing
FirstNet, and their implementation of the country's Public
Safety Network is critical to ensuring our first responders can
communicate at all times.
You have an important mission ahead, and I am happy to have
you before us today. I look forward to the discussion on these
important topics, and I hope that we can continue working
together.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodger
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mrs. Rodgers. I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentlelady yields back.
The Chair would like to remind members that, pursuant to
the committee rules, all members' written opening statements
shall be made a part of the record.
I would like to introduce our witness for today's hearing,
Hon. Alan Davidson, a second--assistant secretary for
communications and information, administrator of the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce. Administrator Davidson was confirmed to
his position on January 11th, 2022.
Congratulations, Administrator.
And he has previously served as the first director of
digital economy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce--at the U.S.
Department of Commerce. That was a little misstep there.
We wish to thank Assistant Secretary Davidson for joining
us today.
We look forward to your testimony.
At this time the Chair will recognize Administrator
Davidson for 5 minutes to provide his opening statements.
Administrator Davidson, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF HON. ALAN DAVIDSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION, ADMINISTRATOR OF THE NATIONAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
STATEMENT OF ALAN DAVIDSON
Mr. Davidson. Thank you for that introduction. Thank you,
Representative McNerney, chairing this hearing, Ranking Member
Latta, Chairman Pallone, Ranking Member Rodgers, and members of
the Subcommittee, for the opportunity to speak with you today.
By law, NTIA serves as the president's adviser on
telecommunications and information policy. Today NTIA's
programs focus largely on expanding broadband internet access
and adoption in America, expanding the use of spectrum by all
users, improving public safety communications, and ensuring
that the internet remains an engine for continued innovation
and economic growth.
We have been given a historic opportunity, thanks to
bipartisan support from Congress, to close the digital divide,
create good-paying jobs, promote equity, and enhance American
competitiveness.
I am excited to join you today, just a little over 1 month
into my new role. I have spent my career devoted to the idea
that technology must serve human progress. For the last 25
years, as a computer scientist, a lawyer, a public interest
leader, and an executive, I have sought to build and shape
technologies that connect people and make their lives better. I
am honored and humbled to lead NTIA at this pivotal moment.
As you of all noted, NTIA has many responsibilities. But
today I will highlight some of the top priorities for us this
year.
Our first priority is closing the digital divide. People
need good internet access to thrive in the modern economy, to
learn and work from home, to remotely visit doctors, to stay
connected with family and with friends. Achieving an equitable
future demands that American homes and businesses have high-
quality connections at affordable prices, and the means to use
them. And that will be our work.
Thanks to the leadership and work of this subcommittee, the
bipartisan infrastructure law provided $65 billion to help
deliver affordable, reliable, high-speed internet to every
American. Forty-eight billion dollars of that total was
allocated to NTIA to create and expand four different programs.
The $42 billion Broadband Equity Access and Deployment
program, the so-called BEAD program, or State program, as we
call it, will fund infrastructure build-outs needed to connect
every American through grants to states.
Nearly $3 billion was allocated for a program to address
digital inclusion and equity.
A billion dollars for a program to expand middle mile
infrastructure.
And our active tribal broadband connectivity program
received an additional $2 billion to help further our efforts
with tribal communities.
In addition to all these programs in the bipartisan
infrastructure law, NTIA is currently implementing $1.5 billion
in broadband grant funding included as part of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act last year.
Our second big priority is ensuring access to spectrum.
NTIA serves a critical role, ensuring most effective and
efficient use of this scarce Federal resource. That includes
meeting essential Federal missions, while also coordinating
with the FCC to support advanced wireless technologies.
As I stated during my confirmation hearing, I am committed
to working toward a coordinated national approach to spectrum
use and planning to meet the current and future demands. As a
tangible step in this direction, I was delighted just yesterday
to announce, with the FCC, NTIA's new Joint Spectrum
Coordination Initiative, and I look forward to answering any
questions, talking more about that in the--in our questions and
answers.
The final thing is that, you know, NTIA is working to
bolster cybersecurity and public safety communications, protect
privacy, advance America's vision of free and open
communications around the world.
We are playing a leading role in the U.S. Government's
efforts to increase market competitiveness and enhance supplier
diversity for secure 5G infrastructure.
We are working to accelerate the adoption of OpenRAM
technologies in the U.S. and around the world.
NTIA is leading efforts to enhance public safety
communications, as was mentioned, and next generation 911,
supporting the FirstNet authority for our Nation's first
responders.
And we are working to ensure that our global communications
systems remain a positive force, offering people open access to
information and economic opportunity around the world. That
includes support for the election of Doreen Bogdan-Martin as
secretary general of the ITU, a key U.S. priority.
All of these are ambitious goals. Given technology's
growing role in our lives, these priorities are about far more
than communications policy. They are about creating new jobs
for Americans. They are about public safety and national
security. They are about competing globally and improving
equity here at home.
This is a exciting and historic time to be at NTIA. I look
forward to working with this subcommittee to execute our
mission, and to deliver on these promises for all Americans.
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Davidson follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. McNerney. Thank you.
We have now concluded openings, and we move to member
questions. Each member will have 5 minutes to ask questions of
our witness. I will start by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.
Administrator Davidson, as you know, these past couple of
years have highlighted why it is so important to make sure
everyone who wants reliable broadband access at home is able to
get it. Reliable broadband access is needed so students can do
their homework, people can look for jobs, family and friends
can stay connected, and people can otherwise participate in our
society.
Making broadband available is not just an infrastructure
challenge. For many, it is an economic challenge. That is why,
again, I championed the Digital Equity Act, which requires the
NTIA to establish grant programs for promoting digital equity,
supporting digital inclusion activities, and building capacity
for state-led efforts to increase adoption of broadband by the
residents.
As the NTIA implements the Digital Equity Act, how will it
engage with all impacted stakeholders, including local groups
that are in tune with local needs, to ensure successful
implementation of the Act's objectives?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for that question, and thank
you for your leadership on these issues. I have enjoyed talking
about these when we had a chance to meet earlier.
And I will say our view is that you are exactly right, that
this is about more than just making sure there is a wire going
past somebody's home. Affordability and adoption require a lot
more than just access. It doesn't do us any good if somebody
has access, but there is no--they can't afford to get online.
It doesn't help if they can afford to get online, but they
don't have a device to use the online connection, or they don't
have--you know, don't have the means to actually make use of
it.
So we are thinking very holistically about how to address
these adoption issues. And the digital equity grant program
that we are going to be implementing is a key part of that. We
have already begun outreach to affected communities. We have
created a digital economy--sorry, digital equity leaders
network. I had a chance to speak with it just a few weeks ago,
a terrific group of people around the country who are thinking
about these issues.
And we are engaged with states, communities, and
particularly the communities impacted, to talk about how people
can most effectively use this, and use it in conjunction with
our other programs. And that is the key for us, making sure
that all these programs are working together in lockstep, so
that we are addressing these digital equity issues, even as we
address the broader set of issues, too.
Mr. McNerney. Well, thank you. One of the things you have
stressed since being brought in at the NTIA is how important it
is that you and the agency's actions are transparent to the
public to build trust in your decisions. Can you talk about why
transparency is important to you, and how this will inform your
decisionmaking about the programs you are charged with
implementing?
Mr. Davidson. Sure. Well, as a starting point, we know that
we need to be careful stewards of the resources and
responsibilities that we have been given. We won't meet our
mission if we don't use funds wisely. And we also need to make
sure we are bringing on--bringing along the public, and making
sure that there is faith in how we use these resources.
There is a saying, you know, sunlight is the best
disinfectant, and I strongly believe that. Transparency is a
huge element of our accountability. It is part of why I am here
today. It is part of what we will be trying to implement--what
we will be implementing at NTIA and working with the states. So
you can expect more transparency about what we are doing. And
we are going to insist that states are transparent, too, about
how they are spending the money that we grant them.
Mr. McNerney. OK, excellent. Administrator Davidson, I am
currently the co-chair of the Artificial Intelligence Caucus,
and I am particularly interested in AI-related issues. What do
you see as NTIA's role in efforts to advance AI and machine
learning in the United States and abroad?
Mr. Davidson. Well, it is a tremendously important issue,
in the sense that we know that there are a lot of questions
about the use of AI, huge benefits, huge opportunities, huge
challenges, too.
And I will say NTIA right now has a fairly limited
portfolio in this space at the moment, but we do serve as the
President's adviser on telecommunications and information
policy. There is very active work happening within the
Administration at the OSTP and the White House. Our colleagues
at NIST are working on artificial intelligence.
And I will say that we stand ready to assist those efforts
as needed.
Just as an observation, I will just say this is an area
where American leadership is quite important, as others start
to move into the space.
Mr. McNerney. Well, how will the agency address the ethics
and security implications of those advanced technologies?
Mr. Davidson. I--you--the--my observation from--coming from
the private sector, particularly, is that there is a hunger in
industry for a sense of what good looks like. There is lots of
companies that want to do the right thing. I think the
government, you know, giving them some sense of what that
should look like could be quite helpful for industry being able
to move forward with these exciting technologies.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. The chairman's time has expired.
The Chair now recognizes my good friend, Mr. Latta, ranking
member for the subcommittee, for 5 minutes for his questions.
Mr. Latta. Well, I thank my good friend for recognizing me.
And again, Mr. Secretary, it is great to have you before us
today, and it was good to talk with you the other day.
Mr. Davidson, as we mentioned in our opening statements,
NTIA has received an unprecedented amount of funding for
broadband deployment. This amount of funding is a historic
opportunity to close the digital divide once and for all. But
the last time NTIA received billions of dollars for broadband
funding for the BTOP program, much of that funding resulted in
a lot of failed projects.
The Senate infrastructure bill has certain requirements,
and it provides significant discretion to you, as the assistant
secretary, to determine how this funding is spent. Mr.
Davidson, one of those requirements is that $42.5 billion for
broadband deployment must go to areas that are 80 percent
unserved. This means up to 20 percent of those areas could be
served.
How do you intend to track those areas, and ensure that
NTIA's grant program funds are not used to overbuild networks
in the 20 percent that are served?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for the question, and we--
that is a--it is a very important element of this program.
The mission that we have been given, first and foremost, in
the--in this--what we call the BEAD program, is to reach the
unserved, to reach all the unserved in America. And that has to
be our focus. We are going to faithfully follow the structure
put forward in the statute, as you said. And we know we need to
do--if we are going to succeed, we need to focus on those areas
first.
The key for us in doing that is going to be using good
maps, better maps than we have had before. I think a huge
challenge in this area has been that the maps that we have used
to understand where to deploy resources have been highly
flawed. I think people understand that now. Congress, in its
wisdom, put--you know, made this very clear in the statute, as
well, that the maps are--you know, maps are going to be built
by the FCC. That work is ongoing right now, and we will use
those maps, and states will use those maps to ensure that the
funding that we are putting out will go to the unserved areas
first, and then the under-served areas, and so on through the--
as the statute describes.
So that is going to be a key piece of this, and
coordinating with other Federal agencies to make sure we are
doing that properly is the other piece for us.
Mr. Latta. Well, you know, I have got a lot of work with
maps, and you are absolutely correct. You have got to use the
maps to make sure--you got to send them the money, but at the
same time those maps have to be accurate. So it is also
important in your role to ensure that the other departments and
agencies are out there using your maps, and the maps that the
FCC create.
The Senate infrastructure bill leaves discretion for NTIA
to prioritize certain projects. To avoid overbuilding, we
commit to requiring grant recipients for prioritized areas that
are 100 percent unserved, meaning lacking speeds of 25, 3
megabits per second, the FCC's current definition of being
unserved.
Mr. Davidson. It is laid out very clearly. In my mind, it
is laid out very clearly in the statute. There is a framework
that the statute lays out. That is the framework we are going
to follow. It basically has these definitions about what an
unserved project is, and what an unserved area is, and that is
what we are going to follow.
Mr. Latta. All right, thank you. By statute, NTIA plays an
important role in reflecting the views and concerns of Federal
agencies' use of spectrum and FCC action that may impact them.
However, several Federal agencies have taken their concerns
about certain spectrum proceedings directly to the FCC in
certain years.
What steps are you taking to ensure that NTIA continues to
speak authoritatively on behalf of the Federal agencies when it
comes to those FCC actions?
I know we have discussed this in the past, but I would like
to hear your thoughts on that.
Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, I think this is a critical
responsibility for NTIA, as we have seen. And I think we have
seen also the cost of not being well coordinated.
We have to get spectrum out in a way that meets the needs
of commercial users, meets the needs of Federal agencies. The
American public demands it, because we want to meet their
needs, and they love using these wireless services and
technologies.
The best thing that we can be doing is what we have started
to do this week, is to strengthen our coordination within the
Federal Government. I spoke to the chairwoman of the FCC on my
second day in the job. We have been in constant communication
since then, and we have launched this initiative just this
week. There are five pieces to it. We are going to be doing
much more high-level meetings within--between the FCC and the
NTIA, not just the biannual meetings that we have been required
to do in the past. We are going to update our MOU about how we
work together. We are working on a national spectrum strategy
together, which I think will be a key piece of this.
And we are going to coordinate on the science. I think this
all needs to be evidence-based. That has being a big part of
the problem, not agreeing on where interference happens. So we
are going to be working on standards for that, and doing
technical exchange between our advisory committees.
So it is a first step. I think it is an important step, and
I--hopefully, it will show people that we are committed to
working in lockstep to make sure that these issues don't come
up again.
Mr. Latta. Well, again, thank you very much for being with
us today.
And also, this--you know, spectrum management proceeds need
to be evaluated, and I want to work with you, Mr. Chairman and
this subcommittee, to evaluate these issues in depth with our
appropriate stakeholders.
And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair
recognizes now the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Pallone,
for his 5 minutes.
Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman McNerney. Mr. Latta said
that broadband investments, both in the bipartisan
infrastructure law and the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations
Act, offer a historic opportunity to address the inequities of
the digital divide.
So what I wanted to ask you is, Mr. Davidson, can you tell
us briefly--because I have a second question, too--about how
the NTIA plans to work with State, local, and tribal
governments to create the broadband and digital equity plans,
and how the agency can ensure that they are serving all
communities?
Mr. Davidson. Thank you for the question. As you said, I
really liked it that broadband is not a luxury, it is a
necessity, and that is for--and it goes for all the communities
you just mentioned.
A key part of what we are going to be building here at
NTIA, we have started building, is a real--a muscular outreach
mechanism, where we are engaging with these communities,
whether it is the states, local communities, tribal and
minority communities. And what we are--we are hiring a team of
program officers here.
There is going to be a person here for each State, so that,
if it is the State of New Jersey, we will know who to call.
They will have a name of a person here that they can reach out
to, and there will be a person here who wakes up every morning
thinking, ``How do I make things work for the State of New
Jersey?'' That goes also for these other programs.
And the key thing for us is we are building out teams,
particularly in the tribal digital equity areas, teams of
people who come from those communities, and understand their
needs. So that is really our approach, is really staffing up to
do the outreach. I think it is a key, critical component of our
success.
Mr. Pallone. I would agree with that, because, you know, I
often meet with my mayors and local officials and, you know,
that is the first thing they say to me, is that they say the
bipartisan infrastructure--but whether it is broadband or
drinking water or brownfields or whatever it is, that, you
know, they want to know how they can tap the money.
And of course, they could always call me. But if you have
a--you know, contacts that we can contact, and that we can give
them, that really know how to deal with this, that is very
important. Because, you know, every week or every month we get
new roll-outs from the bipartisan bill on the different topics.
Some of them we haven't had yet, like the sewer. And, you know,
sometimes the guidelines are clear, and other times it isn't.
So it is good to have the staff.
My second question is that I wanted to say the FCC is doing
a good job helping Americans afford internet through the
Affordable Connectivity Program. But as you know, the
bipartisan infrastructure law clearly requires that recipients
of broadband equity access and deployment program funds offer a
low-cost broadband service option. And states have a role in
defining what that means. But as assistant secretary, you have
the ability to approve those or not.
So do you have--can you share some thoughts about the
criteria the NTIA will use to evaluate proposals for the low-
cost service option?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I will say this is an--this is a very
important topic, and really active area of discussion within
our--as we build out the program.
As you say, affordability is critical here, and we were
just talking about the fact that having access doesn't
necessarily mean that you can afford to get online. It is not
that useful. So--for families.
We also--as good as the ACP program, the $30-a-month
benefit that Congress has put in place at the FCC, as important
as that is, we know it doesn't help if, you know, it is $30 off
a $100 plan, right? For--if the plan still costs a lot of
money, it doesn't help--it is not going to be enough for a lot
of families. So we are quite focused in thinking about--we
are--in thinking about the BEAD program, the State grant
program, in the requirement that every recipient of Federal
funding offer a low-cost option. It is in--it is built into the
program.
What that exactly looks like, I will just say we don't
quite know yet. We have asked for and received comments on
this. We received over 550 comments in our recent request. A
lot of them have to do with the question of how to build this.
We are going to be looking at it with an eye toward some of
the other Federal programs that are out there, like the ACP at
the FCC, you know, like the programs that are out there, so
that there may be an opportunity to help--for states to shape
these things based on their knowing what kinds of benefits may
be available, and the standards. We would like to make this as
simple as possible.
I will say I think we expect states to do it--different
states will do it different ways.
Mr. Pallone. But I think that is important, you know, that
we have criteria----
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
The Chairman [continuing]. That are meaningful, and that
are objective.
And then, as you said earlier, and then we have, you know,
a way of contacting someone in the agency to follow through.
So I can't stress those two things enough. And it is not
only true with broadband, it is true with everything that is
rolled out from the BIF. So thank you----
Mr. Davidson. Thank you. And the offer goes--will be for
every State in the country, not just central Jersey, so--where
I am from.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Pallone. Where are you from?
Mr. Davidson. We are Frank Pallone fans, Chairman, so----
Mr. Pallone. What town, Alan? Tell us. I don't even know. I
apologize.
Mr. Davidson. Somerset, New Jersey, just next to the
chairman's district----
Mr. Pallone. Oh, right, we had that conversation. Yes.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Pallone. I don't represent Somerset any more. Bonnie
Watson Coleman does----
Mr. Davidson. You did at one point.
Mr. Pallone. I did for a long time.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Pallone. You told me that. I apologize.
Thank you, Jerry.
Mr. Davidson. Thanks.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes Mrs. Rodgers, full committee ranking member, for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And again, Mr. Davidson, I really appreciate you being with
us. I wanted to start out by just asking about the recent
dispute--it was pretty public--between the wireless carriers
and the aviation community, and it was alarming, I think, to a
lot of us.
Unfortunately, we saw the chairman of the FCC pretty quiet.
There wasn't a lot of direction or engagement by the White
House. And as a result of that, the FAA was pressuring
companies to impose certain conditions on spectrum licenses,
which is not their role. Congress granted the FCC with the
authority to make determinations of harmful interference, and
impose restrictions on spectrum licenses to avoid those issues.
The C-Band order went through a thorough and transparent
process. It was vetted by the FCC's expert engineers. Yet the
FAA raised concerns on behalf of the aviation industry about
alleged interference at the last minute, without due process.
As NTIA administrator, you are now responsible for
representing matters of the executive branch in front of the
FCC. And while this is a dispute among commercial spectrum
users rather than involving spectrum bands, the FAA
circumvented the statutory spectrum management process. And I
was pleased to see NTIA and the FCC's announcement yesterday,
outlining steps you plan to take to improve communication and
coordination between the agencies. It is a great first step.
But we still must address issues related to other agencies
circumventing the statutory spectrum management process.
And I would just like to ask you to speak to your plan to
restore integrity to the spectrum management process and--so
that this doesn't happen again.
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for that question, and I
enjoyed our discussion about it, as well, previously. I--and I
know this is something you care a lot about.
As you say, this isn't--this was not an acceptable outcome.
It wasn't fair to the parties, the commercial parties involved.
It wasn't--it is not--certainly not good for aviation if we
have real concerns there. It is not good for the American
public.
So, you know, my focus is on how do we avoid these kinds of
issues in the future. And I think what is critical is to do the
hard work of coordination. It is not always glamorous, but it
is, as we have seen today--in recent months, it is essential
and important. So the work that we announced, the initiative
that we announced with the FCC just this week, I think, is a
key first step. It is only a first step, but it is a key step.
And I will just highlight one piece that I think is very
relevant, which is the work that we are going to do around
common engineering standards. We need a real, evidence-based
approach to understanding where there might be interference, or
where there might be problems. And that is something we--our
engineers are going to work closely with the FCC. We are going
to be exchanging technical experts, and I think that is
probably one of the most important things we can do, and then
take that also and work with the other Federal agencies.
So this is going to be a top priority for us, and we can't
let these kinds of problems happen again.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. Well, and I look forward to
working with you on that.
I also wanted to ask about the money, the big investment
in--through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act for
closing the digital divide, once and for all. I believe it is
extremely important that we are using--that we have accurate
broadband maps. I represent a district in eastern Washington
that has many areas that remain unserved, very rural, hard to
reach. And what is the commitment to using the FCC's broadband
maps when making these funding decisions, and also requiring
the states to also do that?
Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, as you said, the maps are
critical, and we are committed to using the updated maps from
the FCC for any of this money that goes out to the State grant
programs. And it is really essential, because, exactly as you
indicate, how do you know where the unserved are, unless we
have good maps?
So the way the statute is written, we rely on these maps
before it--using them, the updated maps, to make sure that--to
decide what the allocation is to each State. So under the State
grant program, the money that goes to each State will depend on
a formula that is largely focused on the unserved. And so the
maps are going to be essential there. States are going to build
their plans based on those maps.
So those maps are absolutely critical, and I am confident
we will get much improved maps when we get--when the FCC
finishes its process.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. I also believe that, in order to
connect all Americans, that we need a technology-neutral
approach to funding broadband projects. And the focus on fiber
will only get us so far. So how do you ensure that the states
are going to take a technology-neutral approach?
Mr. Davidson. And I will just say quickly, you know, we are
not adopting a one-size-fits-all approach here. We know that
fiber is an extremely important technology. It is very
resilient, future-proof. But we also know that there are going
to be--there may be situations where other technologies are
important. So where states are going to craft their program, it
is not one size fits all. And that is how we are going to
approach it.
Mrs. Rodgers. Super. Thank you again.
I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentlelady yields back. The--now the
Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Veasey, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Veasey. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Administrator Davis, I appreciate you appearing before the
committee today, and I wanted to talk with you about this
historic funding to make real progress toward universal funding
for broadband connectivity.
I know today's hearing is a culmination of critical and
bipartisan broadband investments that we have been working on
for a long time on this committee, and I am very pleased that
the bipartisan infrastructure law makes equitable investments
across the country by expanding access to broadband access and
addressing affordability concerns, which, in a district like
mine, is very important.
Among other things, the infrastructure bill puts our
emergency broadband benefit program on a more permanent footing
and is renamed the Affordable Connectivity Program, and it is
funded at about $14 billion. These investments make it possible
for all Americans, regardless of income or zip code, to afford
to participate in today's internet-driven economy. And in the
district like the one that I represent in the Dallas-Fort Worth
area, it is very important that we make sure that people aren't
left behind, and that they can afford their internet service.
As you mentioned in your written testimony, Administrator
Davidson, we have been given a historic opportunity, and I
couldn't agree with you more. We are truly in a unique position
to deliver on our commitment to achieve universal broadband
connectivity.
And I wanted to ask you, the COVID-19 pandemic has laid
bare the challenges around broadband connectivity, particularly
in lower-income communities. What safeguards will NTIA
implement to ensure projects funded through these programs are
technology-neutral to allow communities the flexibility to meet
their unique needs, while at the same time emphasizing future-
proof solutions, so that this significant Federal investment is
good for years to come?
Mr. Davidson. Thank you for that question, and let me
start, actually, by thanking you for your leadership on the
emergency broadband benefit and the American--the Affordable
Connectivity Program. Those are, actually, just simply game-
changing programs for a lot of Americans. And even though they
are not NTIA programs, we think about them quite a bit, and how
they fit into the whole picture of adoption in the programs
that we are implementing.
To your question about safeguards, I will say--and as I was
just saying to the ranking member--we are taking a--we are not
taking a one-size-fits-all approach here. The way the statute
is created, there is a lot of flexibility. And, in fact, each
State will be presenting us with their own plans about how they
intend to implement and to use the funding that they are given.
For some of our other programs, there are going to be--a lot of
different communities will be proposing different things.
We know that fiber is a--you know, has unique properties.
It has got unique levels of extensibility, upgradability,
resilience, it is future-proof in ways that few other
technologies are. So we expect that a lot of people will be
putting that forward. We know it may not work everywhere. And,
as I say, we are not imposing--we will not be imposing a one-
size-fits-all solution. But we will be putting forth
requirements and, you know, they are put forward in the
statute, actually, about the speeds and latency that is to be
expected. And we will be making sure that programs that are
proposed and grants that are proposed meet those requirements.
Mr. Veasey. And speaking of communities, another important
program adopted in the infrastructure bill is the Digital
Equity Act, which can help fill gaps and address different
connectivity barriers people face that have broadband access.
Can you talk about how communities will benefit from the
digital equity grant program?
Mr. Davidson. I am glad you asked about it. It is a
terrific program. In some ways, it is kind of the beating heart
of the work that we do here, as I like to say it.
We are establishing three different grant programs. We have
been given $3 billion to do it, and it--really, designed to
promote meaningful adoption and use of broadband and, you know,
targeting a range of populations: low-income households, aging
populations, incarcerated individuals. And so we will be really
working with communities and individuals, particularly, to make
sure that they are able to be part of these grant programs.
We have a terrific start on this with the Digital Equity
Leadership Network. I spoke to them a couple of weeks ago, a
terrific group of people. Outreach is essential. And honestly,
this is an area we would love to work with you on, which is
making sure that we are reaching the right communities, and
they know where to find us to be part of these programs.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky for his 5 minutes.
Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that very
much, and good to talk with you.
I just want to followup on what Mr. Veasey was saying. We
were on the phone the other day. We were talking about all the
broadband money, and money coming forward. And I have been
meeting the last couple of days. I think all of us have been
all meeting with our county executives, mayors, and there is--
the funds that we talk about, the infrastructure bill that Mr.
Veasey was talking about, and others, there is also, through
the ARPA money, money that counties received as replacement for
revenue lost during COVID.
And one of the available uses for that, as we discussed, is
broadband. And our county executives and mayors know the
communities that are behind and need service and so forth, and
things moving forward. However, I think all that is going to
kind of get intermingled. There is a lot of money for
broadband. There is a lot of need for broadband.
And so, how can the county executives and mayors have
support to move forward, because there is going to be a lot of
people wanting to build broadband?
And I think that we are going to reach capacity with the
people who can supply it, people who can build it, but
everybody wants it and needs it. And so what kind of thinking
of an overall program strategy--since we have an enormous
amount of money available to, really--somebody previous--or an
FCC Commissioner said we have enough money now to put broadband
everywhere we want to--we need to put it, we just need to make
sure it gets to the right--map, so maps is another thing in
that.
So I will just turn that over to you, and let you kind of
discuss what we discussed the other day in public, so people
can hear what you are thinking.
Mr. Davidson. Well, I think there is a couple of different
elements to it, and I think particularly getting out to
communities. The key piece of it is outreach to the
communities, right, so that we are helping people understand
all the opportunities that are there.
And as I have said--and I think I said to you--that we are
building capacity here to do that outreach to states and to
communities, that we are going to have a team of people here
who are kind of a one-stop-shop, you know? ``Operators are
standing by, call us.'' And so they will be sitting and
thinking about how to make Kentucky succeed in this. And that
is going to be critical. And that includes not just at the
State level, but the communities that are impacted.
I will say also of my first speech as--my first public
appearance was at the U.S. Conference of Mayors just last
month, a couple of weeks ago. And I do think that community is
incredibly important for us to reach.
The second thing is that we can be better coordinated on
the Federal side. You know, I think we discussed, you know,
people outside Washington have no idea whether the money is
coming from NTIA or FCC or USDA. It just doesn't make a
difference. So what we can do here at the Federal level is make
sure we are well coordinated, it is easy for states and
communities to apply for these grant programs.
We are hopeful that, at NTIA, since you have been--we have
been given the resources, we are going to build some of that
capacity for communities to----
Mr. Guthrie. OK, I want to get another question in. But
just be mindful that there is going to be a lot of money spent
that is not going through the grant programs, not going through
the state----
Mr. Davidson. Right.
Mr. Guthrie. It is going to counties and cities, and that
is where they are going to spend money, and it just needs to be
coordinated, so we do it correctly and get it to the right
place.
So the other one is spectrum. We talked about Federal
spectrum, agency spectrum. We need to get more spectrum into
the marketplace, as--particularly as we race for 5G. It seems
like agencies can wait people out when they know they are
moving forward, and they have their defenders in Congress--me
being one, and the Department of Defense--``Well, we need to
hold on to this spectrum.''
So how--what kind of plans do you have to really dig into
these agencies, and get spectrum that they--if it is available,
and they don't need it--if they need it, well then, we want
them to have it. I mean, we just had tornadoes through my town,
so we know that we have a need for spectrum at the government
level. There is also, we think, excess spectrum. But agencies
don't give it away freely.
So how--what is the plan to kind of dig in and get this
into the marketplace?
Mr. Davidson. Well, you are 100 percent right. We need to
be using our scarce spectrum resources efficiently and
effectively at the Federal level. That is a key part of what we
need to do. And we are the manager of the Federal spectrum, but
also we have--we understand that--the other imperative here,
which is to make sure that we are making enough spectrum
commercially available.
And I do think that a lot of the other agencies understand
that, but it is understandable also that they want to make sure
that they can meet their Federal missions. So a big piece of
what we need to be doing is what we have started with this
announcement this week, our Spectrum Coordination Initiative.
And particularly, I would highlight building this national
spectrum strategy. And this is something that we need to do,
not just with the FCC, but with other Federal agencies too, so
that everybody is on board and understands where we are going.
I do think there are big opportunities out there. Congress
has indicated some of them. For example, the--this lower three
gigahertz, there is a big band of spectrum. It is Department of
Defense spectrum right now, but I am cautiously optimistic
about our ability to find ways to make those kinds of
transitions work. And part of it is also going to be about
building better tools and working together.
But Congress can play a big role here in helping us
enforce----
Mr. Guthrie. Thanks. My time is expiring, but there is a
big--it takes a lot of effort to get the agencies to release
the spectrum moving forward.
I appreciate your time, and I appreciate the question--I
mean the opportunity to ask questions, and I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Soto, for his 5
minutes.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chair. What an exciting time to
get internet access for all Americans. Much like the 1960's,
under President Johnson, we have the opportunity to do
something big for all Americans, particularly in our rural
areas.
The Build Back Better infrastructure law has 65 billion to
help us with this. And like my colleagues, I have been meeting
with local officials in Orange, Osceola, and Polk Counties,
local governments, including our Farm Bureau president in
Orange County, Bobby Beagles, who--out there in one of the few
areas of Orange County that doesn't have high-speed internet,
and it is affecting our local agriculture.
I also believe the 5G rollout was a huge accomplishment,
years in the making. Obviously, we have to balance it out with
airport safety, and upgrading altimeters, and 10 percent of the
commercial fleet of airplanes--and you have outlined, Secretary
Davidson, the plan forward.
Third, central Florida has--we just saw a recent Space X
launch of additional Starlink satellites, over 2,000 up there
now. We see those launches from our backyard in Kissimmee.
Amazon is hot on their trail, as is Europe.
And finally, the American COMPETES Act, where we are
finally going to bring those microchip manufacturing, that
telecom manufacturing back to the United States. We make
microchips in central Florida and Kissimmee, a key area.
But to our goal of getting internet to all Americans,
Secretary Davidson, the infrastructure law included language
prioritizing broadband funding for grantees that have
``demonstrated record of and plans to be in compliance with
Federal labor and employment laws.''
One problem we often see in broadband is the fissured
workplace, where some of the work is passed down to
subcontractors with poor labor records, who often do rush, low-
quality work that jeopardizes service. Do you have plans in
place to avoid that problem, ensure that the funding that you
oversee will, in fact, support good jobs, high-quality work,
and ensures all Americans have reliable, high-speed internet
access?
Mr. Davidson. We--that--great question. We, you know, I
think have been talking about this infrastructure law both as a
opportunity to deploy broadband, but it is also an opportunity
to create good jobs, and that is a high priority for us as we
think about implementation.
When we manufacture equipment, or dig trenches, or lay
fiber or other infrastructure, you know, we are creating--we
will be creating good jobs, good-paying jobs, in every State.
We know many of those jobs will be, you know, jobs that are
going to be available to new entrants, new people who haven't
done them before.
I think one of the big opportunities here, and one we would
love to work with you on, and the members of the subcommittee,
are thinking about that workplace opportunity, right? How to
train up.
We don't have enough of a workforce to build out the--to do
the deployments that we have--we are contemplating. So there
will be a giant job opportunity ahead of us, making sure that
there is--those jobs go out to local communities, that there is
equity and diversity in how those jobs get filled. That is a
massive opportunity for community colleges, for vocational
programs, and I hope we can work with you all on that.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Secretary Davidson.
We also have an issue with access to poles in a timely
fashion, rights of way in project areas. What--and this is a
barrier in Florida--what requirements will NTIA incorporate
into the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment Program to
ensure all pole owners provide the timely and non-
discriminatory access to poles to project areas necessary for
broadband providers to complete these BEAD projects on time?
Mr. Davidson. Well, it is a great question. It is something
we are looking at. I don't have an answer for you right now, I
don't know the answer. It is an area we have been asking
stakeholders about. We just did this request for comments. We
got over 550 comments. We are reading the comments right now. I
know some of them, for sure, have touched on this issue.
Another related issue is about permitting. We have talked
to stakeholders. We know that there is a lot of concerns about
permitting, and how we could speed the permitting process. All
of these things are going to be important if we are able to get
the--if we are going to get these program dollars out and do--
and build the infrastructure quickly. But poles--pole
attachment is a big issue we know about, and I am sure we will
be addressing it.
Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And because my time is
limited, I also want to just remind you of NTIA's commitment to
distribute broadband funding consistent with our congressional
intent, which is a tech-neutral manner to under-served and
unserved communities. And this is going to be key, going
forward.
And with that, my time is expired. I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back, and has set a good
example for yielding within his 5 minutes.
Next, the Chair recognizes the other gentleman from
Florida, Mr. Bilirakis, for his 5 minutes.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Hey, how long have I been on this
committee? You mispronounced my name.
What is that background that you have over there?
Mr. McNerney. Some pictures----
Mr. Bilirakis. What is that? I am taking too much time,
taking too much time. You look good, Mr. Chairman.
NTIA clearly shares authority over spectrum management with
the FCC. Based on recent headlines in the telecommunications
world, we can see what happens when Federal agencies fail to
communicate honestly, effectively, and timely on spectrum
policy. Simply put, the result is that everybody loses.
The last time NTIA and the FCC updated their memorandum of
understanding on spectrum coordination was in 2003. Last
Congress I introduced for the first time the Spectrum
Coordination Act, which will require the agencies to update
their memorandum of understanding on spectrum policy. Shortly
after, I got word that NTIA and FCC were being proactive and
starting the process on their own. Again, fast forward 2 years,
and the new Congress. I reintroduced the Spectrum Coordination
Act, and I believe that the chairman of the full committee
referred to it. And I am pleased to say that the legislation
passed the committee unanimously. We have got to get it on the
floor as soon as possible.
I was going to ask you, Mr. Davidson, why Congress is
moving faster than the agencies on getting this done. But
yesterday--this is great news--I saw a Washington Post article
that updates are forthcoming.
So Mr. Davidson, can you give us a status report on the
negotiations for updating the memorandum of understanding
between your agency and FCC for spectrum coordination?
And what areas of the MOU do you think are specifically
crucial to update--to make the progress more effective, please?
Thank you.
Mr. Davidson. Well, first of all, thank you for your
leadership on this issue and on this legislation.
We, as you rightly noted, have been taking this on as a top
priority, for me, in my new role, even in this last--just 1
month in. I spoke to the chairwoman of the FCC on my second day
on the job. This was one of the things we talked about. We put
it on the list as a high priority.
We have talked regularly since then, and the result is the
announcement that you saw yesterday, and we are going to be
working expeditiously toward it. It has got a couple of key
pieces. You know, we are going to be doing regular meetings,
probably monthly to start with, definitely much more frequently
than the biannual meetings. And the updated MOU is a key
deliverable here.
We are also working on a national spectrum strategy
technical exchange, but the MOU is a key piece of it, and that
is going to be our----
Mr. Bilirakis. Yes, regarding the MOU, do you think we can
get it done before the end of the year, the update?
Mr. Davidson. You know, I would be very surprised if we
couldn't. This is going to be the new guy talking here, and I
hope--but I--it is definitely something we are going to work--
we are working on right now, and I am optimistic that we can do
it, certainly, before the end of the year. That is our belief.
Mr. Bilirakis. I really appreciate that very much.
Moving on, I do have a couple of minutes here. So Mr.
Davidson, whenever it is time to talk about Federal
telecommunications programs, I always have to point out that
Florida, my great State of Florida--and you know, this is a
bipartisan issue, obviously--we are the payers into the vast
majority of these programs. Simply put, we are not getting back
in services.
I know you are new to this, so I am not criticizing you,
and I appreciate you getting on this--these issues.
So now this would not be a big problem for us, but--except
that, historically, a lot of funding has been wasted on poor
coordination and outdated information, which led to the
overbuilding and under-performing expected outcomes.
Now, through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, your agency is in charge
of tens of billions of dollars in new taxpayer funding to
continue broadband development, and to create and operate new
programs.
What is your agency going to do differently to ensure that
we do not continue again the mistakes of the past, and instead
use this funding appropriately?
And is NTIA going to ensure broadband maps--I think you
answered this question, but again, are they going to--NTIA, are
you going to issue broadband maps, and make sure that they are
updated before allocating large sums of money to get geographic
areas?
Mr. Davidson. I will just say very quickly FCC is going to
build the maps, we are going to use them. They are going to be
much better than any of the maps we have used before. And we
are going to be in careful coordination with the other Federal
agencies to make sure we are spending taxpayer money wisely.
Mr. Bilirakis. Well, I appreciate it very much.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes my colleague from California, the gentlelady, Anna
Eshoo.
Ms. Eshoo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nice to see you in the
chair.
Alan, it is wonderful to see you as the administrator of
the NTIA. I--we all wish you all of our best, because what you
oversee is really the--it is the spine of communications
throughout our Nation. So it is essential. It is absolutely
essential. I have three questions.
The first relates to what your view is of community
broadband, and closing the digital divide. There has been
research done by New America that shows that community
broadband networks have a higher quality, they are more
affordable. But despite this, the emergency brake has been
pulled up in 22 states because they have, as you know,
protectionist laws that prohibit community broadband.
So my first question is--and we have over 900 in the
country. To the ranking member of the full committee, the
Pacific Northwest really leads in this effort. There are 900 of
them across the country.
My other question is to what degree is NTIA considering
wholesale and open access network requirements to encourage
competition and making the funding go further?
And last, you know, building on some of the things that
members have said, you know, frankly, much of the problem
relative to spectrum has really not been with the FCC and--but,
in fact, with other agencies, who are not working through NTIA.
So maybe you can tell us how you are going to fix that.
So those are my--the three points that I want to raise with
you.
And really, Alan, to the extent that you succeed in your
leadership, America is going to succeed. We are on the
threshold of something big, and this opportunity cannot be
blown. And I am sure you carry that with you every day.
So what do you have to say about my three points, or
questions?
Mr. Davidson. No pressure, no pressure. Well, no, it is an
amazing moment, and we are on the threshold of something big.
And I want to, first of all, just start by saying thank you for
your leadership over these many years in the technology space,
in the internet access space. It has really been appreciated. I
have had a chance to see it close up. And also, thank you for
your leadership on the--on so many issues related to broadband
deployment and so many other things. So thank you for that.
Ms. Eshoo. Thank you. Thank you, Alan.
Mr. Davidson. On the community broadband, I will just say
the data shows that these are very valuable, can be very
valuable approaches, and the statute is quite clear. The law
that we are implementing says that municipal broadband co-ops,
non-profits, other types of non-traditional providers can
participate. And so we are expecting that that will happen. We
are going to construct it so that it is possible. We are going
to provide technical assistance to make sure that people who
want to do those things will be able to.
And we expect a broad array of participation. We expect it
will vary. Different states are going to take different
approaches, for sure. But we know that this could be--will be,
for some, a valuable part of it. So I am excited to see what
happens there.
On wholesale and open access, we are thinking through those
issues very carefully. There is a lot of opportunity there. It
has come up--we asked for comments on this, and in our requests
for comments we received a huge number of comments that we are
reviewing. This was an issue. And so we are thinking carefully
about how we can best incorporate that in the program. So I
don't have an answer for you, but it is very much front of
mind, and I have been in meetings, conversations with this--
about this already.
And then the last thing on the--on spectrum, well, you are
certainly--you are 100 percent right. This is not just a--you
know, this is not just a one-agency issue. This is going to be
a whole-of-government issue that we need to be working on. And
so the spectrum coordination initiative that we announced with
the chairwoman of the FCC just yesterday is a key first step in
this. It is not the only step that we need, but I do think it
is a key marker to show that we are committed to working with
the FCC, put regular order in place. And to--then we will
expand out, and we will be working--we are already beginning
the conversations with other agencies.
So I look forward to working with you, and thank you for
your support. We are going to need Congress's support in all of
these areas to be a success.
Ms. Eshoo. Thank you, Alan.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman, a few seconds.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back. And
now the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Johnson,
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Johnson. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr.
Davidson, thank you for being with us today.
We have talked a little bit about the infrastructure bill
several times. You know that new law now includes language that
prohibits sub-grantees from using funding to purchase fiber
optic cable and optical transmission equipment manufactured in
the People's Republic of China. However, if the eligible
entity, the sub-grantee, shows that this prohibition would
``unreasonably increase the cost of the project,'' the
assistant secretary is empowered to waive it.
Given the efforts by this committee, Congress, and the
previous Administration to ban untrusted equipment from our
communications networks that present a national security
concern, several of which are manufactured in China, I am
extremely concerned at the idea that this prohibition may be
waived at such a low bar. So, Mr. Davidson, do you intend to
utilize that waiver authority?
Mr. Davidson. So let me start by saying we take the--
understand the reasons behind it, and believe that
cybersecurity and security in our infrastructure is an
essential part of what we are putting together about--of our
rollout here, and that we are going to be putting in place
clear requirements and understanding about how states and
grantees will use the money to make sure that security concerns
are met.
We are----
Mr. Johnson. But are you planning to use that waiver to
waive that?
Mr. Davidson. As far as China goes, I--it is hard to see
what that would look like, to be honest. I--you know, I----
Mr. Johnson. Well, let me ask you, then----
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Johnson [continuing]. If you were to use that waiver,
how would you go about determining what constitutes an
unreasonable increase of cost?
Mr. Davidson. Right.
Mr. Johnson. How would you ensure China doesn't continue
its attempt to abuse its cyber capability to disadvantage the
United States?
And how would you balance all of that with the threat to
national security?
Mr. Davidson. Very carefully. I mean, I just want to say to
you we take those concerns incredibly seriously. In my mind, it
is a very high bar for us to use that equipment. We have--we
see the requirements in the statute. We also know that there
are real Buy America requirements in there. Our objective is to
have the--as much of this material as possible, the vast
majority of it--the whole point of this is to build--create
jobs, spur our manufacturing capability.
We know that there are unique issues in the telecom sector.
We want to make sure that we are able to build out the program.
We think there is huge opportunity, domestically. That is going
to be our absolute focus. The bar is high, in my mind----
Mr. Johnson. OK.
Mr. Davidson [continuing]. For us to have any kind of
waivers.
Mr. Johnson. All right. Well, good. Well, also, NTIA has a
dual task to manage all Federal spectrum users, while also
making spectrum available for commercial use. This is an
important task, as we are trying to have the U.S. be a leader
in 5G. We have talked about that a little bit. What are your
top priorities in the spectrum space during the remaining 3
years of this Administration?
Do you have plans to make more spectrum available for
commercial use?
Will you be presenting a plan to Congress? And if so, when
can we expect that plan?
Mr. Davidson. So we have plans, we have hopes, and I think
we are--we understand that there is this twin imperative here,
both to make sure that we are managing the Federal use
efficiently, effectively, but with an eye toward the fact that
there is commercial use that we know is needed. And my hope is
that we will make progress on that. There is three big things
we are going to be focused on.
Stronger coordination on the Federal level, so that we can,
you know, have regular order here, and be buttoned up so we
don't face some of the problems we have had in the past.
The second is real, science-based, data-based
understanding. This gets to your point about how do we free up
more spectrum. It is by having a clear, common understanding of
where interference happens, and how we can free up some of
these bands.
And the last point is leaning into new technology. I have
to say the low-hanging fruit, unfortunately, is gone. You know,
the notion that it is really easy to just find an unused band
of spectrum and just repurpose it, that is not--that is much
harder to do today. We have done that work.
We are going to have to be really smart, really clever, use
new technology, including sharing technologies to help people
free up more spectrum. I am optimistic we can do it,
particularly in the lower three gigahertz, which I mentioned
before.
Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, I had another question regarding
pole attachments, but my time has run out.
So Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields, and thank you for being
conservative with your time.
And the Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Vermont,
Mr. Welch, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Welch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so
much for calling this hearing. We are going to miss you next
year.
Mr. Davidson, thank you also for the work you are doing.
And you and I have had a chance to talk a bit about Vermont,
where we have created these community union districts.
And also, the State of Vermont--and this is probably true
in some other states, as well--has done a lot of their own
mapping. And there was real frustration for many of us with the
mapping that had been done years ago.
And the question I have is, where there is a conflict in
the mapping from the State versus FCC, can you describe what
the challenge process will be when the State data conflicts
with FCC data?
And will the FCC consider using a State map, especially in
those circumstances when, for no one's fault, the FCC map is
delayed?
Mr. Davidson. Well, that is a terrific question, and I
know--we know that some states actually have very good data.
Vermont may be one of them, actually. And that should be an
input into this process.
We need to use the FCC maps. That is the way the statute is
built for the bulk of it. And our hope is that that becomes the
one source of truth. The question is how--about where the
unserved are. The question is how to best make sure that it is
that accurate source of information that we all want.
There is a challenge process. It is actually, I think, a
two-stage process. The first will be when we first have that
kind of first draft FCC map. This year, there will be an
opportunity for states and communities to go to the FCC and
say, ``Oh, that is not actually an unserved area,'' or, ``That
is a served area.''
There will also be a possibility--when states submit their
plans to us, we will be checking on that and getting input on
whether they have hit the right unserved areas.
So I think there is two bites at the apple, and we are
building that process out now.
Mr. Welch. Thank you. There are a few communities in
Vermont where we have municipal broadband. And, of course,
there has always been tension between the private sector and
municipalities. But where we have had municipal broadband, it
actually has resulted in cheaper and faster service to the
citizens.
How will you ensure that the municipalities can stay in the
game?
Mr. Davidson. Well, as you said--and I--Congresswoman Eshoo
asked something similar--you know, the truth is that the
statute is quite clear on this, which is that municipal
broadband networks, as well as co-ops, non-profits, other types
of newer or non-traditional providers, they are--they can
participate. We are going to make sure the door is open for
them to participate. We are going to offer technical assistance
to make sure communities that want to use those models can
participate. The statute is pretty clear on that. We know there
is value there.
It won't be a one-size-fits-all solution. Some states may
take very different approaches, and we are going to have room
for that.
Mr. Welch. Thank you very much. I really appreciate the
work you are doing, and we are all quite excited to make the
progress that is right out there for us to make.
I yield back.
Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. Thank you for
yielding your time, Peter. The gentleman--the Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Mullin, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Mullin. Man, I feel special. I have been on this lot
less than Gus, and you got my name right. So I know who is
liked the best.
Anyways, Mr. Davidson, it seems there is not really a good
understanding of what middle mile infrastructure exists in the
U.S., and how you can assure that those funds from the IIJA
Middle Mile Grant Program aren't duplicating the broadband
funding. So how do we keep that from happening?
Mr. Davidson. Well, we--I think we are very keen on making
sure these programs are additive, not, you know, kind of
conflicting or duplicative.
There is--I mean, I know, on some level, $42 billion is a
lot of money. On another level, given the mission, it is not
enough if we are going--if we are not careful about how we use
it. Middle mile programs only--only--is $1 billion. We are
going to be very careful. We have gotten a lot of input already
about how we would best use it. We are being very thoughtful
about--it is not going to be a last-mile program like the BEAD
State grant program.
Mr. Mullin. Sure.
Mr. Davidson. It is going to be about something that we use
that is going to--the hope is that it is additive, and it helps
make things more affordable, it helps fuel deployments in rural
areas by providing that backbone that then other providers can
piggyback on.
Mr. Mullin. Well, and we--that is what we are wanting to
happen. What we are afraid is, though, the duplication of it. I
mean, my district in Oklahoma is the least connected district
in the country. Less than 50 percent of district 2 of Oklahoma
is connected to reliable internet service. And it is very
expensive and hard to get the middle mile, much less the last
mile put in place.
And so we just want to make sure it is used appropriately.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Mullin. It is----
Mr. Davidson. I would say your connection looks pretty good
right now, actually, so----
Mr. Mullin. Well, that is because I am sitting in Tulsa, in
the middle of my truck, and I am using Ford Wi-Fi. That is a
true story.
Mr. Davidson. OK.
Mr. Mullin. So I am--but I mean--but we do have--our
electric co-ops are the ones that is providing a lot of
service, plus our telecoms are providing a lot of broadband for
our last mile, to get to it.
But you know, it has now been over a year since we
appropriated the $300 million to the NTIA for the broadband
infrastructure program. When do you think they are going to
start awarding those grants?
Mr. Davidson. I think it will be very soon. We--there were
two conflicting things in the statute. One said, ``Here is the
shot clock.'' Another said, ``Make sure you give people a
chance to cure their applications.'' And we just basically had
to choose, and we chose to delay the program in order to give
people the chance to be able to make sure that their
applications were good.
And we are very glad we did that, because we have some
great applications, people who just--you know, administrative
stuff, they just needed to fix their application. We just
needed to go ask them to do it. And I think you will see, you
know, in the matter--in the near future, those grants will be
coming out.
Mr. Mullin. Right. My last question is the IIJA allows for
25 percent matching fund requirements to be met by other
Federal funding. How are we assuring that the first-time
applicants are financially viable to receive these awards?
Mr. Davidson. So really, it is an important question. We
have been talking about it. I think it needs to be done
carefully, to make sure that we are, you know, being prudent
with our money, and make sure that the people who get it have
viability.
I think, you know, the match is an important piece of that.
We are looking at lots of different creative ways. You know, it
may be that the match, in some cases anyway, may be too low.
You know, and maybe that becomes a piece of it, too.
But I would say the key thing here is that we know the
match is important. We know financial viability of sub-grantees
is important. Ultimately, the states will decide how they are
going to build their programs, but we are going to put some
baseline rules in there, and particularly around oversight, to
make sure that we have viable programs, and that people don't
just disappear on us. We don't want that to happen. That is not
going to serve anybody well.
Mr. Mullin. Thank you. Mr. Davidson, thank you so much for
your time.
And Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. Well, the gentleman yields. And now the Chair
recognizes the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Schrader, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Schrader. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.
And thank you, Mr. Assistant Secretary, for being here. We
are all excited about the prospects out there.
And I guess I will just take a quick moment to give
ourselves a pat on the back, as the U.S. Congress approving a
bipartisan infrastructure bill. I mean, this is a big deal. We
agree to disagree on a lot of things, but, frankly, when it
comes to bread-and-butter issues, country comes together,
Congress comes together, and we do this. A little bit of a
shout-out for, you know, a dozen Democrats, a dozen Republicans
who made sure it got all the way to the finish line on the
House side, but that is just the nature of legislation. And
this is--the broadband deployment here is just going to be
absolutely transformational for everyone on this panel, and
everyone in this country, where we are finally, hopefully, all
connected.
We got one 137,000 Oregonians without broadband access.
That is totally unacceptable. Congress has made this historic
investment, and hoping that it actually gets disbursed in the
timely manner. I think Markwayne's comments are very spot on,
as have others.
And I just want to make sure folks know, you know, what are
going to be the impediments. You have alluded to a couple of
them. You know, the shot clock versus getting it out the door.
We also have the mapping issue. And what is a--you know, the
realistic timeline to make sure we get it out over--I want to
give folks back home a realistic timeline, so no one is
disappointed, they can get their ducks in a row, and know how
to go about getting that--the grants out there.
Mr. Davidson. Well, we are--it is a great question,
Congressman, and I appreciated talking to you about some of
these issues.
The timeline--you know, we are going to be moving forward
aggressively against the timeline that is put forward in the
statute. The key first date for us is in less than 90 days. And
on--by May 16th we will be putting out our notice--or we call
it our notice of funding opportunity, our NOFO--and that will
be when the shot clock starts, or the--I guess the starting gun
goes off is a better way to say it.
And right after that, states will be immediately able to
apply for planning grants. Very simple, $5 million planning
grants to every State and territory that wants them. We are
going to make it really easy for them to get them. Planning is
a key part of this. And so I am really glad that Congress
wisely included planning money for states. That will start
things off right away.
The key next thing is we are going to be waiting for the--
looking for the maps. And the FCC is working on that. That is
probably going to take until later in the year, from what they
have said. I think this summer, the FCC chairwoman has said,
the maps will start to be available. There will be a challenge
process. And then it will be later in the year when states can
really use those maps to get their allocations, and start
putting their plans in.
So it is--you know, the statute and the law that Congress
put in was very careful. States have to put together plans. We
are going to be approving those plans. It takes a little while
before money will get--you know, dirt will get shoveled. But we
are going to work through it very, very--as quickly as we can,
given the process that Congress set forward.
Mr. Schrader. So where are the communities--who should the
communities go to to get the support?
I mean, there is a lot of small, rural counties----
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Schrader [continuing]. And towns and communities that
don't really have big grant-writing operations.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Schrader. You know, the--understanding the myriad
complexities of this legislation may be a little bit beyond
them.
And certainly they can call my office and everyone on the
Zoom here, but you know, who should they contact in your
office?
And when do you anticipate being staffed up enough that
they can get a call back? I don't want to ask them----
Mr. Davidson. That is----
Mr. Schrader [continuing]. Call you, when you don't have
anybody there, so----
Mr. Davidson. That is----
Mr. Schrader [continuing]. Give it some time.
Mr. Davidson. Probably the most important thing that we are
doing right now is building out a bigger team, a big team of
people who will be there to work with states and communities on
their--on getting access to these funds.
And so we are going to have here a team of folks, where
there is a person dedicated to the State of Oregon. They are
going to wake up every morning and think, ``How do I make
Oregon succeed in this--in these grant programs?'' There will
be a person that you and the State government will know they
can reach out to at NTIA, who will be their point person for
these programs.
And our hope is that, you know, that you all will help us
be an emissary to the states and communities. We will make sure
you know who those people are here, and we will make sure that
you can help get--anybody who has got questions, this will be
an ``Operators are standing by'' kind of thing. That is the
most important thing that we can do----
Mr. Schrader. Well, when will that occur?
Mr. Davidson. It is----
Mr. Schrader. When is it realistic for us----
Mr. Davidson. It is happening now. We already have a State
broadband leaders network that has been around for a while. We
are building out. And by the 16th, by May 16th, we will have a
lot of that capacity in place so that, when the starting gun
goes off, people will know who to call.
Mr. Schrader. Excellent. Excellent. Good luck. Thank you so
very much.
Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
Mr. Schrader. I yield back, thank you.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Michigan, Mr. Walberg, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Administrator, thank you for being with us today, and
it is good to let you see that my technology actually works
this time. I missed that the other day, when you kindly called
me. So----
Mr. Davidson. It wasn't that bad, but yes.
Mr. Walberg. There has been a lot of talk about preventing
overbuilding, and I share those concerns, especially as we are
facing serious workforce and supply shortages. If we don't have
the workers to get the job done, this massive taxpayer
investment we made for broadband deployment will mean nothing.
To address this, NTIA was included as a member of the
Interagency Telecommunications Workforce Working Group, which
was created as a result of my legislation, the
Telecommunications Skilled Workforce Act.
Mr. Davidson, the working group is tasked with developing
recommendations to address the significant workforce needs we
have in the telecommunications industry. Can you please provide
an update on the working group's progress? I hope you have
some.
Mr. Davidson. I can say that this is a huge issue, and a
huge opportunity, and we see the opportunity--the potential
here. As you have rightly pointed out, we have a giant need,
and we are not going to be able to implement these programs and
spend these billions of dollars without workers to do it.
Ideally, you would want those workers coming from the
communities where the building is happening. So we see a giant
opportunity for more vocational training, more community
college programs, all of those things. We are working with the
White House on these issues, and working to coordinate.
I have to say I don't actually have an update for you today
on that working group. I will be sure to get one for you right
away, and get back to your staff.
Mr. Walberg. Well, I appreciate that. I understand it is
early into your tenure.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Walberg. So a lot to find out. But I am concerned, in
all honesty, that the Biden Administration's rollback of
industry-recognized apprenticeship programs is a step, I think,
in the wrong direction in a growing--in growing the skilled
workforce that we need.
Given the immediate need, do you believe that all types of
qualified training programs should be on the table to address
the workforce shortage?
Mr. Davidson. I think we--I know that we need a lot of the
workers, and I think we want to make sure these are good-paying
jobs for all Americans. We need the partnership.
And I am not familiar enough with the details of those
particular programs to be able to tell you, but I know this is
going to be an all-hands-on-deck approach. I can tell you that
is how we are looking at it. And we will just look forward to
leaning into the opportunity, and I can get you an update on
that, too, as I learn more about it.
Mr. Walberg. Well, we hope. You know, I would lobby for the
fact that we ought to be open to all qualified training
programs, that media industry standards, whether registered
programs or not--we need the workers.
Let me move on. My staff recently had a call with the
Michigan High-Speed Internet Office, which will be the entity
in charge of managing and doling out the NTIA grant funds in my
home State. The office was only established in June 2021. And
though they have made some progress in a short amount of time,
the office is behind other states in terms of planning and
staffing. So, Mr. Davidson, what assistance is NTIA offering
the states to ensure that they are deployment-ready, especially
those like Michigan, whose broadband offices are playing catch-
up?
Mr. Davidson. So you rightly kind of point to a key piece
of this, which is that, especially for the State grant
programs, the states are our critical partners. And we know
this. Like, we are not going to succeed unless we are
supporting the states. It is our--honestly, I think the most
important thing that we are going to build here, that we are
building here now, is that State support system.
So we are going to have Federal program officers. We are
hiring right now a whole bunch of new ones who are going to be
tasked with working with each State, and so that there is
somebody here who the State of Michigan knows they can reach
out to for any of their technical questions. We will have a--it
is sort of like an operators-are-standing-by kind of thing.
They will know that name. They will know who to reach out to
here.
There will be somebody here who wakes up every day and
thinks, ``How do I make Michigan succeed?'' You will know who
that person is, and we are hoping that we can use you and the
rest of the members of the subcommittee and Congress in a kind
of whole-of-government approach to reach out to the communities
in need. It is the most important thing we can build, because
we know different states are in different places on this.
And Michigan, I know, has just created this office. I am
not even sure it has been funded yet, but it is going to be
really important for success.
Mr. Walberg. Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back, and now it is my
privilege to recognize the gentleman from southern California,
home of the Super Bowl champions, Mr. Cardenas.
Mr. Cardenas. Thank you very much, Chairman McNerney. And
like my colleagues have echoed, we are going to miss you on
this committee, especially when it comes to this very, very
important issue. You have been, certainly, a leader in many
respects on this. So thank you so much for your service, and
for chairing the committee today.
It is wonderful, as my colleagues have also mentioned, we
are working in a bipartisan manner. We do that quite often. It
is not covered in the news very much, because I guess that is
kind of boring. But we do a lot of boring, good, amazing work
in this committee. For example, the BEAD program and the ACP
being by--run by the NTIA and the ACP program being run by the
FCC. That leads me to my first question about how we are going
to create that seamless ability to create not only
infrastructure, but access.
Administrator Davidson, can you tell us briefly how your--
what your expectations are to make sure that we pull these two
programs together and coordinate with those two, your two
organizations?
Mr. Davidson. I am happy to talk about it, thank you for
the question. You know, the ACP is that $30-a-month benefit for
broadband service, really transformative for many communities,
incredibly important, administered by the FCC, as you say.
We are going to be focused--our part of it, really, is on--
well, first of all, I would just say we know that affordability
is a key issue here. It doesn't make--it doesn't help a family
if they have a wire running to their home if they can't afford
the service on it. So it is essential that we think about
affordability in the program.
Fortunately, the law, the bipartisan infrastructure law, as
it was created, requires that those who receive grants from us
have to include a low-cost option, and I think that will be a
major driver of affordability in this grant program. We are
working with, talking to, thinking about how those FCC programs
will fit into the program.
And so we are very aware of it, I will say, and--as we
construct how we--what a low-cost plan might look like. It is
going to vary from place to place and states to State.
Different communities are going to know--they know that
affordability means different things in different places. So we
expect some variation, but we also are very aware of the
programs that are out there, and want to work closely together.
And it is something I have talked to the chairwoman about, as
well, how we can mutually reinforce the work that we are doing.
I think ACP is going to be a key piece of making sure that
people have that on-ramp onto the internet.
Mr. Cardenas. And it is very important that we make sure
that, when it comes to times of emergency, especially in
California, when it comes to wildfires--and we see floods and
other natural disasters around the country--and one of the
requirements is to make sure that it is reliable, and we have a
reliable and resilient network out there.
What are we--what do you say about that resiliency, and how
we plan on making sure that that is the final--that is the
result that we are receiving across the country?
Mr. Davidson. Another--it is a very important piece of
this. Our hope and our plan is to build out a broadband
infrastructure that is not only fast and affordable, but also
reliable and resilient. And as you say, that has become a huge
issue for infrastructure, as we have seen in recent months and
years.
So we need an infrastructure that is designed for those
challenges. And not just today, but in the future. We are--so
that is going to be--that is a--going to be a key element of
this. We are thinking about speed and capacity, but we are also
thinking about how we can include in our requirements the
ability to handle and have resilience in the future. So it has
been something we have been talking to stakeholders about, and
we have gotten some input on, and I expect we will include it.
That is something I am sure the people of California know
quite well about how to think about, too. So we welcome your
input, and would love to work with you on it.
Mr. Cardenas. Yes, I look forward to working with you on
it, as well. And in the spirit of bipartisanship, my colleague,
Rodgers, and also my colleague, Soto, touched on, when it comes
to technology and implementation, and making sure that what is
ready and accessible should be considered, and being technology
agnostic, to make sure that it is implemented--we get
implementation as quickly as possible, so that we can get as
many Americans connected as efficiently and quickly as
possible, and with long-term benefits, as well.
Also, I just--I would be remiss if I didn't mention the
fact that, in Indian country, as it is called, in our sovereign
tribal nations, there is a lot of issues that they are
concerned about, and we want to make sure that you give some
feedback to this committee when it comes to how it has been
going, and how to help those sovereign nations access and be
able to apply for these grants, et cetera. Because, as one of
my colleagues mentioned earlier, some communities just don't
have the technical infrastructure to compete with other, more
fortified communities that are competing for those grants, as
well.
So with that, my time has expired. I apologize, Chair
McNerney, and I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Carter, for 5
minutes.
Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
Davidson, for being here. It is a pleasure to have you.
I wanted to talk about NTIA's lab, the Institute for
Telecommunication Sciences--ITS, as I think you call it. I know
that it conducts important tests and research to solve
challenging technical issues, and to use spectrum more
efficiently. It is also one of the key drivers, I believe, in
freeing up Federal spectrum for commercial use.
Can you please speak to the importance of ITS, and what you
envision it doing for the--over the next 3 years?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I am glad you raised it. It is a--it is
not necessarily always a well-known part of NTIA, and I have
been learning a lot about it. It is really a national treasure.
We have this lab that is based out of--near Boulder that
has capabilities--engineers, computer scientists, people who
model spectrum interference and understand it, people who can
do testing around spectrum, and real research. And I will say
we have--it has never been more important.
I think the recent months and the kinds of conflicts we
have had over spectrum have made it clear how important it is
for us to have real resources to come up with a common source
of truth about where there is, you know, kind of data that
shows there are problems and where there isn't.
And so my hope is that we can really buildup those
capabilities, both within, you know, the spectrum team here in
D.C., and also our lab out in Colorado to do that work. And
just as a great example, we have--are now embarking on a
project with the Department of Defense, a 5G challenge, to look
at how 5G deployment might affect their equipment.
So just like the commercial aviation industry is
interested, as you can imagine, the Defense Department is quite
interested, too. And we will have to send you some pictures. We
just did a great test, where we had some of the military
helicopters and equipment out at our testing facility, kind of
seeing what the interference looks like with 5G. That is the
kind of cutting edge work that we want to do, and I hope we
will continue to do in the year to come.
Mr. Carter. Well, good. I understand there is some
legislation out there that would take care of ITS. And, in
fact, I think it is my legislation, so I hope that you will be
looking for it.
Anyway, you just alluded to the fact that you are working
with the Department of Defense, you are working with the FAA
and others about the problem that 5G may have in the C-Band.
Can you describe the working relationships that NTIA has with
the FAA, Department of Transportation, and Department of
Defense, along with any other interagency communication
problems that need to be addressed?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I think we do meet regularly with these
other Federal agencies, and there are good mechanisms at the--I
call it sort of at the staff level--for, you know, kind of
technologists to meet with technologists, engineers to meet
with engineers. We have the two committees, the IRAC, one of
them, which has now been going on for quite a while. We have a
group called PPSG--and I am going to get the acronym wrong, but
we have these working groups to discuss the technical and
policy challenges.
We know we need to strengthen those, and I think my sense
is that we need to strengthen the political layer, as well, and
make sure that coordination is happening, you know, at the
highest levels of our agencies. And so that is really why we
need a national spectrum strategy. That is why I was glad to
launch this initiative with the FCC chairwoman this week.
And I would just say, stay tuned for more. This is a high
priority for us, to make sure we are communicating well----
Mr. Carter. Good.
Mr. Davidson [continuing]. With the Federal users.
Mr. Carter. Mr. Davidson, you and I have talked before, and
I have explained to you, as I think a lot of people know, there
are two Georgias. There is Atlanta and there is everywhere
else. And I represent everywhere else. And, you know, we need
broadband in south Georgia. And I get it. I know there are
urban deserts, but at the same time we are really struggling
down here.
And what I wanted to just say real quickly is that, you
know--and we have got the funds coming in in the BIF, and they
have been authorized, and now we are seeing what is going to
happen. But I just want to make sure that we are not going to
have any kind of undue regulatory obligations, such as product
and service mandates or open access requirements, so that this
would interfere with the deployment of broadband in the rural
areas, in particular.
Mr. Davidson. Well, as we discussed, you represent a very
beautiful part of Georgia, as I know.
And so--and we are--we want to work with you, and we want
to make sure we are--I will just say we are laser-focused on
fast, accountable deployment. That is our focus. That is what
we are going to be trying--what we are working on. And those
are the issues that we are going to be thinking about, how to
do that quickly, and how to do it accountably. And I will just
say that is my focus.
Mr. Carter. OK. Well, thank you very much.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Kelly, for 5
minutes.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And thank you for testifying today, Administrator Davidson.
I know NTIA has been waiting a long time for a permanent leader
in this position, and you have a lot on your plate.
Last year Congress made a once-in-a-generation investment
in our Nation's broadband infrastructure, and this is our
chance, frankly, to build the digital divide--or to bridge the
digital divide, and lay the foundation for our Nation's future.
One of the bipartisan infrastructure laws was a provision
on requiring a low-cost broadband service option, and every
State will be required to submit its definition for their low-
cost option, and NTIA will have to approve their plan. This
could mean we wind up with 50 different plans for what is
considered low-cost.
At the same time, the FCC has been overseeing the
Affordable Connectivity Program, which, by statute, defines
affordable connectivity--defines the affordable connectivity
benefit as a monthly discount for an eligible household applied
to the actual amount charged to such household in an amount
equal to such amount charged, but not more than $30. Or if an
internet service offering is provided to an eligible household
on tribal land, not more than $75.
So how do you plan to approach the low-cost approval
process?
Also, the FCC program eligibility is based on income. Will
all individuals be eligible to select the low-cost option for
BEAD?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for those questions. And I
will just start by saying we know that affordability must be a
critical piece of this. That is, just because there is a cable
running to somebody's home doesn't necessarily mean that they
can--a family can afford to get online. So we know we need to
be looking at the full range of things that people need to be
able to get adoption, and affordability is a piece of it.
As you rightly say, our program required--the beauty of
what--the bill that Congress wrote, the law that Congress
passed, is that we are requiring--we will be requiring a low-
cost option be available for any recipient of our Federal grant
money. And so states will have to include a low-cost option,
and that low-cost option, our expectation is, it will be
available to those who meet the requirements, anybody who is
the recipient--works for one of those grantees, for one of
those programs.
We are working on the specifics of that, and we are very
aware of the ACP program. I don't think it is going to be a
one-size-fits-all solution, the way that the program is
written. In fact, the virtue of it is that different states can
do different things. What Illinois needs for low-cost options
probably could be quite different from what Georgia or Florida
or Montana need. Right?
So there is going to--we expect flexibility, but this is
going to be a critical component. We are going to make sure
states have good, low-cost options available.
Ms. Kelly. OK. In addition to affordability, access to high
speed internet and digital redlining have been issues that have
held back many minority communities from fully engaging in the
modern economy. The bipartisan infrastructure law creates a
process to address digital discrimination and prohibit
deployment discrimination.
I know this is something important to you. Can you explain
how BEAD funds will help address the issues that we have so
frequently seen when it comes to digital redlining?
Mr. Davidson. It is an extremely important issue, and I--
and digital redlining is something we can't tolerate in this
program.
I will note that the FCC--I believe the FCC was actually
tasked at looking at this in the--at this very issue in the
bipartisan infrastructure law. We are working with them, as we
move forward in our programs, to get their--benefit of their
thinking and their work, as well.
I know that, as we have talked to mayors and community
leaders--I have spoken to a group of mayors--we know that there
are locations that lack physical access to broadband, and that
are truly unserved. And so it is going to be--I think our
belief is that we should be, you know, BEADS--the State grant
program, the BEAD funding, is for all unserved locations. And
we do believe that there are--and we will be watching to see if
there are, in fact--I think we truly believe there are, as you
know--unserved locations in many different places in America,
including in urban areas. And so we are going to make sure that
our BEAD funding is available there.
Ms. Kelly. Thank you so much, and I wish you the best of
luck.
Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
Ms. Kelly. I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentlelady yields back.
I request unanimous consent to enter the following into the
record: a letter from WISPA to Chairman Doyle and Ranking
Member Latta; a letter from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to
Chairman Doyle and Ranking Member Latta in support of NTIA's
new broadband programs under the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act; a letter from Connect Americans Now, CAN, to
Administrator Davidson; a letter from Nextlink to Chairman
Pallone, Ranking Member Rodgers, Subcommittee Chair Doyle,
Ranking Member Latta; a letter from Ranking Members Rodgers,
Comer, Granger, and Foxx to the U.S. Department of Education
Secretary Cardona; a letter from Ranking Members Rodgers,
Comer, Granger to Federal Communication Chair Rosenworcel; a
letter from Ranking Members Rodgers, Comer, and Granger to
National Telecommunications and Information Agency Acting
Secretary Remaley; a letter from Ranking Members Rodgers,
Comer, and Granger to the Department of Treasury Secretary
Yellen; a letter from Ranking Members Rodgers, Comer, Granger,
and Thompson to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary
Vilsack and Under Secretary of Agriculture for Rural
Development Torres Small.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
Mr. McNerney. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from
South Carolina, Mr. Duncan, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Duncan. Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I concur with a
lot of others: you will be missed on the committee. I have
enjoyed working with you during my short time here.
Administrator Davidson, I represent a very rural area, as
many of the Congressmen that have come before me have said. I
am concerned about the aspect of overbuilding in urban areas to
the extent of not building out the much-needed infrastructure
in rural areas. Industry has available matching funds, and
investing in rural areas is a great leverage of these private-
sector funds.
What can you say about NTIA's commitment to ensure these
rural areas across the Nation aren't left out, as money is
spent in urban areas, where the need isn't as great due to
existing systems?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for the question, sir, and I
would say that the statute is quite clear on this to us:
unserved first. And that is how we are going to be approaching
it.
The statute lays out a clear framework for us to define
``unserved,'' right, people who don't have the speeds that are
defined in the statute. It lays out a framework for how we are
supposed to approach it--again, with the unserved first. And
that is going to be our approach. And I do believe we believe
that a lot--most, perhaps, of, probably--of the unserved are
going to be in those rural areas, where there hasn't been
access.
You heard me just--if you were listening--you know, I don't
know if you were listening, but I just spoke with
Representative Kelly about it. Of course, you know, we will
find the unserved wherever they are. But it is going--that is
going to be our focus. And so I will just say that the--in our
view, my view, the statute is very clear, and the unserved will
be the people we look to, to make sure states are----
Mr. Duncan. Thank you for that answer. The IIJA states very
clearly that NTIA shall not engage in rate regulation related
to the broadband grant program, generally, and the low-cost
option, in particular.
We talked a lot about the under-served and those that can't
afford it, and the affordable option. Will you confirm for us
here today, as other administrators have done, that you will
abide by the statute, and not regulate broadband rates directly
or indirectly as part of your work on the broadband grant
program?
Mr. Davidson. I can confirm that the statute says--is clear
that we are not going to be engaged in rate regulation, and we
will follow the statute.
Mr. Duncan. Thank you. We are served by both the big
Verizons, AT&Ts but we also have electric cooperatives and
telephone cooperatives. How do you envision working with the
cooperatives to assist in this buildout, and meeting the under-
served across the nation?
Mr. Davidson. So, I--you know, we see a--an all-of-the-
above approach to making sure we can meet the mission here. If
we are really going to serve all Americans, if we are going to
make sure that all the unserved are reached, it is going to
take a lot of different actors to build--to do those build-
outs.
The statute is very clear, that all are welcome, and that--
we see a role for co-ops. I expect--you know, we are hopeful
that we will have a lot of new entrants, non-traditional
players. We will put careful standards in place to make sure
that everybody is held accountable for the money they receive.
But our hope is that we will be building these plans, and
states will build these plans. The states are going to actually
be building out the--doing the granting that welcome an all-of-
the-above approach to how we tackle the problem.
Mr. Duncan. You mentioned a lot about training and
education for folks in the technology sector, but also in the
construction and buildout.
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Duncan. Are any of those grants slated for technical
colleges across the country?
Mr. Davidson. I don't think there is anything that is
earmarked. I could be wrong, but I think that we expect that,
in some settings, they could well be used.
And I would also note we were administering several
different programs here, but particularly the--for example, a
digital equity program, funds could certainly be used for
workforce development.
We are taking comments through this request for comments
that we have asked for to think about how workforce development
could be funded through the programs. I don't have a direct
answer. We haven't made those decisions yet.
But I will just say you have hit on it. Workforce is a
giant opportunity, and also a problem if we don't address it.
But it is a big opportunity. We want to make sure we get to it
in the programs.
Mr. Duncan. Can I ask your office to keep my office
informed as to that aspect?
Mr. Davidson. Absolutely.
Mr. Duncan. And that is the technical training and
workforce development.
Mr. Davidson. We would welcome a chance to work with you on
it, get your ideas on it. We will absolutely keep you up to
speed, as we think about it.
Mr. Duncan. Awesome. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentlelady from Texas, Mrs. Fletcher, for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Ranking Member Latta, for convening today's hearing on the NTIA
and its role in administering significant broadband funding to
expand access, and affordability, and bridge digital divide, as
we have been discussing this morning.
Administrator Davidson, thank you so much for joining us
today, and sharing your insights with us. This has been a very
helpful hearing, I think, for us all.
As many of my colleagues have noted, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act provides $65 billion for broadband
programs, including more than 40 billion for broadband equity,
access, and deployment program, sending the money to states to
close the availability gap in their communities.
And as you have already noted a couple of times, and
several of my colleagues have pointed out, different states
will approach things differently. And you have talked a little
bit about the planning money provided for states, but I think
we can reasonably assume that with this funding will come a
flood of applications to deploy the infrastructure needed to
provide these connections, and that that flood of applications
will strain local offices that are tasked with reviewing
applications.
Anticipating this issue, I introduced a bill, the Broadband
Incentives for Communities Act, to support local governments as
they process applications for broadband deployment by providing
grants for hiring and training staff, purchasing and updating
software, and updating their processes. It also brings all the
stakeholders together under NTIA in a local broadband advisory
council to promote collaboration and problem-solving.
So with that in mind, Administrator Davidson, I would love
to hear your thoughts on the crucial role that State and local
governments will play in effective administration of these
funds, and a little bit about how you see State and local
government as partners in the NTIA's goals with distributing
the funds.
Mr. Davidson. Well, to start with, it is a--thank you for
that, and thank you for your leadership on this issue.
It is really essential that the communities, local
governments have the resources to be able to participate in
this, to be working with states on the plans, also to be doing
the permitting they will need to--you know, there is lots of
different elements of this, where we need more strength and
capacity at the local level.
In our view, states are--first of all, the statute is
clear. States are required to consult with local communities as
they develop their plans. And we are going to be making sure
that is true as we review the State grant programs.
We are thinking a lot about how we can support states and
local communities. I think the most important thing we are
building here is this kind of team of Federal program officers
who are going to be assigned to each State. And that is not
just to the Governor's office. That is about working with
communities, too. And so we might have to have two for Texas, I
hear it is a big place. But you know, that is the kind of thing
that we are working on. We want to partner with--you know, I
know there is some terrific private-sector networks that are
also coming on, and I think tapping into that will be very
important.
I would just say we would love to work with you on this
issue as you develop your legislation, as we think about this.
You are 100 percent right, we really need to be supporting
these local leaders who--and giving them the technical
assistance they need to participate.
Mrs. Fletcher. Well, thanks for that. Your answer
anticipated my next question, but I think so much of this
legislation emerged from the experience that we have had here
in Houston, where I live, where we have had a very successful
rollout of 5G, and have local leaders really committed to
making it accessible throughout our community.
But we have also learned a lot of lessons about sort of the
various permitting requirements, the various agencies involved,
the importance of coordinating. And so a lot of the idea for
the bill really came out of our experience here. And of course,
we would love to share that across the country, and really
address some of those issues on the front end.
It is my understanding, with maybe the minute I have left,
that a small portion of the eligible costs and activities for
the BEAD program can be used for pre-deployment and planning
costs, like technical assistance, and employee training, and
establishing capacity at eligible entities.
So in your opinion, would additional assistance like this
grant program that I have introduced for State and local
governments to hire and train employees, purchase software
upgrade capabilities, facilitate these upgrades at the local
level be helpful to ensure the effective use of the funds, as
well as some of the other programs you described at the
statewide level?
We have got about 30 seconds left, but----
Mr. Davidson. So I would just say something like what you
described would be enormously helpful, and we would want to
work with you on the details and dig into it.
But, you know, we are doing planning grants to states. That
is just the tip of the iceberg. A $5 million planning grant to
states is meaningful, but it doesn't reach all the communities
that need it. We would love to think with you about how we
could do that better, and take advantage of the resources that
are out there. It is critical to give the people the technical
assistance they need.
Mrs. Fletcher. Well, thank you so much for your
partnership. I very much look forward to working with you, and
thank you for your leadership of this hugely important process
for our entire country.
So with that, I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. McNerney. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Curtis, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This has been a great
hearing. I am appreciative of my fellow members and their
questions.
And Mr. Davidson, thank you. I think everybody is looking
forward to your service with optimism with what can be
accomplished. I would like to make three points, and then ask a
couple of questions. And these points come from the perspective
of being a former mayor in a city that did municipal broadband
that was actually unsuccessful.
And I would love to have a thoughtful conversation with my
colleagues about municipal broadband. Having been--gone through
that experience myself, I think I see certain things that not
everybody sees. It is frequently referred to as another
utility.
One of the big differences between broadband and power or
sewer and water is that the cities hold a monopoly on those
things. And let me tell you, I loved having a monopoly. It is a
great way, you can't fail. And, of course, municipal broadband
isn't that way.
It is also something that goes so quickly. For instance, we
installed our fiber network, and tried to sell it 9 years
later, and we were told it was worthless, because the
technology is outdated and it would have required another
massive investment from our city.
The second point I would like to make is this money is
fantastic, and it is going to do a lot of good things. But in
my district we see that money is not the only impediment, and
permitting is a large problem, as well. Ninety percent of some
of my district is owned by the Federal Government, and
permitting across these Federal lands is a huge problem.
The third point is that I am not sure we fully thought
through a one-size-fits-all answer for speed. And when we are
mandating speeds of 100 down, I--just for the fun of it, I am
here in my district office. I am on my cell phone now. But a
little earlier I tested the speeds in my district office, and
we were working on 18 megs down, and less than 2 megs up. Now,
that is a fifth of what we are requiring from providers.
And so, Mr. Davidson, you and I had the chance to talk
about this. I represent part of the Navajo Indian reservation.
We spoke yesterday after you and I talked. They asked me to
bring this up with you. They have parts of their reservation
that don't have running water or electricity. And it is--we are
just not going to get fiber in there. And they want to do fixed
wireless, but are prohibited from this.
And so I guess my question for you is am I missing
something? Are there technologies that could get this 100 megs
in, or have we missed something in the legislation, where we
are not taking into account certain geographic areas of our
country?
Mr. Davidson. First of all, thank you. Thank you for the
questions, and thank you for the conversation the other day. I
really appreciated your insights, and particularly the work
that you have done when you were a mayor in Provo. It was very
insightful, so thank you.
And by the way, I hope your puppy is doing well. I got a
chance to see that adorable 10-week-old. That is amazing. And
hopefully not chewing the cables anymore.
So this is an important question. And I do--you know, the
statute is clear, right, that what is contemplated is building
out--you know, if--when we are funding, we are going to be
funding things that meet these requirements for speed and
latency. And I--you know, our sense is that there was a strong
reason behind it, which is that we wanted to make sure that we
are investing in infrastructure that is going to stand the test
of time, so that we are not coming back here in 10 years and
then saying to Congress, ``Well, you gave us all this money,
but the networks are now too slow for what we need 5, 10 years
from now.'' So----
Mr. Curtis. I don't mean to jump in on top of you, but
you----
Mr. Davidson. Yes, please, please.
Mr. Curtis. We only have 5 minutes. And you and I can have
a longer conversation, in other words.
I worry that, like--remember flip phones?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Curtis. If we would have tried to future-proof flip
phones, we would have said, ``They have to open quicker,''
right? And there is just so much
[inaudible]. And I worry a little bit about that. And I
think, really----
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Curtis [continuing]. Mr. Davidson, I think what I would
ask of you in this hearing is that you would engage with us and
the Navajo Nation about what answers are out there for them,
and are there other grants that fit outside of this, if these
won't work, and maybe kind of take this as a special project.
Mr. Davidson. Well, I would welcome the chance to do that,
sir, and to engage with them particularly. And this--you know,
we are not taking a one-size-fits-all approach. I do think
there are other solutions, some of which may meet it, but we
need to learn from the examples you have for us. And so we
would be very open to doing that. So thank you.
Mr. Curtis. I appreciate that. By the way, they told me
yesterday they have 88 requests into your office, so I am
sure----
Mr. Davidson. Excellent.
Mr. Curtis [continuing]. There is lots to do there.
Just quickly in the last few seconds that we have,
permitting. I would just request of you to work with your other
Federal agencies. I know that you--you know, like, I am talking
BLM, and Forest Service, and all of these agencies. But we had
a case where a grant was given, and they couldn't get the
permit before the grant expired. And of course, that is a
terrible thing to have happen. So I just would hope we can work
with you on permitting, and getting some speeds there.
Mr. Davidson. I will just say, absolutely, we would welcome
that. We know that permitting is an issue. You gave that very
good example to me the other day, and it stuck with me, and we
would love to talk to you more about it and working with other
Federal agencies to streamline, dig once, all of those things.
Mr. Curtis. Good. I am sorry, we are out of time, Mr.
Chairman. I yield back. Thank you.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields. We are now moving on to
the members who have waived on, and I appreciate your patience
in waiting your turn. The first will be the gentleman from New
York, Mr. Tonko.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Chairman
McNerney, for the great professionalism and intellect that you
bring to the committee. We are going to miss that.
And I thank Chairman Doyle, Chairman Pallone, Ranking
Member Latta, and Ranking Member Rodgers for allowing me to
waive on to this subcommittee hearing today.
And of course, a huge thank you and congratulations to
Secretary Davidson for being here with us. I am so excited to
hear about all of the great work going on at NTIA.
I know we both agree that broadband access is essential in
the 21st century, and the pandemic has only highlighted how
many Americans are still not able to access this vital way to
communicate, to learn, conduct business, and to engage in the
democratic process. For years I have heard from my constituents
in the capital region of New York about their worries from lack
of access to telemedicine, to concerns about isolated seniors,
to small businesses unable to process electronic payments
online, to students and teachers unable to connect.
The major limitations that come from a lack of quality
internet access is one of my many reasons I wanted to join the
Energy and Commerce Committee and to work on broadband
legislation. Last year my Access Broadband Act was signed into
law, creating the Office of Connectivity and Growth, which now
tracks and coordinates Federal broadband investments. And the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act devoted a whopping 65
billion, as we all know, to expanding quality internet access.
We are off to a great start, and I am excited about the
progress we have made, but I am still hearing from
constituents, including those in Rensselaerville, where 16
percent of residents lack internet access, who are reminding us
that the work isn't done. I look forward to continue a
productive partnership with NTIA, and to make certain we get
this done, and we get it done right.
So Secretary Davidson, I was very pleased to see the first
access broadband report come out in December. Can you provide
an update for us on how the setup of the Office of Internet
Connectivity and Growth is proceeding?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you, Congressman, thank you for
being here, and thank you for your leadership, truly, on the
Access Broadband Act. Creating the OICG, as we call it, the
Office of Internet Connectivity and Growth, you know, really
set NTIA up for success in many ways, in terms of coordinating
Federal investments on broadband. Hugely important.
I will say the organization is wonderful, and I would say
that, actually, about a lot of parts of NTIA. But part of what
I have been really struck by is, just in arriving here, how
dedicated the team is. We have a very smart and experienced
group of people. We have been hiring more, and are going to be
hiring a lot more. That office is going to grow quite a bit.
But the team that is here is expert. They have invested in
relationships around the country that are going to be
important. They have created things like the Digital Equity
Leadership Network and the Broadband Leaders Network, and those
are hugely important things.
And I will say there is a spring in people's step around
here. The opportunity is historic. Everybody knows it. This is
going to be like rural electrification, or building the highway
system. We are excited to be part of it, and I would just say
the--thank you for your leadership in setting up that group.
They are doing very well.
Mr. Tonko. My pleasure. And what is the impact of the new
office on the implementation of the $48.2 billion piece
allocated to the NTIA for broadband investment programs in the
IIJ Act?
Mr. Davidson. They will be leading it. This office is the
structure we are going to be using to building out--to build
out all of this work. The grant programs are going to be
administered there. The Federal program offices are going to be
housed there. We are going to be taking advantage and
leveraging the work they have done, the expertise they have.
The Minority Community Network that is--that we are building,
it is all housed in this office, and that is going to be the
structure that we are growing.
There will be a lot of other parts of NTIA that help along
the way, because there is a lot of work to be done. But that is
going to be our set of leaders. And, like I said, I think
they--we know this is a once-in-a-generation--maybe once-in-a-
lifetime--opportunity for those who have been working in this
space. So it is a great office, and we are going to be--it is
going to grow quite a bit.
Mr. Tonko. And I am committed to continuing to support it,
and push for increased broadband access. What additional
resources would be helpful to your efforts at NTIA to get all
Americans connected to high-quality internet as urgently and
efficiently as possible?
Mr. Davidson. I think there is both resources and there is
different kinds of resources. I would say, first of all, you
know, the--even aside from the State grant program, the
existing grant programs we have, for example, around tribal
connectivity or broadband infrastructure, they have all been
oversubscribed. We get 5 times, 10--you know, much more people
asking for money than the funds we have to give.
It will be interesting to see how digital equity rolls out.
I think that, you know, it may be that we--that the market
shows us that there is a lot of appetite out there that we
can't even reach.
And then the last thing I will say is your partnership--and
I say that collectively to the subcommittee--is critical. Like,
this is a whole-of-government approach. We are going to need to
offer a lot of assistance to states and communities to be able
to--for them to participate. You folks are a key partner for us
in doing that.
Mr. Tonko. Well, thank you. I have a few other questions
that I will get to the committee to get to you, but I
appreciate your responses.
And Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now
recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Joyce----
Mr. Joyce. Thank you----
Mr. McNerney [continuing]. For 5 minutes.
Mr. Joyce [continuing]. Chair McNerney and Ranking Member
Latta, for allowing me to waive on to today's Communication and
Technology Subcommittee hearing.
And thank you, Administrator Davidson, for testifying.
Connectivity continues to be a serious issue in my district
and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as a whole. Nearly 800,000
Pennsylvanians go without fast, reliable broadband, including a
half a million of them, more than 500,000 of them, living in
rural communities throughout Pennsylvania. Now, more than ever,
we must work together to bridge that digital divide. This is
why it is so important that we steer funding to areas, areas
that are in most need of that digital--of bridging that digital
divide.
Mr. Davidson, we have heard a lot of concerns from our side
of the aisle about using these Federal funds to overbuild
broadband in areas of the United States that already have
access. But the only way to avoid this waste of taxpayer funds
is by using accurate broadband maps.
The law is clear that NTIA may not distribute the vast
majority of broadband money until the FCC's new broadband maps
are available. However, I am concerned that states might try to
sidestep the FCC's maps, and rely on their own inadequate data
in addition to the FCC maps, which could lead to duplication
with other Federal programs, if not done correctly.
What steps are you taking to ensure that states use the
FCC's broadband maps when making awards to sub-grantees?
Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for the question, and I will
say I, first of all, strongly--we strongly believe that the
maps are critical here to make sure--good maps are critical
here to make sure that we are following the purpose of the
statute, to serve the unserved first, and then follow the rest
of it.
We will be using the FCC maps. It is clear from the--you
know, we are going to follow the framework of the statute. The
FCC maps are going to be the source of information for how we
allocate funds, how states build out their plans. And we are
going to--like I say, we are just going to follow what the
statute says, follow the framework in the statute to do that.
And I think--you know, and to work with different states
and commonwealths, like the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to
build out their broadband offices and be able to follow what
the maps tell us.
Mr. Joyce. And thank you for addressing that, because the
accountability of following the FCC maps, I think, is so
important in rolling this out in an equitable fashion.
Several commenters for the BEAD program raised concerns
about how to practically implement ``Buy American'' provisions,
given the complexity of sourcing of broadband components. Mr.
Davidson, do you intend for NTIA to seek a waiver from the
Office of Management and Budget for this requirement to ensure
that broadband funding can actually be deployed in a timely
fashion?
Mr. Davidson. I don't know the answer. We are looking at
that--those issues very carefully.
I will say that it is quite clear, you know, that we have a
strong desire within the Administration, that I think all of us
do, there is a clear reason we had those Buy American
provisions, which is that we want the vast majority of this--
these moneys to be spent with American companies on American
workers. We want to promote the workforce, we want to create
jobs, we want to buildup our manufacturing center. So that is--
capability. So that is absolutely the goal here.
We also do know that there are real challenges in the
telecommunications sector. We are trying to understand those
better. We have--you know, we have gotten comments in our
outreach and our requests for comments on this topic, and we
are going to be looking at it. There has to be a high bar, and
we have to be very smart about and very tailored about any
waivers that we give.
But, you know, we appreciate the overall goal of this,
which is to make sure we are building the American economy
first. But we also do need to be able to do these deployments.
So we will be looking at it carefully.
Mr. Joyce. And I appreciate your understanding, because I
also am concerned that we need to keep that Buy American
clause.
But you stated earlier that we need fast, timely, and
accountable implementation of this, and I think that those
waivers need to be considered and discussed in advance. Do you
agree with that?
Mr. Davidson. I do agree with--that we need to be fast,
timely, and very careful here. Agreed. And like I said, there
will be a very high bar for any waivers.
Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to
waive on, and thank you for holding this hearing today.
Mr. McNerney. The gentleman yields. It is now my privilege
to introduce another member from the home of the Rams, Ms.
Barragan, for 5 minutes.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for that
recognition. We are still celebrating here, in Los Angeles, the
Super Bowl win. And thank you for the opportunity to join this
hearing today. I wanted to be on because the issue of broadband
is such a critical issue.
A broadband connection is fundamental to access essential
services, job applications, medical support, telehealth and
education, among others. And the infrastructure bill Democrats
fought for will make the transformational investment, as people
have mentioned today: $65 billion in broadband access,
affordability, and adoption to bridge the digital divide.
In Los Angeles County alone, where my congressional
district exists, over 365,000 houses remain unconnected.
Furthermore, the areas where more than 20 percent of households
lack broadband service are largely communities of color, where
both the household income is less than $50,000 per year.
And Administrator, it is great to hear you today talk about
affordability issues, as some of the other members have spoken
about. I want to ask about broadband for the homeless. So, Mr.
Administrator, in my district and across the Nation we need to
ensure that everyone, regardless of income, can participate in
our digital society. That includes the more than 580,000 people
experiencing homelessness in our country. Does the NTIA have
any plans to direct broadband infrastructure funds to people
without homes, or that reside in interim and permanent housing
sites?
Mr. Davidson. Thank you for that question, and I will say,
you know, we have been thinking quite a bit about how we can
use these programs, again, beyond access alone.
You know, we have the big State grant program that is
highly focused on access, or has major affordability elements
to it. We are administering these other programs that I think
are going to be extremely important in addressing the issues
that you have spoken about.
We know that, again, access alone is not enough. If there
is a wire, but a family can't or a person can't afford to get
online, that doesn't help. If they can afford to get online,
but they don't have a device, as you just indicated, then the
connection doesn't do them any good. If they have a device and
they don't know what to do when they get online, that is a
problem. So there are real issues around literacy and
education.
So we are thinking about all of that. And particularly, as
we think--as we are structuring this digital equity grant
program, I think there will be real opportunities for states
and communities to use that, and access those funds for the
kinds of things that you are talking about.
We also really believe that this is--you know, it is an
essential piece of work for people to--I mean, adoption and
being able to get online is essential to access to telehealth,
mental health resources. It is a way to reach a tough
population.
So I would just say we are committed to thinking about
these issues. You know, we have asked for comments, and we have
gotten some comments that touch on this. I don't have an answer
for you about the homeless population specifically, but we
would love to continue the conversation with you, get your--
understand your experiences with it, and work with your office
on it.
Ms. Barragan. Great. Thank you. Administrator Davidson, the
infrastructure law addresses the practice of digital redlining,
something one of my colleagues touched upon. The redlining is
where broadband providers choose not to deliver high-speed
internet services to certain parts of their service area,
usually low-income, minority areas.
The bill requires the FCC to develop rules that prohibit
digital discrimination. How will the NTIA coordinate with the
FCC to share data and information about providers engaged in
digital redlining?
Mr. Davidson. Well, as you rightly note, the FCC has the
lead here under the broadband infrastructure law to look at
this very issue. We are in conversation with them about a lot
of different aspects of the--of how we are going to implement
these programs, including this. We are going to work with them
as we move forward to make sure we get the benefit of their
thinking on this.
I would just say it is really critical that we can use the
State grant funding to connect these locations, the unserved,
the people who have been left out or been the subject of
redlining. Those folks, wherever they are, not just--you know,
in rural areas, in urban areas, in suburban areas, we will be
looking to serve them all, and to benefit from the--you know,
from what the FCC finds in their work.
Ms. Barragan. Right, and, you know, with respect to that--
just a quick followup in my last 10 seconds here--how will the
NTIA address funding to a provider that has been found to have
engaged in digital redlining?
Mr. Davidson. That is something we really need to
investigate. I don't have an answer for you today. I will say
it is a great question, and I will be interested in what the
FCC comes up with. We are working with them really closely,
sharing data, sharing information. This could easily be
something else that we share with them. So thank you for
raising it.
Ms. Barragan. Great.
Mr. Davidson. And I would be happy to get back to you on
that.
Ms. Barragan. Thank you, Mr. Administrator.
And with that, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. The gentlelady yields.
I would like to thank you, Administrator Davidson, for your
participation today. You are clearly committed, and you have
the enthusiasm and the capability. So we really look forward to
seeing the results of this investment.
And I want to say, as a matter of personal privilege, this
has been an honor to chair the committee tonight--or this
afternoon--and it is exactly what we should be doing in
Congress. We are working together. My colleague from Oregon
mentioned that. This is what it is supposed to be. We are
supposed to be working together. And every question today was
productive. I think we have got a lot of answers, and we are
going to look forward to continuing oversight.
I want to remind Members----
Mr. Latta. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McNerney [continuing]. That, pursuant to committee
rules, they have 10 business days to submit additional
questions for the record to be answered by the witness who has
appeared.
I ask the witness to respond promptly to any questions you
may receive.
At this time?
Mr. Latta. Mr. Chairman?
Mr. McNerney. Yes?
Mr. Latta. Hey, it is Bob Latta. Hey, I just want to thank
you very much for today's hearing on this. I thank the
administrator for being with us today. I also thank him for
reaching out to talk to the members prior to the hearing. I
think it is very, very productive.
I look forward to working with you.
And as always, for my good friend from California, it is
always great working with you. So we are going to miss you in
the future, but we still got you to the end of the year. So
thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you, Bob.
Administrator, do you have any final words?
Mr. Davidson. I would just say thank you. My first
oversight hearing. I am sure it will not be my last.
And I will say it is--I know it is a critical part of our
system. I am glad to be here today. I look forward to your--and
I have really appreciated the conversation. And we have got
some homework assignments here. I have got some questions I
know we need to followup on, but I have really appreciated the
thought.
And I would just say, I really mean it, we want to partner
with you all. This is a huge, historic opportunity, and we are
going to--it is going to require all of us working together to
get it done. So thank you.
Mr. McNerney. Thank you. At this time the committee is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:37 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Anna Eshoo
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]