community of internet users and our partnerships with ietf, engineering society and all the other players in the system. we have a very humble role to play so it's a small little role and we have to do our best to be a fair meeting place and to let the internet name and numbers space of all. >> host: and finally mr. beckstrom, are you familiar with icann watchdog work that reports on what icann does and does not necessarily positively? >> guest: we have a lot of critics inside and outside in that part of what makes any multi-stakeholder process fair and open. >> host: and there's some traffic on icann watch about what happened in some constitutionality concerns and some sovereignty concerns. how do you address those? >> guest: first, i'm not a lawyer all acclaim that. i'm a business guy, technology guy, government policy. i'm not an attorney.

there are some subtle legal issues that some parties and try to represent their concern about sovereignty. on the other hand, the proponents of art community is absolutely delighted over outcome on october 1 including thousands of attorneys around the world who think it's a terrific thing. so i think i may have been written by someone who is very articulate and intelligent critic and watch good someone who has contributed a lot. i think we need to consider that issue but by and large the world has spoken in the world is very pleased with the affirmation of commitment. and even more countries are coming to the table to engage. so we view it as positive but there always be criticism enough the great dane. >> host: rod beckstrom is president of the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers. chris rhoades is a reporter with the "washington. gentleman, thank you.

>> american icons, three original documentaries from c's are now available on dvd. a unique journey through the iconic columns of the three branches of american government. see the exquisite detail of the supreme court. go beyond the velvet rope so

private tours of the white house, america's most famous home. and explore the history, art, and architecture of the capital. american icon, a three disc dvd set. it's $24.95 plus shipping and handling. one of the many items available at c-span.org/. >> now the use of wireless technology and consumer demand for personal wireless devices. we begin with remarks from chair congressman rick boucher. this is two hours ten minutes. some >> subcommittee will come to order. this morning the subcommittee convened a legislative hearing on two measures related to the

availability of the wireless spectrum, which is a central to meeting our future needs for mobile communication services. the movement of personal communications to mobile service says is both dramatic and accelerating. earlier this year it was announced that for the first time the number of homes have been only a cell phone and no landline service now exceeds the number of homes having only a landline and no cellular service. at the end of 2008, there were approximately 270 million wireless subscribers in the nation including an estimated 40 million at the abusers of mobile internet services. daily new attract is an useful applications are added to wireless service says and data rate continued to increase as consumers require faster access to mobile communications.

as more and more americans use data intensive smart phones and services like mobile video urged the demand for spectrum to support these applications and devices. we'll continue to grow dramatically. today the subcommittee continues its examination of possible ways in which federal communications policy can be altered in order to meet these challenges with the goal of enhancing the consumer experience and facilitating the future growth of local services. in july, i was pleased to join with chairman waxman, full committee ranking member barton and subcommittee ranking member stearns and introducing h.r. 3125, the radio spectrum inventory act. that measure now before the subcommittee would direct the end tia -- ntia and the fcc to look up the spectrum and develop

an inventory of each spectrum been in the allocations between 225 megahertz and ten gigahertz. the inventory would include the identity of both federal and nonfederal users have spent term and the types of services they offer at each spectrum band as well as the amount of views in each band on a geographic basis. when the inventory is completed, the ntia and the fcc would create a website in order to make the information gleaned from the inventory available to the public. they would report the results of the inventory to the congress and that report would include a description of information that could not be made publicly available for national security reasons. it would also include a recommendation of which if any of the least utilized lock

suspect turned should be reallocated for commercial uses. the creation of the inventory is an essential staff in making available more spectrum for commercial and wireless services and meeting the extraordinary step of demands that our nation will soon face. i also joined our colleagues j. inslee and fred upton and introducing the spectrum relocation improvement act. this measure would address an urgent need, which was brought to light after the fcc auctioned the advanced wireless spectrum, the aws spectrum in 2006. while that spectrum is auctioned more than three years ago. the winners of the commercial licenses still do not have full access to the spectrum because it's not been fully cleared by the government users. the bill that we have jointly introduced would hasten the

process of clearing federal users from spec drum that the government has reallocated for commercial purposes. it would require the ntia to publish a transition plan of each federal entity to be relocated after a spec term auction and it would clarify the steps that federal spectrum users must take. in order to receive payment for their relocation cost from the spectrum relocation fund, including the requirement that the spectrum fully be reallocated in vacated by the federal users within one year. my goal is to have both the inventory legislation and the bill speeding the reallocation of previously auctioned government spectrum through the committee and through the house at the earliest possible time. i want to thank our witnesses for joining us this morning. we look forward to your testimony and your views on the future demand for wireless spec terms in the ways in which we

can take constructive steps to meet these challenges. that concludes my opening statement. i'm pleased now to recognize the ranking republican member of our subcommittee, the gentleman florida, mr. stearns. >> good morning and thank you, mr. chairman. you've mentioned both these bills and talked about what they do. so we're very pleased pleased to have this hearing. i'm a cosponsor of both of these bills, the original cosponsor. it is clear the united states would need additional spectrum to be the growing demand for wireless broadband. in fact, we may be victims of our own success here. the united states currently lead the world in wireless, wireless providers have you spectrum to cut u.s. consumers, innovative voice and data services, the number of mobile voice customers in the united states has surpassed the number of wireline customers. and the number of mobile broadband customers has increased exponentially over the past several years.

as customers increase the amount of time they spend on their mobile devices talking, e-mailing, and surfing the internet, cell sites become constrained work capacity. as a result, providers need more spectrum, especially in order to create or broadband services. we are facing in the words of the fcc chairman, a looming spectrum crisis. for example, a voice call requires approximately 10,000 bits per second, while uploading and downloading video downloading, video requires millions of bits per second. countries will need 1.3 or 1,300,000 megahertz of spectrum dedicated for commercial use by the year 2015 according to the international telecommunications union. yet the united states currently has only 500 megahertz allocated and only 50 megahertz in the auction pipeline.

so, in order to increase the amount of spectrum available for mobile services the administration and the fcc need to inventory the current uses of spectrum bands. especially those below three gigahertz that are ideal for mobile services. the bottom line is that we need to know who uses which spectrum bands and the purposes for which they used such bans. once we have the answers to these questions, the government needs to decide whether to reallocate spec ram or commercial mobile users. if the government is requiring spectrum users to vacate reallocated band, the government also needs to establish a meaningful process for reallocated incumbent users. the process needs to begin the sooner rather than later. inventory reallocation and to reallocation all take time and commercial mobile demand for spectrum is increasing as i mentioned exponentially.

furthermore, one rate to make more spectrum available for commercial purposes is to use government spectrum more efficiently and simply reallocate the spectrum saved. that was the idea behind the commercial spectrum enhancement act, which was enacted in 2004. the laws designed to provide funding to upgrade the wireless resources of government agencies while clearing additional spectrum for commercial use. while the cs ba government frequencies identified for reallocation or option two commercial licensees and the proceeds are used to improve the relocating agencies of wireless facilities. pursuant to did csta and the fcc held the advanced wireless service one auction in 2006. of the 13.7 billion braised by the aws auction, approximately 1 billion has been spent to reallocate the 12 federal

agencies. the reallocation procedures outlined in the csta works well in most cases. but some problems have cropped up. for example, t-mobile paid 4.2 billion to build a free network. the department of defense and drug enforcement agencies are behind scheduling and clearing some of the spec room. however, because of unforeseen costs, the complexities in their moves which have been compounded by the confidential nature from the agency's activities, problems like these have created the batters of their investment in the time frames originally promised and may discourage participation in future reallocation auctions. h.r. 3019 won't make the process more efficient. the goal is to better coordinate reallocation so prospective bidders have increased confidence to bid on the cleared spec term. this not only helps the commercial bidders but also the

reallocating agencies, since they will have increased from the auction and a better plan transition. thank you, mr. chairman for holding this hearing. i look for it to hearing from witnesses. >> thank you very much, mr. stearns. the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, is recognized for five minutes. do not thank you, mr. chaiman, i want to hold thank you for holding this legislation onto bills that it adopted will create incentives for spectrum utilization and enhance our ability to develop forward-looking turn into policies. developments in wireless broadband technology along with increased consumer demand have raised questions about the sufficiency of current spectrum allocations for wireless communication services. some experts estimate that the wireless industry in the u.s. needs an additional 150 megahertz of spectrum to simply keep up with the explosion and wireless data usage and to remain competitive

with other nations. before we can start identifying bands of spectrum that might he made available for these new services, however, we need to understand how existing spectrum is allocated and utilized in simple terms we need better information about spectrum usage by federal and nonfederal entities. accordingly, in july of this era of bipartisan group of 18 energy of commerce committee members introduced h.r. 3125, the radio spectrum inventory act. this legislation represents a critical first step in developing a forward-looking spectrum policy. h.r. 3125 is simply about making spectrum you sent allocation transparent. it would develop a national telecommunications information administration and the federal communications commission to develop a publicly available inventory of users and usage and the most valuable spectrum vans.

the bill also directs the agencies to examine whether there is underutilized spectrum that might be reallocated for more efficient uses. of course, any comprehensive look at spectrum must be sensitive to military uses and the need to protect the information about such uses. the bill therefore establishes a procedure by which information pertaining to national security will continue to be safeguarded. the community will continue to work with the department of defense to make sure we are sensitive to any concerns regarding our national defense. i would also like to express my general support for h.r. 3019, the spectrum relocation act of 2009 i commend representatives inslee and upped in for authorizing us to approve the current spectrum relocation process.

by increasing the flow of information of resources as well as enhancing transparency. thank you again, mr. chairman for holding this hearing. i look forward to working with you to move these important bills forward. >> thank you very much, mr. waxman. mr. shimkus is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would say that we need to be working on d. block, d. box, d. block. if we can't get the d. block right power mac are we going to get other allocations of other spectrums? and my focus on the d. block as everyone knows been involved with the caucuses, emergency services and communication and hopefully my colleague, anna, will show. and even jane harman and will say shame on us if we have a next disaster and were not ready to communicate affect or delay. shame on us if we have another

9/11. shame on us if we have another katrina and we have sheriff departments not talking to firefighters to be a firefighter not talking to the national guard. so i appreciate this focus and we all understand the importance of having an inventory. but if we can't get the d. block right in a timely manner, who are we kidding ourselves? so i would hope, mr. chairman, and the full committee chairman that we would really work on the parameters to push for appropriate and proper auction in which we get all the benefits, bring in the additional revenue, but we also developed the revenue stream which will allow us to provide grant and money to our first responders to get to one important aspect of our homeland security issues and debates in line. i yield back my time.

>> thank you very much mr. shimkus. the chairman emeritus of the full liberty and commerce committee chairman mr. dingell is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for convening today's conference on h.r. 3125 the spectrum act. and h.r. 3019 the act of 2009. these two bills and which i am the original cosponsor will aid the federal administration allocation of spec term commodity of increasing the importance especially given recent advances in mobile broadband services. like all the rest of us i am concerned about the allocation about the future and also about what we have done so far and whether it has contributed to the proper use of the spectrum for the future and for all of our people. these two pieces of legislation are complementary to the federal communications duty to present

to the congress a national broad and plan as mandated under the american reinvestment and recovery act. to be certain, the success of the development of such a plan in the implementation of its recommendations will be facilitated in no means agree by a clear and better understanding of the spectrum available for use and a better and more efficient process by which to allocated for commercial use. this i believe will be accomplished in large part by enactment of the bill spending, the committee's consideration today. with this in mind, i welcome our witnesses and look forward to hearing their views on the legislation before us. in particular, i hope you'll engage in a frank discussion about the relationship between h.r. 3125, h.r. 3019, and proposals currently circulating the fcc to reallocate spec spectrum of broadcasters to

global communication providers as a part of the national broadband plan. thank you for your courtesy, mr. chairman and i commend you again for this hearing and the foresight that you're showing with it. i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you very much chairman dingell. the gentleman for oregon mr. walton is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you for holding a legislative hearing on these two bills. i think that's important in improvement of our process to have this oversight before we mark up. i want to welcome my senator mr. smith was taken to broadcasters and i am still his congressman even if you do not know my senator. but we've been friends and colleagues in the legislative arena and in oregon for many years. we welcome you at the n.a.b. and now that i've sold our broadcast stations and you gone to the broadcasters i'm going to go into p. pack in. [laughter] i want to point out a couple of things. first of all, concur with my colleague for mr. shimkus about the d. block issue.

i also want to point out another issue that's come up related to a public safety and i'm not sure it's going to get spoken to today. and that his use of the banned by amateur operators as we evaluate the value of spec term. understand that when 9/11 happened, when katrina happened from another committee kitchen systems would fail and even any day when there's a hurricane or a disaster anywhere in the world it is for him at the amateur radio operators who stepped to the fore with their own equipment and provide the emergency communication when everything else fails. it's hard to put a value on not unless you put a value on saving lives. and helping our law enforcement community and our rescue community get through really difficult times. so they're there when needed all the time and so that needs to be a part of what we consider. regarding the fcc's notice, i'm very concerned about what i'm reading and regarding professor benjamin's comments and his paper he is now a very top

adviser to the chairman of the fcc. and i hope this committee will look at some of the things he has had to say, including however dollar but additional cost for broadcaster is one less dollar for profit and reduces the attractiveness of the broadcasting of the business model. for regulation to intense broadcasting place on the spectrum and regulation will not help free up spectrum and should be avoided. in other words, he's calling for the death of over the air for broadcasting, which i think is a real abomination and will get into that war. i know my time has expired, mr. chairman, and i look for to hearing from our witnesses. >> thank you very much, mr. walden and the turn arrested may 5th mr. doyle for two minutes. >> thank you for holding this important hearing on going to wait opening statement and look forward to hearing from the witnesses. >> thank you i'm a mr. doyle. we will add two minutes to your question time of the witnesses. the gentleman mr. ensley is

recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chaiman and in my state as we speak i've got hundreds of not thousands of constituents designing these new internet broadband services in the next generation is important to a lot of my neighbors to whom i represent. it's important to the country as a whole for job creation possibilities. president obama has recognized broadband infrastructure as a tremendous job potential. but we know we'll have to have additional allocation spectrum for commercial use to really reach fruition of the tremendous promise here. in order to first identify spectrum i want to commend him for his cosponsor of that being done at the first. but once the spectrum is identified and ready for option we have to ensure that procedures are in place. this time to adequately guide to the auction process. the 2007 -- or in the 2000 advanced wireless services auction the process and reporting requirements were

insufficient to appraise the length, complex city, and size of federal relocation efforts. they also failed to ensure a timely transition of spectrum by federal agencies. and business planning by commercial bidders. it's this very problem that the bill that i'm prime sponsor seeks to address. fundamentally our bill will do these two things. it increases to bidders before it occurs and it will expedite the flow of auction besiegers to the relocated agency to keep the relocation process on track. i'm convinced that this more complete information about the effective federal agency systems him of the relocation cost estimates and schedules will reduce the risk for potential bidders, will ensure timely relocation payment and moving by federal agencies and will ensure that the next generation of consumer demand and services are

delivered. it will not cure the common cold that otherwise it sounds pretty good. i want to thank macculloch mr. upton and chairman boucher for advancing this and i look forward to fulfilling the thomas of our billing constituents. >> thank you very much, mr. inslee. mr. kerry is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you for holding this legislative hearing him a look for to hearing our witnesses. we have to make sure that we do this right and in balance with the spectrum that's used in military. i had the pleasure of representing the 55th wing which is an electronic warfare and information operations out of air force base right outside of omaha in bellevue. i relate her from the association of old pros that set out some of the issues that we may be discussing here with the spectrum and i'd like to offer that letter into the record.

>> without objection. >> last in our committee memorandum it starts off with the introduction criticizing universal service fund and calling it in effect tears. in the second paragraph also starts off with the universal service. so somehow universal service fund is important in this discussion and i look forward to your comments on how universal service fund affects the spectrum in your usage of it. i yield back. >> thank you very much mr. terry. the gentlelady from california ms. matsui is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman and thank you for calling this important hearing today. i don't like to think today's witnesses for being with us today. we're here today to discuss how we can promote greater transparency on his bactrim issues for expediting the process in which we can allocate additional spectrum in the marketplace. according to recent estimates are approximately 270 million wireless subscribers in the

united states. but that number is growing. according to recent reports, the current economic recession has increased a number of consumers opting for only cell phones over traditional land lines. there is concern that the current allocation of spectrum for mobile broadband services is inadequate to meet the rapidly growing demand. in fact, the fcc recently warned the potential spectrum crisis that could threaten the expansion of broadband services. while the dtv transition helped free up more spectrum the need for commercial spectrum capacity will only expand as broadband continues to be delivered to more areas. winter transparency, and help ensure we meet demand, chairman waxman and boucher have introduced the radio spectrum act and congressman inslee and upton. i am a chairman of both pieces of legislation. spectrum availability will be

key to ensuring confirmation of public safety and growing demand for wireless services and any proposal going forward should ensure underserved urban communities are properly considered. i thank you, mr. chaiman for what it is important hearing today and i yield the balance of my time. see my thank you ms. matsui. the gentlelady from tennessee miss black are in is recognized for two minutes. >> i want to welcome the panel that is before us today. we are delighted that you are here and also delighted mr. chairman that we are talking about legislation that actually represents what is a balanced give and take. and that is not something we often do in this congress. all too often we are talking about taking from the american taxpayer and giving to big business, but today we are going to be talking about raising money from big business through an equal exchange of value for a commodity.

..

and evaluate all of our options for relocation so i am pleased we are bringing many different parts of this discussion together today and the yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you ms. blackburn. the gentlelady-- i'm sorry, the gentleman from california mr. mcnerney is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman for competing today's hearing on to bipartisan bills that are intended to help our country make better use of our spectrum. h.r. 3125 the radio spectrum inventory act will provide for the gathering of information about spectrum used to increase transparency and help us understand exactly how the spectrum is now utilize. this is no small task. but it is absolutely essential to make informed decisions on allocating spectrum to meet the ever-increasing demand for wireless broadband spectrum. it has been reported that the u.s. allocation of spectrum

compares poorly with the oecd nations and is inadequate to meet the growing demand. we can't let that happen. we are going to do the best we can to help industry take the lead and make our nation lead the world in broadband. h.r. 3019 the spectrum allocation reallocation improvement act streamlines the spectrum auction process and will reduce the time required to reallocate federal spectrum cleared for commercial use allowing licensees to utilize their spectrum without unnecessary delay. as a co-sponsor both of these bills i recognize the importance of properly managing available spectrum. i also understand the sponsors of h.r. 3125 are working with the department of defense to ensure that the bill also protect ongoing military uses of spectrum and i look forward to

working with my colleagues to improve this legislation. i thank the witnesses for taking time to share their perspective on this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. >> thank you mr. mcnerney. the gentleman from michigan, mr. upton is recognized for two minutes. not here. the gentleman from indiana, mr. bowyer is recognized for two minutes. >> ies my time the place the question and i welcome steve largent and gordon smith. >> the gentleman from, the gentlelady from the virgin islands ms. christenson is recognized for two minutes. >> i am going to also waive my opening statement and put it to the record. like to walk on the witness is especially senators meth libelee desir for the first time. thank you. >> thank you. the gentleman from massachusetts , mr. markey is recognized. >> thank you mr. chairman and

thank you so much for having this hearing. back in 1993 we were in a world where there were two cell phone companies, they each charged about 50 cents a minute and it was analog, but in 1993, this committee moved over 200 megahertz of spectrum and we treated the third, fourth, the thin six cell phone license. thale when digital, and by 1996 the price had dropped to under 10 cents a minute. the first to company said move to digital as well and we had a revolution that was ongoing and was so successful that right now there are people sitting out here and the audience checking their blackberry rather than listening to my opening statement and that is a tribute to what our committee made possible. now we are on to the next stage of this revolution, where we know that the google, ebay,

amazon revolution is something that continues on. this committee should be very proud of that, and by reallocating even more spectrum will make it possible for the entrepreneurs. it will make it possible for these technology genius is to once again brand a revolution made in america. we have to stay ahead of this curve. we have to make sure that it is something that is the american. we did that in the 1990's. we have a chance to do it again and i congratulate you mr. chairman for your work on this issue. it was bipartisan then. it should be bipartisan again. we are into a wealth creation of. that is what this is all about, and the more effectively we can think this issue through which is what we are doing, the more likely we will create the greatest amount of wealth that will help our country become more prosperous and i thank you for doing that.

>> thank you very much mr. markey. the gentlelady from florida, ms. castor is recognized for two minutes. >> because it and it's impossible to follow mr. markey i'm going to submit my statement for the record and yield back my time. >> the gentleman from ohio, mr. space is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman and i welcome her witnesses and i too what wave the opening. >> that concludes opening statements from members of the subcommittee and we now welcome our panel of witnesses this morning. we are pleased to have each of you with us today and we very much look forward to your testimony. just a brief word of the introduction about each of our witnesses. dr. dale hatfield is an adjunct professor with the interdisciplinary telecommunications program at the university of colorado. steve largent, former member of the house of representatives and former member of this committee

is the president and chief executive officer of the telecommunications industry association, the wireless association. mr. michael calabrese is vice president and director of the wireless future program at the new america foundation. former senator gordan smith, we welcome to this committee for the first time in his new role as president of the national association of broadcasters. and we look forward to a long and successful partnership with you. dr. ray johnson is the senior vice president and chief technology officer of the martin corporation, and mr. thomas stroup is the chief executive officer of shared spectrum company. we welcome each of you. without objection your prepared written statements will be made part of the record and we would ask that you keep your oral summaries to approximately five minutes. mr. hatfield, we will be happy to begin with you.

>> thank you mr. chairman, chairman boucher. >> if you could be sure that mic is on and pull it very close to you. >> chairman bout tariff and ranking member stearns and members of the subcommittee i am very pleased and honored to appear before you today to testify on the topic of radio spectrum management and on the issues raised by h.r. 3125 and five h.r. 3019. my name is dale hatfield and in addition to the position you just mentioned i am the executive director of the silicon flatiron said-- the entrepreneurship at the university of colorado in boulder. i should note in a passer-by had engaged in independent consultative activities including members represent on the panel today. is a detail that my prepared testimony i have other affiliations but today i'm testifying entirely on my own behalf as a private citizen. now, in my written testimony i

present some background on spectrum management and then focus on five overarching themes or point. it is those five points that i will briefly summarize now. first i have been involved in spectrum management issues for over four decades and it is very clear to me that we are now at an unprecedented period and a demand for access to spectrum in the critical frequency range of roughly 300 megahertz 23 gigahertz. this increase in demand for spectrum is propelled by increases in the number of uses of the resourced, in the number of users and the amount of bandwidth or capacity consumed per user, per use. while the exponential growth in commercial cellular bandwidth requirements is perhaps the most visible there are a host of other increasing demands for spectrum in this range as well, including ones that support important ones that support

public safety homeland security and national defense priorities. thus, in my opinion this spectrum scarcity issue that the legislation sets out to address is very real. second, in my written testimony i every queue five traditional techniques that we have used in the past to accommodate growth in demand for the resourced. one, going higher in frequency. two, improving the technical efficiency of spectrum utilization. three, reallocate existing spectrum, and used to another. for come increasing the amount of spectrum sharing, and five, reusing spectrum more intensely in the geographic dimension. i conclude that for technical reasons going higher in frequency will be of limited utility in solving the current spectrum crisis associated with wireless mobile faith applications. and that will further improvements in technical efficiency can help, they are apt to be inadequate and solving

the problems associated with the orders of magnitude increases in spectrum demand. that leaves reallocation, increased sharing and more intense frequency reuse at least in some services as potential solutions. albeit ones with unique challenges of their own. third, setting aside spectrum reallocation for the moment, i next focus on increase sharing and more intense frequency reuse. with regard to the former i comment favorably on past steps that the fcc has taken to encourage voluntary sharing of the resourced through secondary markets. i go on to conclude that a combination of increased incentives or mandates for spectrum sharing coupled with more decentralized, more opportunistic and more technologically sophisticated techniques for accessing spectrum can be a significant help in avoiding the looming

crisis. in terms of increased frequency reuse, ifrs note that it is not always possible because the nature of some services, in other words some services like radar require high-power operating over long-distance is and therefore you can't use the spectrum on a geographic basis as easily. i also want to know that at the spectrum u.s. may be constrained with availability of suitable antenna locations and economic facilities. fourth, i comment i am a strong supporter of conducting the spectrum inventories called out in h.r. 3125 and hence for the legislation itself because i am a strong believer in that old adage, he can't measure-- you can't manage what you don't measure. is that simple. i could go wand-- i do want to conclude a comprehensive and ongoing inventory is necessary to support to the most promising three ways of averting a crisis,

that is reallocation and increase cheering. fifth come i have sir while i am a strong supporter of conducting spectrum inventories, i also note based on many years of experience that there are potential shortcomings associated with the paper study at least and some services. therefore i conclude that the inventory mandated in the proposed legislation should be augmented by selected field measurements that gain additional information when actual usage and those bands identified as being the most promising for reallocation or increased sharing. that concludes my oral testimony mr. chairman and i would be happy to respond to any questions that you were the rest of the subcommittee might have. >> thank you very much mr. hatfield. mr. largent, we will be happy to hear from you. >> i wanted thank you and ranking member and all of the members. i hope you have a merry

christmas, happy new year, hope to get there. wanted thank you for the opportunity to share views on the inventory act in respect and relocation improvement act. these bills are much needed plug-ins for a process that will enable spectrum to be made available for the wireless broadband initiative and other services. today the united states is the world leader in the wireless broadband. while having less than 7% of the global wireless subscribers the u.s. is home to more than 20% of global treaty subscribers. are 112 million for e.g. subscribers are more than any of the country and more than a third, fourth, fifth and sixth countries combined. additionally the most advanced wireless advises which manufactured by global companies and could be launched anywhere in the world routinely debut and the u.s. marketplace. as a former ntia administrator noted the convergence of mobile wireless services and high-speed internet access and the

evolution of handsets from telephones to powerful hand-held computers promises to transform the way we work, learn, deliver health care, manage energy consumption and enhance public safety. the key to translating this promise into reality is access to more spectrum. ctia believes there's an urgent need to identify additional spectrum that can be made available for wireless broadband and other defense wireless services by providing for a comprehensive and timely inventory of spectrum below ten gigahertz, enactment of h.r. 3125 would represent an important step towards meeting rapidly accelerating demand and maintaining u.s. leadership in the global wireless marketplace. how much spectrum do we need? the itu projects that by 2015 developed countries will need at least 1300 megahertz of spectrum for commercial wireless operations. since the united states currently has less than

500 megahertz of spectrum available for commercial wireless services we of the fcc to identify additional spectrum that can be reallocated to help us meet the benchmark. many of our trading partners are taking steps towards this goal in the u.s. needs to keep up to stay ahead. a properly constructed inventory effort is a sound place to start. the inventory is only the first up however. once the inventory is complete policymakers must use it to reallocate spectrum for danced wireless services. history demonstrates it can take a decade or more to reallocate spectrum for commercial use and put such spectrum in the hands of providers of commercial mobile services, more than a decade. given the exploding demand for mobile broadband we must move more quickly than was the case with either aws3 or 700 megahertz efforts. was simply can't wait until 2020 or beyond. we recognize there will be critics of the effort to move forward with an inventory and reallocation of spectrum. they will claim carrier should

be more efficient with the spectrum already available, that we can build our way out of the problem, or that we have rdc in an expansion in the amount of spectrum available for commercial services due to recent a w s. options. there are sound reasons why the subcommittee should dismiss these criticisms and i discuss these in my written testimony. finally once in inventory is complete and spectrum is identified for reallocation and launching the improvements to the spectrum relocation process proposed by h.r. 3019 willen sure that the relocation process works smoothly for all parties. thank you for the opportunity to discuss these matters with the subcommittee. we look forward to working with you to ensure the wireless industry continues to serve as an engine for jobs, economic growth and the american competitive advantage. >> thank you mr. largent. mr. calabrese. >> good morning. first i would like to take a the

committees leadership for taking up these two very complementary and important pieces of legislation and notably on a bipartisan basis. our national goal would not merely affordable braun that-- broadband access but seamless mobile connectivity anywhere and anytime will require an enormous increase in available spectrum capacity. the iphone has proven to be the canary in the proverbial spectrum coalmine. a than smartphones consumed hundreds of times the bandwidth of ordinary cell phones. with-- in applications for sensing networks mobile health monitoring, energy conservation, education and more. this exploding demand and continued focus on exclusive licensing by auction has served to reinforce the conventional wisdom that spectrum is scarce. in reality, the only scarcity is government permission to use

that term that is licensing. spectrum capacity itself is very abundant. even in the most valuable frequencies below three gigahertz actual spectrum use measurements show that the vast majority of frequency bands are not being used in most locations and it most times. this gross underutilization of the nation's spectrum resources should be an urgent concern. spectrum is not only an immensely valuable and publicly owned resourced but one that is infinitely rewable, every millisecond. that is why new america and the broader public interest spectrum coalition that we work with strongly supports annex mcfay chara 3125 the radio spectrum inventory act. we agreed that the more comprehensive inventory described in the house bill is needed. a more granular and comprehensive description of spectrum used at each market will list its policymakers,

entrepreneurs and technologist to propose new ways to enhance both access and efficiency. we also agreed is important to extend the inventory up to ten gigahertz as the house bill provides. spectrin napping would facilitate the expanded access to broadband in three ways. first by improving the functioning of secondary markets for license transfers and leasing, a second it will provide information on what it would take to clear some very underutilized they ins for new uses and third, and perhaps most important, it will repeal the far greater number frequency bands that can be made available for shared access indiscrete geographic areas and at certain times of the day or year or at certain altitudes of power levels. we expect rural areas to be the most likely in the immediate beneficiaries of this napping. the one shortcoming of h.r. 3125 in our do you is that an inventory of spectrum

assignments should be augmented by actual spectrum use measurements, as dale just mentioned. measurements and eventually a spectrum, a system of spectrum use monitoring can provide a more nuanced window into how, when, where and to what extent bands are actually in use. we realize that measurements at a budgetary cost. fortunately we believe appropriated funds are available over the next four years for a very robust implementation of the inventory act. is part of the recovery act congress appropriated $350 million for a comprehensive nationwide inventories map of the nation's existing broadband capabilities. sense ntia will award less than half the available funding to the states for broadband mapping congress to clarify that a portion of the remainder be used to inventory the airwaves as well. we also strongly support

h.r. 3019, spectrum reallocation m improvement act. know where spectrum utilization more evident than many of the bans reserve for use by the federal government itself. while we support h.r. 3019 we also believe legislation should be broadened to take a damage of a critical opportunity to free up a far greater spectrum capacity. h.r. 3019 would continue to limit eligibility for radio system modernization to agencies actually clearing off a set of frequencies, while only a tiny fraction of federal spectrum could be cleared and auctioned in the near future, a far greater number of bands could be shared more intensively by taking advantage of advances and smart radio technologies. federals spectrum incumbents idid-- need the resources to take steps to enable more intensive accessing and then sharing by other users. this could be a win-win for the

military. new and upgraded fedele system could be designed with the broader public interest and spectrum in mind and not only in the very limited case of a band being cleared for auction. i will stop there. thank you very much of that will be pleased to take any questions. >>nk mr. calabrese. mr. smith. >> mr. chairman, ranking member stearns, members of this honorable committee, it is indeed a pleasure and privilege for me to be before you to speak a few thoughts about spectrum on behalf of the national association of broadcasters. verse, nab believes that any inventory spectrum should be comprehensive. let's look at all of the bands and all of the services, including the federal government veins. lets you how each service is using its existing spectrum. second, our national priority should recognize the value that

free over the air broadcasting brings to every american. broadcasting and broadband are not either/or propositions, as some suggest. i believe that is a false choice. third, we should challenge all services to be efficient and innovative users of spectrum. ferraris said transitional-- transition to digital broadcasting has become more efficient. with your help, the transition was a resounding success and the benefits are remarkable. in the digital world, few hours received many new programming strains in a wide variety of content and local news in high-definition. it would be shortsighted to stunt that growth and dampen what is an even brighter future for broadcasting. if broadcasting is limited or eliminated, consumer investments in expectations and the tv receivers would be stranded.

consumers spend an estimated $25 billion in hdtv receivers in 2009 alone. millions of other americans invest time, effort and funds on converter boxes and the u.s. government spent $2 billion to help them with this. broadcasters bens an additional $10 billion to make the transition. for years, consumers have been promised that the digital upgrade would usher in a new era of high-quality television, with new edmark diverse programming, the more channels and a host of new services, all for free, and over the air. if esam advocate, of his that this all be done away with, consumers would realize none of these benefits. through the dtv transition

broadcasters gave that 108 megahertz of spectrum. broadcast television is the first wireless service to never substantially reduce its spectrum use while providing an increase in services. then, there is mobile dtv. this year the television industry adopted a new mobile digital television standard, turning on the green light for manufacturing and implementation and the results are nothing short of stunning. members of the committee, this is a mobile-- this is a mobile tv. right now is playing a program from nbc. there are seven channels in the washington d.c. metropolitan area of that are doing this. it is also cell phone.

and this combination of technologies is i believe the future of mobile wireless communications. it is not an exaggeration to say that you will soon be able to receive broadcast television signals on almost any device. this is an example. sidney or blackberry will be atv commenter iphone could be a tv. you name it, we are on the cusp of it. into a short circuit it know it seems to be very wise. broadcasting-- and this is very important to understand, broadcasting possibility to serve one to many in small bandwidth segments is unique among all services. at moments of national significance or tragedy when millions of americans are seeking information,

broadcasting is the most efficient delivery system. with each new viewer, broadcasters use of spectrum becomes more efficient. without any additional burden on spectrum. by contrast, with wireless broadband, each stream of content to every individual place is an additional strain on the wireless network, clogging up the bandwidth and there is more. for example, a company is working with broadcasters to provide a blended broadcast broadband system. if you haven't seen this members, i urge you to do it. that system is more affordable, high-quality and an alternative to cable and satellite. a comprehensive objective examination of spectrum allocation and usage is a worthwhile endeavor.

such an analysis, if done forthrightly and without bias, will demonstrate that broadcasters continued to be the effective custodians of our nation's airwaves. many broadcast services have not been and cannot be efficiently replicated by broadband services. broadcasters for example helped to save lives through timely coverage of natural disasters and other emergencies. and by coordinating with local law enforcement officials, the amber alert, broadcasters have participated in the recovery of 492 a abducted children. >> mr. smith, if you could wrap up. you have gone beyond your time. >> let's not forget the concerns we shared in the dtv transition. we spend a lot of time to get it right and we did it so that economically disadvantaged the elderly rural and ethnic

minorities are not left out with access to critical news and information. finally, mr. chairman, if my statement is in the record, i think it is important that when you consider highest and best use and you put all of these public values in, the value of broadcasting is self-evident. thank you sir. >> thank you very much mr. smith. dr. johnson. >> chairman belter, ranking member stearns and members of the subcommittee thank you for inviting lockheed-martin corporation to participate in today's hearing on the radio spectrum inventory at. i serve as lucky martin's singer technology officer. my role in the corporation provides me with a broad perspective of the importance spectrum issues relevant to the discussion today. i appreciate the opportunity to contribute and i'm honored to offer input that they inform your consideration of these important policy matters.

lockheed-martin is a global security company that employs approximately 140,000 people in all 50 states. were principally engaged in research design development manufacturing integration and sustainment of a dense technology systems products and services and most of these systems and solutions depend on access to the spectrum we are discussing. our customers include a broad array of agencies both military and civil for helmley support diverse critical security missions both at home and abroad. at any given time lockheed-martin corporation holds approximately 400 fcc authorizations for a variety of uses including experimental licenses that enable the testing of new technologies as well as new applications being applied to existing technologies. as a general matter spectrum scarcity is not a problem that is the need to fcc licensees based on our understanding. federal government users are experiencing the same pressure

they are required to meet increasing demands of their critical roles and missions. therefore it is an important balance that h.r. 3125 that by acquiring-- for quiring inventory resources to be conducted by the that ccn ntia. although for on activities in developing advanced systems and solutions to the federal government needs we see growth and requirements in terms of access to bandwidth and intensive applications whether that is video streaming from and unmanned vehicle or surveillance from a high health to their ship. lockheed-martin endorses the radio spectrum inventory at. we do however have some concerns with the bill as it was introduced in respectfully suggest that the bill be modified to include the following issues. first note the stated purpose of h.r. 20 fee this to promote spectrum efficiency while the bill does not explicitly require ntia and fcc convict efficiency analysis of spectrum usage, this

section 119ae as edited by the bill steers the agency in that direction. however there is no single metric this bansal communications. [inaudible] communications uses of the spectrum which can be used for a point of comparison part of the intensity of use metric is not correlated with the effectiveness or efficiency for users. moreover improvement should be not equated to a reduction in bandwidth feudalize. measuring spectrum efficiency as a proxy the price entities are willing to pay for licenses inappropriate. many critical spectrum users deliver tremendous value to our country must import the toren national homeland security but do not directly generate revenues. second, we are concerned that the bill would ayn for laborer choir nccn the ntia to disclose sensitive information that should not be disclosed. vistas not only impact the federal government but also unpack some fcc licensees like lockheed-martin. we agree with the administration's stated concern

and note from any information security perspective it is very m4 derrick nice the release of individual unclassified data points can result in sensitive information being improperly disclosed wendy morrison heckert it. third i would like to raise a concern to the subcommittee regarding the possible misinterpretation of the legislation into ways. what is potential in obvert message sent for allies in the international community given the scope of the frequencies being a montford in the provision requiring allocation part of the department defense and the defense industry have worked hard to achieve an international spectrum harmonization to support allied interoperability. the other concern is the requirement for an annual review of spectrum in this review can create the impression of volatility and instability in spectrum allocations thus impacting long-term research and development acquisition and deployment. suggestions of instability in spectrum access could result in a chilling effect in the long

term technology investment. finally we have identified a few technical issues with the drafting of the bill that we will submit separately to the staff. while i'm here today to address h.r. 3125 i would like to know we do have some concerns with h.r. 3019 as well and would be happy to offer following discussions with the subcommittee. mr. chairman i appreciate having the opportunity to testify h.r. 3125 is a good start in lockheed-martin commend you and the other co-sponsors for identifying the need for spectrum inventory and taken the initiative to draft legislation to address this issue. we hope he will agree with our suggestions to improve the bill and we look forward to working with you and the committee staff throughout the legislative process. i am happy to answer any questions you would have. >> thank you very much mr. johnson. mr. stroup. >> did morning. thank you for this opportunity to testify on the pending spectrum of the tory and reallocation bills. my testimony this morning will focus on two main points.

first determine how lended spectrum resources are being used efficiently. it must include data on actual spectrum utilization. second, until the database is compiled and analyzed we caution against jumping to any conclusions as to what is next for a particular frequency bands because new technology presents spectrum access alternatives that not been studied until now. i've been involved in the wireless industry for over 25 years. in the early 1990's and was president of the personal communication industry association which dix microwave spectrum for telecommunications services which were the source of competition and innovation reference by congressman markey. then i found it in rennick company facilitating and negotiating the relocation of fix microwave incumbents and bands for the auction winners. since march of this year i've been the ceo of shared spectrum

company. shared spectrum is a small technology company located in virginia. since the founding of the company in the year 2000 dr. martin henry has been conducting spectrum occupancy studies to document the untapped potential frequency bands. attached my written testimony is a list of our public studies to date. the video monitors and the bremer also displaying some sample results of our measurements. the studies include measurements from new york city, chicago and washington d.c. during periods of the anticipated high radio traffic. they indicate that less than one-third of the allocated rate is spectrum is being used at any given time. to take it advantage of this empty spectrum capacity as essie pioneered dynamic spectrum nasa's technology. dsh fixodent ajodha shante capacity by adapting to the spectral and environment unchanging transmission or reception parameters. this allows for more efficient wireless communication without interfering or requiring the

dislocation of legacy systems using the same bands. the company developed dsa over the past five years for several military projects and this technology is now being implemented in several military radio systems. we are also exploring several commercial applications including new cost-effective wireless broad bad systems back in axis burford lower frequencies. as has been pointed out throughout the hearing the demand for spectrum across all sectors in markets that substantially increase. we agree that the necessary first up in confronting spectrum dilemma is to conduct a comprehensive study of the nation's spectrum resources. we are therefore pleased to support the inventory act. the bill would provide guidance to the nccn ntia to work together to create databases spectrum allocations an assignment. however it is also important to supplement this data with information regarding the actual use of the airwaves. virtually every service for which spectrum is allocated can

show a legitimate need for spectrum and most incumbents will argue that they make effective use of their allocations. thus compiling a database will be interesting but that alone will fail to show how much or even at the spectrum is actually being utilized. until such a database is compiled unavailable because against any presupposition as to what is next for a particular radio band. to assume the next up falling initial inventory with the traditional reallocation proceeding what amount to a plan for years and years in fighting among entrenched interests that have no notion are incentive to have their existing spectrum rights diminished the matter how little they are you lies. this is based on my personal experience where it took six years for the pc as spectrum to be reallocated and that look like the fast-track compared to most reallocation efforts that typically drag on for more than ten years. as the subcommittee moves forward we believe it is also important to recognize new technologies like dsa naval mort

efficient use of spectrum allocations and to create new opportunities for sharing spectrum of the existing services and underutilized fans. the interest in finding additional spectrum for wireless rodman services is more likely to be accommodated in a timely manner inflexible bremer is established that includes dsa naval seering with government and non-government incumbents. at sifry marge would focus on multipurpose in vans with flexible overlay rights and responsibilities. this approach that and false repurposing certain bantz in relocating in cummins would be too costly, too time-consuming and in light of new technology and necessary. instead it better policy would build upon the approach taken when the pc as grants were made available in 1995. the licensees were subject to non-interference requirement with the existing microwave incumbents. while most of those licensees of were relocated to new systems on

the other frequencies the dances made in cognitive radio technology now provide the ability to coexist with legacy systems that was not available at that time. thank you for this opportunity to testify and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you mr. stroup and sanka to walker witnesses for your informing remarks here this morning. i particularly appreciate the broad consensus that is evident from your testimony about the need to move forward with both of the bills that are the subject of our legislative hearing this morning. particularly the need for an inventory of spectrum that could be reallocated for commercial purposes. a number of you most recently mr. stroup just mention the potential spectrum sharing as a way to accommodate new commercial services within our spectrum restraint. could you talking little bit about the state of technology with regard to spectrum sharing

and what potential really doesn't hold and what limitations does that face? and who would like to begin? mr. hatfield. >> thank you. i think-- >> could you pull that microphone just a bit closer? >> i think there is-- it is important to look at into ways. we are party shettle lot of the existing spectrum and we call that static sharing. for example, an antenna pointed at a satellite and intent is pointing on the ground appointing in a different direction and that provides sufficient isolation that they satellite system can share with the terrestrial system and that sharing has been with us for quite some time and used effectively. i think the key here is combining the concepts that tom talked about, is that a lot of spectrum is not being used and looking at more dynamic forms of

sharing. and other words for example here in town today in d.c. particular channel might not be used by some private microwave for something like that in that spectrum could be shared on a dynamic basis, so i think the key going for-- >> so you are not talking about technology in an example that we use the same spectrum simultaneously by varies users but simply but they faced use of the spectrum by varies users, each using it fully within the allotted time? >> or, as we can say there may be directionality or something that may be employed that would allow dynamic sharing. >> given that opportunity, talking little bit if you what about the state of technology development for actual simultaneous sharing of the same spectrum. >> i not sure. >> i will be more than happy-- >> mr. stroup.

>> we have tested this on multiple occasions with members of the military. we are currently giving it over to several radio stations. are indications that those radios are going to be ready for testing next year and employed in the field. >> there is nothing commercially available today that would enable simultaneous use of spectrum by multiple users but you are saying this technology is under development and ready for testing essentially next year? >> i would suggest it is beyond the level of testing and radio systems are being developed. within the commercial sector we have the initial licensing agreements with two different companies to use with the the tv white spaces. our expectation is upon conclusion of that rulemaking, sometime within the next 18 months, they will be deployed. >> any other comments? mr. calabrese? >> as you have heard from three of us, there seems to be a far greater opportunity in terms of quantities of spectrum to open

it up on a shared or opportunistic basis and there are a couple of important precedence at least to build on. one i think you are aware of is of course the military already allows the shared use of certain radar bans, so you no thanks in part to the jumpstart brockman act that was over on the set aside a few years ago. the military agreed to open up the five gigahertz band based on the technology that uses dynamic frequencies selection. in other words the devices sense, they sensed before they transmitted and if they don't detect anything like radar than they operate their they keep checking and checking in checking and then they can get off real quick. the other even more important technological precedent here to build on is the order last year from the fcc and the opening the tty spacerun lice and sharing, because what the commission has

required is a go location database so it would-- these devices would need gps and internet access. they look up and get a list of available channels with conditions attached, so we can build on that database that the commission is about to create an and a lot of other frequencies over time that would have conditions attached. >> that is very encouraging to hear. i would just know that the first commercial application of the white technology is now occurring in my congressional district. >> right. >> my time has expired, but i will ask if you have any brief comments about this. are there shortcomings at the present time in the licensing and spectrum management processes that are employed by both ntia and the fcc, the and if you detect that there are

any, do you have recommendations for how this process could be improved? anyone want to answer? mr. largent. >> i would just repeat some of the problems with some of our members as being a shortcoming that i think are dressed them both of these bills. and i thank a definite step in the right direction. >> thank you very much. anyone else what to briefly comment on that? mr. hatfield? >> i would add that the commission has done things in the past to encourage the secondary market-- one of the problems with the existing system is it is centrally controlled and therefore a lot of rigidities built into it. the commission to its credit has gone to the use of secondary markets where companies and so forth can lease spectrum and that is not worked up quite as well as some of us would have hoped, so i think there is a possibility to continue to encourage the secondary market to reduce some of the rigidities

associated with trying to centrally manage their resources. >> thank you mr. hatfield. my time has expired. the gentleman from florida, mr. stearns is recognized for five minutes. >> mr. largent one of my questions for you is, when we have the option of the dtv transition in raised about $19 billion in the bill that mr. barton sponsor did i co-sponsored, i think it became the backbone of the fourth generation of wireless service. that was one approach. the other approach appears to be a stimulus package of $7 billion to provide grants. the question would be, the optioning of the spectrum appears to me would be a more efficient way to do it than just giving out the stimulus package. you might comment on the two approaches here and which one you think is more advisable.

>> well, let me just say this. the bottom line is we need to have additional spectrum in the wireless space in order to meet not only the demands but the promise, the hope of the broadband world, and so however you get to that point, that is subject to debate and can be-- become partisan but the bottom line is more spectrum is needed and sooner rather than later. the fact is the last two tranches of spectrum that were allocated for wireless use, the aide said the u.s. auction and-- both took over ten years to come to fruition. one was about 12 years and the other was 16 years to get it to come to fruition and our thought is this is really a process that we are in the process of developing today that should that be done years ago that is still going to take some were between 12 and 16 years.

so, i guess the bottom line is that there are different ways to get to the bottom line, but the important thing is to get to the bottom line and that is the additional spectrum. >> to members of the association, are they going to benefit from this $7 billion in the stimulus package? willoughby direct? i understand it will go to develop the wireline, but do your companies see it as a positive? >> i would say that the majority of the money that has been allocated is not going to the companies that they are in our association. >> you mentioned just briefly, the chairman talked about t-mobile in the spectrum allocation and you indicated that the problem, the transition and i mentioned in my opening statement, i bethink tippett want commercial carriers to get involved this would be a flag to them that if it is going to take too long they have got i think

over $4 billion, but how long can they continue to deal with that procrastination. so, i mean you might give us some ideas on what could be done to improve this reallocation timeframe and then perhaps what we incumber should be aware of. >> well, actually the second bailout we are talking about today, 3019 actually goes to that subject. once the spectrum is identified, the spectrum is auction did getting the people that are on the spectrum of spectrum more expeditiously is really helped by this particular bill that we are talking about today, so you know my hat is off to you. i think congress-- >> you think that will do it? >> they have made mistakes in recognize mistakes and are now trying to correct them. >> unifil comfortable about solving the problem? >> i'm not positive it solves all the problems but it's also the problems we know of with the

auction process to years ago. >> mr. hatfield, what steps could be taken to make more efficient use of commercial government spectrum that is already deployed? >> in my written statement that i go through the list of sort of five techniques that can be used in the two probably that haven't been talked about as much here is one, more technical efficiency. it is like getting more miles per gallon on your car. there are two ways we can improve transportation efficiency. one is by more miles per gallon or by carpooling for example and sharing that we have talked about here is the carpool analogy but we also need to look at ways to more efficiently use the spectrum, getting more bits per second i would say technical terms. there are a couple of ways of doing that. one is the compression, reducing

the number of bids that have to be sent. the other is using what we call more efficient modulation techniques. what scares me, what scares me as an engineer is those techniques only look like they could provide this with the incremental improvements and i'm not saying we shouldn't do it. we absolutely should send their happening but the difficulty is they are probably not going to be adequate so that leads to the need for more sharing or reallocation. the other ways to complete the thought through more intensive use of the spectrum. for example when your cell phone, that towered maybe 2 miles away and therefore you are taking up an area with a 2-mile radius. if you shrink the sell them then you can use the same channel more and more times in a city like dc so you can use the same channel several hundred times, so you can see carriers have

made enormous investments in more cell towers, that helps a lot but is to keep getting this sell smaller of course that you have to get that information from the cell tower back to some central location and that is where i believe there broadband policy of getting fiber out there intersects with the wireless industry because the wireless industry needs to get the wireless data back to their central point and that requires a broad band facilities so i think there is a real lankier before what is being done in the broadband policy in the wireless. >> i don't have any further questions but i thought dr. johnson might want to comment on the same question. >> and the commercial receivers than it's the military already has the standards for radar but none of those standards exist for commercial systems. so there may be opportunities to take advantage of some of those standards. stay. >> thank you very much.

the gentleman from michigan chairman dingell is recognized for five minutes. >> i would like to welcome the panel particularly mr. largent. welcome back. i have some questions and since there are so many i ask you to do these with the lesser no. mr. largent, yes or no. has ctia's anyone else conducted usage studies which measure actual traffic to see if the spectrum is being used? >> are you talking about the spectrum that has been allocated for commercial mobile? >> just the spectrum studies been completed, tell us wittes spectrum is being used. >> i've not sure i understand the question, sir. >> has anybody made any studies to find out if the spectrum will be reused? this ctia? anybody? >> what i can tell you is the commercial wireless mobile spectrum we have available to

this industry today is used more efficiently than in any other country of the world. >> i'm going to take that as they know, and i thank you for that. now, carriers operating on full capacity in their line of spectrum today? >> no, sir. >> as the fcc conducted any usage studies which examined whether spectrum either by rural members are anybody else is being properly and adequately used with regard to that spectrum which is assigned to them? >> i am not aware of any. >> okay. so, the argument seems to be here i think that you have enough spectrum for now but we'll need it ten years from now or in some future time. is that correct? >> we have an of spectrum for right now but we will need spectrum before ten years. >> i thoroughly agree with you.

our problem here is to see how we are going to get that spectrum efficiently allocated because if you remember from your time on this committee we had a serious problem from the fact that the spectrum was flowing out by the sec and by the government to be sold for budgetary reasons-- reasons as opposed to proper use of the spectrum. now to all witnesses, starting on your right in my left, how do you feel h.r. 3125 and h.r. 3019? do you feel it as complementary to the fcc's work to develop a national broadband plan, yes or no starting on your fright if-- right if he would please. >> a yes or no answer, yes. xp yes. >> yes, very much. >> the answer is yes but believe

it could be expanded. >> next witness please. >> no. >> and the last witness. >> yes. >> now, if the completion of national brockman should be delayed pending enactment of the h.r. 3125 and h.r. 3019, how long should such a delay be? starting again on your far right and my far left. how long could or should that the late be? >> i think, i think the requirement is so great that we do not want to wait pending taking some of these steps pending the inventory. >> mr. largent. >> i would agree with that, the center the better.

>> next witness please. >> likewise. >> how long should we wait for the studies to be completed? sir? the next witness. >> chairman dingell, the answer is a delay is not good but the late is frankly better if you don't have the right information, so if you need the right information, the delay may be necessary. >> i have no special-- for delay but my concern is that if we do this we do it well and i'm not satisfied that up until this time we have been doing these things well and i am very much trouble that we will extend that bad history by again doing things poorly. >> i agree. >> with the mess on our hands because we have built on a false edifice. the next witness, sir. >> we would recommend moving forward with the spectrum of the

toy including the actual measurements which will help identify bans that particularly lee useful for spectrum sharing. >> i will note i am four seconds over my time and i yield back with thanks to you. ..

so costly on broadcasters they surrender their specter, and i find that an abomination, i find it offensive, i don't understand why he's in this position and the fcc and i will follow-up on that, but given the fact we went through a 2 billion-dollar dtv conversion and you are on the cusp of a digital television technology that is mobile and you make the argument in your statement about how every new subscriber to that over the air digital mobile service makes that even more efficient because

you're not adding to the stream, if we follow professor benjamin's council or the fcc are referring the 2 billion into a paper shredder? >> commerce ma'am, yes, your spring $2 billion of taxpayer money away and potentially on billions citizens have spent detrimental reliance in congressional urging of the digital transmission. suffice it to save my phone has been ringing off the hook ever since this gentleman's work has been revealed. that said i think what he does is simply try to monetize highest and best use in dollar terms this regard and all the other public values that are served through local news, local sports, local weather.

these are things i think particularly when it comes to emergency information amber alerts i don't know how you monetize that and i am hesitant to say but when it comes to broadcasting and broadcast airwaves they've always been a public auction to make sure everybody gets served, and he seems to be suggesting that maybe should be yesterday. >> dr. johnson, i raised the issue in my opening statement about the amateur radio broadcast service, and i failed to disclose mr. ross and i are the licensed amateur operators, which gives license to be hams and politicians. [laughter] i'm curious as you look at the spectrum from a technical perspective what months amateur radio licensees be concerned about and what threats and abroad you do you see in that

spectrum? >> i won't be able to give a full detailed answer because i have not looked at that particular issue in detail. i would support, however and i am ready operator -- >> very good. >> -- however i would support your thesis that the bands have been an important backup system for the nation secure the and i think they are also a valuable resource for citizens who have an interest in the kind of technology and although there are other avenues to address the same issues now outside of the bands i think they are still important and we would be happy to look at the technical details of the challenges to that. >> mr. hatfield, do you have a comment on the radio van? and, you are a hamdi and radio operator. >> the way i got into this was starting as a 13 or 14 years ago. i think the problem the immaturity a community has is

they do provide a very vital final sort of backed up communication network and it's just absolutely -- it is totally decentralized so there's nothing central that can feel and that's critical. the problem is if you tune across the man so often they are idle and if someone was clever maybe we could figure out ways we can do a little bit of sharing that would not diminish the amateur opportunity at all for use in emergencies but non-emergency times might be used for some other vital public interest as well. >> mr. chairman, i know my time is expired and i going to excuse myself. mr. bouyer is going to take over. we have a hearing on the defense of pakistan and afghanistan. again, thank you for the testimony. i look forward to working with you and others on this issue as we move forward in a thoughtful and constructive way of appropriate use of spectrum. >> thank you for a much,

mr. walden. mr. bouyer is recognized for seven minutes. i'm sorry, if you can withhold i need to go in order. the gentleman from california mr. mcnerney is recognized for five minutes. spriggs before, mr. chairman. i will be brief. first one to thank the panel. i found the testimony very informative and i didn't hear anyone say no i don't like this legislation. i think dr. johnson had a little reservation about some of the definitions, so i appreciate that and i'm going to ask you in a minute to expand on that first one to say expanding their range to ten gigahertz it would seem to be disagreement between mr. calabrese and mr. hatfield on that. and i am not sure exactly why you would think that going out to 10 megahertz is in that useful, mr. hatfield. is it dr. hatfield or mr. hatfield? >> my doctorate is honorary. >> that's good enough for me. [laughter]

dr. hatfield. >> i get a little squishy about using it too much. but let him answer is, there may be confusion is the range of roughly up to three gigahertz that's critical to people like the cellular industry so that is the most critical. on the other hand, if some of the services we might want to relocate could go higher but still work okay if they went higher in frequencies of therefore i think they make the argument we ought to look ought we ought to tend to see if there is any opportunity for example some could be reallocated from below. .. so there are physical limitations after line of sight. >> that is correct for mobile replications. for certain radar applications for example being that there where you have the line of sight it might work perfectly finds a that is what i think is the perhaps the basis for the difference. i would support giving up higher for that purpose. but we mustn't kid ourselves. there's technical limitations the would prevent it from

certain applications. >> thanks. dr. johnson, you did mention the idea that there is no single magic for efficiency. do you have -- is their anyone out there you are aware of that would be useful or sort of a set of definitions? >> we think that the simple definition like intensity of use is not appropriate. we proposed these in a variety of metrics and they correspond to the critical parameters related to the particular system application that's being used. for simple metrics for communication systems would be different than those for the radar system. >> so are you going to supply the committee with that information? >> we would be happy and pleased to work with the committee absolutely. >> anxious to work with the committee on examining the metric definitions. the last thing i have is the notion the paper inventory isn't going to be adequate. i didn't quite appreciate that.

i come from a technical background and i was a test engineer and field tester but when mr. stroup showed the graph with all of those planks basis people that own spectrum are going to say we used all of it we don't need to reallocate and so we are going to need to do quite a bit of testing to validate. it seems to me like fairly just on the basis of what was spoken this morning a fairly big tasks to really judge how much spectrum is available out there. could you comment on that? >> yes, congressman we submitted suggestions in the written testimony to short-term approaches as well as long-term approaches. we recommend ten to 20 stations supplemented by mobil testing and over a longer period of time and a larger number perhaps in conjunction with universities and other organizations. people need to compile an ongoing inventory of the spectrum is actually being used. >> that is we take a lot of resources and time and money.

even when you've got a short cut seems a fairly big undertaking. >> i believe that the ntia and other organizations, the national science foundation already compiling this information so some of it is there. our studies, many studies are already available publicly and can be integrated into this database so it's not as large an undertaking but i do agree there is a great deal of data that will be compiled. the national science foundation excuse me, illinois institute of technology is conducting ongoing studies in chicago they have over two terabytes of information that's already collected from that location. >> mr. calabrese? >> i've mentioned in a written statement costs have come down so for example ofcom recently completed a nationwide drive test of the airwaves. the mount measuring devices on just the rooftop of a national vehicle fleet which we could do

with the postal service or whatever and then that it's downloaded over wi-fi. there's also inexpensive devices now to have a monitoring network that's being field tested in the d.c. area fairly soon by a company we are hoping to have one on the roof of the building downtown. >> my time is expired. mr. hatfield, if you have a quick response? >> in my written testimony is it one of the things we could focus on is the bands that look the most promising sabrue the measurement first on the most promising. second, why don't i just stop there. >> it comes down to one of the favorite presidents seem trust and verify. thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. mcnerney. the gentleman from indiana mr. buyer is recognized for seven minutes. >> thank you. mr. largent, are you familiar with the latest gao report that cannot intitled fcc needs to

improve wireless service? >> i've not read the entire thing that i am aware. >> are you aware of the recommendations of the gao, they recommended the fcc number one improve its outreach to consumers about its content process related to performance goals and measures complaints. number two, develop guidance on federal and state oversight role and number three, develop policies for communicating with states. are you familiar with the three recommendations? >> i'm more familiar with the facts the uncovered first that was in the report that showed 84% of ntia and that's where i'm going. you're getting ahead of me. [laughter] >> sorry. let's go right there. why asking is they have these recommendations based on supply want to ask you to comment about what they are based on. my gosh, when we look at all of the choices the consumers have going into the christmas shopping season and levels of satisfaction or to comment on the basis and facts they relied upon for the recommendations?

>> well, i think it's not the way i would have written the report based upon the statistics they found in this study. knowing this industry as i have the last six years and seeking the consumer complaints declined every year and consumer satisfaction go off every year we feel like that is a movement in the right direction. 84% approval by consumers is not good enough. we continue to want to raise that even more but it is a heck of a positive mark for the industry and i hope to be able to sit before you in a year or two and be able to talk about how we are no longer a 84%. we are even higher today. but i think the report did highlight some things the fcc can be about that would improve their service but the bottom

line is that i think it is a star for the wireless industry to show the improvement of the service for customers. >> regard to the member companies on the bank's strategic judgment in competition, wouldn't consumer satisfaction be one of those important elements? >> absolutely. it is the key statistic they look out all the time. >> i get excited when i listen to my good friend, mr. markey, share his excitement about competition in the marketplace. and so i would share with my good friend mr. markey when you rejoice in competition in the marketplace and what is bringing consumers relative to choice do not be so eager to get more government control if in fact the marketplace is driving consumer satisfaction. >> the other point if i have a little latitude, mr. chairman

because i'm also cosponsoring this legislation, i would like to shift gears and turn to mr. smith and asked a particular question and matter-of-fact it may drive, mr. chairman -- lightning we should take a really good look here at comcast and nbc. so i'm going to ask a question about comcast and nbc, mr. smith. i have got some concerns about your member companies out there. i've got concerns about consolidation in the marketplace. i've got concerns about what type of new business model does this bring, what is its impact and how does it drive a new model for advertising. you held up your phone and talked about this as a multimedia platform. as we have the marketplace as you try to judge into the future it is about individualizing advertising and i can almost see

we are going to permit the market place to begin to mind and profile people that pretty soon even advertising as it is driven not only upon the web but you can almost have individualized advertising occurring upon tv. so as i try to think about into the future and how a vertical integration is this kind of feel that has this many eyes of comcast and being able to control content it almost terms present business model inside out, upside-down. i welcome your comments on mine. >> congressman, some of my members are for this and some of them are very concerned about in line with my friends. [laughter] >> very good, senator. [laughter] the n.a.b. hasn't taken a position on this at this juncture. we are simply going to watch and see what kind of conditions

develop but we are very attuned to the issue and the problems you've decided. >> the supreme court long ago talked about the importance of having a diversity out there among the the media and that was the 1940's with regard to ideas. if i were one of your member companies and i am a small company and i have a couple of nbc affiliate's may be a cbs affiliate, can't you relate to their concerns even about the transmission rights and fees and what impact is that going to have? or upon others where y is there going to cost shifting because of this vertical integration? >> obviously i am more than interested -- i answered the phone calls because yes, they are concerned the very issues you identified. but i assume that the ftc, department of justice are looking at these things and propose conditions if this is to go forward out all. and at this juncture it is the feeling of the association that

we should allow the process to work. >> one of the -- one of the concerns i have, mr. chairman and why i would encourage to place your eyes and considerations on this issue is defined by the silence. when there is silence in the marketplace because of this type of deal that tells me there is great concern in the marketplace and fear if in fact a company were to come out and come up against this type of merger what type of repercussions in the marketplace with ochre? so the fact that there is silence all there is beginning to bother me, mr. smith, that a lot of your member companies while the mechem fight in the phone call with you that there is a reason they are not coming out publicly because they don't want to get jammed in their negotiations; and my close here? >> they are very interested up servers of this process and they share the concerns you

expressed. again we have networks, affiliate's, they have most issues in common but this is one where there needs to be an accommodation and understanding and legal structure put in place that allows both to survive. >> i would encourage us to put our eyes to have a better understanding so we can try to see over the horizon of the impact this type of merger is going to have on the multimedia platform and advertising model. >> thank you very much mr. buyer. we will conduct one hearing on the comcast abc acquisition at the appropriate time next year. that announcement has already been made and the gentleman is quite right in expressing the need to focus on this very carefully. it is certainly our intent to do so. the gentleman from michigan, mr. stupak is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i apologize to the witnesses for not hearing of their testimony as in constituents to to get their meetings. recognizing the challenges congress and fcc will face in trying to relocate as much spectrum as possible or companies within the ctia exploring the possibility of the dynamic spectrum as mr. hatfield suggested as a possible solution? >> i would say our companies are at a point they are exploring every opportunity an option available to them including how to utilize their own spectrum they currently have come to use it more efficiently and look at every avenue that is available to them in the years ahead to access more spectrum. are any of your company is using the spectrum access? are any of them even trying to borrow if you will during the peak time surrounding the systems? is that going on now?

>> i'm sure they are looking at every option available to them. >> okay. mr. smith? >> yes? >> good to see you. thanks for being here. i think it's important we look for research for a solution that preserves free over the air broadcasting while fostering wireless broadband deployment. in your testimony, you cite how the use of white space spectrum in rural america is a way to support both of these public-interest goals. is the solution workable in urban centers as well? >> it may well be. however we do have a concern about interference and want to make sure we don't degrade other signals. >> what we ask you this, has the n.a.b. conducted studies to show how much spectrum is needed to fulfil future business plans of mobile tv, multitasking and hd television? >> we are doing a study right now on that very question

because we understand the importance of this issue and want to have the best information possible. >> any idea when the study may be done? >> i don't have a date, but i will get back to you, congressman. >> okay. thanks. mr. hatfield, we talked about the spectrum crisis and is it only -- we only have to worry about that for the high population centers or is this a national issue cracks in my area we have a lot of places we don't have anything. >> exactly. it is primarily a large urban area issue and even within that urban area there are some real hot spots. an example would be as a football stadium on sunday afternoon, having said that i think i tend to divide the problem into two parts and that is the urban problem and the rural problems and we need these more dynamically is to be able to use the spectrum and the

rural areas that's not needed because of the lack of population density. >> let me ask you this. is more access to spectrum the only issue the fcc and this committee should be focused on or are there other efficiency gains that can be explored with the next generation smart phones? >> as i indicated in my written testimony i don't hold out an awful lot of hope for some of the traditional solutions for the major urban areas. but there are certainly the examples i gave like compression and so forth that we should be pursuing. i don't think they solve the technical solutions solved the problem completely. >> if we start using smart phones from the manufacture this sort of help alleviate some of these problems we are going to see with trying to free of more spectrum, can that be a solution? can we find it more

manufacturing as opposed to the fcc and government? >> i don't see how the hand set by themselves can do an awful lot to improve with the exception of the sort of dynamic spectrum access where the handset is smart enough it is looking around to see what other spectrums might be available and moving to it so we can use the intelligence in the handset to find additional spectrum. i'm not sure how hauer intelligence of and said well produce beyond incremental improvements. >> calabrese, did you want to add something? >> yes. i talked in my written state but to become -- statement about encouraging hybrid networks because as dale said we are reaching the limits, the technical efficiency limits and also reaching the limits in terms of how close the carriers

can bring back cult to the consumer so you need to shrink the size and get more three years and one way to do that is right now we have pending at the fcc rules to extend the phone device choice to wireless and when consumers have the choice to buy the devices increasingly it will be of the type they will decide on the fly what is my most economical path and most cases that will be in a place like this at home and offices and public spaces it will be over unlicensed spectrum into local back called consumer provided back call and that will offer a lot of traffic from carriers. >> okay. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you mr. stupak. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman very much. mr. hatfield, you were talking

here about the capacity for dynamic sharing of spectrum so that we can make more efficient use of currently allocated spectrum. what percentage of spectrum needs do you think can be satisfied just by use of dynamic sharing? >> i have not looked at it candidly in a sort of quantitative way but i think -- i'm not going to ask satisfactorily. but i think it is sufficient enough it would be of significant help. i don't think it gets us all the way there. >> what you're talking about is something which is supplemental to what the needs are going to be in the future but not a substitute for transfer of the spectrum in order to do with the issue; is that right? >> i guess i would put a slightly different. we are probably going to need to

use all of these different techniques >> ausley u.s [inaudible to puto terms. do you agree with that, mr. largent? it reminds me of the discussion of the cafe standards come improvement of efficiency of vehicles or appliance efficiency where think we can use new technology to get better efficiency out of these automobiles or out of the appliances we use the that the same time you also want to do their research on all of the technologies, all of electric vehicles to move on the old technologies and that is kind of what we are talking about how we get the additional spectrum, but also squeeze out the maximum efficiency out of the old technology so how do you view that mr. largent? >> i have a chart here that i will submit for the record and give to you if you would like to look at it but it basically

talks about how a efficient different countries utilize the spectrum available to them and in the u.s. we have 270 million consumers and we use per megahertz 660,000 consumers per megahertz of spectrum used and that is the most efficient by a factor of at least two of any other country save mexico actually. they have 79 million users there. but we are using our spectrum available in the most efficient way possible. and sometimes my magnitude of two. >> mr. smith? your question to loss is about -- >> about the balance between squeezing efficiencies out of the old technology as opposed to moving over a spectrum to augment what we now have allocated so that we can

maximize the wealth generating opportunities. >> i think it is one of the miracles we have before us is how much more efficiently we are using the spectrum now and certainly broadcasting has invested billions to achieve that efficiency. i do believe because we have seen the explosion of technology you spoke of at the beginning of the hearing, congressman, there are going to be compression technologies that will provide some of the answer here so that we can preserve the broadband and broadcast values the committee seeks to serve. >> dr. john thune? stand yes, congressman i would like to make a couple of comments. first of all the department of defense with our principal customers has huge -- is driven toward increasing efficiency. we mentioned briefly in my testimony the use of unmanned aerial systems and streaming video and intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance needs in iraq and afghanistan

driving that efficiency as they are with commercial markets. lockheed martin has developed the tools used by the customers to increase the efficiency but i would also like to point out that in the federal common on federal kind of by an aerial view of things it's not that, it's not a by mary view at all because it's important to realize the department is a major consumer of commercial equipment and using commercial systems both terrestrial and space, so they have to balance that accommodation between commercial and federal needs. >> 20 seconds. >> i would emphasize the military is deploying spectrum accessible to several military systems. going back to the question about utilization emphasizing the point he made about the pcs, that spectrum was allocated by a 100 microwave paths that the licensees receive that the option with the understanding the could not interfere and we are recommending building of

that model being able to utilize technology available today where they may not have to be relocated can share the spectrum. >> we have to be in flexible in terms of the goal we are trying to reach but flexible in terms of what the final competition looks like but i think it will involve obviously substantial portions of both of increased efficiency and more spectrum and we have to ensure we encourage both to be maximized so that we do make ourselves as competitive as a nation as we can looking over our shoulders to and three and four in the world as you said, steve, so we maintain this. thank you very much, stir german. >> thank you, mr. markey. mr. doyle is recognized for seven minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i just want to start by thanking all the witnesses but especially i want to thank dale hatfield for his years of dedicated public service and his assistants to policy makers

helping people across the country to better understand the technologies behind these issues that never had a chance to tell him that personally but he's here and i wanted to know that. thank you, mr. hatfield. mr. largent, mr. smith, you both talk a lot about mobile video broadcasting, and i'm curious. do you think people want to watch a limited number of channels on a set schedule on a device about this big or do you think they want to watch their choice of programs when they want to watch them come and show that consumer preference drive the spectrum decisions? >> well, i would say from my personal experience the older i get the harder it is to watch television on the handset. [laughter] but, you know, we are serving closer now probably 280 million customers in this country. we will probably beat the statistic at the end of this year. and i would say that there

probably is consumer uptake of that particular service as it becomes available and as it is available now. >> mr. smith? >> , doyle, i don't believe they should be regarded as exclusive. i think we should do both, and i know young people are highly interested in mobile tv and i suspect many who don't have to wear these are as well. with that said, i think it's very important these new inventions like hulu is an broadcast content, it won't be many years until your laptop will have a broadcast signal, too and so, it isn't either or. it's both. >> but it seems to me -- and i agree, i think it's young people because i couldn't watch tv on this either, but it seems to me those same people are the ones who don't want a set schedule.

they want to watch the show when they want to watch the show, and that being the case as we talk about where is the best place to allocate spectrum it just -- all a note here i want to watch the steelers beat the seahawks in real time. [laughter] portnow the steelers are not beating anyone. [laughter] >> eddy, were you responsible for that? [laughter] >> to that point i hear your point but i also hear congressman markey's point. i hear people saying no, i want to watch it when it is really happening. and it is just part of being the american tradition particularly when it comes to sports people are anxious to see it live real time. >> mr. speed? >> i want to thank you for your remarks earlier but i think as an academic stepping back from this vast the fundamental question.

if people want to watch content simultaneously, then the broadcast model is a very efficient way of doing it. if people want to watch individual things, then the more cellulitis approach is more efficient. so why look here your decision or our decision is what that balance should be, how the balance should be made and of course on the broadcast side we probably have this additional public interest benefit with the general broadcasting that may sway the decision but i think that from an engineering standpoint that is a fundamental question. how much of it is individual choice and what time you want to watch it and how much did you want to watch simultaneously in the country. >> does anyone else want to chime in on that? >> if i have one other question, mr. smith and the pittsburgh area roughly about 8% of the people in my region get their broadcast with rabbit ears over the air broadcasting.

and i was curious if you have any numbers on how many people, 8% watch with rabbit ears -- how many members -- you have any numbers how many people watch hdtv over the air with rabbit ears verses relying on standard definition? is there any figure? >> i've heard the range from 8% to 20%. but i think as a couple of other factors that are important depending on your congressional district flexible mr. barton's district it may go as high as 40% and over the air tends to be about people or rural, poor, elderly and have also invested in the digital transition. >> do you think the of hdtv? >> i believe the figure $25 billion, which is an estimate of what people have spent in the digital

transmission i think many of them do now and they really like high-definition and they don't want to see it degraded, and they are beginning to value the multi casting so they get a religious channel, weather channel, hispanic channel, cory in channel, this is the miracle that is now made possible because we all did this, and it is a very exciting future on hate to see clouded by it will consider ideas that would broadband against broadcast. i do think in the fullness of time there will be technology stock will provide for both. >> thank you. mr. chairman i have no more questions and i will yield back. >> thank you. the gentleman from washington state is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you. mr. largent, we know americans are going to be looking for their sulfone more frequently on an hourly basis. just wonder what suggestion you can get on things we can do here with the fcc to promote

investment and the networks that are going to be necessary. to give your general thoughts about that? >> of what the fcc did in november by improving the tower citing initiative. we have been fighting this battle for a long time getting local jurisdiction states the ability to object to tower siting proposals but in doing it in a timely fashion. and that goes a long way to helping this industry provide more service to this country. so i really applaud the fcc for their action on the tower site in. the two bills we are looking at today are the beginning of the process and end of the process. the spectrum inventory build looks at the possible spectrum out there, how it is being used and will spectrum could be identified for higher and better use perhaps. and then your bill comes in at the end of the process and says

here is a more orderly fashion to move the current spectrum holders to the new spectrum and do it in a more efficient and effective way and do it faster. so both of these bills are good bills and go a long way to improve the process of acquiring additional spectrum which the wireless industry is sorely going to need in the years to come. >> i want to make sure i didn't miss any one -- i didn't hear any good or even not so good constructive criticism of our bill and i want to make sure i haven't missed any. does anyone have suggestions on the bill i am working with mr. upton on that you would suggest to improve the product? we are always looking for good suggestions. this might be the first hearing in american history where there isn't constructive criticism, so this is quite an achievement. mr. calabrese, you've suggested broadening the purpose of the relocation fund to support modernizing federal systems and allowing for greater degree of

and sharing. could you give us a sense would be suggested of in terms of cost and what type of approach? >> it is very difficult to know the exact cost in fact i would assume first of all the agencies that would be proposing to modernize the system to free up spectrum for sharing the would be second in line. there would be the first from the spectrum relocation fund a priority for those agencies that are needed to migrate off of a band so it can be cleared for licensees as we did with aws, the purpose of the bill. but secondarily, like now we have remaining funds and i think that agencies should be able to apply to the technical panel you

propose in the bill but would recommend to omb which of those in a competitive basis which of those would have the greatest impact in terms of freeing up spectrum for the commercial sector or spectrum efficiency and it's a great benefit because it would make those agencies more effective with more modern communication while also freeing up spectrum. >> thank you for a much, stir in sleep. i'm going to ask unanimous consent on behalf of the gentleman from nebraska, mr. terrie to insert in the record a letter concerning the subject matter before us of the electronic warfare information operations association. without objection that will be made part of the record. and the gentle lady from california, ms. von yellmac is recognized for five minutes. >> by thank of the chair. i would like to ask a question

of dr. johnson. in your testimony you indicated future government spectrum needs will be focused on height and width use such as video for the uav or high-altitude surveillance aircraft; is that correct? >> this -- yes, that is correct. >> can you please provide an estimate of the percentage of the height you capacity used by the uav and other surveillance aircraft that is currently provided by commercial satellite systems using spectrum above ten gigahertz? >> no, i can't provide that but we can provide that after the hearing. >> thank you. and do you believe most of the teacher high bandwidth media capacity for the uav also will use spectrum above ten gigahertz? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> ok. thank you. if i can get the answer in writing after hearing the would be great. at this point i would like to yield the balance of my time to my colleague, steve buyer if

he's available. thank you. >> thank you very much. a question i have, and thank you for yielding. it is about the delay and the delivery of spectrum and its impact on delivering commercial systems. when you look back even in 2006 brann t-mobile paid a lot of money, 4.2 billion for spectrum we are four or five years down the range now and we still don't have systems being delivered and so when we lay out these time lines for the delivery and they are not met so i look at this legislation before us and i am interested in your opinion if i were to offer an amendment and mr. markey talks about giving encouragement, what about i would offer an amendment that has a penalty clause so that if a government department or agency does not deliver the

relocation at the time line that specified whether it's classified or unclassified, in that department or agency is to pay interest on the money relative to where the spectrum is located. so you can figure out what the economic impact would be. so if the dot says it is too difficult to deliver the spectrum from mobile pensacola to jacksonville because we have our classified issues. well, deal with it than to tell us what they are. you said you could push to learn from a particular date so deal with it. i'm interested if i were to offer such amendment as an incentive because if we ask for these companies to put billions of dollars or asking for an next auction. we do the auction, the government the money and we've used the money are not delivering what we said we would. so in the and mr. smith, you talked about public values. public values are based upon virtues. if you're going to have a deal you can have a deal without

fidelity, and fidelity requires two people. two people. and so if government is not upholding its fidelity maybe we should have an encouragement calls called a penalty clause. what are your ideas and thoughts? >> mr. largent? >> well, i like you're thinking going into this but i would prefer -- i'm just thinking of this free-wheeling right now so i wasn't prepared for the question but as i think about it i think perhaps you could build incentives for the people moving off the spectrum to get off so that you give them the spectrum relocation money you would give them, you know, some amount of money if they are off in a year and you give them something less than that amount if they are off in two years. so you give them more money to relocate the faster they are able to relocate as opposed to the same amount of money whenever they -- >> we can incentivize and penalize; right?

>> we like incentives. >> i understand. mr. smith? >> congressman, n.a.b. doesn't have a dog in the fight so to say, but having said that i applaud the way you're thinking because i think it would have the effect of incentivizing more interest in spectrum options if they knew that there was a two-way street and they would be treated fairly. >> thank you. i would like to explore this idea with not only my colleagues but with you on how we can build this into this next piece of legislation. thank you. i yield back. >> might have to put a second-degree amendment on your amendment and have to punish all members of congress to spend the spectrum money five times over. [laughter] i agree with you. with that i think we will close this happy hearing. thank you to all the witnesses. have a good holiday and thank you for being here. [inaudible conversations]

and now and inauguration ceremony for the new mayor of houston texas parker. she is the first openly gay leader in major cities. during her remarks she said her election to lead the nation's fourth largest city marked a

milestone for gay americans. this is just over 20 minutes. >> i do love this city. the [cheering] i think that you have heard that before but i cannot stop saying it. thank you. [applause] i want to thank all of you for honoring me with your trust and hope for the future. to serve this city has been my highest aspiration. to work with you on the pressing issues and challenges we face is my mission. i will respect the office and read your matteo if i have taken

i want to congratulate our new city council members and city comptroller's having served in both of those positions i know the challenges and opportunities that the face. i salute the service to the city this is a good counsel. a truly representative of our city and its diversity. [applause] so please, honor them again. [applause] there will be times when we disagree on how to achieve success. but understand each of us is here because we care deeply about this city and we will bring our best for word. and i look forward to working with you.

this is an opportunity for me to welcome my extended family and acknowledge the family members i have here down on the front row starting with my mother, kay parker. [applause] i can't quite see them but i know they, are there. our children, yes our family looks a little like houston, doesn't it. [laughter] my sister, alison strength from georgia and three of her four children. please, rise. [applause]

my sister-in-law and her husband jordan and their son as well. please, rise. [applause] >> my in-laws, and my brother mike hubbard. [applause] all the we in from buffalo they like the weather here a little bit better. [laughter] thank you. to those of you in the room today and those of you who may be watching or hearing this i'm going to ask of you three things. first i'm going to ask for your

prayers. we have enormous challenges ahead. all that we must do will be donner. but there are many things we should do that can be done and we will strive mightily. i know we can achieve anything the we want to do with hard work and with your prayers. i ask for your patience. some things cannot be rushed. a city is a continuum. projects begun under one administration continue into another and perhaps in another. it may seem as if little progress is being made, and the compromises, the give-and-take of government can be a slow and difficult process. but we have a range of zero

voices and opinions in the council chamber because no one of us has of answers and all the pieces must be heard. sometimes democracy is a little messy but we get there. and feared, i'm going to ask for your perseverance. we are in this together for the duration. you must commit your time and energy to houston. we've rise or we fall together. we succeed or fail to get their. actually i will ask for a fourth thing. as much as we try to and as hard as we work, and for all the right reasons that we do things, we will make mistakes and we will have failures, going to ask for your forgiveness in advance.

[applause] i have already introduced my mom and i know how proud she is of me. though my dad died many years ago i know he, too would be extremely proud but i want to say how proud i am of them and of the values they taught me. many of you know i grew up here in houston in spring branch and in fact i will call ms. stardig. we grew upon the same street. my parents didn't have much

money. my mom always worked outside of the home and in fact both of my grandmother's worked outside of the home. so i come from a long line of working women. [applause] my family taught me to work hard, my family taught me to accept responsibility. my family taught me to always get the job done. and my family also taught me to contribute back to my community. [applause] the thank you. those are the values on which houston was founded. those are the values i try to teach my own kids and those are the values that will shape our future as a city. in the past few months, actually more than a few months of campaigning as i travel around this city i kept meeting folks

who reminded me of my own mother and father. people struggling with two and three jobs just to get by. fathers worried about putting food on the table, mother is worried about crime and worried about their children's education, and families worried about taxes, neighbors worried about preserving the communities they loved. [applause] i want you to know this call all of you this city of houston is on your side. we will get through this together. i know the city's work force is one of the best anywhere. [applause]

i see them everyday. i know many of them and i know the commitment they have to doing a great job. we hear on the news about the problems, the things that go wrong in this city, and in truth we noticed this move working of the city. how much of the city goes right every day the? we missed a small invisible event like to water department crew who worked through a cold february night to repair a switch week the mayor said one of the clinics who worked a double shift because they were short staffed and then worked the double shift three days in a row. the employee who rescued a dog from adrianne in the middle of a thunderstorm and got soaked and

ant-bitten in the giving probably along with the dog. but those are everyday acts for our city employees. thousands of small acts most people never hear of. so to the unsung heroes of the city workforce, i want you to know this the citizens of houston are on your side. we are in this together. [applause] a free speech by every mayor in this country these days will discuss the economic downturn. in many cities services have been cut back, employees have been furloughed or laid off, the quality-of-life in many cities isn't what it was four years ago. we will not let that happen to the city of houston.