▶ 0:01:53Test test test
▶ 0:25:15Chair Cruz: Today the committee will consider the adoption of the budget for the 119th congress. Immediately following we will examine the critical role of spectrum policy and five in U.S. economy. The budget resolution authorizes spending until february 28, 2027. We were given this allocation by the rules committee who directs each committee to report an authorization for a two your budget period.
▶ 0:25:43Chair Cruz: That is the end of my extensive remarks. This is a ministerial task that will hopefully be adopted by unanimous consent. I recognize the ranking member for a motion.
▶ 0:25:53Sen. Cantwell: I move the budget resolution be recorded favorably.
▶ 0:25:58Chair Cruz: Is there a second? All those in favor say aye. The motion is agreed to. This concludes today's votes.
▶ 0:26:29Chair Cruz: We will now move on to the hearing. Good morning. Auctioning spectrum has been one of the most successful drivers of american innovation, economic growth, and global technology leadership. Spectrum auctions have unlocked billions for the treasury while enabling our nations wireless networks to deliver better connectivity, fueling the rise of breakthroughs from the iphone to ai.
▶ 0:27:00Chair Cruz: This has created millions of jobs, spurred new industries, positioned american companies at the forefront of global innovation and improved the lives of american consumers. The next wireless sleep, whether it is driverless car's, remote surgeries, or air taxis may be just around the corner.
▶ 0:27:22Chair Cruz: Whether americans will reap the benefits and whether it will be made here or overseas depends on our will to unlock more spectrum. We stand today at a critical juncture. It has been two years since the fcc lost auction authority and three years since last meaningful auction of spectrum.
▶ 0:27:50Chair Cruz: The dithering and inaction sadly characteristic of the prior administration yielded nothing. Meanwhile our spectrum innovation lags the rest of the world as china, and adversarial surveillance state, threatens to control worldwide communications networks.
▶ 0:28:09Chair Cruz: Thanks to this new congress and the historic election of president trump, we have an opportunity to build better and faster networks, create tens of thousands of high-paying jobs, and to secure america's global technological lead. The spectrum pipeline act, which leader thune, senator blackburn and I introduced last year would restore fcc auction authority and end our spectrum drought.
▶ 0:28:39Chair Cruz: Through a clear pipeline of spectrum, american companies will have the certainty they need to invest billions in their networks and lead the world in revolutionary innovation. Certain special interest aligned with adversaries like huawei have falsely portrayed a spectrum pipeline as a blunt instrument to deprive the defense department of the instrument needs to engage in
▶ 0:29:09Chair Cruz: 21st century warfare. To the contrary our bill ensures consumer interests and defense capabilities are protected. The bill has a generous timeframe for performing the necessary feasibility studies so federal missions are not degraded and it uses the existing deliberative process, which is carried out by technical experts across the federal government, including dod, to begin auctioning a fraction of underutilized federal spectrum.
▶ 0:29:40Chair Cruz: Studies are not enough to spur action. We need clear goals. For many years the U.S. government incumbents, particular bureaucrats in the pentagon under the direction of general mark milley, have insisted they are using every single megahertz as efficiently as possible and must maintain absolute control of their vast spectrum holdings. I am more than open to compromise.
▶ 0:30:15Chair Cruz: Compromise and what the number should be. But zero is objectively unreasonable, and no institution should be afforded blind deference, especially one that cannot pass an audit and claimed leaving billions in tanks and helicopters and weapons in afghanistan was more efficient than bringing them home. Don't just take it from me. Military analysts with first-hand expertise agree we are falling behind.
▶ 0:30:44Chair Cruz: Both in terms of its effective usage and in the development of intellectual property and wireless capabilities. Further, the pentagon is not the only user of the airwaves globally. Many of the bands used by dod currently are also used commercially in countries like taiwan and japan and korea.
▶ 0:31:07Chair Cruz: If dod is technically unable to operate alongside wireless carriers using these bands domestically, how on earth could we expect to prevail in a pacific conflict? It is simply not credible. There are also significant opportunity costs for our national defense and delaying spectrum auctions.
▶ 0:31:30Chair Cruz: A pipeline would be lucrative, raising $100 billion or more that could go directly to rebuilding our military, funding border security, and the financing coast guard polar ice breakers. That is incredibly valuable offset for the reconciliation process we are undergoing right now. The risk of doing nothing is broader than lost revenue. We are fighting a global technology race against communist china.
▶ 0:32:01Chair Cruz: If we do not catch up and lead, it will be huawei that creates the backbone of tomorrow's global communications network, through which watch -- through which much of the world's economic traffic than our own government's traffic will flow.
▶ 0:32:20Chair Cruz: Chinese infiltrations like the recent salt typhoon attack and the release of deepseek are but a small preview of a future where chinese equipment sets the standard and dominates global networks. Negative ripple effects cascade indefinitely from there, handicapping our efforts and other adjacent technologies like ai, quantum, and semi conductors, and threatening to make america the loser in the 21st century technology race.
▶ 0:32:54Chair Cruz: We cannot allow that to happen. Now is the time. I will make a final point. The commerce committee, as we take up reconciliation, will move forward on spectrum. It would be an abdication of our responsibility to do anything otherwise.
▶ 0:33:14Chair Cruz: We must move quickly and together to preserve the prove median -- the promethian flame of american technology and bolster our national security. We must prevail in the race against china. I recognize the ranking member.
▶ 0:33:33Sen. Cantwell: Thanks for convening this important hearing. I look forward to hearing all of our witnesses and your expert testimony on the subject and I look forward to working with the chairman and all of my colleagues in any way possible to resolve our previous conflicts on these issues. Last congress the committee work to expand spectrum access while protecting critical department of defense and federal system infrastructure and I think we can all agree on two facts.
▶ 0:34:03Sen. Cantwell: The commercial industry needs access to more spectrum to innovate and bring new technologies to market, but second the vital national security -- aviation security and essential federal capabilities that rely on spectrum must be protected. One of our witnesses characterized it best and in his testimony said the U.S.
▶ 0:34:23Sen. Cantwell: Military will need to operate in additional areas of electromagnetic spectrum to address the increasing challenges of the threat environment. To overcome its numerical and geographic disadvantages to china. I cannot agree more.
▶ 0:34:43Sen. Cantwell: During the last congress I work to try to balance those access issues with national security efforts and many of my colleagues have directed the department of commerce to have a larger role in trying to define the issues of agency overlap in this area of spectrum.
▶ 0:35:01Sen. Cantwell: That led to the department of commerce and the joint chiefs of staff agreeing on the legislation we put forward that would open up more spectrum for commercial use and study how we could work together on spectrum sharing. I want to continue to focus on how we get this right. We need to ensure our global leadership and advanced wireless technology against china is there.
▶ 0:35:29Sen. Cantwell: We need legislation and leadership that does not abandon our national security goals. I know it is easy to say this is what I want to do but I am convinced when looking at the past history here the only thing that is going to work is the collaborative hard-working efforts and probably test vetting of technology that will allow us to get this right for the future.
▶ 0:35:54Sen. Cantwell: In 2019 the fcc auction 24 gigahertz band, endangering our ability to track and predict hurricanes. In 2020 the fcc approved a petition to use satellite spectrum for 5g and risk severely disrupting essential gps service. U.S. government is now facing a 39 billion dollar lawsuit because of that debacle, and in 2020 the fcc also rushed to option the band adjacent to airline all to matters.
▶ 0:36:25Sen. Cantwell: Concerns with those flights nearly caused the faa to ground all flights. It also put $81 billion worth of private investment by the wireless industry at risk, significantly delayed lead appointment of 5g in the united states. In early 2000 congress had to spend about $1 billion replacing the radar system on the b-2 stealth bomber because of uncoordinated changes to spectrum allocations. This is exactly what I am talking about when we say we need to work together.
▶ 0:36:56Sen. Cantwell: We cannot continue to have this play out in a way where we are not thinking about our military capabilities. In ukraine we are seeing how central spectrum is every day. The russians are jamming ukraine drones, communications, satellites. This shows that our military is to be nobler and more flexible if we are going to succeed in our operations that kind of congestion environment -- and that kind of spectrum environment.
▶ 0:37:28Sen. Cantwell: Today our warfare does depend on spectrum enable communications. As one brigadier general said, " spectrum is no longer just an enabler of the warfare, it is the warfare." today's victories and battles will depend on us getting this right. If we lose the spectrum more we lose the war. Today's hearing is about how we keep the U.S.
▶ 0:37:53Sen. Cantwell: Globally competitive while china and russia and other foreign adversaries are making inroads. I would like to work with my colleagues on legislation that would help us get this right and continue to move forward. I will also note that president trump has a line "the most challenging driver of U.S.
▶ 0:38:19Sen. Cantwell: Spectrum policy access will be the trump administration's initiative to establish a comprehensive missile architecture for the united states." while I don't know how we can do that if we get the spectrum away. I look forward to today's hearing and I thank my colleagues in the chairman for this important hearing.
▶ 0:38:37Chair Cruz: Thank you. I'll now introduce the distinguished panel of experts we have testifying. Joining us is Dr. thomas hayes let, professor -- thomas hazlet t, professor of economics at clemson university.
▶ 0:38:56Chair Cruz: He served on the fcc and is -- his book "the political spectrum" chronicles the history of spectrum legislation and how spectrum reforms, jenna evaded explosive technological innovation and economic growth. Our second witness is Dr. charles baylis, a professional of electric and computer engineering at baylor university , the oldest continuing operating university in the great state of texas. Dr.
▶ 0:39:23Chair Cruz: Baylis serves as director of smart hub, a dod spectrum innovation center that organizes research efforts among 25 researchers across 15 universities to revolutionize the increasingly crowded spectrum used by dod and nonmilitary users. Our third witness is matt pearl, director of the strategic technologies program at the center for strategic and international studies. Mr.
▶ 0:39:52Chair Cruz: Pearl has more than 14 years of government service, including most recently as advisor to the national security council. Prior to that he served as associate bureau chief of the wireless telecommunications bureau at the fcc where he helped transition the use of dod spectrum to include commercial wireless use in multiple bands.
▶ 0:40:16Chair Cruz: Our final witness, brian clark, is a senior fellow and director for the center of defense concepts and technology at the hudson institute. From 1982 to 2013 he served in a variety of roles in the united states navy. While in the navy Mr. clark received the department of navy superior service medal and the legion of merit. We will start with Dr. hazlett, you are recognized.
▶ 0:40:44Dr. Hazlett: Thanks very much and I thank everyone for their kind invitation to participate in today's discussion. Radio spectrum is a vital component of the modern economy yet artificial scarcity has been imposed by public policies that prevent entrepreneurs from moving underutilized spectrum resources into their highest valued uses.
▶ 0:41:08Dr. Hazlett: Such impediments have long been a problem, dating to the 1927 radioactive facets of the law required mother may I. The term describes the slow process in which idle bandwidth is discovered and then transition to productive employments. Needless permissions and redtape too often limit markets and impede america's economic growth. Bands have been reserved for maritime communications in utah.
▶ 0:41:37Dr. Hazlett: The forestry service has enjoyed exclusive frequency rights in new york city and today 35 channels from the tv allocation table of 1952 are still reserved for terrestrial over the air broadcasting. I love lucy may have benefited from this arrangement. We now have more efficient means to deliver video using cable, satellites, and broadband internet.
▶ 0:42:02Dr. Hazlett: These long lags played entrepreneurial ventures and frustrate wireless consumers desiring more bandwidth. The good news is U.S. policy has not been static. American regulators have taken actions to promote liberalization, in particular market oriented policies that relax mandates for how spectrum must be utilized.
▶ 0:42:29Dr. Hazlett: In granting users and licensees wider discretion, new competitive forms have been unleashed. Today over 10 times as much bandwidth is available for global wireless than in the mid-1990's. The local ecosystems have bloomed. In addition competitive bidding auctions assign such rights, replacing arbitrary distributions.
▶ 0:42:58Dr. Hazlett: Recent decades of experience with new methods including the ones hidebound to the fcc is innovative. In the early 1990's and the introduction of what became known as second-generation cellular or 2g wireless was held up for some years by protests registered by holders of microwave allotments. These incumbents claimed catastrophe would result from any change in band access rights. As is often the case such claims were overwrought.
▶ 0:43:28Dr. Hazlett: The situation was resolved by a clever fcc policy. An overlay. This approach granted emergent networks the right to utilize vacant frequencies in the microwave brand and granted the new licensee secondary rights over spectrum occupied by the microwave transmission. This protected incumbents but gave life to entrance by defining the spectrum access rights needed for bargains to be struck.
▶ 0:43:59Dr. Hazlett: Investors in two g networks were able to pay incumbents to move aside using alternative technologies. It is the free bandwidth for higher valued services. Airways became available in the U.S. and then lagging countries with digital wireless begin to form leadership in emerging network services. The overlay policy has since been used in numerous contexts by U.S. regulators.
▶ 0:44:31Dr. Hazlett: Overlays were modified in auction 107. The 500 megahertz allocated there had appeared clouded and unavailable to entrance. With incentive payments the entrance relocated. Winning bidders pay $94 billion for the new licenses. Some $13 billion was passed through to the incumbents. The reconfiguration took less than four years.
▶ 0:45:02Dr. Hazlett: Lightning fast in spectrum regulation time. Many more targets of opportunity for efficient reforms in radio spectrum await. Thank you very much.
▶ 0:45:18Chair Cruz: Thank you. Dr. baylis?
▶ 0:45:22Dr. Baylis: Good morning. My name is Dr. charles baylis and I serve as professor of electrical and computer engineering at baylor university and director of smart hub, the department of defense spectrum innovation center. Smart stands for spectrum management with adaptive and reconfigurable technology and smart up consists of 25 U.S. citizen researchers across 15 universities in 13 states.
▶ 0:45:53Dr. Baylis: Our mission is to make spectrum usage adaptive and reconfigurable from policy all the way through circuits. We have been established through congressional appropriations report and commissions to the army library. We are not typical academics. We do not desire to merely publish papers that will stagnate, but to quickly put superior technologies into the hands of our fighters and consumers.
▶ 0:46:22Dr. Baylis: We want to put america first in spectrum. The most important dimension of battle is -- as a center we are creating adaptive and reconfigurable technologies that board will provide a win-win for technologies and economic growth. We aim to provide opportunistic spectrum capabilities to systems and 5g and 60 wireless systems, maximizing performance in whatever band they operate.
▶ 0:46:52Dr. Baylis: We could also enable the construction of the iron dome for america. Two weeks ago we demonstrated our initial technologies for the penguin -- as an example of some of our innovations, we developed sensory act and avoid and metacognitive techniques to choose the best available spectrum for operation in real time and are looking to ai to speed spectrum selection.
▶ 0:47:16Dr. Baylis: We are building a dynamic spectrum management system that will include live interference reports to inform the real-time ordination spectrum. We are working on reconfigurable circuits and antennas capable of heading our transmission levels that enable us to -- we are pioneering a novel measurement module that when placed inside a transmitter chain will allows to assess what we are transmitting to avoid interference and improve our system performance.
▶ 0:47:48Dr. Baylis: These techniques will allow both income or government systems and commercial wireless systems to have the functionality to work around each other. Technology innovation will convert congestion into opportunity. Many attempts to organize spectrum have been limited regulation and reregulation. Adaptive and reconfigurable technology will revolutionize spectrum use and allow us to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare.
▶ 0:48:17Dr. Baylis: As the development of reconfigurable technology, the united states will join an enormous advantage economic and tactically. U.S. administrators will develop these symptoms -- these symptoms and sell the technology worldwide. China will have to buy the technology from us. Commercial wireless systems will relies the systems and our military will be the strongest in the world. How do we get to the situation from where we are today.
▶ 0:48:47Dr. Baylis: This is a question that I is the director of a congressionally funded spectrum innovation center have spent a lot of time mapping to direct our research and workforce development. We must develop adaptive and cognitive techniques to move devices to a congested spectrum. In less congested environment device interaction can be used to exist.
▶ 0:49:14Dr. Baylis: And more congested environments like a traffic light dynamic spectrum management system will be useful for coordinating. How do we grow into this paradigm from where we are today. You cannot expect a kindergartner to drive a car we cannot expect wireless technologies to coexist adaptively. In both cases maturation is needed. We are mapping a technology development using taxonomy.
▶ 0:49:41Dr. Baylis: Blooms taxonomy shows the progression from knowledge which is the simple memorization of facts to evaluation, mature cognitive and adaptive approach. Elementary, middle, and high school educators plot the course of the students in subject such as reading, writing, and mathematics to develop the cognitive and physical skills children will need to get behind the wheel of a car and drive the car down the road adaptively.
▶ 0:50:08Dr. Baylis: In a similar manner we must move quickly to evaluation use and adaptive of the spectrum. In the race for spectrum superiority america needs to win. The opportunity is now and we must seize it or be left behind. There are 25 patriot scholars with their U.S. citizen students that are determined to work hard to see this happen.
▶ 0:50:31Dr. Baylis: With god's enablement and provision we look forward to continuing to part work with congress from our president, and our nation to ensure our nations superiority. I look forward to answering questions you have.
▶ 0:50:44Chair Cruz: Thank you. Mr. pearl.
▶ 0:50:48Mr. Pearl: Chairman cruz, ranking member cantwell, is an honor to appear before you to discuss spectrum policy. The center for strategic and international studies does not take policy positions so the views expressed here are my own. In my testimony I will explain the importance of establishing U.S. leadership in spectrum policy, draw attention to recent developments that undermine such leadership, and urge congress and the administration to act to improve the U.S. position.
▶ 0:51:20Mr. Pearl: U.S. leadership in spectrum is critical because the people's republic of china is spending tens of billions of dollars to subsidize huawei in an effort to control the future of this technology. The U.S. is not and should not take the p.r.c.'s approach of massively subsidizing a single company. However, the U.S. should make available its other policy leaders to counter the p.r.c.
▶ 0:51:50Mr. Pearl: And spectrum is particularly critical. Until recently our country was at the forefront of spectrum policy since congress authorized the fcc to conduct options in 1993 it held 100 options that generated $233 billion from the treasury. In addition congress repeatedly provided clearing targets for making spectrum available for commercial use. These actions are critical to economic growth, economic security, and national security.
▶ 0:52:21Mr. Pearl: During the period of 4g U.S. network supported 20 million jobs and were responsible for 10% of gdp growth. Further, spectrum has played a critical role in fostering a stable and resilient U.S. economy. While we take it for granted U.S. companies top the app store on our phone, spectrum played a decisive role in enabling that to happen.
▶ 0:52:50Mr. Pearl: In 2008 we were the first country to option the 700 megahertz band, giving us a head start in giving high-powered 4g networks. As a result U.S. innovators were able to develop the first mobile app's. While I have focused on option spectrum -- on auction spectrum I must highlight the importance of unlicensed and satellite use.
▶ 0:53:16Mr. Pearl: We were the first country to adopt unlicensed use leading to ubiquitous technologies such as wi-fi. The U.S. has also been a leader in satellite spectrum enabling U.S. companies to launch massive low-earth orbit constellations. While the U.S. has played a leadership role in spectrum we are now at risk of falling behind. In march 2023 the fcc authority to hold spectrum auctions lapsed.
▶ 0:53:41Mr. Pearl: In addition many countries have launched 5g in prime spectrum that the U.S. has not made available. It is critical for congress to restore fcc auction authority and establish ambitious clearing targets. Another threat to U.S. leadership involves lengthy delays and acting on a request for satellite licenses, which is another threat to our leadership. Finally we will address the relationship between spectrum and national security.
▶ 0:54:12Mr. Pearl: I have strong views on this question because during my service at the national security council one of the areas I oversaw was electronic warfare. Some have taken the position that making spectrum available for commercial use is undesirable because dod uses the remaining bands. I agree it is critical for dod to maintain the capabilities it needs to accomplish its mission.
▶ 0:54:39Mr. Pearl: However, we have an opportunity to expand those to billy's while creating opportunities for commercial use. There's also a misunderstanding about whether congress needs to provide new statutory protections so that spectrum reallocation does not threaten national security. Under an existing statutory permission, d.o.t.
▶ 0:55:00Mr. Pearl: Cannot surrender spectrum unless the secretary of defense and chairman of the joint chiefs certify they will maintain essential military capabilities. The biggest misconception we confront is that we only need to ensure dod has continued access to spectrum to prevail in the electromagnetic domain. The reality is our military's budget is dwarfed by the commercial sector where comes to technology, meaning to prevail over our adversaries, d.o.t.
▶ 0:55:33Mr. Pearl: Will need to leverage commercial innovation. Wireless networks will be critical to the ai race because of sophisticated ai services will require more data to and from mobile devices. Dod will need to leverage the most advanced ai technologies for this will not happen unless we make commercial spectrum available. I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:55:57Chair Cruz: Mr. clark?
▶ 0:56:00Mr. Clark: Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak to you and the rest of the committee about spectrum policy. The national security competition between U.S. and china and china in the electromagnetic spectrum is not just a commercial one, it is a military one and a lot of ways is predominantly a military one as we look at future conflicts we might face against china and others.
▶ 0:56:24Mr. Clark: If you look at the invasion of ukraine and how the electromagnetic spectrum has played out as the centerpiece of that war, early on russia had a lot of problems in initial push through kyiv. That was in part because of lack of a spectrum management, the inability to use the spectrum effectively. Today both sides are using sophisticated electromagnetic warfare against each other as ranking member cantwell talked about.
▶ 0:56:54Mr. Clark: The recent offensive ukraine forces mounted was enabled by their ability to gain superiority in the electromagnetic spectrum. Operating in parts where the russians are trying to operate and putting their own problems in parts of the spectrum where the russians were unable to jam them. Spectrum is where wars will be won and lost. Against china the U.S. faces a much more powerful competitor in general then russia poses.
▶ 0:57:27Mr. Clark: In order to overcome its numerical disadvantages, U.S. forces will have to rely on counter surveillance and reconnaissance, counter communications capabilities to degrade the ability of china's are congress and intelligence network to be able to target and attack U.S. forces.
▶ 0:57:46Mr. Clark: If we cannot operate inside frequencies were the chinese operate outside our normal policeman so we can receive them hide our forces, and degrade their ability, we will not be able to mass the number of support successfully to win invasion of taiwan. Winning that invasion comes down to the ability to control the spectrum and that western pacific region.
▶ 0:58:11Mr. Clark: We need to be able to build the capabilities for that and train with them in the united states before we go overseas and that deception campaign has to start here. We are operating in parts of the spectrum we were not normally operating in to begin that spectrum against the chinese forces. The iron dome for america will create new demands to protect united states from missile attacks.
▶ 0:58:36Mr. Clark: There is opportunities to use new technologies to more efficiently use the spectrum and more effectively manage the surveillance network. Permits for terminal missile defense and airborne moving target indication are both greater the x well and band frequencies we want to be available for future users. The needs for dod within the spectrum will become larger and more complex.
▶ 0:59:06Mr. Clark: That does not preclude we would be able to share the spectrum between military and commercial users. It doesn't mean we need to bring new technologies and policies to bear and there'll be some delivery of process we can figure out which parts can be made available and which parts cannot because of physics and the number of systems you might need to be able to conduct the operation.
▶ 0:59:29Mr. Clark: Examples like the citizens band radio service and ambit are good examples of where in the past we've been able to de-conflict users between federal and commercial users or share spectrum by taking over new technologies section and the reallocation of spectrum users.
▶ 0:59:48Mr. Clark: We need to take the time and analysis necessary to make those mechanisms feasible in the united states to support the operations we need to do for things like iron dome as well as the training and preparation necessary to get our forces ready to go overseas and fight in a war while they were the of the spectrum to make up the difference between their lack of mass. In the large mass available to chinese, the home team.
▶ 1:00:17Mr. Clark: We should not look into getting into asymmetrical competition with china in terms of who is giving more of a part of the commercial universe -- commercial users and we should not disarm our military capabilities. We need to wait way -- so that we can compete on both battlefields. I look forward to your questions.
▶ 1:00:41Chair Cruz: Thank you all for your helpful testimony. We will move to questions. What are the specific economic benefits that putting more spectrum into the commercial marketplace would produce and how would my spectrum pipeline legislation which requires some spectrum benefit everyday americans and american businesses. Can you turn your microphone on?
▶ 1:01:09Dr. Hazlett: Additional spectrum , particularly of the flexible use variety has been found extremely important to increasing american productivity and allows more things to be done with wireless applications and wireless networks. The reverse is also true. We have had these delays into the system. We have taken the vital inputs of the sector and the progress has been stymied.
▶ 1:01:40Dr. Hazlett: Getting more spectrum into the marketplace allowing entrepreneurs and composers axis to expand. That explains not only the wireless revolution we have seen , but it explains why going forward we have to keep our eye on the ball and make sure there is a pipeline in a spectrum pouring into the market to be used in efficient ways, not in the old locked in rigid
▶ 1:02:10Dr. Hazlett: Definitions of old.
▶ 1:02:12Chair Cruz: Mr. pearl, would you agree making more spectrum available to the private sector would result in billions of new investment and thousands in new jobs? In history demonstrates that?
▶ 1:02:24Mr. Pearl: Consistently. You make the spectrum available, I mentioned the app economy. Being first matters in that because then you have innovators that take advantage of the capabilities they can use in that spectrum.
▶ 1:02:39Chair Cruz: Does my pipeline bill preclude the department of defense from accessing the spectrum it needs to accomplish critical missions or are there ways for power commercial license --
▶ 1:02:55Mr. Pearl: Your bill allows for the possibility of exclusive use as well as shared use. In terms of dod being able to continue to use some or most of the bands to maintain their capabilities, it absolutely creates that opening.
▶ 1:03:10Chair Cruz: We have also heard concerns that reinstating auction authority could hinder president trump's initiatives to create an american iron dome. I'm a strong supporter of missile-defense and have been advocating for an american iron dome for some time.
▶ 1:03:32Chair Cruz: Based on your experience at the national security council it in the fcc auction room, do you believe those concerns are well-founded that having an auction would prevent missile-defense?
▶ 1:03:43Mr. Pearl: Absolutely not. As long as we have the proper interagency process and we make sure the engineers work together we can absolutely ensure we have iron domain as well as increased commercial use.
▶ 1:04:00Chair Cruz: Could an iron dome system coexist with commercial 5g use subject to carveouts?
▶ 1:04:11Mr. Pearl: Potentially it could. We have some cases of countries using iron dome like the czech republic that are using it quite close to those systems of iron dome. There are other ways you can design an iron dome so you can have coexistence.
▶ 1:04:33Chair Cruz: We are told by some in the defense department that if any of the vast spectrum they have use of goes to the private sector it will cripple the military's ability to defend our nation. The facts make that claim highly dubious. Nations operate commercial license in the 3.3 gigahertz band.
▶ 1:05:05Chair Cruz: Mexico's 5g networks operate on frequencies between 3.35 and 3.45 gigahertz. At full power, less than 30 miles away from fort bliss in texas where the U.S. operates ground-based radar systems in the lower third band. Likewise, japan, and the philippines also have 5g networks.
▶ 1:05:33Chair Cruz: Given the fact that in much of the rest of the world there are commercial players operating in those bands, is it credible that our military cannot operate in the --
▶ 1:05:52Mr. Pearl: As long as the process is done responsibly it will not cripple the military.
▶ 1:05:58Chair Cruz: Let me ask you what would the consequences to national security be if china wins the race for 5g and six g and if the global telecommunication network is huawei and chinese based. Is that good or bad for national security and if bad how bad?
▶ 1:06:18Mr. Pearl: It is catastrophic for national security as well as both dod and the intelligence community because we will not have access to advanced trusted secure technology. It is true the U.S. will still ban huawei. The rest of the world will use huawei. It is not only telecommunication networks.
▶ 1:06:48Mr. Pearl: The plan the prc has over huawei's to leverage its control to control other technologies. I would say it is a catastrophic risk.
▶ 1:06:55Chair Cruz: Soldiers you cell phones. -- soldiers use cell phones.
▶ 1:07:02Mr. Pearl: And that is some that we have discovered a new crane. A lot of these mobile technologies can be valuable. They can be used to triangulate drone attacks, to create accurate geographic maps of the combat zones. We are already seeing valley cell phones are an will technology is critical.
▶ 1:07:23Chair Cruz: Ranking member cantwell.
▶ 1:07:26Sen. Cantwell: Thank you for this hearing and I appreciate the panel of witnesses. Dr. hazlett, I think lots of members of this committee could give a critique of the fcc and it would probably mirror yours. And the issues of challenge of that agency in addressing our most urgent needs.
▶ 1:07:48Sen. Cantwell: Probably the fact that good broadband mapping is lacking and even when microsoft produced one buys it known they did not use it. Dr. baylis loves that you are training the next generation of young people to understand this dynamic because we will need it and there is a reason the information age is sucking up everybody out of college that you can produce. Keep producing them.
▶ 1:08:25Sen. Cantwell: I think your exact words are ensuring we maintain critical spectrum capabilities while creating opportunities for commercial access to spectrum. If that is what we are trying to do that is what we tried to do in the bill agreed to. The challenge becomes common thank you Mr. clark for your football analogy because of the away game. I think that does give you a picture of what war fighters face.
▶ 1:08:54Sen. Cantwell: One thing I struggle with is I feel like people misunderstand where we are. I'm not saying we are playing at peewee league but let's say we are playing at the k-12 league right now. With this shift in the dynamics and capabilities of the warfare is going to take place could we have stopped spectrum? Will not be in k-12 football, you will be in insuperable.
▶ 1:09:25Sen. Cantwell: You cannot unilaterally disarm if the ascending technical capabilities and challenges. I wonder if you could address whitespace. A lot of people talk about if we could have dynamic spectrum sharing and you could, easily. There are lots of ways right now that is really detrimental to our efforts.
▶ 1:09:48Mr. Clark: Yes. A couple of things on that. One is that the military will have to be much more dynamic in its use of the spectrum so we will have to maneuver a lot more than the spectrum to avoid her adversaries are looking year. We can jam them using the same technologies Dr. baylis is developing. Will do those operations as well as maintaining ability commercial users are offering.
▶ 1:10:18Mr. Clark: Those technologies are not fielded yet. Opponents legacy nutri and it is a constant cap mouse game in the electromagnetic spectrum. To operate in one part and get connected and jammed and you have to move to another part to communicate with your allies and continue sensing targets and attacking your enemy. This cat and mouse to -- you cannot be isolated to a narrow band of spectrum.
▶ 1:10:48Mr. Clark: During operations we have to train to conduct those same types of operations.
▶ 1:10:50Sen. Cantwell: We will grow in complexity. I do not think -- Mr. pearl, you are not suggesting we mandate auctions for the technical feasibility studies are you?
▶ 1:11:03Mr. Pearl: No. I think we need to mandate clearing targets into the analysis. Certainly before you hold the auction need to do the work to make sure we are not interfering with the central military capability.
▶ 1:11:17Sen. Cantwell: Which I think dod was requesting of us. Back to this artwork like cprs, how we go through those score -- and the one case is navy spectrum and we hear a lot of briefing -- do we have to test bed? What is it we have to do to get this right and how do we do as Mr.
▶ 1:11:47Sen. Cantwell: Pearl is suggesting, this more collaborative effort on the innovation private sector contrived. -- the private sector can drive.
▶ 1:11:58Mr. Clark: Test vetting these capabilities will be important. There is a path forward to identifying the opportunities. Physical comes into it. Certain -- I have to jam an opponent where his system operates. We are limited by physics and being able to maneuver anywhere in the spectrum to avoid commercial users.
▶ 1:12:22Mr. Clark: Within those spaces where we can use the spectrum effectively, we need to figure out if there is a way we can coexist. China just falsely cook them out . I guess you could have the hierarchy.
▶ 1:12:37Mr. Boerner: China's approach --
▶ 1:12:40Mr. Clark: China's approach as have pla officials who maneuver commercial users out the spectrum whenever the military wants to conduct eugene -- conduct routine training operations.
▶ 1:12:52Sen. Cantwell: That is our competitor and we have to beat them and figure out how to take care of this issue.
▶ 1:12:57Chair Cruz: Senator wicker?
▶ 1:13:01Sen. Wicker: Before we auction we still have to do the work. Could you explain what that means and how long will that take?
▶ 1:13:09Mr. Pearl: I think it is important to have clearing targets in the legislation for how much we are intending to make available. That focuses the process. Doing the work occurs at several different levels. The most important level is the engineers from the different agencies. The laws of physics are not partisan. They are what they are.
▶ 1:13:40Mr. Pearl: You need engineers who will share information and work together and I've seen the most brilliant solutions come out of that.
▶ 1:13:47Sen. Wicker: Including engineers from dod?
▶ 1:13:50Mr. Pearl: Absolutely. You need the white house leadership to work with the heads of the departments and agencies so that the engineers know to share information and be cooperative to work together.
▶ 1:14:07Mr. Pearl: What you don't want is a situation where -- and there have been examples -- where there is not that collaboration and as a result often times decisions get made by the fcc or others that are less than optimism -- that are less than optimal.
▶ 1:14:24Sen. Wicker: You do not speak for csis. You're giving us your own views. Are there persons within cis -- within csis that take the same position as the admirals and generals from the defense department that absolutely no way this can be shared? Colleagues who believe that?
▶ 1:14:52Sen. Wicker: I think that clayton swope, who does a lot of our work on the defense side would certainly advocate for some of the defense equities, so I wouldn't necessarily say that he takes their side on a number of things.
▶ 1:15:04Sen. Wicker: We can perhaps get him here or I could call him, but perhaps he would even say there is some scenario in which some of the spectrum can be shared?
▶ 1:15:17Mr. Pearl: Yeah. I think there's a willingness on the part of csis to find those practical solutions so we can accomplish that.
▶ 1:15:26Sen. Wicker: Mr. bayless, do you speak for smart hub or yourself?
▶ 1:15:30Dr. Baylis: That's a good question. I believe I have tried to consult my team.
▶ 1:15:36Sen. Wicker: Is there a minority view that does not agree with you?
▶ 1:15:40Dr. Baylis: I don't believe so, we are unified in that we are trying to have adaptable and convertible technology.
▶ 1:15:49Sen. Wicker: Would it be helpful if you had somebody inside the team who was the devils advocate, could bounce these absolute objections against you?
▶ 1:16:00Dr. Baylis: Devils advocate, as to what?
▶ 1:16:04Sen. Wicker: I will tell you. When we get the military in the schif, I'm not giving away any secrets, impossible. We cannot give an inch. Anything that the chairman might advocate would be detrimental to national security. Am I pretty much correct?
▶ 1:16:24Dr. Baylis: I believe we have objective people on the team that do give me contrasting views when they need to be given. We have a team working to get the best technological solution to the problem. I think that is our sole goal.
▶ 1:16:41Sen. Wicker: Mr. clark, tell us about the idea of finding a solution by compression, compare and contrast that to relocating.
▶ 1:16:57Mr. Clark: Compression, spectral efficiency, is looking at ways to use digital technology to narrow the bandwidth that a sensor needs for a radar, for example, to put enough energy downrange to detect a target and track it. Using new digital technologies, we are able to reduce the amount of spectrum that a sensor might need to be effective. There is a history to this.
▶ 1:17:27Mr. Clark: Over time the dod has done this with different technology, recapitalize the new generation of radars coming into dod right now, they are more spectrally efficient.
▶ 1:17:37Sen. Wicker: Supplement your answer on that. Can you briefly talk about Mr. baylis' reference to live interference notices?
▶ 1:17:51Mr. Clark: In real time, normally what happens when you try to do conflict spectrum, you detect the other user out there and you have to respond to that. You want to augment that with a notification from the other user that tells you I am using the spectrum now, here is the level and power and frequency I will be at. That the system will coordinate between themselves. Instead of responding to what they see in the environment, they are communicating with each other to coordinate the spectrum in real time.
▶ 1:18:21Sen. Wicker: Do you subscribe to this point of view in that regard?
▶ 1:18:25Mr. Clark: Definitely that technology is viable. The challenge is getting it implemented into defense systems that are multiple generations in some cases old.
▶ 1:18:35Sen. Wicker: Dr. hazlett, Mr. pearl, if you could respond, perhaps supplement on the record as to that question.
▶ 1:18:45Dr. Hazlett: Sure. This is an ongoing problem, general order. It is having an unpriced asset at a zero price, if opportunity costs are not considered, of course, there is going to be overconsumption, no give.
▶ 1:19:07Dr. Hazlett: But the fact is, there are social costs, there are economic costs, also technology costs in terms of taking the trade-offs for compression, better radios, better training, better software. There are other alternatives here that everybody in the room should have the incentives to pursue. That is where there has been some progress, real good allocations made, that really do bring efficiency.
▶ 1:19:38Dr. Hazlett: But to say that we are not going to look at efficiency, yet we need more and more, you are undermining the efficiency. That is undermining both civilian and military applications.
▶ 1:19:50Sen. Wicker: Mr. chairman, I realize I'm way over time.
▶ 1:19:54Chair Cruz: Senator fischer.
▶ 1:19:57Sen. Fischer: Thank you for the panel for being here today. We know the context of this hearing is about whether and how to use spectrum, in the reconciliation bill. One key focus I'm hearing on is revenues from the new spectrum pipeline that is only for exclusive commercial use. I will stress for my colleagues we must also weigh the cost and the timelines to relocate existing users for this type of pipeline.
▶ 1:20:26Sen. Fischer: The department of the users, with missile-defense radars, satellite constellations providing critical capabilities. Dod losing access to its spectrum bands entirely, which is what vacating or clearing the spectrum means, comes with huge risks and will end up costing us more.
▶ 1:20:50Sen. Fischer: Replacing national security systems, if that is even possible, would cost hundreds of billions of dollars. And we all know it would take decades to be able to finish. So a pipeline estimated to raise five cbo, based on current proposals, between 10 and $15 million in a 10-year budget window may actually take 20 years to transition.
▶ 1:21:20Sen. Fischer: I agree there are technologies that could make sharing spectrum possible, but dod must have a seat at the table when its spectrum bands are studied and tested. Otherwise, we risk losing access to this finite resource forever. Mr.
▶ 1:21:41Sen. Fischer: Clark, what specific military capabilities could we lose if lawmakers on this committee do not fully consider these realities before pressing ahead?
▶ 1:21:50Mr. Clark: Senator, I think the key capability will be sensing technologies for air and missile defense. In the lower s band, x band.
▶ 1:22:03Sen. Fischer: Could you explain?
▶ 1:22:05Mr. Clark: The lower part of the three gigahertz range is important for air missile defense because it gives you that combination of resolution and range that allows a radar to be pretty effective in tracking incoming targets. Then we need radars that operate in the x band, the eight to 12 gigahertz range, to be able to differentiate small targets and be able to direct an interceptor like a patriot missile to hit them and shoot them down.
▶ 1:22:32Sen. Fischer: So we have to see them and identify them.
▶ 1:22:36Mr. Clark: Both see them and then track them, which requires two different sensor technologies combined in the same radar or indifferent radars. That is how the patriot system works that the navy has. If we were to relocate out of those parts of the spectrum, you lose the physics that allows those sensors to work effectively. We would have to have more centers or come up with a different approach.
▶ 1:23:03Mr. Clark: That is why sharing might be an effective alternative, but relocating them entirely may not be feasible because of the physics.
▶ 1:23:09Sen. Fischer: Mr. clark's, I have concerns about the role that china has played in influencing our spectrum policy in this country. We are being told that we have to keep up with china, that they have far more mid band spectrum available, that their carriers can use the lower three for mobile networks and that there have been no negative impacts to china's national security.
▶ 1:23:35Sen. Fischer: You know, in reality, china only has 10 more megahertz of mid band spectrum available for mobile networks. China also recently imposed restrictions in his lower three band, limiting commercial access to that low-power, indoor use. Yet, we still hear the china comparison from carriers and their effort to gain exclusive use of these bands, which are needed for our radar systems.
▶ 1:24:06Sen. Fischer: If the U.S. blinds it's radars purely for economic reasons, that only helps foreign adversaries like china. Do you share my concerns?
▶ 1:24:14Mr. Clark: I do. I think china could be playing a sophisticated game where they are looking to get us to vacate part of our spectrum that we need for our military censors while they maintain that access. We unilaterally disarm while they maintain their capabilities. They had the ability to move commercial users out of the spectrum whenever they need to for their purposes.
▶ 1:24:38Sen. Fischer: Thank you. Mr. chairman, I would like to submit some questions for the record to Mr. clark about spectrum management, how that also impact what we are talking about today. Thank you.
▶ 1:24:53Chair Cruz: Thank you. Senator klobuchar.
▶ 1:24:58Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you for this important hearing. A good discussion about spectrum. I had a judiciary hearing at the same time, but this is specifically important to our 911 systems. I co-chair the nexgen nine 11 caucus with senator budd. We are dedicated to expanding and improving emergency communications infrastructure.
▶ 1:25:25Sen. Klobuchar: Yet, the fcc spectrum authority expired in march 2023 as we all know, for the first time in nearly 30 years, and I'm concerned about this lapse in spectrum authority with the increasing needs for emergency authority. An estimated 200 40 million calls are made to 911 centers annually, however, this critical public service relies on outdated technologies.
▶ 1:25:50Sen. Klobuchar: I have legislation with senator cortez masto to modernize americans 911 systems to help enable 911 call centers to better handle text messages, pictures, videos, and modern communications. Dr. baylis, can you give an example of innovation at your lab that would make our 911 system stronger and more resilient?
▶ 1:26:11Dr. Baylis: I think this depends on what types of interference, the 911 systems are receiving. An innovation we are finding in our lab that could be helpful, there are two of them. One, we have reconfigurable circuitry that can reconfigure it under emily second, which would change us to optimize performance and operate at a new frequency.
▶ 1:26:37Dr. Baylis: Your circuits are designed to operate at the old frequcy, so if you change frequencies, you may drain your battery because you don't have any deficiency. That is one example of what we are doing, reconfigurable circuitry. Then the dynamic spectrum management system innovations we are working on as well as our measurement capability which will allow us to see when we are causing interference and changing our transmissions. Those would help 911 situations as well as any systems trying to reconfigure.
▶ 1:27:07Sen. Klobuchar: Recently, in the aftermath of hurricane helene many affected areas experienced local communications blackouts because the flooding was severe enough to override the internet providers disaster contingency plans. How could we leverage innovation and spectrum management to ensure our wireless broadband networks are more resilient when things happen like natural disasters?
▶ 1:27:33Dr. Baylis: I didn't research of this. I would have to see what exactly the problem was in terms of the technical lapse and then try to bring it to you to solve it. If it was an interference issue, frequencies not being available, I think our team has the solution. We can deal with it.
▶ 1:27:50Sen. Klobuchar: Getting the spectrum set would be more helpful?
▶ 1:27:55Dr. Baylis: In the sense that technology is behind regulation right now, technology needs to be developed. I think that is where our lapses are. Investments need to be made in technology rather than deregulating. We are slicing the bread thinner and thinner until it crumbles.
▶ 1:28:13Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you. Mr. pearl, Mr. clark coming during president's first administration, they were interagency disputes regarding spectrum. We have seen these disputes through democratic administrations, as well. Recognizing the importance of moral order, a national spectrum strategy was released in november 2023. It's implementation plan in march 2024.
▶ 1:28:45Sen. Klobuchar: Mr. pearl, can you discuss why it's important to improve planning and coordination? Mr. clark, how can this administration cultivate more industry buy-in to avoid the disputes that have arisen, especially with the department of defense?
▶ 1:29:00Mr. Pearl: You cannot work out these issues on an engineering level unless you have the proper interagency coordination, and that has to come from the white house really demanding the agencies work together and participate in a robust way, and have the right engineers who are there to work out the problems. Really mandate that they share information.
▶ 1:29:22Mr. Pearl: That is something we have run into in the past, where an agency that wants to continue to use the spectrum isn't want to play ball and share information so they can work together collaboratively. Then you need a really healthy interagency process where it starts at the lower levels and eventually escalates if you cannot resolve problems. That's incredibly helpful.
▶ 1:29:47Mr. Pearl: If you just have the white house weigh in without having all the information, having that refined set of issues that comes from the interagency process, in some cases, the right decisions do not get made.
▶ 1:29:59Sen. Klobuchar: Seeing a little bit of that right now but I will not go there. Mr. clark.
▶ 1:30:04Mr. Clark: It requires leadership in the white house and also departments. My discussion with the leadership of the current team in the defense department showed they are very willing to engage in this intra-agency deliberation to figure out the best way to use the spectrum. A lot of modeling simulation tools that Dr. baylis and others have that can help us to figure out the opportunities for sharing.
▶ 1:30:27Sen. Klobuchar: Thank you, chairman.
▶ 1:30:31Chair Cruz: Thank you. Senator blackburn.
▶ 1:30:35Sen. Blackburn: Thank you, Mr. chairman, thank you for the hearing. It is one of the things we need to be focused on, what is our leadership going to be as a nation in this area? One of my concerns, and I have talked about this with the chairman, is what I see as spectrum squatting with our federal agencies.
▶ 1:31:01Sen. Blackburn: They controlled most of the spectrum assets, and they are failing to optimize this, and I have, for years, advocated that we do a good inventory, so we know who was using what spectrum, where, and then be able to recoup it.
▶ 1:31:20Sen. Blackburn: Because it does not matter what project is being worked on, whether it is wireless, whether it is the muos system, whether it is leo, everyone in dod is working with the private sector because they are leading the innovation. For federal agencies, Mr.
▶ 1:31:42Sen. Blackburn: Chairman, to squat on this spectrum and not use it, and not want to yield it back and not want anyone to know what they've got, it disadvantages us as a nation. We know that recouping it, going through the auction process, would yield billions and billions of dollars, as much as 100 billion dollars, and we need that, because we are in a race with china when it comes to
▶ 1:32:12Sen. Blackburn: Leading in this area. And we don't have time to waste. And we don't have time for squatters to bicker with what they are going to do with this spectrum. Mr. pearl, let me come to you. This last world radio conference was a hot mess for the U.S.. We were unprepared. We had not done our homework. If we are going to continue to be a world leader, we are going to have to be prepared.
▶ 1:32:43Sen. Blackburn: You mentioned this in your testimony, and I appreciate it, because I think it was embarrassing that we were unprepared. I want to hear from you, and if you want to submit this in writing, I would appreciate that. But the lessons we should have learned from this last one, and the steps we should be taking to prepare for the 27 wrc?
▶ 1:33:11Mr. Pearl: One of the lessons we learned, the next one is 27, and that is tomorrow in real terms, the preparatory process is incredibly quick. Arriving at positions will give you a huge advantage against china. I think it is just important to have congress, when it re-authorizes fcc auction authority, as well as the white house, to make sure these issues are resolved early and you don't have the U.S.
▶ 1:33:41Mr. Pearl: Coming in late with positions. I also think it's important --
▶ 1:33:45Sen. Blackburn: Important to know what those positions are rather than squishing through the whole thing. That would be helpful. Homework for each of you. There are disputes, interagency disputes about how to use spectrum, so each of you have touched on this. In writing, I want from you, what your recommendation would be to resolve these disputes. We have to recoup the spectrum.
▶ 1:34:16Sen. Blackburn: We have got to look at how we slice these bands, and put more, Mr. clark, as you were saying, more into that bandwidth. Help us with your best thoughts on that. Mr. pearl, I want to come back to you on ai, because when we talk about ai and quantum, the utilizations, we know more spectrum is needed.
▶ 1:34:46Sen. Blackburn: In tennessee, we have, I repeatedly hear from innovators, whether they are working logistics, working on something for doe or dod, or health care, they talk a good bit about this.
▶ 1:35:07Sen. Blackburn: But with ai, it's important to get on the record how spectrum constraints would actually hamper ai development and deployment.
▶ 1:35:19Mr. Pearl: Absolutely happy to submit that for the record. One of the important points is it would hamper things not only on the commercial side but also on the dod side of things. There are really interesting ai applications for first responders in terrorist attacks, things like that, leveraging it to make the right decisions, and that is something that is directly applicable to what dod does on the battlefield.
▶ 1:35:49Mr. Pearl: Another example is we have talked about spectrum, but to really advance what we need ai to do, is to be able to take all the sources of information, spectrum, cyberspace, thermal imaging o,p sec, generate real actionable insights. We cannot do that unless we have those commercial technologies and winning the ai race with china.
▶ 1:36:12Sen. Blackburn: I will add to that the satellite systems. Thank you, Mr. chairman. I yield back.
▶ 1:36:19Chair Cruz: Senator roseman.
▶ 1:36:22Sen. Rosen: Thank you, senator cruz, ranking member cantwell, thank you to all of you for your education and when you bring to the table here. Our nations spectrum as we know is one of our important resources. Spectrum policy has to be thoughtful, deliberative, and unlocking innovation while protecting national security.
▶ 1:36:44Sen. Rosen: I share some of my colleagues concerns that this administration and others want to sidestep having a deliberative fact-based process, instead advance spectrum proposals merely to raise as much revenue as possible to fund massive tax breaks for billionaires. So we must instead take our time to find the right policy and ensure revenues from spectrum sales actually lower cost for the american people.
▶ 1:37:10Sen. Rosen: Last congress, this committee advanced legislation to use spectrum proceeds for us to lower my state of nevada's internet bills to help our first responders, invest in the r&d that we need to share spectrum safely with the department of defense. That is a foundation we can and should build upon, and we know there are key challenges between the dod, commercial operations.
▶ 1:37:35Sen. Rosen: One thing that is particularly concerning that I've been thinking a lot about is dynamic spectrum sharing and we we are at with that. Mr. clark, Mr. baylis, where are we at in reality with our capabilities on dynamic spectrum sharing? And how can we deploy when we get there, dynamic spectrum sharing, to ensure we do not undermine military access?
▶ 1:38:01Sen. Rosen: We still want to unlock possibilities but is it still a concept, are we testing it, where are we at with the dynamic spectrum sharing?
▶ 1:38:11Mr. Clark: Dynamic spectrum sharing is being used in applications like the radio service unaware along the coast, we have dynamic spectrum sharing between navy who uses the radar, 5g providers that operate in that same spectrum. There are obviously new technologies being deployed that Dr. baylis has done work in, to make it more sophisticated.
▶ 1:38:35Sen. Roseman: And more nimble.
▶ 1:38:37Mr. Clark: How nimble it can be, there are parts of the spectrum because it gives the ability for both users to jump around into different parts of the spectrum much more agile than they could today. The problem is the implementation because you have to take those technologies and bake them in to come in the case of the military, systems that span multiple generations of technology. We have analog radar still in service, analog communication systems.
▶ 1:39:07Sen. Roseman: We need a bridge to get there.
▶ 1:39:10Mr. Clark: We are going through this recapitalization of the military's spectrum dependent system that will make them better able to take advantage of these technologies. The question is how quickly we can accelerate that to make dynamic spectrum sharing more of a reality.
▶ 1:39:31Dr. Baylis: Incumbent dod questions need technology. I want to focus on that for a minute. In the research question, a lot of times, we are focused on helping the commercial wireless system to be more adaptive. Smart hub has really taken what I think is a unique focus and looking at the incumbent systems, how do we improve the dod systems? Given where the dod systems are today, we want to see them move to an adaptive and reconfigurable model.
▶ 1:40:00Dr. Baylis: We are working on flexible circuitry, flexible communication strategies, trying to figure out how we can put ai into predicting the spectrums so these incumbent systems, with our industry partnerships, we have a quick pathway to put technology into the hands of the dod to facilitate the types of economic growth that our nation needs from the spectral bands. Hopefully the technology development is a game changer where we can have our cake and eat it, too.
▶ 1:40:28Sen. Roseman: To your point, what are the risks in associating the mandating of the movement, alteration of certain bands prior to having first done the studies about what we can and cannot do, how we need a measured approach to get some of these legacy systems where they can be nimble and more adaptive?
▶ 1:40:49Dr. Baylis: Technology development is, I think, the big elephant in the room. We need to address it. We can do a lot of things to posture but we are not going to make improvements because we are just slicing the bread thinner and thinner. By having adaptive and we can farewell technology, congress needs to fund work going forward with entities like smart hub because we are going to bring this to the dod quickly and that will be a game changer.
▶ 1:41:18Dr. Baylis: We will need to have discussions like this anymore because the technology will supersede what we have today. It can be done in a reasonably short period of time.
▶ 1:41:27Sen. Roseman: So investing in more things that you are doing at smart hub. Thank you, appreciate it.
▶ 1:41:33Chair Cruz: Thank you. Senator budd.
▶ 1:41:38Sen. Budd: Thank you to the panel for being here, fascinating testimony. We are all trying to find the both and, how we find the revenues from the spectrum auction that is much needed, how do we secure and protect national defense. Dr. baylis, I want to follow up. Thanks for your work at smart hub. I didn't hear between Mr.
▶ 1:42:02Sen. Budd: Clark's answer in your answer, what is the timeline for dynamic spectrum sharing, if you saw great promise, how far out before an actual practical implementation of that? In your best estimation.
▶ 1:42:18Dr. Baylis: I would say as fast as possible. We are in a national crisis right now in terms of spectrum, we really are. When you have an emergency, you try to fix the problem as quickly as possible. We are trying to work as quickly as possible.
▶ 1:42:36Dr. Baylis: I will say having a center like this where we convene the nation's top 25 spectrum researchers to solve a problem, you have everybody reading of the same sheet of music, policy and economics experts alongside circuit experts. That will speed it up. That will give you a three times speed up. I can say that we can really accelerate it. Me being able to put a time scale, I would say as quickly as possible. I don't want to give you a number because I don't know what that number is.
▶ 1:43:06Dr. Baylis: But I can tell you that our six-month demo, we showed tremendous progress.
▶ 1:43:11Mr. Clark: To get these technologies incorporated into the military systems that would need them, it would take 10 to 20 years. You will take these ships, aircraft, radars off-line to upgrade them, and we cannot do it all at once. It takes time to run them through the process of being upgraded.
▶ 1:43:28Sen. Budd: Mr. baylis, you mentioned congress needs to fund more research on this. Do you have a dollar amount on that? Something that you are particularly asking for to do more research in dynamic spectrum sharing?
▶ 1:43:43Dr. Baylis: Thanks for asking. Smart hub is annually funded by an appropriation right now. We have one so far and we are in the bill coming from the house side with Mr. sessions, asking for $5 million for this year.
▶ 1:43:58Sen. Budd: Should industry also bear some of the burden of this?
▶ 1:44:02Dr. Baylis: Our technology transfer model will actually line of investors early in the process, and also we are building industry partnerships quickly, so essentially investors will start pouring their funds in once we see the technology. We are already building dod contractor pipelines, will not only put the technology into the hands of the war fighter, but we will fund more research. We just need an ecosystem that needs the runway to take the plane off.
▶ 1:44:31Dr. Baylis: Our goal is not to infinitely come to you for money. The reason for me not stating a goal is not for me to say that we have to continue infinitely with support. I just want to be cautious about promising anything and not delivering on it.
▶ 1:44:43Sen. Budd: You didn't give us a year, but you gave us a dollar, thank you. Mr. pearl, I appreciate your statement that spectrum is critical to economic security, and I'm quoting you, provides a foundation for U.S. companies to innovate. When is your assessment of when innovation might be stifled given the increasing data traffic?
▶ 1:45:06Mr. Pearl: I think it has not happened yet because we had some recent auctions in the last administration. I would say probably in the next two years we would see some real impacts. Although I would say congress has to act much sooner than that. It takes time once auction authority is restored, to have the options.
▶ 1:45:31Mr. Pearl: In terms of when you would really have an impact on our ability of our networks to handle the loads, I think it could be in the next year or two.
▶ 1:45:38Sen. Budd: Wood upgrades to existing 5g by us time?
▶ 1:45:43Mr. Pearl: It could, but there are some fiscal constraints on that, which is at the companies spent $190 billion so far upgrading their networks for 5g. That has been great, got us through covid, we have all of these wonderful networks. Just their ability to do that might be constrained. It could be that spectrum is the only solution at this particular time.
▶ 1:46:08Sen. Budd: In your experience in federal spectrum management, how important is what has leadership on this, and do we need more clear leadership from the white house then we had in the previous administration on this issue?
▶ 1:46:21Mr. Pearl: White house leadership is absolutely critical, although I would say, in my view, it starts with congress, in terms of establishing clearing targets and guidance. That really strengthens the hand of the white house, working with the agencies.
▶ 1:46:39Mr. Pearl: Without having from the president on down, willingness from people like the national security advisor, director of national economic council, to spend time on these issues and prioritize them with everything else going on, because that is ultimately how you get things done, ensure that everyone in the inter-agency has their marching orders on how to make progress.
▶ 1:47:03Chair Cruz: Thank you. Dr. baylis, you told senator budd, you said we are facing a national crisis in spectrum. Could you articulate explicitly what you mean by that, what national crisis we are facing?
▶ 1:47:18Dr. Baylis: We have applications that need spectrum real estate so to speak and we don't have enough bandwidth for all of them. The way we are currently doing spectrum by fixed allocations of spectrum is just not going to work moving forward. We need technology to support the movement of the vices in real time between spectral bands. It is a paradigm shift. We need a paradigm shift badly. Too much trying to use too little.
▶ 1:47:46Chair Cruz: Senator schmitt.
▶ 1:47:50Sen. Schmitt: Thank you come Mr. chairman. I believe over the last three years the U.S. has seen leadership in spectrum policy, 5g innovation both domestically and internationally. That is not good news. Under the trump administration, we went from stagnation to global leadership. Congress passed -- I was not here -- but congress passed the secure and trusted networks act.
▶ 1:48:19Sen. Schmitt: In the time since then, the last four years, the biden administration's failure to act, focusing on things like dei has really set us back. I'm one of the members that serves on armed services, senator budd also, and the commerce committee, so there is a bit of a balancing act that goes with this.
▶ 1:48:41Sen. Schmitt: While dod should have a voice in this process, I strongly believe that congress has already established the ntia as the primary authority for spectrum allocation and it must lead rather than act as a rubberstamp or dod. National security, as we have heard, is very multifaceted. Economic security is national security. China is coming for our lunch more than one way. I wanted to ask a few questions.
▶ 1:49:10Sen. Schmitt: I will try not to ask questions that have already been asked but it is possible I might. Dr. baylis, when we talk about spectrum management, enhancing the ability of commercial and defense users to coexist in those shared bands, what role, how far have we come, how far do we have to go for that to really be effective with ai as those advancements proceed?
▶ 1:49:37Dr. Baylis: It is interesting, ai can be used in multiple levels, the new adaptive and reconfigurable paradigm. One level is to predict the spectrum that will be available for use. Having this technology is very useful.
▶ 1:49:59Dr. Baylis: The second is making sure our radar transmitter can reconfigure its ---- we can use ai to reconfigure the circuits quickly and take measurements on board the device so a lot of our technology developments actually equip this plug-in of ai. We have one of the world ai experts, professor bob marks, who has written great books on ai that congress has on the recommended reading list.
▶ 1:50:26Dr. Baylis: He is working actively with us to infuse ai into our decision-making for our spectrum, adaptive and reconfigurable devices.
▶ 1:50:33Sen. Schmitt: Allows you to maximize the band of spectrum as opposed to having overutilization in one place, lack of utilization somewhere else. Predictive modeling.
▶ 1:50:44Dr. Baylis: It really could. Ai has tremendous power. We need to marshal it for being able to use the spectrum efficiently and adapt our technologies to where the spectrum is maximally being shared.
▶ 1:50:58Sen. Schmitt: I will throw this open for anyone of the four. On a topic like this, trying to ask the question. Back home, I think this is one of those topics, it just doesn't come up in a town hall. It doesn't come up on the stump but it is of critical importance for our country.
▶ 1:51:26Sen. Schmitt: It is with those kind of topics, if you were in our position, how would you crystallize by this issue is so important for the american people?
▶ 1:51:36Dr. Baylis: I will take this quickly. I have to go out and tell people what we are doing. One of the things I say is that spectrum is the most important dimension of battle. If you can dominate the spectrum, you will win the war. From the dod side, it's unquestionable. In fact, we are talking with space force people now. The only dimension of battle is spectrum. There are no tanks, there are no soldiers on the ground. It is just spectrum.
▶ 1:52:07Dr. Baylis: We have to be dominant from spectrum. From the dod side that's important. From the commercial side, we are more connected than we have ever been through spectrum. We learned that through the pandemic because we had to use the wireless spectrum to connect with loved ones and other things. Our society certainly sees the need for wireless devices.
▶ 1:52:28Sen. Schmitt: Anybody else? >> the challenge comes into play where we have to be able to keep our adversaries off balance. Which some of the technologies that Dr. baylis is developing can help us do. If we were to field those, that would make our military more agile when it comes to sharing spectrum at home, also more agile when it comes to creating problems for enemies overseas.
▶ 1:52:56Sen. Schmitt: It will take time to where those pathologies can be incorporated into our military systems. Until then, we need to have a hybrid approach.
▶ 1:53:05Chair Cruz: Thank you senator hickenlooper.
▶ 1:53:09Sen. Hickenlooper: Thank you,, thank you all for being here. We know how busy you are. This is one of the key discussion that we will have all year. Spectrum relocation, let me start with that, provides funding to federal agencies to research the feasibility of modifying and if necessary upgrading the federal system that you spectrum -- use spectrum.
▶ 1:53:38Sen. Hickenlooper: This seems limited by only reimbursing a federal agency for necessary costs to update a system of quote unquote comparable capability. So not the next level but comparable capability. Many federal agencies have estimated that the srf limits their ability to continue to fill that remissions. Mr.
▶ 1:54:01Sen. Hickenlooper: Pearl, do you believe srf could be reformed to better incentive I've agencies to share or reallocate spectrum, why or why not?
▶ 1:54:10Mr. Pearl: I would put it stronger and say that srf must be reformed if we are going to resolve these issues.
▶ 1:54:18Sen. Schmitt: I was trying to be generous.
▶ 1:54:22Mr. Pearl: Agencies need to be able to receive upgrades and have more advanced systems. Some of these capabilities we are talking about could be paid for with auction funds. I think it is also necessary to give an tia the authority to get funding in order to do studies. Right now only the agency can get srf money to do studies.
▶ 1:54:46Mr. Pearl: As several senators have said, it is really important, and ntia engineers are really looking at this from an honest broker perspective and try to get to the right answer. Allowing them to do that would be helpful. The last thing is that there is a technical panel under the legislation.
▶ 1:55:07Mr. Pearl: Fcc ,ntia, but they need more oversight of the process after that because when things go off the rails and the study is not going to be useful, you need that ability for the other agencies and other engineers to weigh in and get things back on track.
▶ 1:55:23Sen. Hickenlooper: Couldn't agree more. Dr. baylis, your testimony underscores how collaboration in the academic community, within government and academic community helps to enhance the spectrum innovation center you lead. You see firsthand how our universities educate and create that workforce pipeline that we need to maintain our leadership in all fields.
▶ 1:55:55Sen. Hickenlooper: Computer science to enhance the security of wireless networks. Radiofrequency engineers to develop new technologies for sharing spectrum, more efficient uses. As congress debates how to study, share, reallocate spectrum, try to be as fair, look at the greatest good for the greatest number of people, how do you highlight the importance of ensuring the U.S.
▶ 1:56:23Sen. Hickenlooper: Has a trained spectrum and cyber workforce?
▶ 1:56:27Dr. Baylis: Workforce development is one of the important things we do. I think it starts with the fact that our faculty, staff researchers, students on this project are all U.S. citizens. You will not find that in many academic centers. We are a bunch of patriots and you want to see this country succeed, want to see this country be the best in wireless technology. It starts there. I think we have to develop an american pipeline of students that will be able to work on the future spectrum paradigm.
▶ 1:56:58Dr. Baylis: We've been doing a lot of efforts, one in which the national science foundation is funding, where we have undergraduates from around the country applying to and get the opportunity to come to a residential workshop on one of our campuses. We are actually holding one at colorado state university. We'll be holding one there, so you are welcome to come and check it out.
▶ 1:57:18Sen. Hickenlooper: I will do that.
▶ 1:57:20Dr. Baylis: Also involved with the army research laboratory, who we have been commissioned through. We have a smart hub fellows program where we place students at the lab, working with some of the brightest labs in the laboratory, so they can build cross disciplinary expertise in spectrum. We are expanding that to other agencies now also. That is a part of bringing in the adaptive and reconfigurable. Thank you.
▶ 1:57:50Sen. Hickenlooper: Mr. clark, you can answer very concisely. This partnership between the federal government and the options around how spectrum gets divvied up. How do you look when you are evaluating spectrum, how important is it for the agencies to have a meaningful and collaborative role in that feasibility study?
▶ 1:58:15Mr. Clark: It's really important because the physics matter. No matter how much spectrum sharing, division of the spectrum, more efficient bands, you still have to deal with the physics of certain bands being used for certain operations and you cannot move to a different part of the spectrum. Physics matters.
▶ 1:58:32Sen. Hickenlooper: Thank you. I yield back to the chair.
▶ 1:58:36Chair Cruz: Senator curtis.
▶ 1:58:40Sen. Curtis: Thank you, Mr. chairman. National security is a top priority. Without it, we are at risk of attack from those who would do us harm. I support the department of defense. When it comes to spectrum debate, dod the commercial interest, a stalemate for decades. After years of discussion, it seems unclear to me why something cannot be worked out. It feels as if there is something I don't know.
▶ 1:59:06Sen. Curtis: I know the dod is not here today but I suspect they are listening, and I would challenge them to better articulate specifically what it is that they are not telling us. Perhaps you need to be classified, and if so, I am game for that briefing. But I think it's fair to say that I don't see it. I think it's important that as a member of congress, we understand exactly why we cannot come to this consensus. Mr. hazlett, the U.S.
▶ 1:59:31Sen. Curtis: Won the 4g race which developed in the app economy being developed in the united states. Looking ahead to 5g and 60, I have concerns that if the U.S. yields technology dumbness to china, future technologies may be developed abroad rather than at home. Can you speak to the U.S. being the leader on 5g and 60 technologies?
▶ 2:00:01Dr. Hazlett: We would simply squander an opportunity to move ahead and make the economy stronger, have innovation here that by the way has benefits way beyond the auction revenues. Talking about scoring the auction revenues, economist reaction is, you are leaving out the biggest part of this which is surging the economy, getting tax revenues over time.
▶ 2:00:33Dr. Hazlett: These are routinely led on the other side. I will quickly say one thing. Yes, this debate between civilian and military have been going on before 1920.
▶ 2:00:42Sen. Curtis: Let's figure it out. I meant to say the question, so I will just hit it right now. Cbo has consistently scored the revenue. I understand you are talking about additional revenue that comes from that. Had do we keep getting it wrong by such dramatic numbers, the value of these?
▶ 2:01:03Dr. Hazlett: Good question. I don't have the answer to that.
▶ 2:01:07Sen. Curtis: The score is 51% lower. We will let you off because I have a bunch of other questions. Mr. baylis, can you explain the difference between full power exclusive spectrum uses versus potential spectrum sharing models and how those different policy approaches might impact the rollout of the next generation wireless technologies?
▶ 2:01:29Dr. Baylis: I think what you mean by exclusive full power, that is the only device that goes to use the band. By spectrum sharing, you mean some level of interplay. I would say, from my perspective as a director of a center developing adaptive and reconfigurable technology, we are here at your service to build the best technology that we can to help our country succeed. We are happy to inform you where the technologies are.
▶ 2:02:00Dr. Baylis: In terms of choosing a site in that game, I prefer not to speak out on that because that is not my lane. I'm trying to develop technologies that will make us the best.
▶ 2:02:10Sen. Curtis: Mr. pearl, did you want to comment?
▶ 2:02:13Mr. Pearl: I would just mention that I would separate a bit between full power versus low power, and they both have their benefits and advantages, as we have seen with cellular networks and wi-fi. Full power doesn't necessarily end be exclusive use. I'm actually not aware of a federal spectrum transition that is completely exclusive use in the sense that dod completely cleared out.
▶ 2:02:38Mr. Pearl: You can look at it both ways where you are looking at full power but not necessarily exclusive use and vice a versa with low power.
▶ 2:02:45Sen. Curtis: That is helpful. While we are on you, let me ask you a question. Dod is not here so we will pick on you. The demand, as we know, for midrange spectrum is high and not going away. Dod says they cannot afford to give up a single part of the spectrum without national security consequences. It is dod truly using all of their spectrum with maximizing efficiency, what other considerations are leading dod to this conclusion?
▶ 2:03:15Mr. Pearl: No, I don't believe they are. If you get into the details with them in many cases, they would concede to that. It is necessary to work with all of the right constituencies in dod. One thing I would mention is that you are hearing one thing at the briefings, but there are people at dod that have a more innovative mindset, see some of the advantages here.
▶ 2:03:43Mr. Pearl: Figure out how to empower some of those people and bring them to the table is really helpful because that is how we can solve some of these problems.
▶ 2:03:49Sen. Curtis: I'm out of time. I would like to close that I may dod supporter. I want them to have what they need, but I also think we can work this out. Thank you for your time. Mr. chairman, I yield.
▶ 2:04:04Chair Cruz: Thank you. Senator kim.
▶ 2:04:08Sen. Kim: Dr. pearl, we are going to get a trade-off of what is out there, we are getting from dod and elsewhere. Do you think this committee would benefit from having a classified briefing, conversation with dod, try to dig into those of the people that you are talking about that can to bring to light some of what this is? I'm just curious your thoughts on that.
▶ 2:04:32Mr. Pearl: I do, and I think it would be helpful to work with the right people, bring in some engineers to that process. What it really comes down to is not just the high level briefing, it is getting into, here is a critical system, and here is the actual impact it would have on performance if it used less spectrum, and getting very precise about that.
▶ 2:04:59Mr. Pearl: Then talking about some of the technologies that might be able to avoid that outcome and preserve the dod capability. But really focusing on those small number of critical systems, getting into those details, because just to be told that we cannot share any, we are using all of it at all times. There are important systems in these bands, systems that are absolutely essential to our national security, but to say that we cannot share any of it and we are using all of it, that doesn't pass muster.
▶ 2:05:28Sen. Kim: I think you are right, that precision is incredibly important when it comes to these decisions. Mr. clark, same question, what are your thoughts about us in this committee diving in deeper in a classified way?
▶ 2:05:41Mr. Clark: Yes, sir, absolutely what needs to happen, getting down to that level of precision, what level do they operate, what is the purpose of the system? How does it work in the war fight? How can it work differently so we can make it work differently in the spectrum? A lot of these neat spectrums of bands that are available so they can jump around and avoid detection or jamming.
▶ 2:06:07Mr. Clark: In some cases, these systems are not efficient because they need more spectrum available to them so they can do this anti-jam function but that means they are not using the frequency continuously. If you had spectrum sharing, you can do these operations while freeing up the spectrum for other users when you are not employing it. >> if I could at one point, because it's a worthwhile conversation.
▶ 2:06:34Mr. Clark: Also looping in what are the possible ways that you could accommodate dod and other parts of the spectrum. If we talk about, for instance, lower three gigahertz, which is a really critical area of discussion, there is a federal band that goes 400 megahertz below where dod is using. Also a conversation about where dod could potentially move, I think would be very helpful.
▶ 2:06:58Sen. Kim: Thank you. I agree. Mr. chair, for your consideration, as one of the committee, I was on armed services in the house, but still a lot to unpack, so if we could consider whether that is doable to engage in a classified way, so we can make sure we are all trying to understand this. Especially when Dr. pearl said about the precision necessary here because so much is at stake. Just in my final time, Dr.
▶ 2:07:30Sen. Kim: Pearl, I want to ask in your testimony, you talk about how critical it is for the U.S. to advance our position in wireless innovation technology, especially when it comes to this review to competition we face with the p.r.c. Can you explain to us how the spectrum auction of authority fits into that goal, how is that embedded within the broader ability?
▶ 2:07:53Mr. Pearl: I would characterize spectrum auctions as the first step in a chain reaction that reverberates through the global economy. Meaning, the auction, other than the us insiders, nobody is aware of, raises money for the treasury, but that is the opportunity for mobile operators to upgrade their networks. Otherwise it is too expensive, no reason to do it.
▶ 2:08:20Mr. Pearl: It is one thing to obtain new spectrum, launching new services, expanding their use of it. Then from there it reverberates into the app economy, tech companies, what you can use all of that band with for. Ultimately that creates an ecosystem. We want a technology ecosystem outside the p.r.c. That is the most advanced and robust.
▶ 2:08:46Mr. Pearl: It's a key component in terms of building an overall tech ecosystem, that will be able to outcompete.
▶ 2:08:51Sen. Kim: That innovation is not just good for our own nation but helps us to be able to export that and get market share around the world.
▶ 2:08:59Mr. Pearl: Absolutely. Other countries will make decisions on what spectrum bands they use, wireless networks they procure from. Having that ecosystem that is attractive to them means that they will choose the U.S. over the p.r.c.
▶ 2:09:13Sen. Kim: Thank you. I yield back.
▶ 2:09:16Chair Cruz: Senator marino.
▶ 2:09:26Sen. Murroreno: Thank you for holding this hearing. I know in the senate you are supposed to abide by the rules that even if a point have been made, it has not been made by everybody. I will break that tradition and think the four of you for your testimony, I thought the exchange was fantastic, we learned a lot. With that, I yield my time.
▶ 2:09:44Chair Cruz: Very good. You may win the prize for brevity. I must say, I'm not sure that you will make it as a senator. [laughter] I am not going to follow that line. There are several things I want to revisit.
▶ 2:10:12Chair Cruz: There was a claim mentioned earlier that it would take 20 years to develop advanced sharing technologies. Mr. pearl, did it take 20 years to develop the ambit process?
▶ 2:10:23Mr. Pearl: No. The study was done in about six months. It was completed within 12 to 18 months, if I remember correctly.
▶ 2:10:33Chair Cruz: Mr. clark, our geographic carveouts another way to share?
▶ 2:10:39Mr. Clark: Yes, sir, they are, absolutely. On the point about 20 years, I said it would take 20 years potentially to upgrade the systems with the new technology. The new technology will be available more quickly.
▶ 2:10:52Chair Cruz: Was the ambit process in allowing dod and 5g commercial coexistence?
▶ 2:11:00Mr. Clark: Yes, it did.
▶ 2:11:03Chair Cruz: Some of my colleagues have discussed low power sharing, cbrs. Mr. pearl, do you think cbrs is a panacea or do we also need full power spectrum?
▶ 2:11:14Mr. Pearl: We need full power spectrum, as well. Cbrs was the first serious effort to do dynamic spectrum sharing in a band where it was difficult. But you need both high-powered uses to really utilize the ability to penetrate buildings, walls, to really have that capital investment that the carriers need, in order to offer a lot of those services.
▶ 2:11:40Mr. Pearl: So you need those high-powered services, low-power services which we have and six gigahertz and elsewhere. Both are important, absolutely.
▶ 2:11:48Chair Cruz: Dr. hazlett, I've heard concerns that cbrs has been underutilized because providers lack the certainty they need to invest in their cbrs spectrum. Do you share this concern?
▶ 2:12:02Dr. Hazlett: There are some problems as the sec is acknowledging, going back to the panacea and how to fix it. The claims were was that was the solution, that was going to really have what is going to have sharing. I will just mention the fact that all spectrum is shared. What is called exclusive use is not exclusive at all. You have networks in the united states with 100 million subscribers and they share these aggregations of bandwidth.
▶ 2:12:34Dr. Hazlett: In fact, they're all kinds of models that have developed between firms, providers, when you do get the incentive to come together and make deals. Yes, people coming in from the private sector, dealing with government assignments.
▶ 2:12:52Dr. Hazlett: The fact is, paying to share, in other words, paying to separate the allocation between the new users and the existing users, that is a very effective form of sharing. It is really not just science. It is incentive to come together.
▶ 2:13:12Dr. Hazlett: That is why things like overlays are so important, what a better system of audits, which has been talked about, suggested 25 years ago to the fcc, to impact have, by auction or assignment, have private firms come in an audit spectrum that is being used by government agencies to see if there are to see if there are opportunities there for sharing, but maybe it is money coming to the agency and an improved version of the spectrum
▶ 2:13:43Dr. Hazlett: Relocation process to get that out there.
▶ 2:13:46Chair Cruz: Mr. clark, we heard from my colleague that a pipeline bill would require exclusive licensed use of and vacating or clearing dod out of bounds. As you know, the spectrum pipeline act that I authored requires a pipeline of full power not exclusive use and does not identify any specific bands.
▶ 2:14:13Chair Cruz: Is there anything in that bill that is inconsistent with your testimony or senator fischer's concerns?
▶ 2:14:21Mr. Clark: In theory it is not. The challenge would be implementation. It may prove difficult to be able to work out an arrangement so that the commercial and military users can both employ that spectrum and the auction may not be affordable or attractive from the commercial perspective because the geographic patchwork they end up with or the spectrum sharing requirements are going to be such that it makes it too expensive to pursue.
▶ 2:14:47Chair Cruz: Mr. pearl, we had an exchange with senator fischer and Mr. clark, where they were discussing the theory that china's public push to lead in wireless technology is just a mind game. That they are somehow baiting the united states with ambitious plans and secretly holding back, trying to trick us into giving up spectrum to the commercial sector.
▶ 2:15:17Chair Cruz: I find that a particularly odd conspiracy theory given the facts of what we know. First of all we know that chinese manufacturers are actively and successfully pushing worldwide adoption of chinese six g equipment standards. That wouldn't be possible without china having made its spectrum available for commercial use.
▶ 2:15:42Chair Cruz: China has aggressively targeted our tillich medications industry, has tapped the phones of top officials including president trump and vice president vance and prompted this committee to fully fund a multibillion-dollar rip and replace program to remove chinese equipment from american networks. Mr.
▶ 2:16:00Chair Cruz: Pearl, would american national and economic security be harmed if chinese firms set the global standard for six g network equipment via this first mover advantage? How would that affect the global competitiveness of U.S. companies?
▶ 2:16:20Mr. Pearl: It would have a great deal of harm. I don't think this is a disinformation campaign. I thought the battle against huawei and zte for many years and in order for them to be able to sell equipment outside of china, they need to be able to use these bands inside china and get those economies of scale. If they are successful in terms of setting the global standard, that means the U.S.
▶ 2:16:45Mr. Pearl: Will have a siloed market with a few of its allies and partners where we will have much worse technology, much worse networks. We will have an inferior ecosystem, and ultimately that means we are going to be put at a military disadvantage, because as others have commented, in a battle, the electromagnetic domain can be decisive and we won't have the technology to prevail in that case.
▶ 2:17:15Chair Cruz: I want to thank all the witnesses for very helpful testimony. Senators will have until the close of business on wednesday, february 26 to submit questions for the record and the witnesses will have until the close of business on wednesday to respond to those questions. With that, that concludes today's hearing. The committee stands adjourned.