[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



               OVERSIGHT AND REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NA- 
                 TIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMA- 
                 TION ADMINISTRATION

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMUNICATIONS AND  
                               TECHNOLOGY 

                                 OF THE

                        COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 
                               COMMERCE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                              __________

                             MAY 23, 2023
                              __________

                          Serial No. 118-38 
                          
 
 
 
 
              [GRAPHIC(S) 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 

56-073 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2024 
















                        
                    COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE

                   CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington
                                  Chair
MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas             FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio                   Ranking Member
BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky               ANNA G. ESHOO, California
H. MORGAN GRIFFITH, Virginia          DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida             JAN SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
BILL JOHNSON, Ohio                    DORIS O. MATSUI, California
LARRY BUCSHON, Indiana                KATHY CASTOR, Florida
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina        JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
TIM WALBERG, Michigan                 PAUL TONKO, New York
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia     YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina           TONY CARDENAS, California
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama               RAUL RUIZ, California
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida                 SCOTT H. PETERS, California
JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                  DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
DEBBBIE LESKO, Arizona                MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
GREG PENCE, Indiana                   ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
DAN CRENSHAW, Texas                   ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania              NANETTE DIAZ BARRAGAN, California
KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota, Vice   LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
  Chair                               DARREN SOTO, Florida
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas            ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia                KIM SCHRIER, Washington
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                  LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                   LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee
MARIANNETTE MILLER-MEEKS, Iowa
KAT CAMMACK, Florida
JAY OBERNOLTE, California
                                 ------                                

                           Professional Staff

                      NATE HODSON, Staff Director
                   SARAH BURKE, Deputy Staff Director
               TIFFANY GUARASCIO, Minority Staff Director 
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
             Subcommittee on Communications and Technology

                         ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
                                 Chairman
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida            DORIS O. MATSUI, California
TIM WALBERG, Michigan                  Ranking Member
EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, Georgia,   YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
  Vice Chair                         MARC A. VEASEY, Texas
NEAL P. DUNN, Florida                DARREN SOTO, Florida
JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                 ANNA G. ESHOO, California
JOHN JOYCE, Pennsylvania             TONY CARDENAS, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 DEBBIE DINGELL, Michigan
RUSS FULCHER, Idaho                  ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
AUGUST PFLUGER, Texas                ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
DIANA HARSHBARGER, Tennessee         FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey (ex 
KAT CAMMACK, Florida                   officio)
JAY OBERNOLTE, California
CATHY McMORRIS RODGERS, Washington 
  (ex officio) 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
                             C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hon. Robert E. Latta, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of Ohio, opening statement.....................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     4
Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the State 
  of California, opening statement...............................    12
    Prepared statement...........................................    14
Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress from 
  the State of Washington, opening statement.....................    16
    Prepared statement...........................................    18
Hon. Frank Pallone, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of New Jersey, opening statement.........................    22
    Prepared statement...........................................    24

                                Witness

Alan Davidson, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Communications 
  and Information, and Administrator, National Telecommunications 
  and Information Administration, Department of Commerce.........    26
    Prepared statement...........................................    29
    Answers to submitted questions...............................    96

                            Legislation \1\

H.R. 1677, the Simplifying Management, Access, Reallocation, and 
  Transfer of Spectrum Act
H.R. 1784, the Next Generation 9-1-1 Act of 2023
H.R. ___, the National Telecommunication and Information 
  Administration Reauthorization Act of 2023
H.R. ___, the Commerce Spectrum Coordination Act of 2023
H.R. ___, the Novel, Advanced Spectrum and Communications 
  Technology Networks Promotion Act
H.R. ___, the Public Safety Communications Act
H.R. ___, the NTIA Consolidated Reporting Act
H.R. ___, the Timely Evaluation of Acquisitions, Mergers, or 
  Transactions with External Lawful Entities to Clear Owners and 
  Management Act
H.R. ___, To express the sense of Congress with respect to WHOIS 
  information accessibility, and for other purposes.
H.R. ___, the Digital Economy Cybersecurity Advisory Act of 2023
H.R. ___, the Proper Leadership to Align Networks for Broadband 
  Act
H.R. ___, the Spectrum Relocation Enhancement Act
H.R. ___, the Spectrum Coexistence Act
H.R. ___, the Artificial Intelligence Accountability Act
H.R. ___, the Diaspora Link Act
H.R. ___, the FirstNet Reauthorization Act
H.R. ___, To direct the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 
  Communications and Information to publish data from the 
  Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, and for other 
  purposes.
H.R. ___, the Improving Broadband Mapping Act

----------

\1\ The legislation has been retained in committee files and is 
available at https://docs.house.gov/Committee/Calendar/
ByEvent.aspx?EventID=116004.

                           Submitted Material

Inclusion of the following was approved by unanimous consent.
List of documents submitted for the record.......................    84
Letter of May 10, 2023, from Mr. Dunn, et al., to Jessica 
  Rosenworcel, Chairwoman, Federal Communications Commission.....    85
Letter of May 19, 2023, from Donna M. Black, President and Board 
  Chair, International Association of Fire Chiefs, to Mrs. 
  Rodgers and Mr. Pallone........................................    88
Letter of May 23, 2023, from Harriet Rennie-Brown, Executive 
  Director, National Association of State 911 Administrators, to 
  Mr. Latta, et al...............................................    89
Letter of September 30, 2022, from Senator Rodger F. Wicker and 
  Mrs. Rodgers to Mr. Davidson...................................    91
Letter of May 23, 2023, from former Federal Communications 
  Commission leaders to Senator Maria Cantwell, et al............    93
Prepared statement of Ms. Eshoo, May 23, 2023....................    95

 
                  OVERSIGHT AND REAUTHORIZATION OF THE  
                   NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND IN- 
                   FORMATION ADMINISTRATION

                              ----------                              

                         TUESDAY, MAY 23, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
     Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,
                          Committee on Energy and Commerce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in 
the John D. Dingell Room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, 
Hon. Robert E. Latta (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Members present: Representatives Latta, Bilirakis, Walberg, 
Carter, Dunn, Curtis, Joyce, Weber, Allen, Balderson, Fulcher, 
Pfluger, Harshbarger, Cammack, Rodgers (ex officio), Matsui 
(subcommittee ranking member), Clarke, Veasey, Soto, Eshoo, 
Cardenas, Craig, Fletcher, Dingell, Kuster, Kelly, and Pallone 
(ex officio).
    Also present: Representative Johnson.
    Staff present: Sarah Burke, Deputy Staff Director; Slate 
Herman, Counsel, Communications and Technology; Nate Hodson, 
Staff Director, Tara Hupman, Chief Counsel; Noah Jackson, 
Clerk, Communications and Technology; Sean Kelly, Press 
Secretary; Peter Kielty, General Counsel; Emily King, Member 
Services Director; Giulia Leganski, Professional Staff Member, 
Communications and Technology; John Lin, Senior Counsel, 
Communications and Technology; Kate O'Connor, Chief Counsel, 
Communications and Technology; Michael Taggert, Policy 
Director; Evan Viau, Professional Staff Member, Communications 
and Technology; Hannah Anton, Minority Policy Analyst; Jennifer 
Epperson, Minority Chief Counsel, Communications and 
Technology; Waverly Gordon, Minority Deputy Staff Director and 
General Counsel; Tiffany Guarascio, Minority Staff Director; 
Dan Miller, Minority Professional Staff Member; Caroline 
Rinker, Minority Press Assistant; Michael Scurato, Minority FCC 
Detailee; Andrew Souvall, Minority Director of Communications, 
Outreach, and Member Services; and Johanna Thomas, Minority 
Counsel.
    Mr. Latta. Well, good morning. The subcommittee will come 
to order, and the Chair recognizes himself for an opening 
statement.

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

    Good morning and welcome back before this subcommittee, 
Assistant Secretary Davidson. Good to see you again.
    Today's hearing is to provide oversight of the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration, or NTIA, and 
discuss reauthorization of the agency. Since 1993, when NTIA 
was last authorized, the communication landscape has changed 
drastically. NTIA has important statutory obligations to manage 
Federal use spectrum, coordinate other internet and 
communications functions between the executive branch, and 
support public safety communication initiatives.
    NTIA's budget has increased substantially as their duties 
have grown. Federal and non-Federal use spectrum has 
intensified with the explosion of mobile phones and improved 
technologies, and cybersecurity challenges have dramatically 
increased.
    It is Congress' role, and especially this subcommittee's 
role, to oversee and authorize the agency's funding and 
priorities to ensure communications policies that benefit 
Americans and drive our economy. Since our last oversight 
hearing, NTIA has submitted its 2024 budget request for 117.3 
million, nearly double its current authorization. With this new 
budget request and several other new initiatives being 
implemented by NTIA, this hearing will serve as the first step 
in a much-needed oversight and transparency into the agency.
    For example, NTIA has formalized existing spectrum 
coordination procedures with the FCC by updating their 
memorandum of understanding, which members of this committee 
had advocated for. NTI has also begun implementing several 
broadband subsidy programs. Today's oversight hearing is the 
first with NTI since it published its Notice of Funding 
Opportunity, or NOFO, for BEAD Program. These NOFOs include the 
rules of the road for how these programs would be administered. 
Getting these rules right is crucial--including technology 
neutrality--and will ultimately determine whether all Americans 
are connected or if they will continue to be left on the wrong 
side of the digital divide.
    Today we have 18 pieces of draft legislation to discuss 
during today's hearing to jumpstart discussion and NTIA's 
evolving mission and seek feedback from the agency. I am 
pleased to be leading the NTIA Reauthorization Act of 2023 to 
begin a bipartisan discussion on how Congress can ensure NTIA 
has the statutory tools it needs to fulfill its mission.
    The NTIA Reauthorization Act would elevate the Assistant 
Secretary to an Undersecretary level, modernize the agency's 
policies and missions, and authorize its funding to match 
current funding levels. Other discussion drafts on today's 
hearing would elevate NTIA's role in coordinating interagency 
broadband funding and permitting processes, support NTIA's 
Federal spectrum management submission, and reflect NTIA's 
expertise as a Federal coordinator and convenor by granting 
authority to coordinate public safety and cybersecurity policy 
developments and representation.
    With the billions of dollars available for broadband 
deployment being managed by a variety of Federal agencies, 
coordination will be a key to ensuring that money isn't wasted. 
As the lead agency for broadband, NTIA should lead the 
development of a national broadband strategy.
    Other components of the reauthorization effort would 
require NTIA to lead efforts on developing common models, 
methodologies and inputs to inform spectrum management 
decisions, ensure NTIA benefits from the expertise of the 
commercial spectrum users, and make reforms of Federal spectrum 
relocation processes.
    I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
for leading on the initiatives before us. The role of NTIA has 
drastically changed since it was last authorized. And again, I 
look forward to working with the agency and the affected 
stakeholders to update its authorizing statute.
    Finally, I am pleased that we are beginning oversight 
efforts this Congress, which include ensuring that NTIA is 
being good stewards of tax dollars allocated for broadband 
expension--expansion and funds are going toward unserved and 
underserved communities. And I really emphasize truly the 
unserved and underserved. These oversight efforts would be the 
crucial link to help close the digital divide and make sure all 
Americans are connected with highspeed broadband internet.
    Before I do yield back, I want to note for the subcommittee 
to be--effectively conduct its oversight, we do need your 
testimony within 48 hours, the requirement, before we move 
forward. I look forward to the discussion.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Latta follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    
    Mr. Latta. And at this time, I yield to the ranking member 
of the subcommittee, the gentlelady from the 7th District of 
California, for 5 minutes of an opening statement.

        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DORIS O. MATSUI, A REP- 
         RESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALI- 
         FORNIA 

    Ms. Matsui. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This hearing 
comes at an important time for NTIA and the future of 
connectivity. The decisions we make over the coming months will 
have a lasting impact both domestically and abroad. I 
appreciate NTI Administrator Davidson for coming here to 
discuss them with this subcommittee.
    NTIA's responsible by law for advising the President on 
telecommunications and information policy issues. But 
technology is no longer its own issue. It underpins every 
sector of the economy and informs everything we do. NTIA's 
statutory role, speaking on behalf of the Federal Government on 
telecommunications and information issues, has never been more 
important. As I have said many times, it is imperative that the 
entire executive branch acknowledge and support that 
responsibility.
    Unfortunately, we have all seen what happens when these 
statutory roles break down. We are having this hearing more 
than 2 months into a protracted lapse in FCC's auction 
authority. It is hard to overstate the economic and national 
security implications of that lapse. Ensuring the Federal 
Government speaks with one voice on spectrum issues is 
foundational to America's continued global leadership. Look no 
further than the upcoming CTEL and World Radio Conferences.
    There is vital work to encourage global adoption of 
unlicensed spectrum in the 6 gigahertz band and harmonizing the 
3.3 to 3.4 gigahertz bands for mobile telecommunications. And 
looking beyond that, we all know NTIA will be the tip of the 
spear for keeping our spectrum pipeline strong. That means 
ensuring the Federal Government is a partner, not an obstacle, 
in making new spectrum available for commercial use.
    I have two bills on the agenda today that I am confident 
will help. First is my Spectrum Relocation Enhancement Act. 
This bill would make needed updates to the Spectrum Relocation 
Fund. This fund compensates Federal agencies to clear spectrum 
for commercial use. But for many agencies, the costs outweigh 
the benefits. My bill would make needed updates to better 
incentivize agencies to clear spectrum by allowing them to 
upgrade their technology consistent with their operational 
needs.
    My other bill, the Spectrum Coexistence Act, would require 
NTIA to conduct a review of Federal receiver technology to 
support more intensive use of limited spectrum.
    The FCC recently released a set of receiver principles for 
commercial equipment, and I think it is important we do the 
same for Federal tech. As new spectrum gets harder and harder 
to find, updating the SRF and scrutinizing Federal technology 
will help ensure that the Federal Government is playing its 
part.
    I am also excited to have an opportunity to hear from 
Administrator Davidson on the status of BEAD implementation. 
Between the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the CHIPS and 
Science Act, NTIA will be implementing several programs with 
massive potential. With the June deadline for State BEAD 
funding allocations coming up, it is vital that we keep moving 
forward despite misguided calls for delay.
    I know unserved constituents in my district are desperate 
for this funding to get shovels into the ground and 
connectivity to their homes. This bipartisan program can and 
should be a landmark achievement for all of us on this 
subcommittee, and I look forward to supporting its timely 
rollout.
    NTIA is also in the process of implementing the funding I 
helped secure in the CHIPS and Science Act to support the 
maturation of the open RAN market. NTI recently released the 
first-phase NOFO to advance testing and evaluation of open and 
interoperable networks. We are expecting the first tranche of 
funding in August, and I look forward to seeing the funding 
being applied quickly.
    So clearly there is much to discuss today. I appreciate 
Administrator Davidson appearing before us.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Matsui follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    Ms. Matsui. And with that, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much. The gentlelady yields 
back the balance of her time. And at this time, the Chair 
recognizes the gentlelady from Washington, the Chair of the 
full committee, for 5 minutes for an opening statement.

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

    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to start with welcoming the fire chiefs from 
Washington State, Brian Schaeffer, fire chief for Spokane--City 
of Spokane. But just appreciate all you do, and we are working 
on getting the Next Gen 911 approved this Congress. Just know 
this committee is committed to that, Republicans and Democrats.
    And also want to welcome Administrator Davidson to the 
committee. Appreciate you being here today. You are the 
Administrator for the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration, NTIA, which is the principal 
advisor to the President on issues ranging from managing 
Federal spectrum use to working on domestic and international 
telecom policies, advanced communications research, and 
strengthening public safety communications. It is responsible 
for developing a national spectrum strategy, seeking input on 
AI, and privacy policy, cybersecurity issues, and more 
recently, running the largest broadband grant program in our 
Nation's history.
    IIJA created the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment, 
or BEAD Program, the Middle Mile Grant Program, two digital 
equity grant programs, and it gave additional money to the 
Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program. Altogether this funding 
gave NTIA an additional $48.2 billion to administer on behalf 
of the American taxpayers. These initiatives highlight just how 
much NTIA's duties have changed since it was last authorized 
in--or reauthorized in 1993, and the need for Congress to 
reauthorize agencies whose authorization has lapsed.
    Reauthorizing agencies in the Energy and Commerce 
Committee's jurisdiction is a top priority. It is good 
governance for Congress to consistently evaluate the duties and 
authorities of agencies within our purview. NTIA has not been 
reauthorized in 30 years, and I am pleased that we are making 
it a bipartisan priority in this subcommittee to change that. 
The discussion drafts we are considering at today's hearing 
would modernize NTIA's authorities to come in line with their 
21st Century responsibilities.
    Today's hearing is just as much about oversight as it is 
about reauthorization. Millions of Americans still lack access 
to broadband services, despite our Federal Government spending 
tens of billions of dollars on broadband-related programs over 
the years. The BEAD Program is poised to allocate over $42 
billion to every corner of the United States. Americans deserve 
to know that those resources are being invested effectively and 
aren't being wasted.
    We are still waiting to hear about the accuracy of the 
newest version of the FCC's broadband data maps, and NTIA is 
supposed to ensure those resources get to the communities that 
need them most with those maps. We are concerned by reports 
that the initial version of the maps still miss entire 
communities and inaccurately stating coverage in many areas. 
NTIA needs to make sure that those concerns are resolved in the 
new map before allocating money to States.
    NTIA also has responsibility to remain technology neutral 
as investments are made per congressional intent. We need to 
make sure that these funds meet each community's needs as the 
geography and use case allows. I was disappointed to hear that 
certain restrictions in NTIA's Notice of Funding Opportunity 
would lead to funds being primarily spent laying extensive 
fiber, even in areas where alternatives like fixed wireless or 
satellite solutions would be better options. While fiberoptic 
infrastructure may be the best option in some communities, 
especially higher-density areas, we cannot forget about the 
importance of other solutions which can offer connectivity in 
areas unreachable by fiber.
    I was pleased that the notice asked entities applying for 
BEAD funding to streamline their permitting processes. 
Permitting reform is a top priority for this committee. It is 
clear that the current permitting regime in the United States, 
both at the Federal and local level, is not equipped to handle 
the quantity of projects and resources that the BEAD Program 
promises.
    This committee is leading efforts to reform broadband 
permitting process in the United States to ensure quicker 
access to broadband, and I look forward to working with you and 
NTIA to streamline broadband permitting to ensure resources 
aren't wasted and communications infrastructure is deployed 
effectively. If we fail to take action now, these projects may 
not be completed within the deadline and could even stop 
receiving funds before completion.
    I look forward to discussing several legislative solutions 
today to help ensure NTIA is carrying out its mission of 
strengthening American communications leadership and closing 
the digital divide.
    Thank you, Administrator Davidson, for being here. I look 
forward to our discussion.
    [The prepared statement of Mrs. Rodgers follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    Mrs. Rodgers. And I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much. The gentlelady yields 
back, and the Chair now recognizes the ranking member of the 
full committee, the gentleman from New Jersey, for 5 minutes 
for an opening statement.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK PALLONE, Jr., A REP- 
       RESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JER- 
       SEY

    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Today the committee is conducting important oversight of 
the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 
or NTIA. This agency may not receive as much attention as 
others, but NTIA has done tremendous work in the last year to 
help connect all Americans to high-speed, reliable, and 
affordable broadband. And thanks to the historic broadband 
investments we included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, 
their efforts have not--only have just begun.
    NTIA will continue to play a crucial role in the years to 
come to achieve this objective while also helping advance other 
cutting-edge technologies in a safe and secure manner. Their 
role is crucial because broadband is no longer 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, it is estimated that 24 million Americans 
are still without home broadband internet access. For years we 
have discussed ways to bridge the digital divide so that all 
Americans can take part in today's connected society. 
Fortunately, last Congress we delivered for the American people 
with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which includes a $42.45 
billion investment in broadband buildout, and this investment 
will help us ensure every American has access to reliable 
highspeed internet.
    But we know that physical infrastructure alone will not 
close the digital divide, and that is why we also included the 
Digital Equity Act that is part of the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law. This program will address barriers to 
broadband adoption faced by specific communities like seniors 
and veterans who may lack some of the skills needed to fully 
participate in the digital economy.
    So I look forward to getting an update from NTIA today on 
all of these important broadband programs, including those we 
enacted on a bipartisan basis in the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act in 2021.
    Congress has also tasked NTIA with other important 
responsibilities. These include managing Federal spectrum 
users, coordinating with the FCC to ensure that our airways are 
effectively managed, and advising the President on advanced 
technologies. And here we are 2 months after the expiration of 
the FCC's spectrum auction authority, and I want to once again 
emphasize the importance of reauthorizing this important 
program. I am concerned that this lapse will cause us to lose 
footing on the international stage.
    Congress designated NTIA as the manager of Federal 
spectrum, and we must put the disputes of the past behind us so 
government can speak with one unified voice in spectrum 
management decisions. And that is why I am also pleased we are 
considering a discussion draft from Chairman Latta that will 
reauthorize NTIA and elevate its leadership in the Department 
of Commerce. Making these changes will better reflect NTIA's 
importance to the President and the American people.
    Given NTIA's enormous responsibilities, I hope my 
Republican colleagues not only reauthorize the agency but also 
ensure that NTIA is fully funded for the coming year. The 
Republican's Default on America Act threatens to undermine 
NTIA's ability to connect communities that have been left 
behind for far too long.
    We will also be considering several Democratic-led bills, 
including legislation that will require NTIA to provide 
critical data on diversity and equity objectives with respect 
to broadband programs as well as closing the digital divide, 
and legislation to direct NTIA to develop measures that allow 
Federal spectrum users to operate more efficiently and enhance 
Federal spectrum relocation efforts. And we will also discuss 
legislation that directs NTIA to assess both the degree to 
which artificial intelligence systems are accountable to 
consumers and the value of developing a transatlantic submarine 
fiber cable connecting the United States, the U.S. Virgin 
Islands, and countries in West Africa.
    And finally, NTIA plays an important role in public safety 
communications. From managing Next Generation 911 grants to its 
oversight of FirstNet and its important first responder work at 
the Institute for Telecommunication Sciences, NTIA is at the 
forefront of ensuring that the public and law enforcement 
agencies have a modern and reliable communications network.
    So, there is obviously a lot for us to discuss as we 
continue our efforts to connect America. And I welcome 
Administrator Davidson back to the committee.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pallone follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    Mr. Pallone. And with that, Chairman Latta, I yield back 
the balance of my time.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and we 
have now concluded with Members' opening statements.
    The Chair reminds Members that, pursuant to committee 
rules, all Members' opening statements will be made part of the 
record.
    We would also like to thank our witness for being with us 
today before the subcommittee. Our witness will have 5 minutes 
to provide an opening statement, which will be followed by a 
round of questioning from our members. And our witness for 
today is the Honorable Alan Davidson, the Assistant Secretary 
of Commerce for Communications and Information, and 
Administrator of the National Telecommunications and 
Information Administration. Can you get that all on a card?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Latta. I would like to----
    Mr. Davidson. Believe it or not, we do. I can show you 
later.
    Mr. Latta. Very small print.
    I would like to note for our witness that the timer light 
will turn yellow when you have 1 minute remaining, and it will 
turn red when your time has expired.
    And so at this time, Mr. Davidson, you are recognized for 5 
minutes.

STATEMENT OF ALAN DAVIDSON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR 
  COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION, AND ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL 
  TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT 
  OF COMMERCE

    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you, Chairman Latta and Ranking 
Member Matsui.
    Members of the subcommittee, good morning and thank you for 
the chance to speak with you today.
    By law, NTIA serves as the President's advisor on 
telecommunications and information policy, and we are serving 
in that role at a historic moment. When I last appeared before 
this subcommittee, I had just taken the oath of office, the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law had recently taken effect, and 
much work lay ahead. Just over a year later, I am proud to 
report on the progress that we have made toward the bipartisan 
initiatives that Congress has tasked to NTIA.
    I will start with our work to bridge the digital divide. 
Eight weeks ago, I joined Secretary Raimondo in visiting the 
small town of Hickory in North--rural North Carolina. There we 
met with residents who were struggling with little or no high-
speed internet service.
    We met a farmer who told us how he can't take orders online 
and relies on word of mouth to expand his business without 
internet access. We met a Boy Scout who couldn't earn merit 
badges during the pandemic and couldn't complete his homework 
either. We met a new mom who struggles to run her Etsy business 
at home. And we spoke with a librarian who told us how so many 
people in this community were forced to rely on the library's 
Wi-Fi as their main connection to the internet.
    Stories like these are not new, and many of you know them. 
We have been talking about the digital divide in this country 
for over 20 years. But now, thanks to the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law and other funding programs, we finally have 
the resources to do something serious about it.
    I am proud of our accomplishments to date on this Internet 
for All initiative. NTIA has awarded over $2.6 billion in 
broadband grants, including nearly 1.8 billion to improve 
connectivity on Tribal lands. Every State and territory has 
applied to participate in both our $42 billion State grant 
program and our digital equity program. A key goal this year is 
supporting States and territories as they submit plans for 
their grant programs. We now have Federal program officers 
providing on-the-ground assistance for every State and 
territory.
    As we bridge the digital divide at home, we are likewise 
determined to maintain our leadership in advanced wireless 
technology globally. NTIA is developing a new national spectrum 
strategy to build a pipeline that will meet the needs of both 
commercial and Federal users for years to come. We want to 
identify 1500 megahertz of spectrum to study for future 
repurposing, an ambitious but achievable goal.
    We also must find ways to allow for more intensive use of 
this scarce resource. We must do so in a coordinated fashion, 
and we must account for the future needs of stakeholders and 
ensure that new uses are balanced with Federal operations and 
do not compromise public safety.
    And just while mentioning public safety, I just want to 
acknowledge the representatives of our Nation's--some of our 
Nation's first responders who are here with us today, fire 
chiefs from across the country. And I will just say I am 
intensely proud of the work that NTIA is doing to support first 
responders and to support FirstNet in its work to make sure 
that first responders always have the connections that they 
need in an emergency.
    With all our efforts to bring more people online, we also 
need to work on building a better internet. One pressing issue 
is the advancement of artificial intelligence systems. 
Responsible AI innovation will bring enormous benefits, but 
only if we address the real risks and harms that it poses. That 
is why NTIA is seeking public feedback on what policies can 
support the development of AI audits and assessments to create 
earned trust in AI.
    Online privacy is another area where Americans need greater 
protection. Where you live in America should not dictate what 
kind of privacy protections you have. The administration has 
called for a comprehensive Federal privacy law, one with clear 
limits on how companies can collect and use highly personal 
data. Right now, NTIA is drafting recommendations to address 
the outsized impacts that privacy and security online can have 
on poor and marginalized communities.
    Finally, I've made it a priority to build an organization 
to meet this historic moment. I welcome today's conversation 
about modernizing NTIA's existing authority. I appreciate your 
leadership in ensuring that NTIA's statutory authority and 
resources are sufficient to do the important work that Congress 
has entrusted to us.
    In closing, NTIA has an ambitious agenda to bring the 
internet to everyone, to support U.S. leadership in wireless 
innovation, to promote a better internet, and much more that 
I've detailed in my written statement. Thank you for inviting 
me to appear today. I look forward to working with this 
subcommittee to execute our important missions, and I welcome 
your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Davidson follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you very much for your testimony 
today.
    And that will conclude the--that portion of our 
subcommittee hearing this morning. We now begin questions, and 
I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Assistant Secretary, NTIA's mission has evolved 
significantly since it was last reauthorized in 1993. Managing 
spectrum has become more important and more complex. The 
internet has become a component of our everyday lives, and as a 
result, the demand for broadband access has skyrocketed. That 
is why I am leading the NTIA Reauthorization Act of 2023.
    What are the two top challenges you face as the NTIA 
Assistant Sectary?
    Mr. Davidson. Top two challenges? Yes. Well, first of all, 
thank you for that introduction. And I would just say, as you 
have outlined, we have an ambitious mission and across the 
board from our historic role on broadband deployment, our work 
on spectrum, our work on internet policy issues.
    I would say generally the biggest issues that we have are 
really about resources and continuing to make sure that we are, 
you know, where we need to be to meet this ambitious goal and 
that we are--and I think we are doing well right now with what 
we have. And the second thing is the need for partnership: 
partnership with States to implement the broadband programs, 
partnership with other agencies to make sure that we are 
implementing our spectrum work well.
    So those are some of the big things I am focused on, and 
especially making sure that we are building an organization 
that can meet the challenge that Congress has given us.
    Mr. Latta. Well, it is our understanding that the FCC will 
release its updated broadband maps in the next week, and that 
this is the version of the maps you intend to use for making 
allocations to States participating in the BEAD Program. The 
last version of the map was a vast improvement over the last 
set of maps but still had significant inaccuracies. How 
confident are you that these maps will be accurate enough to 
making the State allocations?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you, it is an important and 
excellent question. As you know, good maps are critical if we 
are going to make sure that we are spending this money well. If 
we are going to meet our mission of connecting everybody, we 
need to be spending the money in the right places. And as we 
know, the maps in the past that have been used have not been--
have been poor.
    We think that these maps--the map that the FCC is working 
on now is substantially improved. Much more accurate, much more 
granular map than we have ever had before. We have been in the 
middle of a long challenge process where States have been able 
to come to the FCC and ask for updates to the map, and we have 
been pushing and working closely with our colleagues at the FCC 
To make sure those challenges are adjudicated.
    So it is important that we move wisely in how we spend our 
funds but also with a sense of urgency because we know that 
every week we wait is another week that people are not getting 
connected. So we think that the map that will come out--the 
FCC's map that will come out this June will be a map that we'll 
be able to use for our allocations, as we have said.
    Mr. Latta. And I am concerned that the Notice of Funding 
Opportunity for the BEAD Program is a wish list of items that 
conflict with the statute or it will increase the cost of the 
deployment. This seems contrary to your previous testimony 
before this subcommittee that you acknowledge that a one-size-
fits-all approach won't work, and yet the NOFO priorities 
certain--prioritizes certain technologies and as a result you 
might be picking those winners and losers. These requirements 
could undermine the goal of connecting all Americans.
    Why did NTIA include these items?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, we do believe that this is--that there 
is going to be a need to use a broad range of technologies in 
the deployment of these programs, and our expectation is that 
the only way we are going to make sure that everybody is 
connected is if--if there are a broad range of technologies 
used: fiber, fixed wireless, satellite technologies.
    And we believe that the--our notice allows States to make 
their choice about how they're going to--what that mix will 
look like. Some States will have a heavy preference perhaps for 
fiber. Other States will choose to use much more of a mix. And 
we believe, and I fully expect, that there will be a broad 
range of technologies used and implemented under the program.
    Mr. Latta. Well, you know, I am also concerned about the 
deployment timeline that is required for the BEAD Program, and 
I understand from--providers have 4 years to complete projects 
once they receive their grant, but I am also concerned that 4 
years will not be enough given the permitting barriers that 
still exist, labor shortages, and supply chain issues and 
delays that we have talked about. How realistic is the 4-year 
buildout timeframe given these constraints, and will NTIA be 
willing to issue waivers to those providers who are delayed 
because of factors beyond their control? And I've got about 10 
seconds left.
    Mr. Davidson. So we are keenly watching this. Super 
important question. We are trying to find that right balance: 
urgency and making sure we can--that we are pragmatic. We will 
be pushing to get shovels in the ground and people connected as 
fast as possible, and so we are going to keep pushing providers 
to hit those goals because we need--know communities need to be 
connected. We'll be watching to see if there are problems, but 
our--we are hopeful that people will be able to meet that mark. 
Four years is a fair amount of time to do the implementation.
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you. My time has expired. At this 
time, I am going to recognize the gentlelady from California, 
the ranking member of the subcommittee, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Matsui. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    To stay ahead of the rest of the world in wireless 
communications, we must have a reliable spectrum pipeline. My 
Spectrum Relocation Enhancement Act would make needed updates 
to the SRF that will better incentivize Federal agencies to 
clear spectrum for commercial use.
    Administrator Davidson, briefly, do you think allowing 
agencies to replace their technology beyond just a comparable 
capability would help encourage Federal agencies to make 
spectrum available for commercial use?
    Mr. Davidson. It absolutely would. And thank you for your 
leadership in this area and with the Wireless Caucus and in 
this space. You're--you said it exactly right. We need to have 
a steady pipeline of spectrum coming in to meet the needs of 
the private sector if we are going to--and the public sector if 
we are going to have--continue to be the leaders in the world 
in wireless innovation. We are committed to that goal. And what 
you've just said would make a huge difference to give--to align 
incentives, to give agencies greater incentive to find ways to 
make spectrum available.
    Ms. Matsui. OK, thank you. The FCC recently adopted a set 
of principles to promote improved receiver performance to 
maximize spectrum access and promote coexistence. While this is 
a positive step, I think it is imperative that the Federal 
Government keep pace.
    Administrator Davidson, do you believe receiver guidance 
for Federal systems can play a role in promoting better 
wireless coexistence?
    Mr. Davidson. Right. Well, I will just say, you know, 
receiver standards are incredibly important for spectrum 
management. We have seen that in some of the big recent debates 
about key areas of spectrum usage.
    Ms. Matsui. Right.
    Mr. Davidson. So I will just say that we are doing a lot of 
work on receiver performance. The FCC is doing a lot of work in 
that area. And I would say further attention would be terrific. 
Look forward to working with you on your efforts for that.
    Ms. Matsui. OK. Well, thank you very much. I look forward 
to that also.
    I was an original cosponsor of the USA Telecommunications 
Act and worked to include it in the CHIPS and Science Act last 
year. NTIA recently issued its NOFO for the $1.5 billion 
Wireless Innovation Fund, and I am excited to see this program 
in action developing the open RAN market.
    Administrator Davidson, in addition to better supply chain 
durability and network flexibility, what benefits do you see 
for the U.S. with robust open RAN markets?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, this is a really important area 
because we need to have secure, trusted, resilient, wireless 
supply chain. And right now, there are only a handful, really. 
of major providers for wireless equipment, and not all of them 
are trusted. Some of them are from our competitors in China, 
where we have real security concerns.
    Ms. Matsui. Sure.
    Mr. Davidson. So this effort through--to promote open RAN 
through our wireless innovation fund is critical because what 
we'll be able to do is catalyze the industry for openness, 
create greater innovation in the wireless industry, promote 
more security, promote a great competitor--great competitors 
out there and more competitors out there that are trusted.
    Ms. Matsui. Well, how will supporting better testing and 
evaluation for open RAN markets create opportunities for 
smaller companies to enter the market and compete?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, and that is exactly a huge part of 
the point here----
    Ms. Matsui. OK.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. Is that by opening up the stack, 
you allow smaller competitors to come in and compete for 
different pieces of it: for the radio, for the controller, for 
the computing. And the key to being able to do that is to makes 
sure that they all interoperate.
    So one thing that we heard loud and clear from industry and 
observers in this space was if we could create good testing----
    Ms. Matsui. Right.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. We would make it possible for 
smaller players' new entrance into the market to show ``our 
equipment works and you should buy from us.''
    Ms. Matsui. OK, that is great. The BEAD Program represents 
the single most effective tool we have to finally close the 
digital divide. We owe it to our constituents still waiting for 
connectivity to move as quickly as possible.
    Administrator Davidson, is the NTIA on track to make State 
allocations by the end of June? Yes or no.
    Mr. Davidson. I am pleased to say, yes, we are on track.
    Ms. Matsui. OK, great. Good. NTIA is currently working on a 
comprehensive national spectrum strategy. This document will 
outline a governmentwide approach to maximizing the potential 
of our Nation's spectrum resources. Administrator Davidson, can 
you provide an update on the national spectrum strategy and how 
you see it advancing spectrum access?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Very briefly I will just say we are 
moving rapid--we are moving out rapidly on a national spectrum 
strategy. This is something we think will be really helpful to 
make sure that we are planning and getting a pipeline for years 
to come.
    We have put out a request for comment. That request for 
comment is closed. We got something on the order of 140 
comments. We are now writing and working on identifying the 
particular bands. We have put out this ambitious goal, 1500 MHz 
of spectrum to study.
    Ms. Matsui. Nice.
    Mr. Davidson. We are on track to make sure we get that into 
a study that comes out towards the end of this year.
    Ms. Matsui. OK, thank you. And we are looking forward to 
it.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Latta. Well, thank you. The gentlelady yields back. The 
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida's 12th District 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman. 
Thank you. And thanks to the panelist for your testimony.
    There's been--and I will be a lot--there's a lot of talk 
about the BEAD Program today, and rightfully so. It is a 
significant investment, an opportunity for Americans to get 
connected, and my constituents and their local elected 
officials are very engaged on it to ensure their eligibility 
under the FCC broadband data maps, so we got to make sure that 
that is the case.
    But my question is, what is next? For the first time there 
is no additional spectrum pipeline. Stakeholders are looking at 
a spectrum cliff in the next 3 years, unfortunately. Meanwhile, 
countless devices are getting connected.
    As you know, every day a new technology is coming online. 
In sum, the Government needs a spectrum plan before industry 
can have a plan. Congress is actively working on a renewed 
spectrum auction authority and will be marking that out--I 
understand we are going to be marking that up tomorrow. Is that 
right, Mr. Chairman? That is our plan for the future of 
spectrum access.
    So the question is, what is NTIA's plan for the next steps 
of America's access to spectrum after the BEAD funding is 
distributed? Sir, if you could please answer that, I'd 
appreciate it. Yes, go ahead.
    Mr. Davidson. So first of all--on spectrum, first of all, 
thank you for the question. Couldn't agree more that we need to 
have a pipeline of spectrum available and for--in the--and in a 
predictable way, to be working with stakeholders to make sure 
they know what that pipeline looks like. That is very much why 
we have created the national spectrum strategy.
    The first thing I will say, even before the national 
spectrum strategy, we do have bands that are--we are looking at 
and people are working on, including, for example, the study 
that we are working on now with the Defense Department and 
the--called the lower three gigahertz band, a 3.1 to 3.45. 
Getting that study right around that band is very important and 
has been the subject of legislation. We really appreciate the 
leadership of this subcommittee and committee in pushing that 
forward last year.
    Go--looking further ahead, we do need that pipeline, and we 
need to identify it, and that is exactly why we have got a 
national spectrum strategy that we are working on. I would say 
we have got to be looking not to skate to where the puck is now 
but where the puck is going, to use the hockey analogy. And we 
have got to hear from the--from industry and from experts about 
where their spectrum needs are going to be and how we make sure 
we are identifying bands. That is exactly what we are trying to 
do with that spectrum strategy, and we are going to move 
quickly on it. You will see it this year.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, thank you. Next question. 
Historically, programs that have been intended to provide 
broadband to unconnected communities, particularly our most 
rural and remote areas, have been inadvertently used for 
overbuilding already connected areas. What is NTIA doing 
differently this time to ensure that the nearly $45 billion in 
BEAD and other broadband grants are being allocated to the 
right communities?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, we have been given a very ambitious 
agenda to connect everybody in America, and we strongly feel 
that we won't be able to do that if we are not using the money 
wisely. Congress has given us very, very clear direction, and 
we have taken that direction in how we have constructed the 
program. Focus on the unserved first, then the underserved. And 
we are building our--we built our notices with that firmly in 
mind. So it starts with the unserved. States have to use their 
money for that first, they can't use it for other things, and 
then we go from there.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Very good.
    Mr. Davidson. So that has really been our commitment, and I 
think you will see it in our notices, and that is the way we 
are expecting States to roll out the plans.
    Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Since redistricting, a 
significant part of my district is rural in the State of 
Florida. People are anxious to get better wireless coverage 
and, you know, I see it every day when I drive in my district, 
the lack of wireless coverage. So it is underserved.
    To give you an example of how important it is, one of our 
local newspapers, the Citrus Chronicle, has had two local news 
articles on BEAD funding, and normally you don't get that kind 
of coverage.
    Mr. Davidson. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Bilirakis. But it is so very important. Unfortunately, 
the low-power approach taken by CBRS is not likely to provide 
reliable coverage to my constituents. This is a major concern. 
How will you make sure that we have adequate spectrum available 
to support the full power services rule constituents need to 
deliver high-quality, reliable wireless services to rural 
America? And, you know, we are talking about our kids have to 
do their homework on--you know, on a daily basis, so it is 
definitely a necessity. If you could answer that question, I'd 
appreciate it, and then I will yield back.
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will just say very quickly, we--this 
is exactly why we need to have that pipeline of spectrum. You 
know, there are many different bands that will be used to make 
sure that we are getting that variety of coverage on the 
wireless side. And as you said at the end, you know, we do need 
to make sure that everybody's got access. Some of it will be 
wireless. Of course, our BEAD Program, our broadband programs 
are focused on making sure that they are fixed, you know, 
connections as well in people's homes. So both of those things 
are quite important and we are focused on making sure we have 
got them going.
    Mr. Bilirakis. All right, thank you very much. I look 
forward to working with you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. The gentleman's time has expired. And the Chair 
now recognizes the gentlelady from New York for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Clarke. Thank you--excuse me. Thank you, Chairman Latta 
and Ranking Member Matsui, for holding today's hearing. I would 
also like to thank Administrator Davidson for being here to 
testify on these bills and the critical work that you are 
leading at the NTIA.
    I was glad to see the Workforce Planning Guide, released 
under the BEAD Program, call for the development of an equity-
driven telecommunications workforce. My bill, which I am happy 
to see the subcommittee considering here today, would help us 
evaluate how the BEAD Program takes steps toward that goal. 
This legislation would require the NTIA to release demographic 
data on those receiving funding through the program so we can 
understand how this funding is reaching communities across the 
country, including minority and women-owned businesses.
    Is the NTIA ready--already planning to collect demographic 
data on subgrantees in the BEAD Program, and if not, would this 
present a challenge in implementing?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will just say we--first of all, thank 
you for the question and for your leadership in this space. You 
know, I keep saying digital--our digital equity work is the 
beating heart of our internet and broadband work. It is really 
all about how we make sure not just that people have a 
connection running past their home, but that they have the 
tools and skills they need, the devices they need to be able to 
get online, and that we are reaching a broad set of 
communities.
    We are very focused on this--these efforts already. And I 
will say we are doing a lot of work to make sure we are 
collecting data on subgrantees and really thinking about--and 
even more important than who is getting the money, the question 
of which communities are being impacted. I think the kind of 
goal that we are pushing for and that you should hold our feet 
to the fire on is being able to measure outcomes. If money gets 
spent in a community, we ought to be able to see 5 years down 
the road how--10 years down the road, how did that impact, you 
know, poverty rates, how did it impact educational levels, how 
did it impact healthcare outcomes.
    And that is the kind of data that I think we ought to be 
collecting and you ought to be measuring our success based on. 
And so we look forward to working with you on that--on those 
issues.
    Ms. Clarke. Yes, I'd like to talk to you, drill down a 
little bit deeper on that. But thank you for your answer.
    As a followup, how does the NTIA view building a diverse 
telecom workforce in its implementation of the BEAD and Digital 
Equity Programs?
    Mr. Davidson. So the workforce is one of the great 
opportunities here. The President has said these aren't just--
this isn't just a connection program, this is a jobs and 
manufacturing program if we do it right. There are going to be, 
we think, on the order of 150,000 new jobs created by these 
broadband programs that we are implementing. We want to make 
sure that there--the networks are being built by the 
communities that they serve and that it is a diverse workforce 
that is doing so.
    We have been working directly with States to talk to them 
about the opportunity in front of them and to encourage them to 
use their digital equity monies and their BEAD planning grants 
to think about how they plan for that workforce challenge that 
is coming and making sure that it is a diverse community of 
workers.
    Ms. Clarke. Well, I've long been a champion for protecting 
vulnerable communities from the harms that come with new 
technologies, and that is why I wrote my Algorithmic 
Accountability Act to protect against built-in bias in 
automated critical decisions like algorithms and AI.
    Recent developments in AI have presented a range of 
exciting new opportunities but also grave consequences. I saw 
that the NTIA recently put out a request for comment on AI, and 
I know one of the bills we are considering today is Rep. 
Harper's AI Accountability Act. And I agree, we need more 
guardrails in place on AI, which is why I introduced the Real 
Political Ads Act earlier this month and plan to reintroduce my 
Algorithmic Accountability Act and Deep Fakes Accountability 
Act this Congress.
    I am sure there will be many questions from my colleagues 
on coordination from broadband funding to spectrum access, but 
I want to ask about coordination with AI. How is the NTIA and 
others at Commerce working across the administration to ensure 
the Federal Government's approach to AI as well as its 
potential benefits and harms is harmonized?
    Mr. Davidson. It is a terrific question. We are focused on 
this because, just as you said it perfectly, there is--there 
are huge potential benefits here but only if we are addressing 
the real risks and harms, real risks that are being faced 
today. We are part of a comprehensive approach across the 
administration looking at these issues. Certainly they have 
grabbed the public's attention, which makes this--and actually 
a great opportunity for us to be addressing this and talking 
about it with the public and getting people--people's input on 
it.
    NTIA has got a very specific--we are trying to do our part. 
We have got a very specific role right now. We have put out a 
request for comment on how to make sure that AI systems are 
more accountable and that when you do an audit of an AI system 
that it actually does what it says it is going to do, and what 
the Government could do to make sure that that--to reinforce 
that.
    So we look forward to working with you on that, and thank 
you for your attention to those issues. Very, very important 
right now.
    Ms. Clarke. Absolutely.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back, and the 
Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Washington, the Chair 
of the full committee, for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Administrator.
    I represent eastern Washington, and many parts of my 
district remain completely unserved. I was very disappointed to 
see in the Notice of Funding Opportunity for the BEAD Program 
that it prioritized fiber projects over other technologies like 
fixed wireless, despite language in the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA, being very clear that the 
program was supposed to be technology neutral. While I would 
love for every constituent of mine to receive fiber to the 
home, geographic challenges and economics don't make--don't 
always make sense, and I fear that with fiber being prioritized 
that many of my constituents will remain unserved and the 
funding will be wasted.
    I know you have the authority to issue waivers in certain 
instances, but States are developing their plans based upon the 
current requirements. How do you plan to make the determination 
of what areas deserve a waiver and may use wireless technology?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you, Chair, for the question. And 
I will just say, you know, we take very seriously the mission 
we have been given, which is to connect everyone in America 
with high-speed, reliable, affordable broadband, and we know 
that the only way we are going to do it is with that all-of-
the-above approach. We fully expect that in places where it is 
challenging there will be generous amounts of other 
technologies besides fiber.
    There will be fiber, there will also be fixed wireless, 
there will also be satellite used, and States will have and are 
given a tremendous amount of flexibility under our plan to set 
their own thresholds and take their own approach. Because what 
Rhode Island needs is different from what Washington State 
needs. And so I think the answer to your answer is that States 
will be given the flexibility--in the notice, they are given 
the flexibility to make those choices to set that extremely 
high-cost threshold where they need to to make sure they are 
getting the right mix of technology.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Would you approve a State plan that is only 
fiber but does not connect every home and business?
    Mr. Davidson. We have told States that the top--that they 
are required to show us how they are going to connect all of 
the unserved in their States. So we will not approve plans that 
don't show us how they're going to connect everybody in the 
State.
    Mrs. Rodgers. OK, I am going to be paying very close 
attention to this because I really do believe that this is a 
moment and we need to make sure that the taxpayer dollars 
accomplish the goal and that my constituents don't remain 
unserved because fiber isn't possible.
    Mr. Davidson. Absolutely.
    Mrs. Rodgers. I'd also like to move on to the Middle Mile 
Grant Program, also established under the IIJA. The law did not 
provide nearly as much specificity as the BEAD Program, and so 
it gives NTIA a lot of discretion on how to administer the 
funding. And I have seen firsthand how a Federal--Federal 
investment in the middle mile can yield little to the 
taxpayers.
    Just about a decade ago, a provider in my district received 
$138 million, and yet today you fast forward 10 years, I hear 
from broadband providers that it is too expensive to use for 
backhaul. For the Middle Mile Program, we need to have 
transparency as to who is applying, where the funding is going, 
the goals and types of technology. How do you plan to provide 
funding and track the deployment of infrastructure for the 
middle mile?
    Mr. Davidson. Right. It is a terrific question. We really 
are optimistic about the role that middle mile can play here in 
the sense that middle mile is sort of a force multiplier. If 
you do it right, people can use it to build other networks. And 
so it is actually important that we are sequencing it the way 
that Congress has done it, so we are doing middle mile first, 
and then it will help us with our BEAD and other State grant 
deployments.
    We are in the final stages of putting out our middle mile 
awards. And as Secretary Raimondo has said, we'll have those by 
the--we are expecting to have them by the end of June. I will 
say it is a program that we have already talked about as being 
wildly oversubscribed--$1 billion program, over $6 billion in 
grant requests, many of them very, very high quality--and so 
that has been a real challenge--it will be a challenge for us.
    I am very hopeful that you will have a different experience 
in Washington State if there's a--is a middle mile.
    Mrs. Rodgers. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. You will see this across the country----
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. That these will be very 
valuable.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. I want to get just very quickly to 
spectrum also because I know we are preparing for the World 
Radio Communication Conference----
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mrs. Rodgers [continuing]. And just wanted to ask you what 
is NTIA's role in preparing for the conference, and if the 
FCC's auction authority still remains expired, does it put us 
at a disadvantage?
    Mr. Davidson. So quickly I will just--World Radio 
Conference is incredibly important coming up in Dubai this 
fall. We do it once every 4 years. It is really essential for 
us to have strong leadership at the conference, push back on 
our competitors, make sure that we have got our vision of how 
to make sure the spectrum pipeline is operating in the future, 
is being put forward in that setting.
    We have got strong leadership there, experienced 
negotiators backing them up. NTIA is part of the team. It is 
across an interagency team, but we have got real experts who 
have done this before and who are going to be staffing this and 
helping support the negotiation. And we are going to make it 
work with or without spectrum auction authority, but boy, we 
really believe that spectrum auction authority is something 
that would help us.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you very much, appreciate you being 
here.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair 
now recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, the ranking 
member of the full committee, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Chairman Latta.
    Administrator Davidson, I am trying to get three questions 
into you, so if we can give short answers to each.
    Mr. Davidson. Is that a hint?
    Mr. Pallone. You were last before our committee in February 
of last year, and at that time, the Infrastructure Law was only 
recently enacted and you were just getting started on the job. 
And I know the agency's been standing up these programs in 
order to turn the funding into meaningful projects for States 
and communities, but there's still a lot of work ahead, 
particularly once the State allocations are made.
    You mentioned in your testimony that supporting States and 
territories is the primary focus of your work right now, but 
can you describe in a little detail what that means and how the 
agency is assisting States and local communities as they 
prepare to receive these funds?
    Mr. Davidson. So----
    Mr. Pallone. About a minute or so because I have two more 
questions.
    Mr. Davidson. Oh, yes, and I could talk about this for an 
hour so----
    Mr. Pallone. Oh, great.
    Mr. Davidson. I will just say that you hit the nail on the 
head. This is actually an incredibly important place for us 
now. The way that these programs are constructed, the States 
get the money and have to do the grants. Different States are 
situated differently. The great State of New Jersey may be in a 
different place than other States in terms of their ability, 
and its--and, you know, maturity in putting together these 
programs.
    The main thing that we are doing is trying to support these 
States, and the biggest thing we have done is--since I've seen 
you is create a program of Federal program officers, NTIA staff 
who sit in the State. Every State has a Federal program officer 
who is there to make sure that they succeed. And that and the 
technical assistance that we are putting a huge amount of work 
into, hopefully will make a big difference.
    Mr. Pallone. Thank you. Second question is about the Tribal 
Broadband Program. It is important to me that we not overlook 
Tribal populations, which we know are among the very least 
connected of Americans. So can you give us an update on that 
and how you are working with Tribes and Tribal Governments to 
make sure they can full--they take full advantage of this 
program and the BEAD and Digital Equity Programs?
    Mr. Davidson. Right. Well, the----
    Mr. Pallone. And----
    Mr. Davidson. The Tribal Program is incredibly important. 
These are communities that have been left behind for years in 
terms of their connectivity and really need help moving 
forward. What we have been doing is working--we have a team, it 
is largely made up of people who come from those communities. 
They work really closely with them. And we have given out over 
$1.7 billion in funding already of the ultimately $3 billion 
that will be disbursed to those Tribal communities, and it--
making--I have seen it on the ground. It makes a huge 
difference for them.
    Mr. Pallone. All right. Then the last thing I wanted to ask 
about is spectrum. Chair Rodgers and I introduced the Spectrum 
Auction Reauthorization Act of 2023 yesterday, and among other 
things this bill would improve how NTIA and the FCC work 
together to manage our airwaves, including reaffirming NTIA's 
role as the manager of Federal spectrum so the Government does 
not repeat past mistakes and can once again speak with one 
voice on spectrum decisions.
    So what types of actions have you taken since you started 
as the Assistant Secretary to ensure that spectrum disputes 
that we have seen in the past do not happen again?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, spectrum coordination--the coordination 
among Federal agencies is absolutely critical if we are going 
to continue to have leadership in this area and if we are also 
going to make sure that we avoid some of the disputes in the 
past that have tripped us up.
    And I will just say we are working really closely--I made 
it a huge priority from the start of my term to first and 
foremost work very closely with the FCC. We put in place a 
spectrum coordination initiative. We put together a revision to 
our MOU, an MOU that had not been updated--a memorandum of 
understanding that had not been updated in nearly 20 years.
    We put that in place last summer, and it is already bearing 
fruit. Our staffs are working together very closely. I am in 
really constant communication with the Chairwoman on a range of 
issues but especially on spectrum issues. And that is just the 
start.
    The other piece of this is working with the other Federal 
agencies, and we are doing a lot of almost what I would call 
shuttle diplomacy, a lot of time sitting with the agencies 
understanding their needs, making sure we are coordinated and 
meeting them.
    Mr. Pallone. And you think that by reaffirming your role as 
the manager of Federal spectrum that that is going to help 
avoid the spectrum disputes going forward?
    Mr. Davidson. We can hope. And I think it will be--it is 
helpful for us when it is acknowledged--again, we have our--
this is our statutory authority, this is our statutory role 
that Congress has given us. Underscoring it makes a big 
difference and making sure that, you know, I think we are doing 
better and better all the time, I think, at working with 
Federal agencies. I think some of the recent disputes that have 
been on the, you know, front pages of the paper have made 
people realize that we don't--we are not well-served, the 
American people are not well-served, when the agencies are not 
well-coordinated and NTIA is not playing the role it has been 
given.
    Mr. Pallone. Well, thank you.
    I thank Chairman Latta and our Ranking Member Matsui. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Latta. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentleman from Michigan's 5th District for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 
being here. Connecting rural Michiganders is one of my top 
priorities. We have done a lot in Congress to address the 
digital divide, but there are concerns that with a multitude of 
programs, unserved areas will still be left behind due to 
duplication or fragmentation of funds. To avoid this, we need 
better interagency coordination, and that is why we are 
discussing my PLAN for Broadband Act today, which I plan to 
reintroduce soon with my friend and fellow Rural Broadband 
Caucus cochair, Representative Kuster.
    Administrator Davidson, how would a national broadband 
strategy improve deployment efforts at your agency and across 
the administration?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for the question. I will 
start by saying as--and as we discussed when we had a chance to 
meet last week, making sure that everybody is connected to 
affordable, reliable, high-speed internet service, and 
particularly in rural areas, is a huge priority and a huge 
opportunity for us right now.
    You know, we are working with other Federal agencies in a 
way--in a coordinated way, in a way that, you know, we feel 
like we have got a strategy moving forward based on the statute 
that Congress has handed to us, given to us, that lays out very 
clearly our approach to reaching the unserved first and how we 
are going to do that. I think it is important for us to make 
sure that we have got a good strategy moving forward. I think 
right now we are moving out on the strategy that we have but 
welcome the chance to work with you and your team, talk to your 
staff about how we could do better.
    Mr. Walberg. Yes. You know, we look at the BEAD Program, 
but it prohibits nonfiber projects from receiving funding. 
Fiber is great. That is what I have to my home. It is a great 
option for connection, but it is not the only option. Today 
many rural Americans are well-served by satellites or fixed 
wireless because fiber is far too costly to deploy to their 
homes. I understand NOFO includes a waiver request process for 
States that want to use other technologies, but it seems to be 
overly complex. It is burdensome and really not what Congress 
prescribed. Giving States options but hiding most of those 
options behind regulatory hurdles is really giving them no or 
little option at all.
    So let me ask, the NOFO requires that entities set the 
waiver threshold to use other technologies as high as possible. 
In fact, it is called ``extremely high cost per location 
threshold.'' And so how does the NTIA plan to connect rural 
areas that may not meet the steep requirements but in fact 
would be better and faster served by technologies other than 
fiber?
    Mr. Davidson. I think States will have--first of all, I 
will just say it is incredibly important for us to be able to 
connect everyone, and that is our requirement to the States as 
well. We will only succeed in many areas if we have a mix of 
technologies. There will be some areas where you will be able 
to connect everybody with fiber with the funding that is given. 
States will choose to do that. Other States will have a mix.
    I will just say under the notice that we have put out 
actually you don't have to--the only path. It is not--the 
extremely high cost threshold is not the only path. There are 
other ways for nonpriority broadband projects, for other 
technologies to be included in the mix. States will also choose 
where to set that threshold, and some will set it lower, and we 
have encouraged States to be able--we are giving States the 
flexibility to set that threshold where they need to in order 
to meet their goals.
    So I think you will see a range--you will see a wide range 
of choices made by States. We are going to support that. Our--I 
think our notice supports that, and we do fully expect there 
will be a range of technologies, including a lot of fiber, but 
including a lot of other technologies where needed.
    Mr. Walberg. Well, I certainly would encourage that 
flexibility, and as--the less complexity as possible to get to 
that would be helpful as well.
    Let me move on, and we discussed this briefly on our phone 
call, but last Congress my legislation, the Telecommunication 
Skilled Workforce Act, was signed into law. It supported a 
report that found we'd need tens of thousands more workers to 
successfully get America connected. If we already have problems 
filling jobs, don't you think that prioritizing justice-
impacted participants and other groups will further delay an 
increased cost for deployment?
    Mr. Davidson. I am not sure there has been prioritization 
like that. We need--we are going to need everyone--we are--this 
is an all-hands-on-deck moment from our perspective to make 
sure we are being able to have the workforce that we need. We 
are expecting that these programs will create somewhere on the 
order of 150,000 new jobs. We want them to be good, high-
paying, safe jobs. We want them to be in the communities that 
are--where the networks are being built, and it is really going 
to take a lot of training, and it is going to take pretty much, 
I think, it is like a aall-hands-on-deck moment to make sure we 
can meet that need.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you.
    My time is expired. I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman's time has expired. The 
Chair now recognizes the gentlemen from Texas' 33rd for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Veasey. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
    As the lead Federal agency implementing the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law's historic $65 billion broadband investment, 
NTIA is playing a critical role in making sure that millions of 
Americans will be able to reap the benefits of the digital 
economy. And thanks to the 42 billion invested in the BEAD 
Program, we are delivering on our committed--on our commitment 
to create a more digitally inclusive and equal society for many 
generations to come.
    And as you are aware, Mr. Davidson, the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill requires that any BEAD subguarantee must 
offer at least one low-cost broadband service option. Further, 
States will be required to ensure that services offered over 
funded networks allow subscribers in the service area to 
utilize the Affordable Connectivity Program, and many may 
require providers to participate in the ACP. Moreover, the 
existence of ACP, which helps many more customers subscribe to 
broadband than otherwise would, factors into providers' 
buildout proposals and make deployment dollars more efficient.
    In fact, one study estimates that the presence of ACP 
reduces the per-person household subsidy required to 
incentivize deployment by $500,or 25 percent. But you probably 
also know that ACP is slated to run out of money here soon if 
we don't act. And so I wanted to ask you, Mr. Davidson, if 
Congress cannot come to an agreement to extend ACP funding, 
will this have a negative impact on BEAD and other broadband 
programs?
    Mr. Davidson. The short answer is that it will. And you 
have rightly said, first of all, that affordability is a 
critical feature here. It is a necessity, not a luxury. And we 
know providing a family connection that they can't afford 
doesn't do them any good.
    ACP has been an incredibly important program. We have seen 
from--literally millions of American families now are using ACP 
to make their internet connections available, affordable, and 
we need to make sure that we are continuing--putting the 
program on firm footing going forward so that we can meet the 
affordability needs of those Americans. But also, there is this 
tie-in, and you have noted it, to the--our success in the BEAD 
funding.
    As we make sure--as we build out our broadband networks, we 
want providers to know that there is some certainty that they 
will have customers, particularly in these rural areas, 
particularly in areas where there's lower-income Americans, 
they need to know that those Americans are going to be able to 
afford to get online. ACP plays a major role there too.
    Mr. Veasey. Yes. No, thank you very much. And I would also 
like to highlight the fact that over 18 million Americans, as 
you mentioned, are benefiting from this. And on top of that, 
last year in May 2022, 20 internet providers, including AT&T, 
Comcast, Verizon, and others, committed to offering ACP-
eligible households high-speed internet access for $30 or less. 
And more importantly, more than 80 percent of the U.S. 
population has access to at least one of these no-cost plans, 
and these families in all of our districts are maintaining a 
broadband connection now because of the benefit of this 
program.
    I had a second question for you. The Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law also allocated 2.75 billion for the State 
Digital Equity Grant Program and the Digital Equity Competitive 
Grant Program, programs which will transform the lives, again, 
of all Americans. I understand that these programs are still in 
the important planning stages. Can you elaborate how these 
programs can help constituents and districts all across the 
country to promote adoption and meaningful use of internet 
among underrepresented populations, including low-income 
households, veterans, rural residents, and others?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. It is--these digital equity programs are 
ultimately going to be incredibly important if we want to reach 
our goal of helping Americans really thrive online. Connection 
alone, as I was saying, is not enough. If a wire runs past a 
family's house and they can't afford it--the service, it 
doesn't do them any good. But even if they can afford it, if 
they don't have the tools they need, if they don't have the 
training they need to be able to thrive online, none of this 
work that we are doing really matters.
    So at the end of the day, part of what we are really 
focused on with these digital equity programs is making sure 
that people have the tools, they have the skills, and that we 
are reaching these communities--many of these communities that 
have been traditionally disadvantaged in this space: the poor, 
the elderly, kids. All of this is being done by the States now, 
and the--even though we are in the planning stages, I am very 
proud of the work that States are doing right now. By the end 
of this year, every State in America will have a digital equity 
plan that is going to be a requirement of getting these grants. 
And we have never had that before.
    Mr. Veasey. Wow.
    Mr. Davidson. So we are really looking forward to seeing 
those plans and how States are going to address these big 
digital equity issues.
    Mr. Veasey. That is awesome. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and the 
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, the vice chair 
of the subcommittee, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 
Davidson, and thank you for reaching out a couple of weeks ago. 
It is very obvious you take your job very seriously, and we 
appreciate your dedication.
    You know, in the last 30 years, technology has evolved like 
we never imagined it would have--and, yes, it has been 30 years 
since the last reauthorization of NTIA, so it just shows you 
that we need to get this done. We need to--it needs to be 
modernized and it needs proper oversight.
    NTIA and the Institute of Telecommunication Sciences, they 
not only manage Federal use spectrum but they also establish 
the models and then the testing that are used to inform 
interference analysis determinations. Now, I know the 
discussion a little while ago was that we don't want a cookie-
cutter approach and that the States need to have some leeway, 
but I think you would agree that this is a very technical 
process and it is important that NTIA sets the common 
methodologies, if you will, and inputs so that spectrum policy 
decisions are data-driven, and they should be, and there is a 
common--and they are based on a common understanding of fact.
    One of the discussion drafts that is before us today would 
require NTIA to establish these common methodologies and inputs 
for any interference testing that may be performed. Can you 
speak to the importance of having NTIA establish common 
methodologies and inputs for interference testing?
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you for the question, and this is 
actually something that is very important. If you--we need to 
have as a starting point a spectrum policy that is evidence-
based, that is science-based, right, so that when we have 
disagreements about, you know, how different uses of spectrum 
might interfere with each other, we have a common baseline for 
understanding whether that is true or not. And believe it or 
not, it is--it often is hard to get to that factual basis.
    I am very proud of the work that is being done at our 
Institute for Telecommunications Science out in Boulder, as you 
rightly know. They were, for example, instrumental in the--some 
of the scientific research that went into understanding the 
questions around altimeters and 5G networks and some of the 
potential interference there, and I--we believe--I think that 
our work really was instrumental in helping make sure that we 
had--could come up with a solution to that issue.
    So I will just say this: Science is important, and 
investing in it is important. We appreciate your leadership in 
helping doing that.
    Mr. Carter. You know, probably most people watching this 
are wondering why does all this matter.
    Mr. Davidson. Right.
    Mr. Carter. And--but it does matter. It matters. And can 
you discuss the importance of--how important it is for our 
economy and the technological innovation that NTIA's technical 
expertise continues to be--it continues to be the foundation 
for Federal spectrum management decisions?
    Mr. Davidson. I totally appreciate the question because I 
think probably many Americans don't realize how big a role that 
these--that spectrum plays in their life, you know. We are so 
used to----
    Mr. Carter. Right. I agree with that.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. The fact that, you know, these 
cellphones, they just work, right, and they are amazing, they 
are kind of a wonder of the modern economy. From our cellphones 
where we are getting, you know, streaming video now on our 
phone to, you know, weather prediction that relies on weather 
satellites to all--you know, to all sorts of new, you know, 
mobile applications that we are seeing in our cars.
    Spectrum plays a huge role in our everyday life, and it is 
getting bigger and bigger. So we need to make sure that we are 
managing this scarce resource really well, because it is a 
scarce resource, or making sure it is getting to the right 
people. Aviation safety, national security, all of these things 
depend on, you know, access to spectrum. So it is hugely 
important that we get it right. It is behind the scenes. Most 
people--we--people shouldn't have to worry about it, but they 
should know that it is important we get it right.
    Mr. Carter. Good. Let me ask you, the Build America, Buy 
America regulations that were introduced in the IIJA, they 
require grant funds expended in the BEAD Program to be Buy 
America compliant. But at this time, there is only one fiber 
manufacturer that meets these standards. Are you concerned? Are 
you concerned that a nationwide $42\1/2\ billion grant program 
that prioritizes fiber development will be stalled for lack of 
available fiber?
    Mr. Davidson. So I really appreciate your question. We are 
very focused on this issue of making sure that we have got an 
adequate supply chain. This is not just a connectivity program, 
it is also a jobs and manufacturing program. We want to make 
sure that, if we are spending Federal money, we are doing 
everything we can to make sure that it is being spent in the 
U.S. and supporting U.S. jobs where we can.
    We also know that telecom networks are really hard to build 
and that there are things that are going to be difficult to do 
in that rubric, so we are going to be looking for, as we have 
in our other programs, how to set--how to create a waiver for 
some of those requirements. But that--the bar for those--for 
that waiver has to be high, and we are going to keep pushing to 
make sure that there is manufacturing.
    On the fiber piece, I am proud--I am pleased to say the 
fiber manufacturers are stepping up. I was in North Carolina, I 
visited two fiber companies, CommScope and Corning. They are 
making new manufacturing lines to meet the needs of the 
programs that we are putting out, going to create new jobs. And 
that is exactly what we should be doing, pushing companies to 
invest in America where we can, and then we will figure out how 
to make sure that we can build----
    Mr. Carter. Well, I am encouraged to hear that as well. So 
thank you again.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back. The Chair 
now recognizes the gentleman from Florida's 9th District for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Soto. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Last term, the Congress had the audacity to put up a bold 
goal, which is to make sure that every American would get 
access to the internet, much like we saw in the 1960s with 
efforts to bring electricity to every household across the 
Nation. In modern America, not having internet means you are 
left in the dark, it means that kids don't have the access to 
be able to do their homework, small businesses lack the access 
to be able to thrive, and this has been an inequity in many 
rural areas across the Nation for far too long.
    And so we came together, many of us, to pass the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure package with $65 billion for broadband 
investment, including 42 billion for the BEAD Program. I am 
excited to see that Florida's base allocation is 247 million 
with a potential of up to 2 billion, by estimates of a lot of 
our nonprofits. And we are already seeing even before that the 
American Rescue Plan adding in some key funding for our area 
including 11--or, excuse me, 15 million for two projects in 
rural areas like Kenansville, Deer Park, Bull Creek, and Yeehaw 
Junction in our district.
    And I am excited to see local governments working with our 
local internet companies to ensure we get every central 
Floridian internet access. Charter Communications, in 
particular, has stepped up with our local folks.
    Assistant Secretary Davidson, how has Florida been to work 
with so far on their BEAD application?
    Mr. Davidson. First of all, I will say thank you for your 
statement there. I--you know, we do feel this is a once-in-a-
generation opportunity to connect everybody. We haven't been 
given these resources to do it before. We recognize we probably 
won't be given them again and we have to get this right.
    Working with the States is really an essential part of that 
for us, and we have seen from the beginning, known from the 
beginning, that the way the program is constructed, the States 
are going--our success rises and falls on the success of the 
States. And we are committed to making sure that every State, 
including Florida and other States that are going to--that have 
big rural populations that need to get served, we need to make 
sure that States like Florida succeed.
    And so the biggest thing we have done is invest in staffing 
to make sure that we are there for the States, that we have 
somebody in every State, we have somebody in Florida who is 
there, wakes up every day thinking about how Florida is going 
to succeed, and that the State has kind of a customer service 
rep at NTIA that they can go to. And we are making sure we are 
also moving out on good technical assistance to make sure the 
State can meet these goals, and we are optimistic that it will 
happen.
    Mr. Soto. The equity provision has been discussed quite a 
bit.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Soto. Is the current application up to par on the 
equity needs that we are going to need to satisfy for the 
Sunshine State?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes, I think that--I know that Florida has 
gotten its digital equity planning grant, it was over 2 
million, I think probably around $2\1/2\ million. As I said, as 
far as we know, we are on track and the expectation is--the 
requirement is that Florida will have a digital equity plan by 
the end of the year.
    Mr. Soto. We know broadband's going to be a key part of it. 
This committee is also taking a lot of time to talk about other 
types of internet access like cellular and satellite. How do 
you think we will evolve over the next 5, 10 years when it 
comes to something like internet--satellite internet like we 
launch every week from Cape Canaveral with SpaceX, where do you 
see that going over the next 10 years?
    Mr. Davidson. It is incredibly exciting to see the 
innovation that is happening in satellite communications, 
across the board on communications. Satellite is a particularly 
exciting one, and it is wonderful to see what we are able to 
provide now both in internet communications, broadband that was 
being provided by satellite, even now handset-to-satellite 
communications, which is an exciting new area.
    It is kind of incredible, and as a computer scientist, I 
would say--a fallen computer scientist, anyway, I would say 
that we have--it is almost like a modern miracle. You would--if 
you would have said to people 20 years ago that we would be 
doing these things that we are doing today, I think people 
would have been really surprised.
    So I will just note that there's going to be a lot of 
innovation that keeps coming. We are watching that, and we are 
going to make sure that it is part of our programs as we roll 
out.
    Mr. Soto. Well, we appreciate your excitement and vision 
for it. There are places in rural areas of our district where 
there is cattle, citrus, hunting leases, conservation lands, 
and I have been pleasantly surprised by how needed the internet 
is in these areas for these rural businesses to stay 
competitive, so I appreciate your commitment to that.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and the 
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida's 2nd District 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Dunn. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Well, the NTI's 2024 ask is a 77 percent increase, so let's 
review a couple of programs. Secretary Davidson, 42 billion for 
the BEAD Program passed with good intentions, but we must use 
these funds wisely. We all know the last deployments can help 
underserved and unserved areas, but the grants on--rely on the 
quality of the maps, the FCC's broadband maps.
    So the NTI asked the public the challenges to the maps by 
the 13th of January. Several States and Members of Congress 
have asked for NTI to push that date back. I have a letter on 
that I would like to submit for the record, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Latta. Without objection.
    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
    Mr. Dunn. Thank you very much.
    So stakeholders in my district have contacted my office to 
express concerns with the initial route on the maps, and I just 
want to make sure that we ensure that we are all doing the 
right thing for the rural and underserved communities. The 
letter that we signed, I referred here, was signed by 18 
Members of Congress, and it is just we ask for a delay on those 
maps so that you can get better data.
    First question: Will the NTI reconsider allowing more time 
to evaluate the maps?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, Congressman, first of all, I really 
appreciate the--what you are--the impulse here that maps are 
incredibly important. As I said earlier, we have got to get the 
maps right, otherwise we are not spending our money wisely. We 
want the maps to be very good.
    We also know that we need to move out with some urgency 
here because every week that we wait on those maps is another 
week that we are not giving the States their money, another 
week that we are not connecting people with the broadband that 
they need. So our--we had said--8 months ago we said that we 
were going to make these allocations in June. We are still on 
track to make them in June. And I think that when people see 
the new FCC map that is coming out at the end of the month----
    Mr. Dunn. I am just afraid that there--may be some blowback 
if we make some terrible mistakes. People are going to see some 
injustices, I think, in these things. I know that some of the 
areas in my--that I have talked to in my district are least 
served, and they are the ones that would like to have the maps 
looked at again.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Dunn. So let me move on. Last week a group of us here 
on this committee went to see a demonstration of Starlink which 
showed a high-quality, reliable service suitable for broadband 
use, streaming things and whatnot and, you know, it was very 
impressive. I think we all know how important that has been to 
the Ukrainians fighting for their freedoms and their lives.
    So I think there's many similar technologies that uplink 
directly to satellites and provide broadband connectivity, and 
I think that the Federal broadband deployment should--it seems 
to be all grants for fiber. We need to open the aperture and be 
a little more technology agnostic so we can pick things based 
on what works where. I know you can just drop a Starlink--I 
know this in Ukraine. You can just drop a Starlink and start 
having--I guess they could watch movies if they would use them 
that way, but they don't--they tend to do other things with it.
    Let me change subjects. I want to briefly commend my 
colleague, Mr. Soto, who just spoke. He and I sponsored the 
Launch Communications Act, and it passed this committee in 
March. That is an act that was a huge step forward for 
commercial space launches and reentries. They rely on the NTIA 
Secretary, you, as--in this case, to coordinate regarding 
access to frequencies needed for the launches. It is imperative 
that we continue to lead in the satellite communications and 
space exploration businesses.
    So in the frequencies that are used for launch and reentry 
control is a serious bottleneck to launches, and so I would 
like to ask you what takes so along to allot those frequencies 
for each launch?
    Mr. Davidson. You know what, just a starting point, I will 
just--we are incredibly excited about the opportunities around 
commercial space exploration and making sure that we are 
supporting that. It is an administration priority, it is a 
priority for our--for the Commerce Department, and we are doing 
a lot to make sure that we are doing what we can from NTI's 
perspective to support all the spectrum needs that are out 
there. And it is not just about launch, of course, there's 
other things.
    In terms of the specifics on the launch spectrum, happy to 
get back to you. I don't have a good answer for the exact 
question about the delay----
    Mr. Dunn. So, I mean, it seems to me, what we--we are 
launching now two and three times a week. I think it is time to 
just give them a spectrum that they can use for launch, reentry 
and--launching and reentry.
    Mr. Davidson. I know it is a strong--we have a strong 
desire to make sure we are supporting the needs of that 
community, and I'd be happy to work with you and your staff, 
talk to you more about any delays that are out there.
    Mr. Dunn. There's a very, very high interest in this and 
the satellite community generally, I assure you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Latta. The gentleman yields back, and the Chair now 
recognizes the gentlelady from California's 16th District for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Eshoo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 
hearing, and to the--our ranking member, Congresswoman Matsui, 
and thank you, Mr. Davidson, it is great to see you here.
    I have three areas of questions: spectrum, broadband 
funding, and AI. It has been 75 days since the spectrum 
authority expired. Seventy-five days. You've spoken to it. 
Almost every single Member has brought up the issue of 
spectrum, and I have to say that I am really deeply 
disappointed. Deeply disappointed. I don't know if there--with 
each day it is chipping away at a sense of urgency on this. It 
is expired. It is expired.
    And, you know, spectrum is the gold in the 21st century. 
Nothing moves without spectrum. So what is it that you can tell 
us that will give us some hope that real hard negotiations are 
going on? This has to be resolved. I mean, the private sector 
is really getting screwed and tattooed. But, you know, I mean, 
overarching, it is shameful for our country to have this be 
marking every single day. Seventy-five days. Seventy-five days 
is a lot of days.
    On broadband funding, tell us what you think the single 
biggest obstacle is to getting the money out on schedule. I 
think you can, you know, handle that one.
    And on AI, I know you have the request for comment. 
Together with Michael McCaul, we cochair bipartisan AI Caucus. 
When will we get the comments that you have requested? When 
will Congress get to see what the input is?
    So those are my comments and my questions and----
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Ms. Eshoo [continuing]. As my mother would--or my father 
would say, what do you have to say for yourself?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Davidson. Well, first, thank you for those questions, 
and thank you, as always, for your leadership on all these 
issues over the years, and your partnership and support for 
NTIA is really appreciated.
    On the auction authority, all I can say is, you know, the 
Nation benefits enormously from having that spectrum auction 
authority at the FCC. You know, it is essential to continue 
that high-quality----
    Ms. Eshoo. But, Alan, we know that it is.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Ms. Eshoo. These are all wonderful things that you are 
saying, and we agree with you.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Ms. Eshoo. But that is why I am so upset about it.
    Mr. Davidson. Well----
    Ms. Eshoo. Because of the importance that you just 
described.
    Mr. Davidson. Right. And you should be concerned, I would 
say. And, ultimately, this is in Congress' hand. We stand ready 
to do whatever we can to support that and to help push that 
forward. But I agree, this is a topic of great urgency, and we 
hope that there will be action.
    On the issues around broadband, I would say the single 
biggest thing that we are quite focused on now is the move to 
the States, right? We are going to make our allocations by the 
end of June. States will know how much money they have. The 
shot clock starts. They have 6 months to put in their plans. 
They have a big homework assignment. Because we are not going 
to write large checks, we shouldn't write large checks, without 
understanding how people are going to spend the money.
    I know the States are hard at work on that, and your help, 
your partnership generally, this subcommittee's help in 
partnering with State--us and with the States to make sure that 
they are getting their plans in and that those are good plans 
that are in--you know, that work with the statute, is going to 
be really important, so that is the biggest thing we are 
focused on in building out on that, and we really appreciate 
your help.
    Ms. Eshoo. These individuals that you have dispersed to the 
States, can you tell us who they are so that----
    Mr. Davidson. It is actually on our----
    Ms. Eshoo [continuing]. Maybe our offices can check in with 
them?
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. Website. If you have--it is on 
our website.
    Ms. Eshoo. Oh, OK.
    Mr. Davidson. You can find out who the State/Federal 
program officers are. You can also just reach out to us.
    Ms. Eshoo. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. We would be happy to tell you. There's two in 
California, actually, and they are both in Sacramento. Not too 
far away.
    Ms. Eshoo. Well, we are a nation state. Yes. Thank you.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Davidson. And the other thing I would say is you had 
asked about AI and just I will very quickly say thank you for 
your leadership with the caucus and on these issues for some 
time now. We are only going to--you know, we are only going to 
be able to get this right if we are dealing with the risks and 
the benefits here. Very excited about this request for comment 
that we have put out, and the reaction we have already gotten.
    Ms. Eshoo. When is Congress going to get the comments?
    Mr. Davidson. It is--so the comments are due June 12th, I 
believe, so just a few weeks from now.
    Ms. Eshoo. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. They will be up on--you know, through our--we 
do a quick filter to make sure there's no dirty words in there, 
and then we will be happy to share them with--not just with you 
but with the public.
    Ms. Eshoo. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentlelady yields back, and the 
Chair now recognizes 5 minutes to the gentleman from Utah.
    Mr. Curtis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Davidson, welcome. It is a pleasure to be here with you 
today. I've listened with interest to my colleagues talk about 
the uniqueness of their districts. I cannot help but weigh in 
on this. I have over 400 miles top to bottom.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Curtis. Probably no more diverse landscape than we have 
in eastern Utah, and as a matter of fact, they talk about 
rural, I actually have half of my district is frontier, and 
much of it is rural. So your success is very important to us 
and to my district.
    And so perhaps because of that there is great frustration 
when it seems like other Federal agencies that might be unhappy 
with you or FCC spectrum decisions go what I would call rogue 
and use strategies of crisis to hang on to allocations or delay 
transitions to commercial use. It has got to be a frustration 
to you. It is a frustration to the committee, I imagine a 
frustration to the companies who have invested billions and 
billions of dollars so that they can move the interest of our 
country forward and, quite frankly, in many cases probably have 
more ability to solve these problems that these Federal 
agencies are complaining about than the agencies do themselves.
    It seems like it is frequently last minute. We are not 
getting enough leadership from the White House. So my question 
to you is what are you doing to work through this with other 
agencies at NTIA, and what recommendations would you have for 
the subcommittee? And really basically we have got to have 
these other agencies understand that you and FCC are the last 
word, and I would just be curious to know what your 
recommendations are.
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I really appreciate that question, as 
you can imagine. Look, we have this dual imperative. We serve 
as the coordinator of Federal spectrum. We also are the 
President's advisor on these issues and so feel real strength--
real strong tie to the need to make sure we have a pipeline out 
there, as we have spoken about already today. Pipeline of 
spectrum.
    It is hard to do that because, you know, this is a scarce 
resource, and the low-hanging fruit is gone, so there are no, 
you know, fallow bands just waiting to be reassigned. So in 
that setting, it means that everybody has to roll up their 
sleeves and do the hard work of coordinating together and 
figuring out where we can find opportunities for repurposing 
and greater sharing of resources.
    Coordination is really important in that. The main thing 
that we are doing is investing in the strength of that 
coordination, working very closely with the FCC. We have a new 
MOU with the FCC about our operating procedures. We are working 
with our sister agencies to make sure that we have got good 
connectivity with them, that we are building our relationships 
with them and promoting this. And I think some of the high-
profile problems we have had have actually sort of reminded 
people that this is not the world we--the better--we can do 
better.
    And the last thing I will say, you asked about the 
subcommittee, I really appreciate that. You know, doing things 
that reinforce regular order and how this is supposed to work 
are really important. The work the subcommittee--last year--in 
last year's legislation, the Spectrum Innovation Act, to 
reinforce a return to regular order on how we study the lower 3 
gigahertz spectrum band, those kinds of things really matter, 
people pay attention, and so your help is really important, and 
I appreciate it.
    Mr. Curtis. OK, thank you, I appreciate that answer. You 
are currently working on--to develop an incumbent informing 
capability.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Curtis. Mr. Guthrie's legislation, the Smart Spectrum 
Act, would provide direct statutory authority for this 
capability. Can you explain why that is important for your 
agency to do that?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, as I said, and I will say it 
quickly, you know, the low-hanging fruit is gone. We need to 
find new, innovative ways to share spectrum. IIC, the Incumbent 
Informing Capability, is actually a terrifically exciting new 
possibility about how we can do better sharing--better--and get 
more use out of the scarce resources that we have. So we are 
excited to--we would--we welcome the chance to work with you 
more on that because I think making sure that we have got the 
ability as a Federal Government to invest in the--those kinds 
of new tech--sharing technology is going to be important if we 
are going to meet the challenge of--in the future.
    Mr. Curtis. Finally, I would like to just emphasize the 
point of this agnostic technology concept, and my district, 
there is probably no better example, where you simply can't get 
fiber everywhere in the district, and we are dependent on these 
other technologies.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. I think there--I suspect that there--as 
I say, when I think about just places where there will be a 
healthy mix of technologies, it is exactly the kind of district 
you are describing, right, area you are describing. And we want 
to get fiber out as far as we can to the--because we want to 
give every American the best internet connection they can have, 
but we know that in challenging geographies, it is going to be 
a broader mix.
    Mr. Curtis. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And I am glad we have those technologies to 
rely on.
    Mr. Curtis. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.
    Mr. Latta. Thank you. The gentleman yields back, and the 
Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California's 29th 
District for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and also Ranking 
Member, for holding this very important committee.
    I appreciate you, Mr. Administrator Davidson, for coming to 
enlighten us today about what is really going on out there, and 
also thank you for your public service. We really appreciate 
you.
    The Broadband Equity Access and Development Program, 
otherwise known as BEAD Program for short, was established by 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to invest more than 42 
billion in bridging the digital divide across America. The BEAD 
Program, which is administered through NTIA, is intended to 
close the gap in access to broadband by providing grants to 
States and territories to build broadband infrastructure so 
they can deliver high-speed, reliable internet connections to 
underserved and underserved communities across the country.
    Last week, I introduced the Improving Broadband Mapping 
Act. The goal of this legislation is to help build an 
authoritative source on the state of the digital divide in the 
U.S. so that we can have better awareness of where things stand 
as we make strides toward closing the gap. Specifically, this 
bill would make improvements to the indicators of broadband 
need map, a resource NTIA offers to States to better understand 
local broadband availability and highlight socioeconomic data 
that may suggest challenges.
    Administrator Davidson, can you talk about how an improved 
indicators of broadband need map would help policymakers 
address broadband barriers other than just physical 
infrastructure?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for that question and for 
highlighting the importance of getting good data in this space. 
The--this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity, as we know, 
making sure that we are deploying--spending our resources, 
deploying our resources in the right places and then measuring 
outcomes is incredibly important to us. This is--some of this 
is work that NTIA is already doing, and some of it is work that 
was put forward in the Access Broadband Act.
    I am glad to--be glad to brief you and your team more on 
the--our efforts to date. This is an important area. I look 
forward to working with you as you put forward your legislation 
to make sure we are supporting you.
    Mr. Cardenas. So more improved and more accurate maps is 
critical to our success as a country?
    Mr. Davidson. Absolutely.
    Mr. Cardenas. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. We need to spend the money in the right 
places and measure how it makes people's lives better.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you. While expanding broadband networks 
is vital to bringing more communities online, it is just as 
important to make access to broadband affordable so that 
families across the country can get online and stay online. The 
Affordable Connectivity Program has been hugely successful, 
with over 18 million eligible households participating in the 
program across Democratic and Republican districts combined, 
both urban and rural, throughout the country.
    However, it is estimated that the program's funds will run 
out as soon as possibly March of 2024. The ACP is playing a 
critical role in helping to close the digital divide by 
connecting families to the internet and giving them the means 
to stay connected. Our goals for these programs will be 
frustrated if families in our districts cannot afford to 
maintain a consistent broadband connection from month to month.
    How will extending the ACP program further the goals of 
NTIA's BEAD Program and continue its success?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, I couldn't say it better, sir. 
Affordability is critical to our success here, and ACP has 
played an essential role in recent years in making sure that we 
have got affordability in internet access. You know, having a 
connection to somebody's home doesn't help a family if they 
can't afford to get online. Affordability is a necessity, not a 
luxury here.
    Congress has instructed us to make sure that we are 
building affordable, reliable, high-speed internet service. So 
programs like ACP, now relied on by millions of people, are an 
essential part of that. We won't be able to reach our goal of 
affordable networks without it. And the other thing that is 
quite important here is the--our deployment programs do better 
if ACP is on a firmer footing, because it gives providers the 
confidence that there will be consumers, that low-income 
Americans will be able to get online, and that is incredibly 
important.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you for that feedback. Administrator 
Davidson, recently NTIA released a data drive report 
demonstrating that the CBRS spectrum-sharing model is working. 
In your view, why is this approach so promising, and why are 
spectrum sharing approaches so important to the future of 
spectrum policy, and could the CBRS approach be replicated in 
other spectrum bands?
    Mr. Davidson. Right. Well, thank you for highlighting that. 
I will say very--just very briefly that we have got to find 
innovative new ways to make better use of spectrum if we are 
going to meet our future spectrum needs. It is a scarce 
resource. Sharing is really one of the interesting and 
innovative and exciting new things that is happening in this 
space that has proven to be very successful.
    The study you mentioned showed a 120 percent increase in 
number of devices on these--in these--using these sharing--the 
sharing platform, so we are excited to see how it rolls out in 
the future and where we might be able to use it in other places 
and invest in other kinds of sharing. So I think showing that 
sharing works is really important for our spectrum future.
    Mr. Cardenas. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter [presiding]. The gentleman yields. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Joyce, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for convening today's 
hearing on oversight and reauthorization of NTIA and the role 
that they play in closing the digital divide and ensuring that 
all Americans have access to fast, reliable broadband. And 
thank you, Assistant Secretary Davidson, for testifying here 
today.
    Connectivity is truly the key for success. The demand for 
fast and reliable internet access has grown, and the need is 
especially prevalent in rural areas just like mine in south 
central and southwestern Pennsylvania, similar, Mr. Davidson, 
to what you acknowledged in your recent visit in your opening 
statement. Rural Americans often lack accessibility to this 
critical tool because of the lack of infrastructure.
    Since coming to Congress, bridging the digital divide has 
been a top priority of mine, yet the problem remains that these 
communities are often overlooked and underserved. There has 
been concern about the accuracy of the FCC broadband maps, 
especially as it relates to the BEAD Program funding 
deployment. Very simply stated, a poorly developed final map 
can and will undermine the potential success of the BEAD 
Program.
    Mr. Davidson, the Broadband Data Act places mapping efforts 
at the FCC, yet NTIA continues to produce its own national 
broadband map. You just said we need to spend money in the 
right places. How does your map differ from the FCC's, and why 
should Congress continue to fund that map?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, it is a very good question. So, first 
of all, as you rightly said, mapping is essential here over--to 
make--ensure that we are spending our money--the taxpayers' 
money properly, that we are good stewards of those funds. The 
FCC is creating the map that is the authoritative map that we 
will use for the BEAD allocations and for State--that States 
will use as the basis for how they are going to spend their 
money.
    We have created over time other kinds of maps, and I think 
we are constantly looking at where we can deprecate our maps 
where they are no longer needed, but also to look at and 
understand where--understanding, for example, the impacts of 
digital equity. We are collecting a lot of data about the 
outcomes of our broadband investments, and so there are layers 
to these maps that are not duplicative, and we will continue to 
make sure that, where maps are needed, we will continue to 
invest in them. Where they are not, we won't.
    Mr. Joyce. I understand that the maps that will be used to 
calculate the BEAD funding allocation for each State will not 
be the same maps that are used by States to conduct their State 
challenge process.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Joyce. Are you concerned that the difference between 
each variation of the map could lead to certain States being 
overfunded and others being underfunded?
    Mr. Davidson. That does not--it has not emerged as a big 
issue so far. The--we are going to keep a close eye on it. The 
difference is just that States are given some--States are 
required under the statute to run their own challenge processes 
after allocations are given to make sure that they are being as 
accurate as possible in their process. So there will be further 
refinements based on the FCC map.
    I agree that--our hope is that the FCC map will be the main 
source of truth, but we do want to give States the flexibility 
to add their own data on top of it and make sure that they are 
also making that map better.
    Mr. Joyce. And I appreciate that oversight because I think 
it is apparent to us here that we need that oversight to make 
sure the funds are placed in the right situation.
    Given that the States are responsible for awarding and 
administering the BEAD funds to entities within the State, what 
is NTIA's role in oversight of those funds?
    Mr. Davidson. We are making sure that States do a lot of 
homework before we give them their final grants. So there will 
be two bites at the apple here. States have to present us an 
initial plan that describes how they expect to spend their 
money. They will then do their grantmaking, and then they will 
present us with a final plan.
    We feel it is very important that we not just--that we not 
just write hundred millions of dollars of checks, billions of 
dollars in some cases, to States without a plan. And so we are 
going to be looking at those plans. We have given--it is a 
pretty detailed plan that we are expecting that shows how they 
meet the requirements of the statute, and that is going to be 
our main way to make sure that States are spending the money 
wisely and consistently with Congress' direction.
    Mr. Joyce. And I appreciate that analogy you made that you 
have given that homework assignment, but before that final 
grade, before the awarding of those millions and billions of 
dollars that you just mentioned, let us make sure that those 
maps are accurate before Federal funds go into these programs.
    I thank you again for being present today.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes 
the gentlelady from Michigan, Mrs. Dingell, for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to you, 
Chairman Latta and Ranking Member, for holding this hearing.
    I am going to agree with all of my colleagues because I 
have got a lot of questions. I think the point that everybody 
is making is that the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act has made a once-in-a-generation investment. We want 
every American to have access to broadband. And you play a 
central role in making that happen. And a lot of people are 
worried about it because it is our constituents that need to 
get that access.
    Mr. Davidson. Right.
    Mrs. Dingell. Let us start with privacy. For starters, the 
Energy and Commerce Committee has worked diligently in a 
bipartisan manner to enact comprehensive data privacy 
legislation that will guarantee vital protections for every 
American. They are desperately needed.
    In your statement, you mentioned NTI's work on the 
intersection of privacy and civil rights. Could you talk a 
little bit about the work that is currently going on in 
privacy, and is a Federal privacy law needed?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I really appreciate that question, and 
the starting point, of course, is that everyone in America 
deserves to have their privacy protected. The President has 
said that we need to do more to make sure that we have got a 
comprehensive Federal privacy law, a baseline privacy law that 
protects everybody, and it shouldn't matter which--what State 
you live in, whether you have crossed State lines. We need a--
we need that comprehensive Federal law.
    NTIA is trying to do its part here too, because what we 
have learned from listening to stakeholders, people out in the 
communities, is that privacy and security concerns have a 
disproportionate impact on vulnerable communities: the poor, 
the elderly, children. They suffer more when their privacy is 
being violated. They are less well-situated to protect their 
privacy.
    So the work we are doing is about how to put 
recommendations in front of Congress, in front of enforcers to 
make sure we are doing everything we can to protect the privacy 
of those communities.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you for that. The Innovation Fund. With 
each subsequent generation of wireless technology, we have 
experienced significant increases in network speeds in a number 
of connected services. As a cochair of the 5G and Beyond 
Caucus, I've continued with my colleague and cochair, Mr. 
Walberg, to push for innovative technologies and highlighted 
the importance of enhancing security of these networks as we 
increase the number of connections.
    How does a limited market of suppliers for wireless radio 
equipment impact the overall security of our networks?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. It is a terrific question. The--a 
limited set of suppliers makes our networks less secure because 
we have to rely on fewer of them. Many countries around the 
world are relying on untrusted suppliers, particularly from our 
competitors like in China, and it hinders innovation.
    So we are very eager to open up the--to use our innovation 
fund to catalyze a more open market, to create different layers 
where smaller companies and new innovators can get involved. 
That will make the supply chain ultimately more resilient, we 
will have more suppliers involved. It will create better 
competition, greater security.
    Mrs. Dingell. Let me build on that. Does our country's 
overreliance on foreign vendors for 5G and successor wireless 
radio technology present a risk to our national security, data 
security, and resiliency of our wireless supply chain for 
future shocks?
    Mr. Davidson. It does.
    Mrs. Dingell. So what do we do?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, we are--Congress has given us a--in the 
CHIPS Act the opportunity to really act here. We have a $1.5 
billion Wireless Innovation Fund. We are working, as I say, to 
catalyze and create more open markets, so support open RAN, 
which is an important set of tools that I think will break open 
this market, allow more competitors to engage, we will get 
greater innovation, we will be able to not just have to rely on 
foreign suppliers.
    Mrs. Dingell. I am running out of time, so I am going to 
cut to more chases. My colleagues have talked about the BEAD 
Program. Will you--do you expect to meet the June 30th 
deadline?
    Mr. Davidson. We do. We do.
    Mrs. Dingell. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. We think it is very important.
    Mrs. Dingell. National spectrum. Secretary Raimondo has 
spoken often about the importance of spectrum to our economy 
and the need for a national spectrum strategy. You have 
launched your national spectrum strategy process and have 
received comments from numerous stakeholders. Can you provide 
us with a quick update on the spectrum strategy process, and 
once released, what are your plans for the implementation? And 
it matters to me and the heartland because spectrum matters for 
a lot of our businesses.
    Mr. Davidson. Spectrum matters for a huge amount of our 
businesses, it matters for the auto industry----
    Mrs. Dingell. Correct.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. Relying on it more and more. It 
is showing up in people's lives and people's cars, and that is 
terrific. We need to have a strategy that meets all of those 
needs, and that is what we are working on. We put out a request 
for comment. We got our comments back in. We are hard at work 
now on identifying the bands, 1500 megahertz of spectrum that 
we want to make available for study so that we can work on 
meeting that pipeline of need. And then we expect to have a 
study out--I mean, have our strategy out by the end of the 
year.
    Mrs. Dingell. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields. The Chair now recognizes 
the gentleman from Texas for 5 minutes, Representative Weber.
    Mr. Weber. Thank you, sir.
    Administrator, thank you for being here. I am over on this 
end, Mr. Davidson. Over here. There we go. It is the last time 
you will see me to your left, just so you know.
    One of the things I did want to do, I have the Gulf Coast 
of Texas. We have some rural areas there on the Gulf Coast over 
in east Texas, Piney Woods section. And as my grandfather used 
to say, it was so rural that it took three acres just to rust 
one nail. Now that is real rural, OK?
    I want to know a couple things. We have a lot of 
hurricanes, and so we deal with FEMA a lot, and we deal with a 
measurement called the low to moderate income when they are 
coming in with funding for disasters. So you have talked a lot 
about doing this--the plans, the meet outs to these different 
States with the money. You talked about Florida. Texas also has 
a plan, I am assuming. Are you up to speed, do you know 
anything about it yet?
    Mr. Davidson. Texas will have a plan. It is--and for--both 
for digital equity and, of course, its initial plan for the 
broadband, the big State grant program allocations. I think 
Texas, you know, has a huge challenge in terms of, you know, 
literally hundreds of thousands of households that need 
broadband connectivity, that need internet connectivity, and we 
are eager to help.
    Mr. Weber. Right. That is true in my district too. And I 
read in your comments, I think, where you had a plan for, what 
was it, middle income, I think? But what about the LMI people, 
the low to moderate income that I described that FEMA uses, do 
you all interact with any of those kinds of figures?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Actually, that is a great question about 
the FEMA tie-in. We have--the statute and our funding notice 
requires a low-cost option, so when we deploy these networks, 
we give out this money, there has to be a low-cost option for 
lower-income Americans.
    We give States a fair amount of flexibility about how they 
are going to implement that and identify that low-cost option. 
And the FEMA piece is something--actually, I haven't heard a 
lot about it, and I will take it back to our team. We would 
love to talk to you more about it.
    Mr. Weber. OK. Well, that is--unfortunately for us, we deal 
with that too frequently on the Gulf Coast of Texas. Also I--
TexDoT came into my office a couple years back, 2 or 3 years 
back, maybe before pandemic even, when there was talk about a 
sell-off of some of the spectrum, and they wanted to reserve--
they were against that because they thought they should reserve 
that area of spectrum for some of the car--the auto-driving 
cars and the lights that communicate signals that could 
communicate with vehicles. Pardon me.
    And so is that what you're discussing today where you were 
talking about a lot of the spectrum being used in communities 
on traffic things?
    Mr. Davidson. I am sorry, on which?
    Mr. Weber. On traffic signals, on moving auto--autonomous 
vehicles.
    Mr. Davidson. It is a little--it is part of what we are 
thinking about. I mean, there are a whole range of uses now of 
spectrum in the transportation sector, and there are 
technologies out there, and there is recent development to make 
sure that we have got what they call CV2Access, the connected 
vehicle connections for safety purposes. That is something that 
has recently been--the FCC made a recent announcement about.
    I just meant there is a more general principle here, which 
is all of these connected technologies are using spectrum more. 
We expect automotive uses to only increase. Everybody wants to 
be connected in their car, everyone wants their cars to be able 
to do new things, manage traffic, drive themselves, and all of 
that is going to rely on a steady pipeline.
    Mr. Weber. That might a good thing if people were all 
connected in their cars, if somebody gets mad. Instead of doing 
something physical, they could maybe email them the hand 
gesture, I don't know.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Weber. Just thinking about that. How do other countries 
manage some of their spectrum in respect to automobiles and 
traffic and highways, do you know?
    Mr. Davidson. I only--there are others who are more expert 
at NTIA about that, but I know that we think about this quite a 
bit in terms of making sure we are harmonizing our work where 
we can, and this--the importance of the World Radio Conference 
that is coming up, making sure that we are--that what our 
industry needs in the future, our stakeholders need in the 
future, including our Federal stakeholders, is reflected in 
those international obligations.
    Mr. Weber. Do you all inter--this is a loaded question. Do 
you all interact with the Department of Defense about spectrum?
    Mr. Davidson. We do on a very regular basis.
    Mr. Weber. Can you interact harder?
    Mr. Davidson. [Laughter.] I will say we have had a--
actually, we have invested a lot, and I have very--we have a 
very good working relationship right now with our counterparts 
at the Department of Defense. I think they understand that our 
national security relies on our economic security. We do well 
as a Nation when we have the leading wireless industry in the 
world, and making sure that we have got the spectrum to feed 
that is going to be important.
    Mr. Weber. Well, I agree with that except I would reverse 
that, our economic security relies on our national security. 
Thank you for that.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields back. Ladies and 
gentleman, we are going to take a 5-minute recess right now. We 
will readjourn in 5 minutes.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    [Recess.]
    Mr. Carter. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to get 
started back. The Chair is now going to recognize the lady from 
New Hampshire, Ms. Kuster, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Kuster. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Assistant 
Secretary Davidson, thank you so much for being with us.
    As you know, NTIA is tasked with administering historic 
broadband programs to deliver high-speed, reliable, and 
affordable broadband internet services to everyone across the 
country. Closing the digital divide is no small task, and it 
will require the work and coordination of multiple Federal 
agencies. That is why I am working with Representative Tim 
Walberg to reintroduce the Proper Leadership to Align 
Networks--PLAN for Broadband Act, we call it.
    This bill will require the development of a national 
broadband strategy to assist Federal agencies in aligning their 
efforts to deliver on the goal of connecting every community to 
the internet. A national strategy will maximize the impact of 
those broadband programs by directing Federal funding to 
communities that are unserved or underserved and need it most.
    Mr. Davidson, I know your agency has already begun 
implementing these programs and has provided planning grants to 
States for the BEAD and Digital Equity Program. In New 
Hampshire, the State broadband office is already fast at work 
developing plans for both programs, and I appreciate your 
agency's ongoing attention to New Hampshire in support to get 
shovels in the ground and networks up and running. I know your 
staff is working closely with my office to help the State 
resolve any issues and prevent program delays.
    Mr. Davidson. Sorry.
    Ms. Kuster. No worries.
    Mr. Davidson. I--first of all, thank you for your--for 
the--for your comments, and it is incredibly important that we 
get these--this is a stark opportunity, we have to get these 
right. Once-in-a-generation moment for us to make sure that 
everybody in New Hampshire and everybody across the country is 
connected.
    I think you were asking about permitting, right?
    Ms. Kuster. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And I will say that is an area where we know 
that there are big challenges, and we know if we are going to--
we feel the urgency of the moment. We would--we know that 
people are really hungering to get connected. We want to make 
sure that, once States give this money out, that the projects 
can move forward quickly, and we know that permitting can be a 
real challenge in some places.
    So this is an area where we have heard a lot from 
stakeholders about it. We are trying to do what we can on the 
Federal level to make sure we are streamlining all the Federal 
processes. We are working closely with other Federal agencies 
trying to figure out how we can invest with States in making 
sure we are streamlining State and local processes too.
    Ms. Kuster. Great. Very helpful, thank you so much. And 
we'll continue to----
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Ms. Kuster [continuing]. Work with your office. I am the 
cochair of the bipartisan Rural Broadband Caucus, and I share 
your mission to bring internet access to every community, and 
especially as Mr. Curtis has said, to rural communities that 
have previously been left behind. The BEAD Program will invest 
42 billion in our Nation's broadband infrastructure to finally 
connect the hardest-to-reach communities. It is critical that 
this historic funding opportunity be optimized to provide high-
speed, reliable internet to as many households as possible.
    Now in the Granite State, as in Utah, New Hampshire has a 
lot of mountainous and difficult-to-penetrate terrain, which 
will make it challenging to deploy fiber to many homes in my 
district. However, there are several technologies like 
wireless, cable, and satellite that can be more easily deployed 
and provide comparable services in areas that fiber can't 
reach.
    Does the BEAD Program provide sufficient flexibility to 
allow States to choose the broadband technology that most--may 
be most practical for each community?
    Mr. Davidson. We believe it does. And as you rightly noted, 
every State is different, and we believe it has got to be an 
all-of-the-above approach if we are going to meet this goal of 
connecting everybody, particularly in rural America. And so we 
are--we fully expect that States will have the flexibility to 
include a variety of technologies in their deployments.
    A lot will choose to favor fiber or have a lot of fiber. We 
hope there will be a lot of that out there because it is 
terrific. But in many places, there will also be fixed 
wireless, there will also be satellite deployments. Those are 
going to be very good too, and we are excited about making sure 
that we have got the right mix that will vary from State to 
State to connect everyone.
    Ms. Kuster. Terrific, thank you so much. One quick last 
question. Another potential barrier is workforce. We have an 
unemployment rate of 2.1 percent. Does the BEAD and Digital 
Equity Program provide support for training for workforce?
    Mr. Davidson. We do allow--so, first of all, let me just 
say the training--workforce and training issues are going to be 
huge. You rightly note already that unemployment rates can be--
are very low in some of these areas. We are expecting that we 
are going to need somewhere around 100,000 to 150,000 new jobs, 
100,000 jobs that we will have a shortfall on, and we are 
encouraging States to invest now in workforce training to make 
sure that we have the workforce we need when the money really 
hits and the shovels hit the ground.
    Ms. Kuster. Terrific, thank you so much.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields. The Chair now recognizes 
the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our 
witness today.
    Mr. Davidson, the NTIA is leading a national spectrum 
strategy which requests feedback on broader spectrum management 
questions in addition to specific frequency bands of interest. 
While I understand there is interest in exploring the utility 
of dynamic spectrum sharing modeling, how will these comments 
inform NTIA's effort to prioritize clearing exclusive-use 
spectrum versus sharing?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will just say that we are--we expect 
that there's going to need to be a kind of--another all-the-
above approach if we are going to meet our future spectrum 
needs. There will be a need--there are needs for unlicensed 
spectrum, for shared spectrum, and also for exclusive licensed 
spectrum. And we are working on all of those, and our national 
spectrum strategy is designed to put together a strategy for 
meeting all of those needs, and particularly, identifying 1500 
megahertz of spectrum to study to make sure we are meeting 
those needs in the years to come.
    Mr. Allen. Two of the bills we are reviewing today enshrine 
important cybersecurity roles in NTIA. It is my understanding 
that NTIA has been increasingly active on cybersecurity 
matters. As NTIA continues to take on more cybersecurity policy 
development initiatives, how important is it that the NTIA is 
informed by information security professionals in the private 
sector?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I think it is incredibly important that 
we are informed well about the work that we are doing. We know 
that a lot of great expertise exists in the private sector, and 
we regularly speak with folks there. We have a big mission 
there. I mean, the administration has made this a priority. 
There are a lot of other parts of the administration where this 
work is done.
    NTIA has a big role in sort of making sure that our 
broadband networks are secure, looking at our supply chain, and 
recently even taking on issues like the security of the 
internet router system, our Border Gateway Protocol, BGP, and 
making sure that even in areas like that we are a leading voice 
of expertise.
    Mr. Allen. And in this effort, where do you think NTIA can 
add value for the American taxpayer?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, you know, again we--I will recognize 
there are a lot of other--there are other agencies that are 
taking the lead in this space. We believe we have a particular 
role to play as experts on thinking about the economic impact 
of cybersecurity policy, thinking about how it affects our 
other digital economy and telecommunications policies, our 
expertise and our work in standards internationally. Each of 
those areas touches on this work on cybersecurity, and we want 
to make sure we are doing our part. Again, there will be others 
who take the lead, but we have a role to play, and we are going 
to make sure we do it well.
    Mr. Allen. Moving on, will NTIA recommend to OMB that the 
Buy American standards for optical fiber need to allow for more 
than one manufacturer to comply?
    Mr. Davidson. We are looking very closely at making sure 
that we can meet the needs of our broadband deployments. At the 
same time, we want to make sure that we are using this as--if 
we are spending Federal money here, we want to spend it to 
promote American manufacturing and American jobs where we can. 
So we are going to take a close look. We are working very 
closely with the fiber cable suppliers to make sure there is 
adequate supply.
    I was gratified to see just recently an announcement in 
North Carolina, I was down with the Secretary, new assembly 
lines, manufacturing lines for fiber cable being put together, 
specifically to meet the need that is being generated by these 
programs. So that is exactly what we are looking for.
    Mr. Allen. There has already been discussion today on rural 
cell service. Over the past several years, Georgia's 12th 
District has seen major improvements in--on broadband 
connectivity. However, consistent cell service remains to be a 
big problem in the district. I have heard from plenty of my 
constituents before that they don't want to hear what the 
Federal Government is going to do to improve broadband access 
as long as they still do not have consistent cell service. What 
policies or incentives does NTIA recommend to encourage private 
companies to invest to sell infrastructure in rural areas?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, you know, the biggest thing is, of 
course, making sure that we have got that pipeline of spectrum 
available to them to do those deployments, and I think that is 
probably the biggest area where we are working hard to make 
sure that we are supporting the work that is being--the good 
work that is being also done by the Federal Communications 
Commission and others.
    Mr. Allen. That--yes, that is kind of my next question, is 
how are you collaborating with FCC to facilitate and expedite 
the deployment of cell towers, you know, which, again, you 
know, trying to get permits and things like that so we can 
connect the district?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. Well, again, I mean, the FCC has been a 
lead--a real thought leader--a leader on this, not just a 
thought leader, a real leader on making sure this--these 
deployments are happening. We are working closely with them on 
a range of issues. And I will also say our hope is that our 
broadband deployments, putting more connectivity, more backhaul 
out into the field will ultimately help also with some of these 
deployments, so we are eager to continue to collaborate on 
that.
    Mr. Allen. OK.
    Mr. Davidson. And thank you for your leadership on----
    Mr. Allen. All right, thank you.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Kelly, for 5 
minutes.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank Chair 
Latta and Ranking Member Matsui for holding this morning's 
hearing. I also want to thank Assistant Secretary Davidson for 
being here today and all the work NTIA is conducting to expand 
access to affordable, high-speed internet services.
    I, like many of you, don't think any community should be 
left out of the digital revolution. Equitable access to 
internet and broadband services is especially important for the 
rural parts of my district and many others. And that is why I, 
along with my constituents and Illinoisans, are eager to see 
the BEAD Program materialize into projects in our communities. 
But I know you and the agency still have work ahead of you, 
particularly looking ahead to June 30th and the announcements 
of allocations.
    My understanding of the challenge process is that the NTIA 
will use the Federal Communications Commission's national 
broadband map to determine based on need what States--which 
States need additional money, and then States will have their 
own challenge process on FCC maps to drill down even further 
where the needs are for each individual State.
    So, Assistant Secretary Davidson, now that NTIA has 
received public comment on this challenge process, when will 
NTIA finalize its model challenge process for the BEAD Program, 
and once out--allotments are announced, how does NTIA plan to 
work with States to incorporate third-party data to provide a 
better picture of internet availability?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, Congresswoman, first of all, thank you 
for those questions, thank you for your support of these 
programs, and we do feel the weight of this historic 
opportunity here to connect everybody and make sure that no one 
is left behind.
    The State challenge process that you mentioned is actually 
quite important here because it is a way to make sure that the 
States are putting together their version--that their programs 
are not--or spending the money where they should be spending 
it, and that we have really uncovered where the unserved truly 
are. And we know those unserved communities, they exist as 
unserved locations. We have broadband deserts in urban areas, 
in suburban areas, and we want--and the State challenge 
processes are going to be really important in making sure we 
uncover all of those and we are really spending the money where 
the need is.
    We have released, actually, proposed guidance on the 
challenge processes. We are also providing what I think of as a 
kind of plug-and-play model for States so that we are offering 
sort of kind of model guidance. Here is a challenge process 
that you can just pick up and use that we think will meet--you 
know, meet the requirements of the statute, and States can use 
that. But we also expect some States are going to kind of go 
with their own, and we are prepared to look at that too.
    So more to come. Our guidance is out. We are going to be 
putting more guidance out for States, and it will be--and we 
will be eager to see how they choose to implement.
    Ms. Kelly. Well, I am encouraged that this program and 
other programs will make meaningful progress in bridging the 
digital divide. But once everything is in place, infrastructure 
is built, the program still needs to be nurtured. We have to be 
really intentional about making sure that we close that 
internet or the digital divide among communities, and 
especially as so much stuff is online.
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I would just say we wholeheartedly 
agree. We look at this as this is a years-long effort, right, 
and deployment is only a piece of it. That is why those digital 
equity programs are so important as well. We want to make sure 
that people have the connection that goes to their home, but we 
also need to make sure it is affordable, and we need to make 
sure that they have the tools they need to get--to stay online 
and thrive.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you. How do we ensure in the months and 
years to come that we are not creating a new digital divide 
within those communities that have been historically left 
behind?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, we--this is going to be an area where 
we need to be in constant communication and do continual data 
collection to make sure we are seeing where people are online. 
And, again, not just where there is a connection but where 
people are actually getting service, using that service. And 
that is kind of the--some of the data that we are expecting to 
collect when we look at measuring the outcomes of all this 
work.
    And, again, we are looking at this as a--this is a decade-
long project. For some of the funding programs, that is the 
time horizon that we are looking at. And, again, it is not just 
about deployment, it is about making sure that people are 
actually thriving online.
    Ms. Kelly. Thank you.
    And I will yield back.
    Thank you for your responses.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Balderson, for 
5 minutes.
    Ohio, excuse me.
    Mr. Balderson. Mr. Chairman, that would be Ohio.
    Mr. Carter. That would be Ohio, wouldn't it?
    Mr. Balderson. Yes, thank you, sir.
    Mr. Carter. Same thing.
    Mr. Balderson. [Laughter.] Same thing.
    Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today. With the 
BEAD money--and we have talked about this today a little bit. 
With the BEAD money going to States soon, I am concerned about 
the application provider's need to submit permits they need to 
acquire to build out networks. The full committee will mark up 
a package of broadband permitting bills tomorrow, but I want to 
discuss what your agency is currently doing to address the 
burdensome permitting process. Yes, we touched on that a little 
bit.
    Long permitting or environmental reviews can significantly 
delay the deployment of networks. Can you tell me what NTIA is 
doing to streamline deployment approvals to ensure BEAD funding 
is being used to rapidly deploy networks to underserved and 
unserved households and businesses?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, it is a terrific question, sir, because 
we are keenly interested in and concerned about the potential 
delays in deployment. We know--we feel the urgency of the 
moment. We know that people really want these networks. We are 
working hard to get money out to the States and ultimately the 
providers. We would hate it to be a situation where providers 
get their money and then they are not able to build their 
networks for years because of these kinds of hurdles.
    We are working very closely now to develop a permitting 
strategy. We are working closely with other Federal agencies to 
streamline the Federal permitting process, and that is starting 
to bear real fruit. That is the area where we have the greatest 
control in making sure we are working with the big land 
managements agencies and others who have--who can help us 
there. The other big challenge is going to be the State and 
local level.
    Mr. Balderson. Great, thank you. I think everyone in this 
room agrees that we want to close the digital divide and 
connect all Americans. As you know, many households in rural 
Ohio in my district remain completely underserved. Do you think 
that BEAD Program funds should be prioritized for households 
that are completely unserved before using funds to upgrade 
speeds for existing networks?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes, I think the statute that we are 
implementing is very clear. We were given an ambitious mission: 
connect everybody in the country. We are only going to meet 
that mission if we are making sure we spend our money wisely 
where it is most needed. The statute is very clear in our 
minds: unserved first, and that is where we are going to spend 
the money.
    Mr. Balderson. All right, thank you. My last question is, I 
want to shift topics to the supply chain. With such a massive 
increase of Federal dollars going toward broadband, providers 
will be competing for the same materials as they build out 
networks at the same time. What is your agency doing to ensure 
that the supply chain for network equipment is strong and that 
there won't be delays caused by a sudden increase in demand for 
network equipment?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will just say, you think about in the 
context of the broadband programs correct, sir. So it is a 
really important question, Congressman, because we are also 
wanting to make sure that there aren't unfortunate delays or 
increases in prices because we do not have the supply chain 
that we need.
    So this is an area where we are investing quite a bit of 
energy because we see this as not just a connectivity program 
but it is also an American jobs and manufacturing program, and 
where we can, we really want to work with and incentivize to 
provide the builders of the network equipment, the builders of 
fiberoptic cable to make sure that they are manufacturing that 
equipment in the U.S., and they are invest--and that they know 
there is this big opportunity coming from this funding. So we 
are really pushing and working with providers to make sure we 
are getting more American jobs, more manufacturing here in the 
U.S.
    We will note that there will probably be--there will be 
challenges to doing that. There are areas, there's kinds of 
equipment that are going to be very hard to source here in the 
U.S. And as we have in other programs, we will be looking at 
the--at waivers, but the bar for those waivers needs to be 
high. We want to make sure we are doing everything we can to 
get the equipment sourced locally, then we will make sure 
that--but we want to make sure these programs succeed, and so 
we are working to really take a close eye, piece by piece, at 
what is needed in the supply chain.
    Mr. Balderson. OK, thank you very much.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Balderson. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman from Ohio yields back. The Chair 
now recognizes the gentlelady from Texas, Mrs. Fletcher, for 5 
minutes.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to 
Chairman Latta and Ranking Member Matsui for convening today's 
hearing to discuss the central role that NTIA plays in spectrum 
management, broadband deployment, and other Federal 
telecommunications and technology policy.
    We have covered these topics pretty extensively today. 
Assistant Secretary Davidson, I thank you for joining us and 
discussing these topics, sharing your insights with us, with 
our entire subcommittee.
    As you mentioned in your opening statement, one of NTIA's 
many important responsibilities is management of public safety 
communications, including Next Generation 9-1-1 and overseeing 
the First Responder Network Authority, or FirstNet. This is a 
topic we haven't really touched on yet in this hearing, so I am 
glad to have a chance to ask you about it and also to see the 
first responders who have joined us today for this hearing. I 
appreciated getting the chance to visit with them.
    Since January of 2018, all 50 States and six territories 
have opted into FirstNet and use it to coordinate State and 
local law enforcement and first responder efforts. In my 
district, Texas' 7th Congressional District in the Houston 
area, not far from Mr. Weber's, we have seen this network has 
been absolutely essential in supporting crisis response from 
natural disasters to the COVID-19 pandemic. And I just visited 
with Chief Schaeffer about his--how vital this connectivity has 
been to his community in Washington State.
    So last week I reintroduced the FirstNet Reauthorization 
Act to ensure network continuity and to support our first 
responders, and I am so glad that the committee has brought 
that before us for consideration so quickly.
    So I want to focus my questions to you on this issue. 
First, Mr. Davidson, can you just talk about how FirstNet 
serves as an example of a public/private partnership?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I have to--thank you for this question, 
and I am glad we are getting a chance to talk about it because 
FirstNet has been in many ways an amazing success story in 
terms of an example of a very--highly successful public/private 
partnership. I served in the Commerce Department previously, 
and when I left in--well, when I was serving in 2015-2016, 
FirstNet was just a PowerPoint presentation. It was an idea.
    To come back now and see a network that is supporting over 
4.7 million first responders around the country, over 25,000 
public service--public safety agencies, fire departments, like 
we have seen here today, police departments, EMTs who are 
relying on the FirstNet network to make sure that they have 
connectivity on a bad day in case of an emergency. And the 
network is working incredibly well. So it is really an example 
of a success story of how we can build a public/private 
partnership to serve a real need for our first responders.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Well, thank you. And I think that leads into 
my followup question very nicely, which is, can you tell us why 
it is so important to reauthorize FirstNet before its sunset in 
2027?
    Mr. Davidson. Right. Well, it is incredibly important 
because it--because the project does sunset in 2027 without 
reauthorization. We need that reauthorization. We now have 
millions of first responders who are relying on the network. It 
has been highly successful, and we have--you know, there are 
stories every month, every year, all the time about how 
FirstNet has been able to help in cases of day-to-day 
emergencies, in the case of public--you know, major disasters.
    And just know that we need to reauthorize it to make sure 
it is on firm footing, and we should do it well in advance of 
the actual deadline so that we can continue to operate with 
confidence and with our private-sector partner to make sure we 
are continuing to invest in the network and build it out for 
the first responders who need it.
    Mrs. Fletcher. Well, thank you so much for that. I look 
forward to working with my colleagues on this subcommittee and 
on our committee to reauthorize this important program.
    And I have about a minute left, so with the time I have 
left I do want to touch on one other topic, one that we have 
discussed pretty extensively today, and several of my 
colleagues just asked you kind of related questions. Ms. 
Kuster, Mr. Allen, and Mr. Balderson all asked about permitting 
relating to NTIA implementation of BEAD funds.
    And I have introduced both in the last Congress and again 
in this Congress the Broadband Incentives for Communities Act, 
which provide grants for local governments to hire and train 
employees, to buy software, to do things to expand their 
permitting capabilities. And this is something that we know 
from experience in my district in Houston, where we have some 
of the largest operators and folks who are working on building 
out this infrastructure, they have seen that this is absolutely 
essential to effective broadband deployment.
    It is not in tomorrow's markup, but I hope that this 
committee will move it quickly. And because I am going to run 
out of time, I might ask Mr. Davidson if I could ask to get 
your response in the record about how a grant program like this 
at the local level could help prevent bottlenecks and delays 
and support rapid infrastructure deployment in all communities.
    So I know I am out of time, and I will yield back, but I 
will submit that question. Thank you so much for your time 
today.
    Mr. Davidson. Happy to do it. And it is a great idea.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Fulcher, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Davidson, thank you for being here. It is good to talk 
with you. Mr. Davidson, NTIA represents the U.S. on issues 
regarding the domain name service through the Government 
Advisory Committee within ICANN. And ICANN's multistakeholder 
model is an attempt to access and management of websites that 
they will remain open and have a transparent process--at least, 
that is the attempt. Can you elaborate on NTIA's role within 
that advisory committed?
    Mr. Davidson. Absolutely. So, first of all, the domain name 
system and the issues around it are in some ways in the 
background. Most Americans probably are not really thinking 
about how the domain name system works, but it is actually an 
incredibly important area to make sure it is functioning 
properly, and we have had this multistakeholder approach, not 
run by governments but actually run by a community of technical 
experts. It has been very successful so far.
    There is a Government Advisory Committee, and NTIA serves 
as the Federal lead, the U.S. lead on that advisory committee 
making sure that we are the interface so that we work at ICANN 
to solve big issues.
    Mr. Fulcher. So with that, can you share with us what steps 
that NTIA has been taking to ensure internet domains aren't 
abused or supporting cybersecurity attacks, making sure they 
are not devastating----
    Mr. Davidson. Right
    Mr. Fulcher [continuing]. And impacting us in a negative 
fashion?
    Mr. Davidson. It is an area--all of those are areas of real 
constant attention. We have staff who are part of the ICANN 
working groups on some of those issues. We are particularly 
interested in making sure, for example, that we have the 
continued operation of the WHOIS database to make sure that 
legitimate law enforcement and other folks who need access to 
that information are able to get it. We are keenly interested 
in the security of the domain name system, making sure that we 
are supporting in any ways we can from the Federal Government 
side.
    So those are all--the topics you mentioned are all topics 
that we are watching and engaged on, I think are quite 
important.
    Mr. Fulcher. So one of the things I wanted to just get your 
feeling on was where you think NTIA's possession--position is 
within this effort, and if you think you have got the strength 
position there. To set that up, Congress has recently taken 
steps to elevate NTIA's cybersecurity policy expertise as 
cybersecurity risks present more challenges for American 
businesses and consumers, specifically in 2019 directed NTIA to 
carry out a supply chain vulnerability information-sharing 
program known as the C-SCRIP program.
    And so from our vantage point, one of NTIA's strengths as 
an agency is its policy development and multistakeholder 
approach, which you just talked about, to convening other 
agencies. One of the examples is NTIA works with other Federal 
agencies on spectrum matters, and under the Access Broadband 
Act NTIA also works closely with Federal agencies recording 
broadband deployment and permitting challenges.
    So from your vantage point, do you think NTIA is in a 
strong position of leverage there when it comes to interagency 
cybersecurity challenge----
    Mr. Davidson. I am very proud of our work in this space, 
and thank you for asking about it. We do feel there are--we--as 
I said in an answer to a previous question, there are a lot of 
agencies that are working on cybersecurity within the Federal 
Government on an operational level. And we work--we are trying 
to do our part on this, and our focus is really about 
cybersecurity policy. And where I think we have had real 
expertise to bring to the table has been in understanding the 
policy dimensions of some of our cybersecurity issues, really 
understanding the impact on the economy and on businesses of 
some of the cybersecurity policies that we are putting in 
place.
    We are also doing a lot of operational work ourselves, 
thinking about, for example, our broadband deployment and 
making sure we have got good cybersecurity standards for all 
the Federal money that is going out. We think about it in the 
context of spectrum, as you mentioned. We are working on the C-
SCRIP program to make sure that we have got good supply chain 
information about cybersecurity risks going out to smaller 
companies.
    So across the board working on our vulnerability equities 
process. So across the board, we have got areas--we have got--
you know, we don't--we are not the biggest operational agency 
out there, but on cybersecurity policy we have got a real role 
to play and we are very proud of the work we are doing there.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you for that. And I am about out of 
time, but I am going to submit a question in writing to you, it 
has to do with GDPR----
    Mr. Davidson. Great.
    Mr. Fulcher [continuing]. And their privacy versus the 
WHOIS directory.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Fulcher. But I will get that to you in writing.
    Mr. Davidson. Very important question.
    Mr. Fulcher. Mr. Chairman----
    Mr. Davidson. Glad to answer it.
    Mr. Fulcher. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields. The Chair now recognizes 
the lady from Minnesota, Ms. Craig, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Craig. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 
Ranking Member Matsui, for holding today's hearing, and thank 
you, Assistant Secretary Davidson, for being here today and, of 
course, for the work that you do to make sure that Americans 
have reliable access to the internet.
    Our communities and constituents rely on affordable, 
accessible broadband for their healthcare, to support their 
businesses, and for their children to do their schoolwork these 
days. The need for reliable broadband access in rural areas is 
significant, and there are still too many communities, even in 
Minnesota's 2nd District, that lack this essential 
infrastructure. I believe that the work NTIA is doing is 
critical to helping us close the digital divide, so thank you 
so much for that.
    We have heard from you today repeatedly that NTIA expects 
States to honor enforceable commitments to deploy broadband and 
treat those areas as served for purposes of BEAD. Given that 
Federal and State agencies are currently making awards for 
infrastructure under different programs, I want to make sure we 
avoid duplication of funding so that those dollars reach as 
many communities as possible. So a couple of questions for you.
    How is NTIA working with other agencies to distribute those 
funding awards for various projects in a way that ensures 
consistency and equity across States and townships?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I really appreciate that question, and 
we have been given a huge mission. The President has directed 
us we have to make sure that everyone in America has access to 
high-speed, affordable, reliable internet service--and he keeps 
saying ``everyone,'' which makes us a little nervous--but to do 
that we know we have to be smart about it, and that means 
avoiding duplication where Federal funding is already 
happening.
    So we are working very closely with other agencies. We 
coordinate with them on a very regular basis, our staffs are in 
constant communication. We have put in place new MOUs so that 
we can exchange data with some of those other agencies. And 
there is just a huge amount of coordination from the White 
House on down to make sure that we are marching in lock step 
and we are not duplicating efforts.
    Ms. Craig. I appreciate that very much. Let me just follow 
up with what specific actions are you taking to make sure that 
underserved communities, which in Minnesota are often our rural 
communities--are prioritized when it comes to building both 
affordable and accessible broadband infrastructure? And you 
just said in your remarks ``everyone.'' That is a tall order, 
given the geography of certain congressional districts across 
this country. Even in my own it is very difficult. So give me a 
sense of what you are doing to close that gap in rural 
communities.
    Mr. Davidson. Sure. Well, I think it is very important 
that, you know, the starting point, again, our--we are taking 
the mission to heart, which is really to connect everybody. And 
the statute, the broadband--the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
is very clear that we--that priority is to serve unserved 
communities first, so truly those communities that--those 
locations, those households that don't have that basic 25 
megabit per second, you know, service.
    And that is--we are going to make sure that States--that is 
the State focus. We are being faithful to the statute. And that 
is how we are really going to make sure we are getting to these 
rural communities by saying we have got to prioritize the 
unserved. Every State has--including the State of Minnesota, 
has to give us a plan for how they are going to reach everybody 
in their State with the funding that they have been given, and 
we expect it to include a variety of technologies to be able to 
do that.
    Ms. Craig. Thank you. Again, thank you so much for 
testifying here to us today and so generous with your time.
    And with that, Mr. Chair, I will yield back some life to my 
colleagues.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields. The Chair now recognizes 
the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Pfluger, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Assistant 
Secretary, thank you for being here.
    You've touched on a lot of the things that I wanted to 
touch on, but I will get specific. I represent a rural 
district. It is home to the most prolific energy producing area 
in the country, in fact, probably in the world, and also 
produces a tremendous amount of agriculture.
    And when I look at the amount of money that has gone into 
these efforts, it might be an oversight, and please help me 
understand if it is, when I read your testimony, I don't see 
the word ``rural'' anywhere in your testimony, and that really 
is concerning because I think you have heard on a bipartisan 
level, in fact, from my colleague from Minnesota, talking about 
underserved areas being rural. Your priorities, you know, 
mention Tribal lands, they go into the middle mile, and then 
they talk about, you know, some of the minority-serving 
institutions, of which my district has multiple either 
minority-serving institutions or Hispanic-serving institutions, 
including Angelo State University, which is a Cyber Center of 
Excellence.
    So looking at the technology-neutral statements that you 
have made and the--you know, the agency has talked about, I am 
concerned that fiber is being prioritized ahead of other areas. 
So can you please clarify, both in your testimony about the 
rural needs and when it comes to technology-neutral, whether 
that means only fiber or is there going to be a mixture of the 
best of the above to serve these areas?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, as a starting point, you know, we have 
been given this mission to connect everyone in the country with 
high-speed, reliable, affordable internet service, and we 
really mean everyone, so that includes--and we know--and in 
some ways perhaps it goes without saying more than it should, 
we know that includes, and primarily will be, rural areas where 
there is a huge number of unserved locations.
    So it is top of mind for us how to reach these rural 
communities. You heard--and I stand by what I also said to the 
Congresswoman from Minnesota. We are going to make sure that we 
are reaching the unserved first. We have required every State 
to submit a plan to us before they get their money that shows 
how they are going to reach all of the unserved in their 
States. And for many of them, the real challenges are going to 
be in the rural areas.
    Mr. Pfluger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And it is going to require, as you note, a 
variety of technologies, and as I just said to Congresswoman 
Craig, you know, we expect, particularly in rural areas, that 
the way to meet the need will be with that variety, kind of an 
all-of-the-above approach technology.
    Mr. Pfluger. So it is going to be licensed and unlicensed, 
it will be fiber and satellite, and this is what I can go home 
and tell my constituents that this plan is coming----
    Mr. Davidson. Absolutely. Absolutely.
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. And that they are going to have 
access?
    Mr. Davidson. And we do--we are going to try and push fiber 
out as far as we can because that is the--you know, I think 
that is--we want to make sure we are giving every American the 
best internet service that we can. You still need to have 
backhaul even if you have got fixed wireless services being 
deployed.
    Mr. Pfluger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. But the truth is that in these really hard-
to-reach locations--I am sure you are incredibly familiar with 
them--there are going to be places where we are going to rely 
on satellite, we are going to rely on fixed wireless, for sure.
    Mr. Pfluger. I think it is really important because you are 
talking about precision agriculture impacts here, you are----
    Mr. Davidson. Absolutely.
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Talking about the oil and gas 
industry, the renewable industry. I mean, all of these things 
comes together. I would invite you to come to Glasscock County 
and see the amount of production that happens when it comes to 
agriculture and energy.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. That mixture of energy.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. And fiber may not be the best option there.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger. So maybe it was an oversight in your testimony 
that rural was not mentioned but----
    Mr. Davidson. Duly noted, sir. Duly noted.
    Mr. Pfluger. This needs to be part of the----
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mr. Pfluger [continuing]. Public-facing campaign.
    Let me switch areas real quick. Who needs to be in the room 
when it comes to spectrum discussions? I am a 20-year fighter 
pilot, I have used the 6 to 8 megahertz range my entire career. 
So who needs to be in the room to have these discussions, to 
have the auctions available, but also to preserve our national 
security, and what would you recommend to this committee?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I--you know, our belief--first of all, 
we are only going--we need to have that pipeline of spectrum, 
as I've spoken, but we only are going to do that if we can also 
make sure we are meeting Federal--important Federal user needs, 
including national security needs, aviation safety, all of that 
has to also be accounted for. So that is why these coordination 
mechanisms are incredibly important. And I know it can 
sometimes sound a little boring, but that is actually the hard 
work that we need to do.
    We convene--that is what NTIA does, we convene the Federal 
stakeholders, we create that room. They need to have a seat at 
the table, too, when we are making these decisions, and we need 
to make sure we have got all the stakeholders coordinated or 
else we are not going to succeed in these efforts. So thank you 
for raising it.
    Mr. Pfluger. Thank you. My time has expired. I invite you 
to come to my district, to come to Angelo State University to 
see the Cyber Center of Excellence, which is a Hispanic-serving 
institution directly in line with your priorities, and to see 
the good work that is being done with that.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentlelady from Tennessee, Mrs. Harshbarger, for 
5 minutes.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you, Assistant Secretary, for being here today. You 
know, permitting reform is one of the committee's top 
priorities, and I serve, as Mr. Pfluger said, a rural district 
in East Tennessee. I have two distressed counties, I have the 
Great Smoky Mountains National Park, so there is a lot of, you 
know, a lot of mountainous terrain, too.
    I appreciate that NTIA directs States to identify steps to 
reduce costs and barriers to deployment and encourages State 
and local governments to expedite permitting timelines and 
waiving fees where applicable. However, what steps are you 
taking to ensure that States and local governments actually 
follow through and really respond in a timely manner like--and 
also cap fees and otherwise streamline permitting processes?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, it is--first of all, thank you for the 
question, because we feel the great urgency that people have to 
get connected, and we know that there are real challenges out 
there and we would--we are working so hard to get this money 
out to the States and then ultimately out to the providers who 
are going to build these networks. We want them to be able to 
build, right?
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And to build as quickly as possible. The 
issues are going to be that the--of course, always has to take 
into account the local and State needs, the permitting needs. 
And what we are really doing is two things. One is we are 
doing--the place where we have the greatest control is at the 
Federal level, and, of course, we are investing a lot and 
working with the Federal agencies on that. You are asking about 
the State and local level.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And we are really going to push the States. 
So we have not gotten these initial plans yet, it is still 
early days. We have said the homework assignment is, show us 
what you are going to do to invest in these permitting 
processes. In many places, a lot of it is about resources, 
right?
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Oh, it is.
    Mr. Davidson. It is--you just have one person who is the 
permitting chief in a county or a town, they----
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes, very limited.
    Mr. Davidson. And there is a tidal wave coming.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. And we want--so that is really what we want 
State--to work with States and localities on. Know this tidal 
wave is coming. Invest in the resources to be able to handle it 
and streamline the process.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Is there a time--I guess a timeframe that 
you have for these States to get that report in?
    Mr. Davidson. We are trying to share with the States our 
sense of what the, you know, kind of deployment wave looks 
like, and so we have shared a lot of that information at the 
State level. I think the investment at--you know, especially at 
the State and local level in these processes, is going to be a 
huge piece of it, and it is----
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. Again, it is really trying to sound a little 
of the alarm for folks, so appreciate your attention to it.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Well, it is the timeframe. That is the 
whole thing. You know, we have--and I have one other question 
that goes along with that. Will the States--do they have the 
authority to choose somebody to put that fiber in or do they 
have to go through Federal agency to do that?
    Mr. Davidson. You mean about who the----
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes, mm-hmm.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. Providers will be? The States 
will be--under our program, a huge amount of this happens at 
the State level.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. So the big $42 billion grant program that we 
are implementing, States will be doing--making decisions about 
who the providers are.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Who the provider will be?
    Mr. Davidson. And so they will be the ones who are in the 
best position to figure out how to make sure--to see those 
timelines, understand how to make sure they are moving quickly. 
We are trying to help them.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. Work with them as much as we can. There's 
possibly things that Congress could do here too.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson. But I would just note that getting this 
balance right is important, and capacity for the State and 
local level permitting offices is a huge potential in there.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. It is. I mean, they need to know there is 
a timeframe.
    Mr. Davidson. Right.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. NTIA is--has also worked with Federal 
agencies to help streamline their approval processes to review 
broadband permitting requests for Federal land. What are some 
of the barriers that still remain, and what are you doing to 
remove those?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I think one of the things we have seen 
has been really about capacity. And I am gratified to see that 
these conversations are bearing fruit. Again, it is still early 
days here. You know, we are looking at a wave that is going to 
come in probably 2025 when you really talk about shovels 
hitting the ground and a lot of money being spent.
    But the--we have started this early work working with the 
big land management agencies, folks who administer this, to 
make sure, again, that they understand these timelines----
    Mrs. Harshbarger. Yes.
    Mr. Davidson [continuing]. That they know. And it is 
starting--it is also already starting on some of our programs. 
And so that they are putting the resources in and will have the 
expertise in place to have people on the ground who can do 
rapid review of these applications.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. OK. Thanks so much.
    Mr. Davidson. Thanks.
    Mrs. Harshbarger. I think I have 25 seconds. I will yield 
back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Davidson. Thank you.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields back. The Chair now 
recognizes the gentlelady from Georgia, Mrs. Cammack.
    Voice. [Indiscernible.]
    [Laughter.]
    Mrs. Cammack. Hello, sir. I am the gentlelady from Florida, 
the Great Florida Gators.
    Mr. Davidson. [Laughter.]
    Mrs. Cammack. And as you can tell, the chairman is a little 
bit salty that we just have better colors than he does.
    Can you briefly describe the duties and--of the Office of 
Public Safety Communications? What are the priorities, and how 
can Congress support NTIA's roles in advancing public safety 
communication technologies?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, thank you for that question, and we had 
a group of first responders earlier.
    Mrs. Cammack. I saw.
    Mr. Davidson. It was terrific to see them here, and it just 
underscores the importance of this work, and it is a really 
essential area. We do two major things that I would highlight 
through our Office of Public Safety Communications. One of them 
is working with FirstNet, and we are the oversight group and 
body within the Federal Government for FirstNet. That has been 
an incredibly successful public/private partnership. We have 
got now over 4.7 million first responders using that network. I 
am very proud of our work with FirstNet on that.
    The second big area is around Next Generation 9-1-1 
services and really investing in making sure that our--let us 
say our first first responders have the technology that they 
need to be really effective in supporting Americans in case--
moments of emergency.
    Mrs. Cammack. I appreciate that. You know, my husband is a 
first responder. He is on FirstNet and----
    Mr. Davidson. Oh, terrific.
    Mrs. Cammack. Yes. So 16 years as a firefighter, SWAT 
medic----
    Mr. Davidson. Wow.
    Mrs. Cammack [continuing]. And we are very familiar with 
it. But I do think that NTIA has such an important role, and 
sometimes the public safety side of it isn't really discussed 
in this conversation. I was glad to hear my colleague mention 
the reauthorization efforts, but just wanted to make sure that 
we got that on the record.
    Mr. Davidson. Yes.
    Mrs. Cammack. And I know it was touched on earlier, talking 
about AI, NTIA being one of the many agencies seeking input on 
responsible policy regarding AI. And I wanted to know with this 
public policy request for comment period that you guys are in, 
what are some of the biggest challenges that you are going to 
be seeing or that you foresee as it relates to communications 
networks and AI?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, it is a terrific question. So I will 
just say just generally, I mean, we are excited about 
responsible innovation in AI, right? I--this is going to be 
tremendous benefits to people if it is done properly. At the 
same time, there are these real risks and concerns that need to 
be addressed if we are going to have a successful deployment of 
AI.
    Our--we are part of a much--a broad Federal effort to 
address the issues that are being raised by new AI 
technologies, and our part in particular is really focused on 
the policy side and what we can do to help make sure that AI 
systems are trustworthy, right, that they actually do what they 
say they are going to do. And it is a hard problem, and you 
think of it as almost like financial audits, right?
    If you think about, you know, auditing a company's books, 
you do it after the fact to make sure that they actually, you 
know, made the money they said they made, paid the taxes they 
said they were going to pay. We want to make sure we can 
support the same kinds of systems for AI systems, and that is 
the idea behind our work. And I think it will be a big issue in 
communications networks generally because we are going to see 
AI deployed widely to support communications and, you know, 
across the internet, and we want to make sure that it is being, 
again, deployed in a trustworthy way.
    Mrs. Cammack. Well, and you had mentioned this. From a 
telecommunications standpoint, what is the number 1 concern or 
risk that you see with the implementation or introduction of AI 
into those systems?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. I think probably safety concerns will 
ultimately be a pretty big deal, although--in the long run. In 
the short term, we do worry about bias, which we are seeing 
already right now against particular communities. Worry about 
privacy, too, what data is being collected, what data is being 
used, and how it is being used. So those will be--I think you 
already see those things as short-term issues.
    Long term, again, I think safety, security, and also job 
displacement. You know, as we start to see more deployment, the 
question of whether--you know, how that affects the jobs that 
Americans have and whether we are making sure that there are 
good transition paths for people.
    Mrs. Cammack. So how--as you are crafting an AI policy, 
getting input on that AI policy, how are you developing the 
internet policy in conjunction with the concerns of AI and work 
across the--I don't want to use the word ``spectrum'' since it 
means something different to us, but across the spectrum with 
other agencies in this relevant space?
    Mr. Davidson. Yes. It is a great question. I know I am 
almost out of time. I will just say really quickly that we are 
closely coordinating with other agencies. This isn't just going 
to be an NTIA thing. Other parts of the Commerce Department are 
very involved in thinking about risks, our colleagues at NIST, 
but really across the Federal Government in different vertical 
areas. I think you will see from defense to employment, 
different agencies really taking a hard look at these things. 
We are trying to take a overarching look at trustworthiness, 
but we are working closely in the interagency process as well.
    And thank you for your interest and am happy to talk more 
about it anytime.
    Mrs. Cammack. I appreciate it. Thank you so much.
    My time has expired. So, Chairman, the gentlewoman from 
Florida yields back.
    Mr. Carter. The gentlelady yields. The gentleman from--the 
Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Johnson, for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Johnson. Mr. Chairman, thanks for allowing me to waive 
on to this important hearing today on this committee that I 
served on--subcommittee that I served on for the better part of 
a decade or more, and so I appreciate it. These issues are 
still very much important to me.
    Mr. Davidson, one of the key functions of NTIA under the 
NTIA Organization Act is to represent the views of the 
executive branch to the Federal Communications Commission. 
While we know NTIA does this on spectrum matters, my TEL--my 
TEAM TELECOM Act would put NTIA in a similar position to act as 
a coordinator of certain national security reviews of 
telecommunications networks seeking to serve the United States. 
This discussion draft would still preserve the subject matter 
expertise of other relevant agencies.
    Can you please describe how, if enacted, NTIA would work 
with the relevant TEAM TELECOM voting agencies to ensure this 
review process is conducted in a timely and transparent manner?
    Mr. Davidson. I appreciate the question, and as you can 
imagine, I--as a computer scientist, you will probably 
appreciate this that many of the issues that we face in those 
settings are--you know, they are complex technical issues. They 
really require a depth of expertise to understand the issues 
and understand their implications for our economy, for 
companies. And that has been the role that NTIA has often 
played in these conversations has been to be an expert voice 
that we can offer as a counterpoint at times to some of our 
colleagues in these conversations.
    So I would just say, you know, we try to coordinate and 
make sure that we are raising those kinds of issues, really 
understanding the technology and its policy implications. And 
we appreciate efforts to try and make sure we have a stronger 
voice at the table.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. All right. Well, you know, Chair Rodgers 
noted that later this week the Americas region will be meeting 
to develop a regional position on several important spectrum 
matters at CTEL. You described NTIA's role in the domestic 
policy development process as representing the interest of the 
executive branch agencies in this process to make sure the U.S. 
can continue to protect their mission-critical operations. 
Given that, do you think the process for developing a domestic 
position ahead of these conferences is working?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will just--I think it is, and here is 
why. I actually--I may have emphasized at the--in a particular 
moment part of our role, which is that we are working as the 
Federal manager. We are the coordinator of Federal spectrum, 
and we work very closely with different agencies.
    But we also have a dual imperative here. We are dual-
hatted, and we work and think as the President's advisor on 
spectrum policy. We spend an awful lot of time thinking about 
how we make sure we are meeting the needs of the private sector 
as well.
    So I would say, first of all, we really--we--all of our 
conversation today about the spectrum pipeline and the need to 
have leading industry feeds into our positioning when we think 
about how we represent at CTEL and at the World Radio 
Conference. And I will say we have been lucky to have--we have 
great leadership right now in this space working at the State 
Department. We have real expertise in our--at NTIA and other 
sister agencies who--experienced negotiators who have been 
through World Radio Conference before.
    We are out there fighting for America, for our 
competitiveness, making sure that we are also taking on China 
in those settings. And so I do think it is working well now, 
but we want to stay in close contact with industry, make sure 
we know what we need to do out there.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. Do you have any recommendations on how the 
United States' process to get a unified domestic position can 
be improved? Any insights thus far?
    Mr. Davidson. Well, I will say this is my first World Radio 
Conference, so we have got great staff who are working on it. 
I--it is too early for me to tell. I would really be happy to 
get back to you and think about it as we are progressing 
through it.
    So far, the process has been working well. Like I say, we 
are working collegially within the Federal system, but we are 
hearing a lot and talking all the time with the private-sector 
stakeholders because their needs are a huge part of what we 
need to represent out there.
    Mr. Johnson. OK. Well, great. Well, thank you.
    And, again, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the ability to waive 
on.
    Mr. Carter. The gentleman yields. Seeing there are no 
further Members wishing to be recognized, I would like to thank 
our witness today for being here. I ask unanimous consent to 
insert in the record the documents included on the staff 
hearing documents list.
    Without objection, that will be the order.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.]
    I remind Members that they have 10 business days to submit 
questions for the record, and I ask the witnesses to respond to 
the questions promptly. Members should submit their questions 
by the close of business on Wednesday, June 7th.
    Without objection, the subcommittee is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 1:04 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
    
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
     

                                 [all]