things that drive them, what i've learned in the last two years i've been back in the government at ntia is their incentive is to perform their missions, you know, in the best way possible. so how can we get them to -- and i think jenna wheeler talked about a lot of ways that can be done through better technology, obviously, through -- money doesn't necessarily translate into the mission, especially if the folks that are doing those missions don't have control over that money. so what are the ways. and in a property rights type scheme where you're giving agencies more freedom, you know, more autonomy over how they use the spectrum, how they control the spectrum, can they sell it, can they buy it, can they, you know, divide it up just like the private entities. i'm kind of reminded that when i worked on the fcc's spectrum secondary markets policies, even the fcc did not grant secondary, you know, market authority to all users of the spectrum. it was really limited where there's exclusive use of the spectrum. in the federal side, that doesn't exist. they really, there's no one single agenc

what we do is again to provide our information to ntia, working with fcc. sec is ultimately responsible for making the and announcement and the way ahead in terms of working with industry around that proposal. , but wenk fine line want to be clear that for that 25 megahertz, that is an effort that we are working with ntia, and fcc will make a final announcement on that. you have a figure in terms of what dod plans to invest this year or the years ahead in terms ems?larging the [indiscernible] >> i think what we can do oiis give you some idea ems? [indiscernible] >> on particularly as it relates to transition planning. youlenge we have in giving efficient spectrum is there is not a pure spectrum investment. the strategy is to lay out how we are influencing all of our programs that are dependent on spectrum. to ensure that we are more flexible as opposed to simply alone and spectrum talking about how we are changing that. perhaps the best way to answer that question would be to focus on some of our transition planning efforts. , if you further on that look at

things that drive them, what i've learned in the last two years i've been back in the government at ntia is their incentive is to perform their missions, you know, in the best way possible. so how can we get them to -- and i think jenna wheeler talked about a lot of ways that can be done through better technology, obviously, through -- money doesn't necessarily translate into the mission, especially if the folks that are doing those missions don't have control over that money. so what are the ways. and in a property rights type scheme where you're giving agencies more freedom, you know, more autonomy over how they use the spectrum, how they control the spectrum, can they sell it, can they buy it, can they, you know, divide it up just like the private entities. i'm kind of reminded that when i worked on the fcc's spectrum secondary markets policies, even the fcc did not grant secondary, you know, market authority to all users of the spectrum. it was really limited where there's exclusive use of the spectrum. in the federal side, that doesn't exist. they really, there's no one single agenc

this year, ntia is taking the same approach to secondary as, facial recognition technology. if you are interested in privacy issues surrounding that technology please make sure we are aware of your ideas. as well my team is engaged in the recently announced presidential review of bid data and privacy being led by john podesta this will help all of us understand how to promote the free flow of information while also supporting privacy and security. ntia's highly collaborative approach is the same approach being used by a second commerce department bureau, the national institute of standards and technology. as you might know, this works with industry to protect the seiderssecurity of america's critical infrastructure. including companies that support our nation's water and energy needs. nist held meetings across the country each of which were attended by hundreds of leaders of industry, government and other stakeholders. we also received hundreds of written comments. over the past year we have published several drafts of this framework. the most recent of which was posted on l

another recommendation was a spectrum advisory board, and at ntia we have a commerce spectrum management advisory committee, a member in the front row, jennifer. that serves the bill. there's also an interagency group called the ppsg, policy planning steering brown. jenna participated in that with the cio from dod and the other federal agencies with spectrum. so there's a lot of interagency collaboration. reinforcing the international functions is not one we had a little discussion about, how that is still in the works. but we'll go into that. research to sport for spectrum innovation. that struck a chord and that's a key focus and one of the things that they're working on in conjunction with national institute for standard technology at the commerce department, and we're putting together a center for advanced communications which -- talk about the initiative which is -- would be under that center for advanced communication. so that's being implemented. and last but not least, the recommendation from csiis was a national spectrum strategy, and, wow, that's kind of interesting. a couple d

that is still act of and we are working with ntia in the department of defense to continually look atthe systems they have in that space. you heard a little about five gigahertz and there is a long story there, too. is one of the primary unlicensed band geek used for wi-fi. you see 2.4 gigahertz and then you will see five gigahertz. there is already spectrum for wi-fi at five gigahertz and it shares today with federal radar systems. going into 2003 world radio conference, they advocated a bottle based on dynamic frequency selection. it was brand-new and accepted by the world and came back. they found out it took a little bit more work than we anticipated. ?o why is this so hard he? you're searching for signals that you cannot identify. it is often not sufficient. it was really tough and there were points along the way where it was not clear we were going to come up with an answer. fast-forward to today. the wi-fi technology has continued to evolve to the new standard you are seeing on the store shelves and what is so magic about it. it can offer data speeds above one gigabit per secon

subsequent to that i think with the president's 500 megahertz initiative, the work that's ongoing at ntia, going through the process of evaluating each of those bands, it is a lengthy process. and so, you know, the fcc has the tough job of trying to balance the federal needs with the commercial requirements, and so that, that is certainly difficult. i think on the technical level, you know, in preparation for the this upcoming work, you know, a number of joint technical working groups that are working to assess a number of bands that are going to be put on the agenda. but challenges are abroad, and i think it's going to take a lot of work on both sides. and peter's right, if the u.s. does lead, i believe, the world many this regard, other countries tend to follow our lead on it. so hopefully the process will speed up a little bit more. >> and i'll just add to the fact that the international standards community and the role that they play in this so critical. i mean, carriers by their very nature are looking for the greatest economies of scale that they can get. and if you can get bands th