forward to repurpose that spectrum, how is the pentagon being included in this to protect our national security interests and how can we ensure it's an open and transparent process so that all stakeholders can weigh in so we hand handleproperly? >> representing all of the federal agencies in the process. we coordinate with ntia and speak with the military agencies. of course i agree it's important to make sure anything that happens in this area protects the needs of the military, but as others pointed out, there's wide agreement that there's inefficient spectrum use on the part of the federal government and it's in all of our interests to address those and move forward to free up spectrum. >> as the pentagon expressed, have they expressed concerns how you're moving forward with that band? >> my understanding, there's real interest in this idea of sharing mechanism for that band that would free up significant spectrum for commercial users in

options soon and preserving the military's ability to use that in the limited area where it needs it. >> i quickly want to jump in on the universal service fund, because you know, it's the usf fund. certainly we all have different viewpoints on it, and new hampshire in the last data out, 2009, is donor state, $25 million. so i commend you on the reform, and i do think it's important that you're slowing the growth of the money that's being held in the fund. so i think that the more we can get the money out it's important, but even donor states like new hampshire have rural areas that aren't, don't have broadband access. how do i continue to ensure my constituents with reforms being made that as a donor state, that that is going to be addressed in a better way for the return or investment for my constituents? >> look forward to working with you. our uniformed goal, joint goal is to make sure that unserved

americans everywhere including new hampshire get the benefits of the money that goes into this fund. so if you're an unserved american, our commitment is in the years ahead, this money will be use efficiently to provide service to you and not wasted where it's not needed. >> great. real quick, you only have data from 2009 by each state. we've been trying to get data from you for 2010 and '11 for each state-by-state breakdown. i hope you'll get it out soon so everyone can see what it means in each of the states and what they're contributing or not contributing. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you senator. the vote is -- in process, senator wicker, you're free to ask a question, but will also be chairing the hearing. >> thank you, and shall i adjourn to them? thank you. >> let me ask if you will be willing to answer questions, also, that we didn't get the chance to ask for the second round? >> of course. >> i have a couple. >> oh, yes. >> i appreciate you

accommodating me. we'll report the bill to the full senate in your absence, mr. chairman. chairman genachowski, thank you for sticking around. we all have full schedules this afternoon, and i'm sorry i haven't been here for most of the time. you know i've advocated device interoperability along with a number of competitive wireless carriers operating in the united states. so let me commend you for moving to a notice of proposed rulemaking, addressing the prospect of interopperability in the lower 700 megahertz band. of course, this is only a step. so if you could, tell us what is the status of this notice and when do you expect the fcc to

take final action on the issue? >> we're taking this seriously and we appreciate your, your urging in this regard, interoperability is a real issue for the smaller carriers that have that a-block spectrum. there are interference issues that came up and we're working with stakeholders to analyze and determine if there's a way to address them. ultimately to make sure that all the carriers who have spectrum in that band have the ability to use it and get devices for their consumers. >> okay. now, how is that process going? because i'm, what i'm trying to get is the timeline. >> i -- if i could respond in writing to that. i don't remember whether the proceeding is still open or not, but our intention is to move quickly because it's a real issue in the marketplace for the carriers that have the spectrum. >> well, good, then. if you could take that, for the record, and give me a specific answer on when you expect to the take final action. that would be terrific.

and let me just ask this to commissioner mcdowell. about the -- the universal service fund and relief mechanisms. the last time the committee addressed this issue, i said the fcc needed to focus on broadband availability rile reining in costs and being responsive to the unique needs of rural america, which most of my state comprises. not all of my colleagues agreed with every aspect of the order, particularly the funding dedicated to wireless service. and i share that concern. however, i believe the commission took an important and necessary first step. i urge the fcc to move forward on the second part of usf reform, focusing on the contribution to ensure that we complete modernization of usf.

however, i do understand that some companies will have growing pains during this transition. it's my understanding that part of the usf order includes several relief mechanisms for those who believe that reform will have an adverse effect, adverse impact on their businesses. so are you in a position today to elaborate on those relief mechanisms, mr. mcdowell? >> i believe you're speak ak the waiver process at the fcc, and. >> all right. >> and we had an interesting dialogue earlier regarding that. we do, we're taking this very seriously. we want to make sure that the waiver applications are as detailed as possible. so we truly understand what the hardships may or may not be for the applicants. we also want to keep it as streamlined as possible. this is a work in process, and we hope to be able to refine our process going forward, and learn a lot as we go. >> the process proceeding. >> i think it's proceeding fine

thus far and we will make determinations as quickly as possible. on those waiver applications. >> well, thank you very much. and i appreciate folks sticking around. i look to counsel, to see if there's magic words i need to say. do i need to adjourn the hearing or -- >> this is the most power i've had in quite a while. if there's no objection from the other members of the committee, we'll keep the record open for two weeks. hear nothing objection -- >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the hearing is adjourned. >> thank you. snoot

this afternoon, book tv will be live with arthur brooks. in it, he says big government policies weakened american traditions. hear what he has to say at 5:30 eastern at booktv.org. this is c-span3 with public

programs throughout the week and every weekend 48 hours of people and events telling the american story on american history tv. get our schedules and see past programs at our websites. and you can join in the conversation on social media sites. the u.s. army chief of staff general raymond odierno told reporters sequestration will be xafr rou disastrous for the army. also about the army's decision to expand training for women in certain specialties. this runs about a half hour. >> sorry about that. well, i want to talk about three or four minutes and open it up to any questions that you might have. i really want to start off by reminding everybody that today the united states army remains committed around the globe.

we have 92,000 soldiers currently deployed in support of operations. 68,000 of those are in afghanistan. as you know the president and the secretary of defense provided new strategic guidance to focus our efforts on the beginning of the year. the guidance was clear, very collaborative process. we've been through that. more than ten years of fighting two large scale operations. the army clearly is moving inside a frame of transition over the next five, six, seven years. it's important to me that we continue to apply the lessens. we will be leaner and more agile army that is a versatile and ready component of the joint force. our charter will remain to be the best manned, best equipped, best trained, to be decisive for a broad range's missions. in today's increasingly uncertain and complex strategic environment we must ensure that we sustain a diverse mix of

rapidly deemployable capabilities, adapt processes to reflect broader ranges of requirements. and through the changes ahead we will demonstrate unwavering commitment to the honor of our professional values. to guide us through this dynamic landscape underpinned by challenges the under secretary of the army has said our vision is the army's globally engaged and regionally responsive and indispensable partner in the capabilities and multi-national environment. as part of the joint force and as america's army that we offer we guarantee the agility, versatility and depth to prevent -- in the future. acknowledging the changing geopolitical environment the

21st century defense that sustains strategic guidance articulates. the army has a vital role in the priorities and we are developing several initiatives. i would like to share a few of those with you. first our army generation process has served us well in meeting our demands in iraq and afghanistan the last several years, but with operations in iraq complete and ongoing in iraq and afghanistan, we will have the opportunity to adapt this process to be more wide ranging especially as we rebalance towards the asia-pacific region. as such, we'll implement a progressive readiness model for the active and reserve components to be responsive to all of our combatant commanders. in support of the combat and commanders we will be implementing a concept beginning next year to better meet some theater requirements. the intent is to focus unit or headquarters during training

cycle on specific mission profiles and unique environmental characteristics that make them available to a combatant commander in their area of responsibility. we'll conduct a pilot next year when a brigade combat team will from the tenth mountain division will be the first unit to execute this concept in coordination with the u.s. africa command. the regional concept will be especially important in the asia-pacific region as we move forward. home to seven of the ten armies and this will follow over the next several years. for enduring commitments in some of the theaters we plan to employ rotational units. europe comes to mind as we reduce two forward station brig kade combat teams over the next two years, leverage equipment, set and exerciseses to allow us to promote regional security and

enhance capacity and sustain our relationships with our nato and other allies in europe. flinl as the army's end strength reduces it is important to note that this leaner army will be vastly more capable than our pre-9/11 army. besides ten years of hard-earned combat we continue to increase our special operations force capacity. we have significantly increased our ability to conduct intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. we have increased our aviation assets to support worldwide missions and responsiveness around the world. we continue to increase our cyber capability as we move forward, and we continue to look at other capabilities in order to move forward. we are also reviewing and refining our organizational design. mission command in training methods to institutionalize the lessons learned in combat. all in all i believe these are the right investments to posture the army to meet our strategy. we'll serve our nation well in

the future. in addition to these initiatives we will continue to reinforce stands, discipline, fitness and accountability. rightfully so the military is held to the highest standard. since its entrusted with special responsibilities by the american people. trust and respect are paramount. standards and discipline are fundamental. and i will never pass up an opportunity to talk to our soldiers and our leaders about the sacred trust and our commitment to moral and ethical behavior and values. secretary mchue announced we will be standing up at joint base lewis-mcchord washington to focus on the training readiness and administration oversight that promotes standards, discipline and excellence such as fort hood and for the bragg. fort bragg. on another important note last

week we concluded our annual sexual harassment and sexual assaults response pleechx summit. something that is absolutely intolerable and inconsistent with our army values. it is something that i have commanders at all levels to stay focused on to take care of and protect each other. that's what we do and that's who we are and we cannot expect anything less. as many of you know earlier this week more than 200 women began reporting to the maneuver bat battalions in nine of our combat teams selected to participate in the exception to the direct ground combat assignment rule. additionally this revision will result in the opening of six military occupational specialties in 80 units, more than 13,000 positions to women

opening up new opportunities to our female soldiers which make up about 16% of our force. around lewes us to render tremendous talent flnt our ranks. resident in the our ranks. as i have testified over the last several months it's important for the army to execute the fiscal year '13. as planned. it allows the army to meet contingency requirements, take care of soldiers and families and achieve balance between end strength, readiness and modernization. our approach to the current budget will remain strategy-base and fiscally prudent. so thank you for allowing me to give this opening statement and i welcome your questions. >> one quick question. >> general, with a.p. one quick gwen then a broader one. you mentioned the women who are

starting with this non pilot program. i understand there has been some decision or some initial discussion about rangers. can you talk a little bit about that -- >> this is a progressive way forward. we have a nine brigade combat team, opening up the occupational specialties that currently women serve in down to infantry and armor battalions. we will run this for several months. my guess is based on my experience in iraq and what i've seen in afghanistan, we'll then move forward with a more permanent solution inside the army probably sometime this fall. the next step is we have to continue to attempt to look at do we open up infantry and armor mlss to females. and that's the next step. so what we've done is, we're really now collecting information and we're setting a course forward on how we might take a look at this. so that's what i've asked general bob cohen, the training and doctrine commander and major

general bob brown, the commander of the center to start taking a look at this and provide us recommendations how we might move forward. there has been no decisions made. we want to bring information up to the secretary and decide the way forward on how we want to progress, and potentially opening up these positions. >> does that depend on how you see things go over the next several months with what is happening now? is that independent? >> i think it's not -- we're not going to wait -- we're looking at it now and then we'll chart a course of action, a way forward. and i suspect something like that will probably come out sometime this summer. >> take one in the back. >> does this include a plan to send women through the marine corps equivalent of their infantry officer school? >> no. i mean, we have our own schools. yeah. >> go -- >> well, we'll take a look at it.

that's what the recommendation will come forward. are we going to do something like that? that's part of what the recommendations are and what -- we'll make some announcement later. we haven't had a chance to look at it. >> the house opposition that has the floor today, i wonder if you can comment on a couple items. one, there's language in there that limits the pay and downsizing of the force. can you give reaction to how you handle that? >> i submitted the budget for the pace that i thought was the most appropriate pace for us to downsize. i have two concerns. one is the language the last time i saw it caps us at 552,000 through '13. and right now, that will hinder us because we were planning on being at about 543,000 by the end of '13. so what does that mean? well, that means we will not be

able to use attrition necessarily. this might cause us to force more people out of the army than we want instead of using natural attrition over the five or six-year period we've identified over the last two budget submissions. so i have talked with the house. i've told them that i don't agree with those amendments. i'd liking to see them adjusted, but we'll continue to work with them as we move forward. i think we'll be able to come to an agreement. i think what we submitted the right pace. what is the right pace of reef deductions? i think we've done the right pace. it enables me to take care of soldiers and families and to continue to the meet our commitments in afghanistan and it continues, if necessary -- it gives us enough leeway if something occurs we could reverse it if necessary, and i think all of those factors can be met in what we submitted in the budget. >> secretary panetta said that the way that they put some money back into some items will take away from military personnel.

or other -- have you identified an example? >> i would say for us in the budget the real issue is the end-strength number. if we have to keep a higher in end-spring number, we start to lose our balance, which is end strength, modernization and balance. and if those start getting out of balance we have to be careful. we don't want a hollow force. i want the best trained, best equipped and ready army. i'm worried that could impact in a if we don't do this right. >> can i just follow up? i'm unclear on your answer on the ranger question. >> yes. >> what exactly -- what did you say that, you're looking at this? lita asked what is the chance of women being able to take ranger training? >> i think we are taking a look at it. i think -- well, i don't want to get ahead of myself. okay? so let me give you some statistics. okay. so as we look at our senior infantry officers, about 90% of our senior infantry officers are

ranger qualified. so if we determine that we are going to allow women to go in the infantry and be successful they are probably at some time going to have to go through ranger school. we have not made that decision but it's a factor i've asked them to take a look at and come back to us as we look at this problem. we have to at the all-encompassing problem in terms of, if we determine to do this we want the women to be most successful. we have to look at the all how do we make them most successful? >> what classes will -- >> it's signal. they're now able toll go into infantry at much lower levels. so, it's, yeah. it's signal. it's advocate general, it's m.i., it's medical, m.o.s.s --

what's that? yeah. m.o.r.s. which is, m.o.s. those are the boards. >> sir, could you tell us beyond the budget if sequestration follows through what kind of cuts do you anticipate to end-strength modernization, how will that affect the army? >> two points of sequestration. one is my estimates are it would cause us to cut another 80 to 100,000. in end strength, but it would be a combination. active component end strength. but what even makes sequestration worse is we have no say in where the cuts go. it is directed across every element of our budget. and it's a certain percentage. so what that would cause us to do is increase the pace, cause a significant hollowness in the

force, breach contracts we already have in place, because we would not meet the current requirements we have on our developmental contracts. so it would affect every asset that we have in every area. so much that's the concern. fundamentally, i think all the joint chiefs have come to the conclusion we fundamentally would have to relook at our whole strategy, if it occur, and those are the concerns that we have. >> quick clarification. of the regionally aligned brigades are those specialized units? that you have alluded to? >> no. >> of those, give us a sense -- >> so what we've done in the past -- so we go through a generation process where we put brigades, we put, aviation, engineering force, and we prepare them to go to kuwait or -- excuse me, afghanistan or iraq. okay? what we are changing is they will be aligned to a combatant commander. as they go through a training process they become available

for a period of time, 9 to 12 months and they will be aligned based on their centcom, and other, and based on requirements. and then they can use those forces to meet whatever requirements they might have. it might be rotational forces or building partner capacity. . could be providing security assistance. could be doing exercises. and what this does for us, it enables us to focus the united nations nations -- units to become more understanding of the task they'll have to work. what we're doing is meeting baddaba combatant commanding to shape under which they're operating. that's the thought process. using the forces we have and they will adapt and adjust to meet whatever requirements that combatant commander will have. >> full spectrum? >> that's not what i said.

what i said was we will have units that will train to certain levels. and then as they get requirements from combatant commanders they will train and be capable of conducting operations in those areas of -- for that specific -- give me an xempl. example. we might have a unit that says they are going to do small unit training in africa. they will reach a certain level of capability combined arms training. and then we'll use them to help train and assist units in other nations in africa in order to continue to build partner capacity. the bottom line is, if want to train units to be more capable in their specialties you want units that are capable until wir specialties. we want frantry training, armor office training armor and you want that capability within each individual in order to be able to train there, and you want unit dmaft order to train there. so we'll align them as such, and

we'll continue to train to a certain combined arms level. as we move forward. >> just a follow up. on the africa thing. can you talk a little bit more about how this is going to work. as we all know a lot of the special operations forces are doing a lot of this training in somalia and other places. will the army be working with special operators? is this now in africa going to be more of an army job? >> it's both. it's both. i mean, there are some missions and there are many things that go on. it is probably better to talk to general hamm. he can give you a better feel how hue use them. there is a mission for both conventional and special operations forces. there will be some cases where conventional forces are supporting special operations forces. you know, we've built these strong relationships in both iraq and afghanistan over the last seven, eight, nine years, and we'll continue to utilize that. we have ha