and shrouded his receipt. but certainly the overbroad use of the section 215 has resulted in a loss of trust in american companies and is translated to the real dollar loss in the lost jobs. moreover, the surveillance itself is an abuse of privacy rights and of people abroad and they have a history of abuse not just this government worldwide but when the surveillance coverage is broad. last, there is not a lot of evidence that the authorities are affected. we have had multiple independent boards including the civilian oversight board and the review group as well as members of the panel who have reviewed the classified evidence and have determined that less intrusive means could maintain the same end. so i would say that not only do i not have the information about the abus abuse that i in fact he information that the authority that you're asking about are not

affected. ..t baker gave about the zozzi had 215 i'm not convinced that if we had this place under the facts of that case we would have probably an explosion in the subway new york city. and the reaction that we had 9/11 that you referred to and iay be overstepped -- understand what you are saying, that is the way congress tends -- the nfortunately reaction would have been to the opinion,re we where we wouldn't be here today talking about modifying them in a softer way. we be talking about modifying them in a stronger way.

mr. baker, you at homeland security, you were at homeland security until 2000 or -- >> yes being on the show much access you had to redo any cases that may involve the use of 215. but can you shed any light on this from the standpoint of any, number one, abuses older reasons why even stronger reasons why e-15 should be maintain? >> i heard mr. geithner said he did know of any abuses and i agree with that. i did not see the abuses and i will say, we felt so strongly about the importance of having a large data set that we had bitter battles with the european union to make sure that we could get information on everyone who was flying into the training. of course, most of them were innocent but we needed a data we go through it and look for most

suspect passengers and give them a little bit more questioning at the border. it was an enormously effective program that relied on having a comprehensive database, not a selected database based on magic terms. >> if i can clarify my earlier statement. what i said was that the overbroad use of 215 is problematic or i can see 215 been used in a variety of different circumstances that are not bulk collection. rather, the evidence that has been complied -- compile about s the bulk collection programs themselves is problematic and it is that we are trying to end. >> i understand. mr. woods, and i'm going to ask you this, you may not be able to enter because it would relate to practices of your competitors but i assume there are some generalities in your industry.

let's say you were mandated to keep records by this law that we are debating and ultimately may pass. if you were mandated to keep records for up to 18 months, do you have any idea what that would cost your industry? >> know, senator, i don't have any reliable figures. >> would there be a cost to it? >> certainly increased the storage space to be a cause. i have no idea of the magnitude. >> let's say we don't mandate it and leave it wide open as the house did, which i think is a huge mistake. and let's say that you were, you received a query on one of your customers who was in conversation with a customer of

at&t who was been in contact with a customer of sprint. under this bill, as i understand it, if you got a query then you would give information on your customer, then we would have to go back to doj would have to go back to the fisa court to get an authorization for a query on the at&t customer and vendor would have to go back to the fisa court and get a query on a sprint customer. is that your understanding? >> i'm not sure exactly how the process would work. we would respond with the call detail records out whatever we had. we would survey the call detail records on our customer. we also have call detail records on telephone calls that are not by our customers but? >> guest: our system. as we have a lot of what we used

to call long distance and a lot of international calling. so we would simply respond with as much as we had which might be the call from a verizon customer to the at&t customer. it might conceivably include other c.r.s. >> it might but it might not? >> that is totally dependent on how the call is routed through the telephone infrastructure. >> which makes my point that as mr. baker said, and as you said, right now we've got it all collected at one point. and there's only one query, and that one query gives us all of the numbers in that little spiderweb that is built with a terrorist makes a phone call to somebody who makes another call. and the information is available instantaneously as opposed to may be taking, been received by

nsa or fbi, or whoever may requested, over a period of hours, maybe even days i guess conceivably. so the term is right, this is -- and i understand -- the chairman is right. both a problem you have raised relative to the economic issues and whatnot, but let's don't kid ourselves. we're not the only ones that do this. i mean, we've got folks across the pond who do this against us. and it has, it has been necessary to interrupt and disrupt terrorist activities. and you want to say something, mr. garfield. mr. garfield. >> i want to be clear we are not suggesting not engaging in activity that would protect our national interest, national security interests. the thing that we are suggesting

is, particularly as relates to the link in the bill, that there are ways to do that while also addressing the equities related to privacy. and so behind you is a seal of the united states where it says e. pluribus unum. it turns out the iraqi people have completely lost trust in its own government, -- the american people. the impact of these programs will be quite significant. and so i think it's important to come up with language that achieves what you want but also ensures that were not doing in an indiscriminate way. >> and i don't think there's anybody here that disagrees with that philosophy. i do think that there's going to be some disagreement over how we get there. okay. >> if i can respond to your point about data retention. so as has been noted earlier, the telecommunication compass as was many other internet services already received millions of

requests from law enforcement around the country every year and they're responding to that and law enforcement generally doesn't have the ability to build such a gigantic database. there's not been any evidence so far that we've seen that a data retention mandate is necessary for the companies to fulfill these requests over law enforcement to use the data from these requests to actually catch criminals. moreover, a data retention mandate would be an enormous burden both in terms of technological infrastructure, particularly for small companies and startups, but also result in loss of user trust and potential problems with privacy and data breach. we urge you not to go down the road of a data retention mandate. >> the problem is, mr. woods said, they may not keep these records more than two months next year. and things are going to change five years from now or three years from now. we all know how fast technology changes.

if there's not some requirement that he be kept for some period of time, then we may as well not have this program. we will lose it and we will lose the ability to interrupt and disrupt terrorist activities. so there's going to have to be some kind of understanding or mandate, some kind of understanding that his firm, or some kind of mandate in the law on a period of time. otherwise, we simply will not be able to gather the information on guys that are talking. these guys are smart as y'all are, a lot smarter than what we are up here. these guys that want to do bad things to us, and they're going to figure out their way around it. it's already happening. we see it. mr. woods could tell you some things that would scare folks to death about the way some of the folks in the terrorist world are reacting to revelations by

mr. snowden. and as we stated today, giving away this kind of information to terrorist, i assure you, there are folks watching this who are making notes and they're going to use those nodes to try to avoid whatever type of system we ultimately come up with. so we've got to be mindful of that as we try to carefully craft this legislation that protects privacy rights. we all agree that needs to be done, but at the same time protects americans. thanks, madam chair. >> thank you, cindy. senator rockefeller. >> just a quick thought. and that is the influence of negative public thinking. about the activities of government. shared by most people, or all people when before i used we have an approval rating of 90%

in congress, i think i was quoting correctly. i think it varies between 11 and nine. and i think we have a responsibility to consider what that means, but at the same time looking at this committee, whose job is not to measure public reaction but to do the very best job it can do to do something called protect our national security and privacy at the same time. senator chambliss has made a very strong case in his opening statement, that kerry is breaking out all over the world -- that terror -- it's the biggest growth industry in existence, and it hasn't the enormous emotional advantage of being based upon tribal hatreds,

ancient vengeance, retributions from 200 years ago, flat-out racism, territorial disputes. look at what's going on in 10 cocco islands off of china and philippines and taiwan, south korea, all of them claiming a piece of rock which is a laudable. is going to increase and increase and increase and, therefore, the need for broad and highly professionalized analysis o of the intelligence which were able to collect it were able to collect enough. remember it was some years ago that we close down a lot of our station chiefs in africa. you will remember that. paid a terrible price for the. terrible price for that.

measurable terrible price for that. so that i'm very conscious of being on the intelligence committee. i'm on other committees but the intelligence committee has a responsibility to do in secret for the most part, this is a very rare occasion we have an open meeting, and i don't consider that bed. i consider it good that we do our work privately. we can talk to ways we can trust. we can talk to nsa, cia and others who of our disputes in ways which are understood by all of us as we try to adjust to extremely malevolent fast-changing events. so my only point is that we better be good at collecting and using intelligence, and protecting privacy. i am convinced that if somebody wants to say that nsa is collecting so much bulk that

they could become malevolent is a usable argument in this country. you know, it's like if tootsie rolls tasted like lemons, people probably wouldn't buy them, but they don't. we have not had problems of privacy. we have the perception of problems with privacy. that we can't stop. that is not our job. our job is to protect, through intelligence and through protecting security, our people. and that's what this hearing in a sense is all about. it's not reacting to public distaste for government or for collecting information. it's just that people are afraid of government and the always have been.

and that in no way diminishes all responsibility to collect, analyze, query, one hot, too hot, three hops, whatever with the firewalls built. the fisa act was -- and the patriot act was an extraordinary act, a firewall in people being able, so that you could say they were very, very few cases where we had to actually go after folks. very few cases. very few cases people would guess thousand and wasn't even 25. i just want to put that plug-in for the importance of the job of the intelligence committee and what it is that we cannot be swayed by public opinion. we can listen to it and learn from it but not be swayed by it away from a stronger, more

protective and i think better protection of privacy courts. thank you. >> thank you very much, both of my colleagues. i very much agree with what you have said. if i had my brothers, do i believe -- druthers. toyed with privacy rights are better served by having the telecoms hold this or having the government hold it quacks i should leave privacy rights are better served by having a limited number of people, whom you know, who you trained, who are supervised, who are no more than 22, who do the actual querying, other than hundreds that you don't know out in telephone companies. and i am really very concerned that we are going to end up next year with this whole program

going down. and that's a very real concern, because what both my colleagues have said, and what we see, we see the intelligence. we redid the intelligence. we know that terror is up around the world, and we know that they will come at us if they can. so the only way you stop that is by gaining intelligence to be able to disrupt a plot. that's what has been happening. and so far so good in the main. having said that, there are so many different views in this body that when the time comes for these sections of the patriot act, the sunset next year, there's going to be chaos and that concerns me greatly. and there's a high likelihood that we get left with nothing.

so my hope here is that the various parts of our community can come together and we can find a way. you know, the private sector is perfect in terms of privacy at all. i mean, i know peoe on't want their homes on the google map because of privacy concerns. and there's nothing they can do about it. it's there. facial recognition. all of the internet going's on that take place, hacking, which is epidemic. and so privacy every day is threatened. i think you want to limit the numbers that have access to this. i think you want to limit how you do it, and this is what we

are trying to find a way. there are a lot of telecoms out there right now and if we have to go to a mandate, which we may have to do, and mandate the length of time, which we may have to do, i suspect there will be a court battle somewhere. and that's not going to help us. we have a very limited period of time to solve this problem, and it's up to win all of these sunset. and there are people in both bodies the want to do away with all of these programs until someone gets blown up at a sports match, a number of people, big buildings gets blown up, planes get blown up, here and people have to understand, i am really concerned. there are bombs they go through the magnetometers. we know that the person who makes these bombs is still alive. there have been four attempts to get these bombs into our

country. one was abdulmutallab in 2009. it misfired. he wanted to explode the plane over detroit. there was enough explosive to explode the plane. two were found in printer cartridges in the dubai airport, headed to the united states. and one was an asset that helped recover this bomb that was headed for the united states. so these are real things out there. and the only way we have to disrupt this is intelligence. and so, you know, i beg people, please come together, enable us to do the right thing for both, for privacy and for protection of this country. and i think the telecoms have to

come aboard. i think, you know, the big companies have to understand what we are trying to do. i've been visited by members of the european community. i've heard from many of your companies that they are concerned. and yet, half of what was produced by this program went to europe to help them disrupt plots there. and that's the irony of this. so i hope we can work something out. it's not easy to get something through the house, and when the houshouse passes something threo one with both political parties, and two committees, if we could work from this entry could make

certain amendments to it and we could strengthen it, and we could pass it, the chairman of the house intelligence committee has said, look, we conferencconferenc e it right away and we will get it done. because there is a sense of alacrity that we need to do this. bottom line, we would like to have your thoughts, but we are dealing with bill language now. so having bill language submitted to us to solve problems that you've made, if you don't like minimization, give us some language. i don't know what to do about the telecoms, because i think i know where you are going, but this is based on the telecommunication companies understanding that there's a problem out there. and my sense is, if there is a bill will, that we mandate it

because you wouldn't want to be responsible if there were three planes going down loaded with people, or buildings hit by them. and that's really where we are. so i really thank you. i'll look forward to working with you. we will make ourselves available. we will make our staffs available, and use it as an example, anyone is other, that as has a concrete thought, please contact us. because this is the one opportunity i see to be able to sustain the program, which certainly disrupted azazi. and mr. zazi pled guilty to some of his conspirators pled guilty and there was no question that what he was going was to blow for the new york subway system. so with that in mind, i say thank you very much. it's been a long hearing but

you've all been terrific and thank you very much. the hearing is adjourned. >> the labor department released the may unemployment numbers are would today. the economy added 217,000 jobs which actually is the jobless rate unchanged at 6.3%. according to the bureau of labor statistics, an average of 234,000 jobs have been added each month for the last three months. nearly five years after the so-called great recession, these has finally regained all lost jobs. summary action, senate majority leader be the least a statement which reads -- today marks the 70th anniversary of the d-day invasion which led to the end of world war ii. several if it took place today to commemorate the occasion in

france will show you today's ceremony including remarks from president obama and french president hollande tonight on c-span at 8 p.m. eastern. >> russia and united states is a nation which believes in its mission. and our missions are similar. we believe in freedom. we believe in the street getting our core values, which is suddenly disappear in the '90s and the 2000. we didn't go anywhere. it was our core. the biggest national idea for russia during all those years was victory day. that is our main national holiday, and that is what united the whole nation. and how it was presented to the

nation by president putin is that in ukraine, those who came to power, and he -- the flags of former ukrainian liberation army who were aligned during one or two, and so he used that to prove that these are fascists who are fighting against both sure and -- russian and ukraine nation. so we are looking just to protect russia our russian speaking minorities. no. for the overwhelming majority of russians, we are continuing world war ii. we are liberating, really liberating to ukraine from the fascist threat. >> this weekend on c-span, looking to the politics of putin's russia saturday morning at 10 eastern.

on c-span2's booktv, live coverage of the "chicago tribune" printer's row lit fest starting saturday at 11 a.m. eastern. on c-span3's american history tv, the 70th anniversary of the d-day invasion of normandy beginning saturday morning at 10:30 a.m. eastern. >> next, updating communication networks and the potential impact on public safety services like 911. the senate subcommittee looking to the issue come witnesses include the fcc's chief technology officer, internet industry experts and others. the subcommittee examined what's known as ip transition which involves changing legacy networks like copper wire-based television service to internet-based networks like broadband. this hearing is 90 minutes. >> well, we will call the hearing to order. thank you for coming to the senate subcommittee on communications technology and the internet. the committee on commerce, what

are the other what is going to be a will have a number of colleagues coming and going this morning. we have a number of other hearings and markups, et cetera, going on, some action on the floor as well. some of our colleagues will be coming and going. let me just say good morning to everyone and will compute to beijing. we do today to discuss the public safety network rely build aspects of the ongoing evolution of our nation's communications networks. today the nation's voice networks are in the midst of multiple transitions that promispromised to change how we communicate. first, the transmission infrastructure that carries our voice to mutations moving away from reliance on copper to fiber optics. next, the so-called circuit switch protocols that have long underpinned traditional telephone service or transitioning to newer internet protocols, or ip systems. finally, many america's are choosing to substitute wireless service for traditional wired

voice communications. however, that may be challenges that consumers, carriers and public safety officials face as our networks increasing rely on all-ip technology and fiber optic infrastructure. for example, in the state of arkansas recently suffered a severe tornado. tragically we lost 18 arkansans in that, and significant property damage as well. 36,000 homes lost power. i've heard nothing but positive things from the arkansas department of emergency management and the governor's office about how our local telephone companies reacted during and immediately after the storm. i would expect those countries in arkansas and others around the country to continue the commitment, to public safety, no matter the technology used to transmit phone calls over our networks. consumers have come to trust the reliability and resiliency of the old copper telephone network. they cannot afford to wait for a disaster to strike to find out that there are gaps in our

communications networks and and all-ip world. so i want to be sure that we are exploring the public safety applications of these transitions in asking the right questions proactively. but i do not -- but do also want to stress that the ip transition presents an important opportunity for consumers and communication providers. new technologies bring potential of new services and possibilities to make our networks even more efficient and to bring that cost for consumers. rather than being an impediment, it's my intention to explore this transition in a thorough manner to identify any challenges, discuss applications in depth and work towards solutions and advanced to mitigate any negative impacts. i want to recognize the efforts by the federal communications commission, at&t and other carriers who are working with the commission to carefully and deliberately explore implications of the ip

transition through the fcc's transition the trials. ultimately, it's my hope through these trials all stakeholders can work together to address any issues revealed in the trial, protect consumers and preserve public safety. but i also expect congress to making close oversight over this process, the transition of this magnitude deserves nothing less. and again i want to thank you all for being here, and i want to hear your perspective on this important discussion. i look forward to test what i do want to turn over to the ranking member, senator wicker. >> thank you. this hearing deals with preserving public safety and network reliability in the ip transition. this hearing certainly hits home not only for our kansas but for mississippians who -- arkansans, but mississippians who experienced devastating storms this your also. in late april partners ravaged communities in mississippi and arkansas taking innocent lives and causing extensive damage. despite the devastation we could

be thankful for the technology that provided critical information ahead of time, alerting people to take shelter and saving hundreds of our fellow citizens. the swift action of our weather forecasters, local officials and first responders validated the importance of technology and communication when disaster strikes. the modernization of our nation's communications networks from legacy copper line telephone infrastructure to high speed fiber and wireless broadband is expected to maximize the benefits of ip broadband networks to all americans. these networks will provide far more capable and efficient voice services, out loud faster and more robust data transfers, deliver 21st century education and health services and enhance public safety communications like next generation 911. there will be a host of issues raised when we discuss ip transition but nothing is more important than ensuring a

seamless transition for our first responders. and the citizens they serve and protect. the capacity for this technology to protect citizens not only must be preserved but also improved by this exciting new transition. the fcc has moved the ball forward in constructive ways authorizing voluntary ip transition trials. these trials will test, analyze, and analyze the impact of moving away from legacy communication networks, particularly in regard to public safety. the commission held a public ip transition in april that focus on the transitions effects on critical public safety emergency response, national security functions. i would like to welcome the fcc's chief technology officer who provided important technical expertise to the workshop and easier today to do the same. i welcome the rest of her witnesses who represent a

section of key stakeholders including state and public safety officials, consumers, broadband providers themselves who have invested significant capital and resources to deploy modern research but i'm glad we're all here today. the hearing will be brief and will let you start talking. ensure a smooth path for public safety must be an all hands on deck after with congress, fcc and stakeholders working together to scrutinize the ip transition, transitions impact on emergency communications in this country. country. so, mr. chairman, thank you again for holding this important hearing. >> thank you. i want to thank you and your staff for being flexible because as you all know we have moved the time here from 10 a.m. to 9:30 tonight 15 done that to try to accommodate senators schedules, so that you offered and the. we're also going to make a slight change when it comes to y'all's opening statement. mr. shultz has a presentation

which will take five minutes. i think were asking everybody else to limit their remarks to three minutes if we can't are clinically and abuse the hope of an unrecognized mr. shultz. mr. shultz, indications commissions will be our first witness. and we will have jonathan banks, senior vice president, law and policy u.s. telecom. and we will have jodie griffin, senior staff attorney, public knowledge and then we will have called it audible, the chair of the board and president of the national association of regulatory utility commissioners and she's also chairman of the state of arkansas state public service commission and introduce, and ms. gigi smith, president of apco international. so mr. schulzrinne, let me recognize you for your presentation. thank you. >> thank you. chairman pryor, ranking member wicker, and members of the subcommittee, i appreciate the

opportunity to appear before you today to invite some technical context regarding the technology transitions that you refer to in the particulars public safety. i am the chief technology officer for the fcc. as the cbo i am pleased to discuss the technical foundation for today's topic that will respect for declined comment on any policy related matters. the transition based on internet protocols, short ip, offers opportunity to improve emergency can indications unprecedented since the conversion from analog to digital systems in the 1970s and 1980s. however, these very same changes all pose new challenges to performance, reliability and sustainability of emergency communications systems. as you hinted, about 70% of all 911 calls originate on a mobile phone today. and of the 79 million

residential landline connections in the united states, 34 million are now interconnected as opposed to tdm. we can also no longer take for granted that all households have a tv, a landline phone with a central office battery backup or even a battery-powered transistor radio, or let's say a college student with the watching tv when the emergency alert tone sounds to seek shelter. the transition to ip is multifaceted and encompasses three layers. at the application layer, voice, video and text services are enabled by new internet application way of protocols instead of the old signaling system number seven. after the transport layer, ip offers an application neutral mechanism that replaces the old time division multiplexing foundation. the physical layer dominated is

integrating fiber, wireless, kulaks and satellite into a unified whole. however, even as transition is taking place we should not forget that large parts of the voice networks are still using the same tdm technology and hardware developed and deployed in some cases 30 or 40 years ago. in particular for public safety, so-called common trunks originally developed for operator services. unfortunately, they have played a role into large-scale outages of 911 systems in the last few years. spare parts, investment and expertise needed to maintain these legacy networks are becoming scarce. as fcc chairman wheeler has stated, public safety is one of the core values that must be sustained during the nation's transition to all-ip networks. to technical challenges that

will need to be addressed in this transition are back in power and emergency location. no longer will we have access to backup power provided by the central office as it has been the case for many years, but there are also new tactical opportunities to leverage into system of powers through user exchangeable batteries, for example, batteries that look similar to what you might have asked back up on your cell phone, or energy efficient network termination devices that will make it possible to sustain uninterrupted communication for both voice and increasingly important for internet services, even if commercial power should be disrupted. the second topic, location technology, such as gps, has been very successful along with network-based translation to locate callers for outdoor 911 calls. unfortunately, both technologies

have limitations that make them less than suited when people cut the cord and use wireless calls to call 911. they are either not accurate enough for the do not function at all. for example, gps generally does not work well indoors. however, fortunately, the transition to ip-based and network-based technologies is also spilling new investments in technologies that while not originally designed for location determination, such as in building communication infrastructure, allows us to greatly improve the reliability and availability of location information. for example, wi-fi, bluetooth beacons and distributed antenna systems could be used to locate callers inside buildings. to succeed in meeting the challenges and leverage the opportunities, all stakeholders must work together to ensure

that every 911 call receives the appropriate responds, that every american is alerted when danger is imminent, whether they use old technology or new technology. thank you. >> thank you. mr. banks. >> good morning, chairman pryor, ranking member wicker, and the members of the subcommittee. my name is jonathan -- [inaudible] and i'm the senior vice president for law policy at u.s. telecoms. thank you for holding this hearing. u.s. telecom represents broadband companies ranging from some of the largest companies in the u.s. to some of the smallest cooperatives and family-owned telecom providers in rural america. they serve some of the most world areas in the country as was the most urban and use a broad range of technologies, including broadband and internet protocol to do so. to begin, i would like to note the recent tragedy caused by an extremely powerful tornado touching down in arkansas north

of little rock in late april. the tornado caused substantial loss of life and damage. communication services were affected with poles blown down, cables severed, facilities damaged, and cell towers destroyed. one local carrier, windstream, was unable to keep a switch up and running into buildings that lost its walls to the tornado's winds and suffer substantial rain damage. this storm illustrates that no network is or can be 100% reliable. but a well coordinated response in arkansas that networks up and running relatively quickly. careful preparation for emergencies can make a huge difference in the effect that disasters have on communication networks and the customers they serve. our industry has long participate in emergency readiness planning with the government partners and will continue to do so. the transition to modern broadband networks and ip services promises enormous benefits to our country. the fcc's national broadband

plan says that building these networks is the great infrastructure challenge of our time. the communications industry is stepping up to the plate, investing about $685 over the last decade in infrastructure, with about $70 billion being invested just last year. we agree that as we navigate through this transition that there are key values that cannot be left behind. fcc chairman wheeler describes these values as making up a network compact between communications providers and at the public. network reliability and public safety are essential elements of this compact and they are key values over industry. our industry has a long history of working with federal and state governments, public utility commissions, the public safety community and industry standards bodies on these issues. we have been working with these partners to understand the transition to broadband and ip services for well over a decade. i provide a brief summary of some of these efforts in my written testimony.

in closing, i'd like to reiterate our commitment to working with this committee and our full range of partners to ensure that the promise of broadband connectivity and the power of ip services deliver to consumers a safe and secure network and robust capabilities that will empower them for the 21st century. thank you. >> thanks. ms. griffin. >> chairman pryor, ranking member wicker, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. my name is jodie griffin and i'm a senior staff attorney at public knowledge, an organization that advocates for the public access to knowledge and open communication platforms. the phone the transition -- advantages for our nation. but we need to make sure these transitions result in a meaningful step forward for every person who depends on the network. americans trust the protections of the phone network. we conduct our business and personal recommendations a summit of the phone networks will just work because it always

has. during emergencies we again call for help from police, firefighters and hospitals. in the rare instance that any part of the system breaks down, local, state and federal authorities intervene as if our lives depend on it. because they do. in january, in a unanimous bipartisan vote the federal communications commission recognize that our phone network policies must serve a certain basic enduring values. public safety and national security, universal access, competition, and consumer protection. our policies in the network transition to serve all of these values. this hearing focuses on public safety and reliability but a conversation about these values will always entailed a rest of the network compact. after all, when you need to make an emergency call, what you really need is a reliable network to make that call. a person can call 911 if she doesn't have phone service in the first place, and she lives in a rural area she may waste precious time trying to get connected.

new technology has great promise but they don't always make the critical needs to a reliable communications network. we have already seen reports of wireless carriers providing insufficient location data, public safety answering points, or in the event of a power outage fiber-based services will require battery backup unlike traditional self powered copper lines and wireless services will be useless if the cell towers also lose power. public safety services and reliability are so firmly ingrained in her network an now, many consumers may simply assume new technologies will give them the same guarantees they have an existing network. if, for example, a customer doesn't realize that fiber-based service needs battery back up until the power has our recon out, he can't prepare for a prolonged outage. it is critical to ensure the fcc has the authority it needs to preserve the network compact and serve its fundamental values. in light of the recent ruling, policymakers must make sure the fcc can implement rules to

require carriers to complete calls and provide basic service even after a network is move to ip or wireless or fiber infrastructure. to be clear, no one is suggesting we should hold back on technology. the question is how to make this technology work for all of the 300 million people who rely on our network every day. the underlying technology may be changing, but the essential services and consumers expectations for them remained the same. our national policies must reflect that fact. thank you, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. ms. autor bold. >> good morning, chairman pryor, ranking member wicker, and the members of the subcommittee. thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the ip transition and its impact on public safety and network resiliency. my name is collect audible. i the honor of serving as chairman of the arkansas public service commission, and i may especially honored to be here before my senior senator whom i think is an outstanding public servant. i'm also testifying in my will

as president of the national association of regulatory utility commissioners. i up on the subcommittee for holding this hearing which is focused on the proper question, which is which public policy valley should be preserved? what consumers care about is that their telecommunications work and are reliable regardless of the technology used to provide the. as we transition from traditional circuit switched technology to an ip and wireless based system, federal and state policymakers must work together to ensure that emergency 911 service and network resilience do not suffer. public safety is indeed a core value that should not and cannot be compromised. as senator pryor and ranking member wicker know all too well, the recent tornadoes in arkansas and mississippi were another unavoidable reminder of how important these collaborative efforts are to ensure the resilience of our critical infrastructure and the safety of our citizenry.

the april eff or tornado not only to the lives of many but damaged hundreds of homes in one county alone. i'm very pleased with the recovery and restoration efforts which included the immediate response of our governor, mike beebe, the arkansas department of emerged in management, first responders and emergency personnel, and the utility and telecommunications sectors. too large cell towers were destroyed interrupting communications throughout the affected area. however, the carriers respond quickly bring in mobile power that helped to return some level of service. while the situation is devastating, it could have been worse. superstorm sandy demonstrated the frailties of our utility infrastructure knocking out power for days and weeks cutting off telecommunication networks. while new ip and wireless based systems can be more efficient than traditional landline services, they may not have the same back up our capabilities as the older networks. circuit-switched technologies

are supported by robust and independent power sources and continue to function during prolonged outages. many of the new i.t. systems rely on a backup our in the consumer's home. these backup units are indeed the responsibly of the consumer and, therefore, it is important that consumers are educated and are aware about these issues and how they can prolong the life of their infrastructure at home. as more consumers switch to ip based systems, we must ensure that the technologies provide the same kind of support, or that consumers are aware that they may not. in conclusion, what is important are the values we apply to the communications network, not the technology used to deliver. fcc chairman where a spouse of the four values of universal accessibility, reliable interconnection, consumer protection, public safety and security. naruc agrees. while technology may change, the

expectations of consumers do not. consumers expect the same quality of service, reliability, and access to emergency service to which they have grown accustomed. when hurricanes, tornadoes or other natural disasters unleash their destructive force, they don't discriminate between a copper fiber or a wireless network. it is precisely for this reason that we as policymakers should not discriminate and opine our values. these values must be applied consistently and in a technology neutral manner, especially when it relates to public safety. thank you for this opportunity, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. ms. smith. >> good morning, chairman pryor, ranking member wicker, and members of the subcommittee. my name is gigi smith and i'm the president of the association of public safety committee conditions officials, or apco. thank you for inviting me back to testify on yet another important public safety matter. apco is the world's oldest and largest organization of public

safety committee patients professionals. our members feel the 911 calls, dispatch critical information to first responders and manage the communications networks used by first responders. i have been active in public safety for over 28 years, starting as a 911 call taker and now serving as the police operations manager for the salt lake valley emergency communications center in west valley city, utah. i bring the perspective of an association that is focused on how technology shifts, including ip transition impact of public safety. the ip transition will bring a number of benefits. we are fully embracing efforts to bring ip technologies into public safety committee patients by supporting the first net network driving next generation 911 deployment and ensuring development of the most effective apps for public safety among other initiatives. i'd like to briefly mention a few considerations regarding the impact of the ip transition on public safety. first, ip-based networks must be reliable, supporting access to

911 communications between dispatchers and first responders, and communications of emergency operation centers and first spawned are -- first responder agencies. second, ip networks present new vulnerability or service providers should incorporate security procedures, spill over plans and mitigation strategies to best protect public safety communications. third, ma copper networks are self powered were as ip networks rely on power from the consumer collector created. ip network designs need to consider standby power, battery backup and other contingency plans. fourth, ip networks must maintain the quality of location information for 911 calls and we encourage exploration of how i.t. can offer improved capabilities. fifth, ip and next generation 911 transitions in the public safety community will be more gradual than for non-public safety networks. certainly additional funding at the national level would support the rapid adoption of next-generation technology by

peace apps and thus help public safety keep pace with the industries ip transition. finally, some service providers offer or may require wireless replacements to landline. we need to preserve existing levels of 911 service in these cases. in summary we believe that the ip transition holds great promise. apco looks for to working with the subcommittee and all stakeholders to help guide the best path for. thank you and afford to answer and 80 questions. >> thank you. this honorable, let me start with you if i may and that is kind of pick up where ms. smith left off about 911 service. as we move forward does it make sense that 911 service is more of a federal function or a state function, specifically you know, i think that we all recognize how important 911 service is, what a great success it's been, but as we transition to ip-based, you know, how should

we make sure that our 911 service has the integrity that it has up to this point? >> thank you, senator, for the question. the naruc community believes that it's a proper state function. i believe the success we've enjoyed thus far has been precisely because of the inability of the states to work very nimbly and with flexibility within the borders to not only coordinate and have oversight, but also to respond in emergent situations. what i think back over the severe weather events that we've had over the past two years come and we have indeed had many, as many of the members of the subcommittee have, the inability of first responders of our state department of emergency management, of our governor's office, at the local and county officials, as well as the state public utility commissioners who participate very aggressively with coordination efforts, even at higher levels than ever before, it's imperative that we

have the ability to respond quickly, that we have the ability to oversee 911 efforts locally. but the ultimate goal is safety. the ultimate goal is public safety and ensuring that we use every tool to respond as probably as possible, and the best way to do so is to ensure that that is occurring at the state level. >> are there any states though that a state laws that would prohibit the state to do 911 requirements on an ip system? >> i'm not aware. there are certainly other state provisions with regard to telecommunication services more broadly. as you know many states have undergone the regulation. but certainly the 911 core function are carried out at state and local level. >> mr. banks, let me ask you, i be concerned about us going to

ip. some of you all have mentioned this. obviously, there's great innovation with it and there's a lot of good things with the. i don't want to say it's all bad because it's not at all, but we all know and our expense has been when a lot of people are on the internet, sometimes it runs slower. and we talked about the power, the need for, you know, electricity and if electricity goes out you lose your power. so how do we resolve that with -- how do we resolve that in the 911 world, or when there's emergencies or some crisis or to make people get on the system? how do we make sure as we go forward that we don't have that problem? >> there is always an issue around disasters when networks can be overloaded, and that can be a wireless network, traditional copper network or another network. i think the first thing that puts us in a better position for

all those that we were a decade or two ago, there are multiple networks throughout the country. so in general, people can use their traditional wireline network. their neighbor might be on the cable network. there are four or more of wireless networks, and 90% plus of americans have a least one mobile phone in the home. the aussies multiple networks people can turn to. if anyone network gets overloaded, that doesn't mean no one can get through to 911. but fundamentally you're asking a very good question about designing robustness into the te systems, and that is a challenge for our industry, the wireless cable industries and the public safety community to work together to make sure that they are the right number of trunks to peace apps, that our backups and overflow systems. so this is one of those technological challenges we are working through this transition to working through at dhs with apco and the public safety commission with the fcc and were

very focused on that. >> senator wicker? >> thank you. let me ask about the transition between the copper line networks and ip fiber. it obviously doesn't all happen at once. so there's a lag there. let me start with mr. banks. substantial geographic areas, and, therefore, substantial numbers of individuals will be living in areas that will continue to be served by copper, which we call tdm, and others will be in the transition to ip areas. ..

occasional unfortunate call completion issues that your question probably touches on, but our members that serve these people everyday are going to make sure those calls can go through for the next however long it takes to get through the it transition. >> do you need any help from the congress in that regard? >> there is a substantial effort at the fcc to understand some of these call completion issues going on and the fcc is gathering data going on from across the industry. so we are very involved in the provision of data and i think we

need to see the outcome of that investigation. >> let me toss this topic to you. are there any novel technical challenges to maintaining the conductivity in this incremental area by the phaseout? >> yes i believe they are. the challenge is always when you have an old technology and new technology that danger is that investment in the real technology lies in the complexities that have incurred because you need to interconnect the old technology into the new technology. i briefly mentioned where even in areas that are now more where the cable customers are in the systems they still reach through these legacies that offer a capacity limited and maintain in terms of vendor support and very

few people still understand how they operate. so the transition i'd be leaving many cases if it comes faster across the network can prevent these type of interruptions. for the call completion issues, i do the leave there are opportunities that as we transition to the ip-based interconnection that the number of places where things can go wrong decreases. similarly the commission started an effort as part of its investigation of telephone numbers to improve the databases which at least in some cases are implicated in making it difficult to route calls to thee corrected ithecorrect defend thk destinations and lead to call failures. >> it is thdoes the state reguly level have any insights to offer in this regard?

>> yes we do. thank you. we have been engaged with the fcc even at the highest levels. i've personally met with chairman wheeler and i want to applaud the fcc for engaging the state. they recognize we have a significant role to play a thing in the smooth transition and we have been particularly interested and concerned about doing our part to ensure a smooth transition. and we hope to watch with great interest the trials and we've been following and working with the s. pc and its staff to make sure state regulators are involved offering feedback and again the ultimate goal that we share is the same and it's to ensure public safety but also from the regulatory perspective and shoring the same sense that we've come to know, same quality of service, the same ability for consumers to have option now thanow atthe end for them to hae

consumer protections as well. >> think -- thank you all. >> thank you senator pryor for holding this hearing and senator wicker if there's one thing anybody has been concerned about i know from my former job as a prosecutor is public safety and we need to make sure that these technologies are functional and there are opportunities. firefighters walking into the building that may be able to see the media blueprint and you have those in minnesota that gets stranded on the snowmobiles and their only hope is to have some kind of a gps system and we have seen some really good rescued because of technology, but we know that there are also challenges. i am the chair of the next-generation caucus and i continue to be an advocate for deploying this community technology and this modern

technology in our efforts. as with many members of the subcommittee i've been concerned about the call completion. it's not going to help if people are making 911 calls if they can't complete them and this is especially as you know ms. smith and ms. honorable is a problem in the world areas and what i wanted to know from the perspective is if you've been supporting the action by the fcc. as you know they issued a new content announced with telecom and can you expand on how this issue is a concerned public safety if we cannot complete the call. >> thank you for the question and the concern. we share in both planes that you've mentioned it one of regarding public safety and after the hurricane sandy hui issued a strong resolution that calls for the heightened coordination particularly on the utilities and telecommunications

sectors. we've been off rating in our own silos but the lessons we learned from sandy and others is that there's a strong symbiotic relationship between both the utility sector and telecommunications. they need one another. the telecom center can't do an effective job without the electric infrastructure and the electric infrastructure can't communicate and give their life back on without a strong telecommunication efforts to restore the service once there has been an interruption. so we have been very active. particularly also on the completion to the second issue that you have raised was also issued resolutions on the call completion and we commended the efforts even yesterday with regards to that dissent victory. this is such an important issue. the calls have to go through because lives are on the line and we recognize that and we are very committed to continue to raise these issues and asked

state regulators to make sure that we see this through because lives depend on it. >> the senator has been working with me on that effort and i appreciate your help as well. we are starting to see texting and 911 service is being launched and someday we may be able to see as i mentioned the video to 911 services. how do you view the service for the potential innovations and how well the transition help or hinder these efforts and what is the balancing act we need to see to make sure that they have what they need to provide the service? >> there is a balancing act and as mentioned earlier this is an exciting transition so for me personally being a police operations manager of a 911 center, it is exciting to see what the future has lying ahead to provide the resources for the responders and to be able to offer them the information that is needed. but in the balancing act there

are pros and cons are coming intconcerns cominginto those coe challenges as we mentioned earlier, do we need to have reliability and security. reliability we need to ensure that the systems are up and that the time of need citizens can get the help that they need. but we also need to be aware of the security issues. there's cybersecurity to be aware of, telephony and services, those type of things. so the systems are not taking down but instead we know that they are reliable and that they are going to be needed. >> one last question. when we passed the map i included an amendment from the incentive option that was end outdated to the first net paying down the deficit to go to the next generation upgrades including the implementation of the emergency services and applications. we expected to take place next year i know that we hope the action raises enough revenue to

provide these resources to upgrade to the 911 systems but in the meantime what other resources are available to help as they try to keep up with this evolution to the ip? >> the funding is a very important question and i don't have the answer specifically what other findings are available, but i can definitely look into that and we can respond back. but i would like to say that funding is important an in as mh that i know my own center we just went through where we are now able to connect and i know how much we spent just under $400,000 with that that's just for the equipment only that it doesn't include the training and the personnel and the other equipment that's going to come through it. it. times that by 6,000 across the nation there is going to be a large cost and it's very important that we understand it we arandwe are very appreciativt

the funding sources may come and will be coming later but at the same time, we nee need to have something immediate in order to ensure the public safety does not lag behind and that we can keep up with the industry. >> thank you. >> senator johnson. >> thank you mr. chairman. i apologize for not being here for all of the testimony. i am a numbers guy, so i want to try to define the problem here. we are talking about the transition from the copper to ip. how much has already been transitioned. how much do we have left to go? >> if you look across america's households about 25% still have regular old-fashioned pots, copper phone service. i would say the vast majority of americans business have switched

from the ip-based systems. >> of the 25% though, how many have easy access to upgrade to make the transition? or is that 25% just a problem? >> no. much of the 25% also has a cable system available or like many households could switch to wireless. the upgrade paths are the homes that depend very much on where they are and some of them are though more rural area. >> what percentage of people that haven't transitioned is the problem that we need to be concerned about and do companies like yours. you made significant investments into the infrastructure. >> what percentage is the problem? >> that is a difficult number to give you. but having the fcc follow-through on the right universal service reform to ensure people that have these

really old networks in the rural areas there is a business case to upgrade. >> you look like you want to jump in here. >> i just want to comment. from the technology perspective as mr. banks eluded to, they are somewhat different circumstances. so the one that is where it's available and i think that is a relatively small number of places, but they exist where no networks exist, and in particular where not all of the telecom providers in the ip services because then it would run over the copper. >> are we talking about 1% or 12%? >> the order of magnitude i would say it's probably in the 5% range but that changes on a year by year basis. >> that we have a 5% problem here. >> the problem is one where a

number of consumers have chosen to retain the landline because the value of the landline. so we need one carrier that has recently offered the traditional landline for the modest fee presumably to address the consumers that want to maintain those or bad enough with to subscribe to the service. >> some of the discussion of course is how we are going to regulate the broadband. anybody here on the table to regulate the rules? okay. i assume that nobody wants to do that. >> i would say the values that underlie and a phone work apply as mucapplyas much as we move tt generation of the services in broadband. i think that how those rules look if maybe a little different than what we have done in the phone that works because it is a different technology and operates differently. but at the end of the day we

want everybody to have access to the basic service is -- then moves to broadband, then we need to make sure that we have the rules that ensure everyone has access to that. >> it sounds like you are not necessarily believing the broadband companies having the incentive to make sure that the majority of the calls go through anand that you really think the government has to -- is that -- is that your position, do you need the government to force broadband providers to take sure that the service is excellent? >> i think that we have seen some reports there've been failures like the cases and the call completion and even where there may not be bad actors, the new technology can create situations where nobody really has an incentive to absolutely guarantee that the call goes through. >> do you think the government can absolutely guarantee that they they call that comes

through and a better capability as opposed to the broadband carriers themselves to provide excellent -- let's face it. if you have a company that you are providing a service if it doesn't work very often don't you think the customer is going to switch, don't you think the competition would actually do a better job and having had the government try to guarantee that, which i don't think that it would do? >> i think into many areas the competition doesn't exist or isn't robust enough to really guarantee that people are going to have a meaningful choice, particularly if they are using a heart monitor and they may be able to switch to a wireless service but it wouldn't support the monitor or if the new service is not affordable. so that you sensual promise of the phone net work is that it goes through and that should be the goal of the government to make sure that we are still filling out. >> would you like to respond?

>> i think the vast majority of americans have the choice for how they communicate and that interconnection is part of how the whole industry works is that it is essential for anyone being able to sell voice service and you see this on the wireline side and the wireless side of the government is not yet involved telling wireless companies how to connect and not connect into the interconnection happens in the free market. there is no reason to think it wouldn't have been in the rest of the industry. >> thank you and thank you mr. chairman. >> i want to thank all of you for being here and just follow up on some of the points that the senator was making. as i understand it is to build out the capacity. it used to be hard-line and now we are looking at broadband because of what we are talking about today in terms of the transition that makes sense in

terms of technology. i represent a state that gets shortchanged under this fund. 37 cents on the dollar and i would love to have any of you drive around new hampshire with me in the rural areas and you could see that we really do have very much need that are not being addressed. is it, i've introduced legislation to make it more equitable. so, i want the fcc to ask to reform happens in the universal service. but when we are thinking about this percentage that mr. johnson, senator johnson asked you about, really what we are talking about are areas where the rural areas where you're not going to have the business incentive to build out the capacity as i understand it that is why we had the universal service fund. so what is your thought in terms of the transition as a way of

really i think hopefully more effectively using the universal service fund and what opportunities do you see for the universal service fund in this transition? and please correct me if i'm wrong in terms of what i think the purpose of the fund is and what we are trying to accomplish. >> you are right the purpose of the fund is to connect america americans. the fcc is engaged in a major reform of a big part of that fund created a part of the fund for the larger companies and increasing the funding available to the larger companies to serve people who wouldn't be served otherwise. the fcc anna that was a 2011 reform order. they are still working to implement vat to operationalize it. hopefully that will be in place by 2015. and for that larger companies the funds will flow in a much more targeted way to connect

peoples incentive blocks that they have no other service. >> as we think about this transition, how do we think it will impact competition? i think that is an important issue for consumers and then also as we look at the reformat the uss fund. i've heard a lot of concerns obviously with the transition with the rural carriers trade >> park number two is reforming the smaller company. company. of the world company fund. they made some reforms that were ill advised to the fcc credit. she has taken those off of the table and is going to issue a notice of the rulemaking to modernize the fund for the carriers just like they modernize the larger carriers. that's a very big deal and it's important to get that right. in terms of the carriers in the transition, many of the carriers invested heavily in broadband

and so in many of the areas the services are available. the reform in the fun reformingd help a lot with that. >> mr. schulzrinne, would you like to comment on this? i'm sure you have some thoughts on that. >> let me comment on the technical aspects and thank you for the question. the ip transition unlike in the older days where it essentially it meant you have to extend the copper lines to the remote areas now offer several choices that will hopefully make it possible to cost-effectively reach all-americans bother that is through fiber or about long-term option in the capability, extending the capability of copper, fixed wireless hand in the really remote areas, satellite. it is important to provide robust broadband to all americans and it allows modern applications a voice as well as

other applications to function well and indeed to explore the technologies in new ways of providing broadband services as part of the reform effort. we are looking at an experiment to provide funding to both traditional and nontraditional providers and to extend broadband into the areas. we have received over 1,000 indications of interest from a wide variety of organizations, electric utilities working to explore the providing robust mostly fiber but also robust wireless services into areas that are not currently being served so i believe that gives us additional opportunity to do that cost-effectively and on a schedule that may be more aggressive than what we've been able to do in the past that we had to rely on one technology only.

>> that would be good news for many of the areas because as you know, having the ability to connect can determine the economic viability of the world areas as well so i see this as a very important jobs issue, so thank you. >> senator nelson? the >> hurricane approaches knocks out the power, somebody is entire streets in their home come and they need to make a 911 call into the copper wire, the power source is there. and fiber-optic there is generally thought to be a power source in the house or a battery backup. what do we do?

>> ms. smith? >> that's very important. thank you for the question. there's going to be a paradigm. there's going to be a change. our consumers are used to that, just picking up the phone and it works for them and i think a lot is going to have to come back on education, and it is going to have to be from the industry into both from the peace ourselves to educate the consumers and how important that backup power is going to be. whether that would be as we call our plan b. meaning we have the resources available to us whether that be supplied with the equipment, whether i know my equipment well and i know if it takes an extra battery how i'm going to recharge the battery that's so important again to bring to their attention so that they know what the expectations are and that they could have those challenges ahead of them so that they can reach the help when they need it. >> you have a lot of educating

to do. when you have your smartphone at cell phone and you see the battery is getting low and have nowhere to plug it in. imagine in an emergency you need to make that phone call, you need help and you don't have to cover that is necessary. so the bill to educate and put that information out there but also to ensure that the industry is creating what is necessary whether it be a battery packs that they are putting into the hold and making them available to the customer so that they can have them in their time of need. >> anybody else? >> let me comment on it from a technology perspective briefly. the opportunities are that i think the industries are learning based on consumer experience i believe partially and i think it could work to make that less onerous than it is for smoke detectors for example. first unlike for the smoke

effectors the devices are typically rechargeable batteries so in most cases they should be charged. however the duration that they provide may be sufficient to bridge short disruption that month-long disruption. this is reflected in some of the comments that our technological advisory council has been offering is that there are opportunities for example with the user exchanged battery so you can go to the drugstore and pick some up for example and some of the carriers are starting to do that and the standardized connectors that you can use for example the backpacks some people have on their cell phone to power down the activity and importantly, to reduce the power consumption of the network units that has two benefits. it reduces the use of energy during normal times but also allows the households to sustain operation and i believe it's important to sustain it for both

voice and internet connectivity for a much longer duration than we are able to currently do. >> that is a good suggestion on the standpoint say for example with an elderly population easier that you can make that two recharge the batteries, for example, what you just suggested with a kind of thing that we do with cell phones, that's -- that interconnected nobody so that a senior citizen knows what to do, that's a good suggestion. thank you. >> think you. senator markey i'm going to turn over because they need me on another committee. >> thank you mr. chairman. it was just 18 years ago when

the congress passed the token indication that of 1996. i was the host and not one home in america have broadband in february of 1996. , said today a 12-year-old belief that broadband and a 50-inch hd screen is a constitutional right. that's how quickly it moves. and simultaneously, i know out of my committee we move the spectrum for the third, fourth, fifth and sixth license. it was all just bottled up so that a couple of companies control everything and you couldn't have facebook or ebay or amazon or all these other issues because they were all left by the companies and competitors that did not want to see that kind of competition. and we had to do as a part of

that to ensure the reliability, competition, economic growth for all a part of this into trillion dollars for the private sector investment with that went into the marketplace investment because of those trillions of dollars of investment because there was more opportunity for people to get off of it with their new ideas and products into way of doing business, but they need the government is up the rules for the private sector could act. and the principal definition of the act was that everything was going to be technology neutral. we weren't going to decide. the marketplace was going to decide. so we need to make sure that the system is reliable and that a public safety remains at the core. and we have to make sure that the network works every single time. we have learned that again at the marathon bombing in boston. we each learned it in each of our communities over and over again. mr. griffin, what implications on public safety does the dc

circuit net neutrality decision have for the transition? >> thank you. the decision has implications for its own network and the transition. one lesson that we can take from it is if the fcc has put a service into the information service box and its regulatory classification the one thing it can't do is make it like a phone network and that becomes a huge problem when the service that we are talking about is the phone network. so if the fcc can't require the carriers to complete any calling and make sure that we have complete reliability in the phone network without reclassifying the services as the title to tell the communication services and that's what it needs to do to unveil itself of the authority. >> the chairman is from florida. how should we evaluate the

results of at&t ip trials in florida and alabama? what's with the success look like a? >> i think that a successful trials would have objectively collected data on a variety of printers involved these new technologies so that we know for example what is the impact on the voice quality and on the reliability. and the trials that do so transparently and protect consumers throughout the trial so that even though this is an experiment and we are learning, we have safeguards to know people won't be left alone during the trial. >> and there are concerns that the transition will impact vulnerable populations including the seniors, minorities disproportionately that rely upon traditional telephone. what steps have to be taken to ensure that the broadband services and other services are

provided to the public regardless of the economic service packs does anyone want to take that into getting an answer agive an answeras to how? >> senator, thank you for the question. i believe certainly the national association of regulatory utility commissioners has been very engaged with the fcc on this issue and iab leaves a very broad stakeholder involvement process is critical. it's critical to make sure that we leave no consumers on the side of the road particularly where so many of the states have substantial and moral areas, significant senior populations come a significant minority populations it takes an all hands on deck approach and they were certainly part of the process going forward. >> ms. griffin we don't have to really keep a log of the

protections of the books from the 96 act for the land-based wireline services. what are the potential unintended consequences of moving the protections that were built into the 1996 act? >> i think first of all whether it is a mobile call or a landline when someone places a call they expected to work and a lot of times they expect the same guarantees they have on the traditional copper network event and if they are making the call over a wireless network. also why your list networks rely on their networks so we cannot ignore why you're lying just because more people have cell phones and additionally 100 million people still have traditional copper-based service and 85 million have it in addition to another type of voice service usually wireless. i think that's because they get protection from the landline service that they don't get elsewhere.

>> do you agree that we should keep the protections on the buck even as we move more towards the wireless world? >> from our perspective to compact idea that the chairman has articulated is something that we believe in and finding out how best to apply them to everybody as a challenge. >> i have a few more questions and then i think we will be joined by the senator. the public alert systems are crucial in making sure the public is notified of any oncoming danger. in my state it is important because tornadoes. we have a lot of tornado touchdowns in minnesota mr. schulzrinne -- sorry how do you say it again? how will the public alert systems work in this ip enabled

world? >> public alert systems currently we have a hybrid system between a traditional system and emergency alert system with radio and television largely into the wireless that is with short messages and a backbone system if you like that is behind the scenes that distributes the messages to bo both. as we move to the it environment, the existing components while continued to fulfill a vital role that we can supplement those. in particular the limitations that we have in the system of short messages may no longer be necessary in that environment, and importantly, we can now leverage new ideas on how to distribute the alerts. for example since many people no

longer watch tv or listen to the radio continuously, they have the opportunity to inject words into internet content over video streaming or advertising networks that people might be viewing. so we have to see that as an integrated system that is available regardless of technology and for the legacy protection and capability caused many of those are robust but also providing much for precise targeting and much more detailed information. finally it's important to not just think about the first minute or so but also to think about the whole lifecycle of a disaster for examples during hurricanes and e. it was important to form consumers as to where we could get gasoline and find a grocery stores that were open and what roads were

passable. all of those were conveyed by the maps and other information so we need to integrate the longer-term recovery functions where they are important short-term and immediate response capabilities. >> we have talked here about how we can see failure with the ip over the fiber particularly. they can make sure people communicate effectively over ip technology. do you think that the transition to copper is the answer? >> i think there are a number of things like mr. schulzrinne said. there is a lifecycle to this. disaster preparedness is a part of this and our industry can help people think through what

they need to do first. alerting is important, reliability and restoration. so we talked a lot about copper and the advantage that it has which is a significant and meaningful advantage, but we shouldn't overlook the fiber advantages. fiber is generally a more reliable technology and less prone to going out and quicker to restore than copper. so when a tree falls over on a power line i and a phone line, f the phone line is fiber is quicker to restore than copper. so it is a balancing act and i think that we recognize that the copper network and the switches that run it are deteriorating. there are people making those switches, there isn't a market for spare parts. >> are you aware of the copper theft issue? >> there's the copper theft

issue driven by the marketplace of copper. so the movement -- >> did you have senator graham and i have a bill to do something about that? >> we worked with your staff and we were active at with a numbef state commission groups. it is a problem because you don't know it is gone until you pick up the phone and it doesn't work. i think you are illustrating that there is a large range of disasters and it's hard to balance. but it's important and i think it's consumer education. the fcc has a group devoted to studying the backup power practices and how to inform the consumers and things so we need to work together on the education and understanding of the transition and reducing copper theft. spackle we really want to get the bill passed because it isn't

just about telephone lines it's also about buildings and infrastructure and they've broken into a lot of electric companies. we have a lot of support from every police group and we are working with the veterans community because we have seen battles on the grave, 200 minnesota allowed just from the past week because the value of copper at this crap metal dealers are stopping the bill on the floor and they've put a hold on it basically threw senators. anything that you can do to help we would appreciate it. it requires a check for ten over 100 bucks to purchase so that the police can track down when they need to through it is that's bringing the copper in. many states have those rules in place but a number don't answer what people are doing is stealing copper from whatever source electric companies,

telephone lines, veterans graves and bringing it to other states that don't have the rules in place and it's an outrage the bill won't get through given the rights from the business community and others so i'm talking about it every single day until people start to see that this is the kind of bill that is bipartisan and it needs to get done and they should stop holding the bill up. i see that senator is here so i'm going to turn it over to him. >> i want to thank you all. forgive me for running in late. i think this is a critically important issue that we are discussing and actually i think your issue is incredibly important. i could tell you issues found by day as the mayor. the superstores and he actually came into our area and the folks in new jersey and new york area are very familiar with it and the communication networks that i witnessed firsthand for

particularly severe during that time and we experienced power outages and wireless and wireline services were unavailable to the flooding and other conditions of which i know that you are all very familiar. as the technology transitions move forward, i just thin thinks pair announced that we have reliable and consistent access to these critical safety resources like 911 and others as i'm sure that you are all very familiar with. what is made crystal clear in the experiences that we saw in my region and places like new york county can significantly impact consumers in ways that are not always evident in the outset and there's been a lot of very strong feelings about this and s if so i guess the first question would be simply do you agree there are instances in which the copper network must be

maintained because the services do not need all of the needs of the consumers and that is an open question to the panel. >> thank you. i would say we need to maintain the protection of the network so that now as we are figuring out what the new technologies are and what opportunities we have to make sure that they are serving the same values that the network did. as you mentioned after hurricanes and e. in new jersey, verizon decided to replace its proper network with fixed wireless service, and there was an outcry from everybody because people read the cared and they realized this service wasn't as good as they had on the copper surface. people had heart monitors, security systems, internet access that they lost because the wireless service and event support it. luckily the fcc and the state commission of new york were able

to step in and protect the consumers and verizon hasn't had fiber instead but we need to make sure consumers know the differences between the technologies and are prepared for more outages. as packed as somebody want to add -- yes. >> yes, i am a comment as well. the cd view is so important to maintain and i'm echoing this person exactly what they get now. it needs to be seamless when we move towards this transition. when we communicated this is important that we need to maintain that the expectations are with the consumers. >> that means maintaining the copper, correct or no? >> yes if that means maintaining it at this point, yes. but again, knowing that as the futuris thefuture approaches weo

have the capabilities. >> any other thoughts? >> thank you for the question. the core objective is safety and ensuring the safety of the people that we serve and to respond to some of the tenants that you have mentioned in your remarks and coordination of this effort is important. we have learned so much from hurricanes in th and the end ofe national association of utility commissioners issued a resolution after hurricanes and he calling for better coronation, height and coordination not only with regards to the mutual assistance and how the utilities have traditionally worked. what do we do in response to the form storm in such a magnitude and what are we doing to educate the public? we believe that we are technology natural. so whatever the platform might be, the consumer comes to expect a certain level of service.

certain consumer protections that we support continuing that. we also support to the preparedness efforts, core donating among the electric sector and the telecom sector. we also want to ensure reliability that is the core mission as economic regulators that are safe and reliable utility service. >> we all want the same and have the same ambition and the same goals. my concern especially as we get into hurricane season again, which means that the gulf coast and the east coast could see another major weather events is how are we stress testing and are we sure that as we go through a time of transition that we don't have more vulnerable communities that can find themselves come and again, as a guy that was in the trenches with my first responders trying to deal with this crisis come is a difference

between life and death and so my worry isn't that we are not all a permit if we desired of the same thing, that what are we doing in the time of transition to ensure that we get the result that we all want? >> senator i believe the work that we are doing is the work that we do in advance and proactively. in arkansas as well as i'm sure in new jersey the work proactively around tabletop exercises. i will participate in one this month in which we are very focused on the continuity of operations efforts and ramping up the broad range of potential so it is a hurricane in your part of the country. and any other severe weather events that might occur as well as other attacks that may be a greater disruption to the grid. but we believe that the core effort has to be proactive. >> i'm sorry to interrupt and have the privilege of being in

your state this weekend and serving the tornado damage and mayflower. i guess to be more specific and anybody on the panel can pick this up is that i don't want us to be doing conversions that are creating problems that we could be participating and that we were that the fcc frankly could be helping us avoid. so what happened is we need the technology switch approved less reliable especially in a crisis consumers didn't only get what they want but they were much more exposed to the crisis and so i guess what i am saying is that i understand. i have gone through my tabletop exercises at fuzz ad as you shoo in the local government but i guess my concern is on this technology transfer transition.

how do we make sure that we are avoiding it and that we are right for the crisis to emerge how are we deciding not to do that transition for example? >> thank you for the interesting question that we address in the two technical perspectives as others have you limited to end principle, rain and fire are a better combination than water and copper to long-term in particular in the flood prone areas the goal should be that we have a fiber dominated network simply because it will continue to function even when flooded. the other aspect is that as communities plan they are utility infrastructure, considering our ability of the utilities and particularly as they transition to fiber and it would make it much more reliable. and this has been a long-term

perspective as we do that road repairs and roadwork so that the utilities particularly the fiber-based utilities are planned for a type of policy and coordination between the communication providers and by local department public works so that the conduits for example when the roads are opened up, that besides opening up the new opportunity for the higher bandwidth communication also i believe will facilitate a deployment have much more robust infrastructure that is not susceptible to wind damage and is much more resilient when the water comes flooding in. is that allow me to push forward if i can with one more question and with permission of the chair. one of the things i'm concerned about is the penetration of those changes. and i agree with the technology shifts. ultimately in conference with what you're saying that is the ultimate goal. during the tradition i am worried about the holes or gaps but if i can't go down that we

have this idea of the penetration that we are seeing sort of equally applied, access to technologies t technology ist democratizing force in our society. it is powerful in terms of being a matter for the social and economic mobility. but right now, there are really significant discrepancies in the reliability and a lot of these technologies such as broadband into the low income communities. and so we are very concerned that the communities are often in the volatile populations is that they are often adversely affected by the technology transitions. and so the question very simply is what can we do -- what should we be doing to ensure that the reliable voices and broadband services are delivered to the public regardless of economic background or geography? >> if i can jump in a little bit i think it is two questions.

one question is the overall question of how can you get these facilities that are very expensive and build in very rural areas and that is to have the universal service funds to help get that infrastructure built. the states and many other places and there seems to be the consensus that there's a couplee of barriers to the adoption. one is having a computer or smartphone and education is important. for whatever reason they are a chunk of americans believe the internet does not offer value to them and in education with them is important. hoping to find or create a program in the broadband option and so there is a lot going on that recognizes what you are illustrating that there is an

adoption issue in america. and so, you're saying that the research shows that the issue some of it has to do with the end-user'end users lack of apprn or access to some of the laptops or smartphone, but then your answer indicates it is on us as well that we are not getting it to the end-user in the way that we could be? be? stanek certainly in the rural areas it is a challenge to build networks where there are very few people. and that's where the availability gap would be. >> and it's a shortfall -- again i'm just looking for actions to address this and there are a lot of conversations that folks are trying to make on the cheap pop-ups available for students and things going on. but on getting the technology to that end user, give me your unbiased appreciation of the universal service funds.

we have the resources necessary to take on that end of the issue and if not, what is a more realistic approach? >> the fcc is in the middle of reforming the fund to make it more efficient and focused. so i think if they can get that operationalize and in the field what we will be able to see us if there is enough money there is about four and a half billion dollars on the high cost fund on the availability. >> can you tell me some of the e issues you are working on to make that more efficient? >> how best to target the funding and identify the areas that rea really need the funding versus those that can get by without it. they are sort of an old honda that allocates money in kind of unusual ways and this is a more targeted fund.

>> unusual ways, that sounds like a euphemism. >> of the old fund was sort of built on a series of implicit subsidies that were not well quantified and then particularly for the larger carriers it was based on the statewide average is so that you could have a state with dense areas that on average would seem like it did not need funding although there were parts that could be world that did need the funding so we were trying to target that more accurately now. >> okay. thank you very much. >> i want to thank the witnesses for holding this hearing and the senator. we will keep that record opening for two weeks for questions. it was interesting discussion with a lot more work to do. the hearing is adjourned. thank you for the witnesses.

and although conversations [inaudible conversations]

russia is the united states as a nation that the leaves and its mission. and in our missions they are pretty similar. we believe in freedom, we believe and distributing our values, which suddenly disappe disappear. but it didn't go anywhere because it was still there.

so in the biggest nation for all those years it was victory day. that was our main national holiday and that is what united the nation is that it began the fascists and how it was presented to the nation by president putin is that in ukraine they came to power and illustrated that with the flags of the liberation army who were alike during world war ii so he used us to prove those that are fighting in the nation and us as a misinterpretatiothesite has an

that we are looking just to protect russians or the russian speaking minority. no. for the overwhelming majority of russians, we are continuing world war ii. and we are liberating, really liberating ukraine from the fascist threat. >> what role should government play in the housing finance? ..

from public affairs books now if able for a father's day gift at your favorite bookseller. >> president obama has praised the new president-elect of ukraine, petro proshenko, and a thursday president obama urged russia to open talks with the new government. also thursday witnesses at a senate foreign relations committee hearing offered policy recommendations and urged